Qui tollis peccata mundi-who takest away the sins of the world, Quoniam tu solus sanctus-since thou alone art holy, Te Deum laudamus-We praise thee, God, Te Gloriosus Apostolorum Chorus-thee the glorious choir of the Apostles, Tu ad Liberandum-thou for delivering, Te ergo quæsumus-we beseech thee therefore, Per singulos Dies-every day, Dignare Domine-vouchsafe, O Lord, Misere nostri Domine-have mercy on us, O Lord, In te Domine speravi-upon thee, Lord, I have placed my hope, Et ne nos inducas in tentationem-and let us not into temptation-(from the Pater Noster,) Chorus. Sed libera nos a malo-but deliver us from evil-(from the Chorus Domine salvum fac Regem-God save the King-(or Prayer for the King,) Chorus. To conclude with an extempore Voluntary on the Organ, by Mr. De Monti, sen. "We feel pleasure in noticing the numerous and respectable auditory which was assembled at the oratorio on Thursday last. The zeal and activity of the directors, the alacrity and pleasure with which their solicitations, in behalf of a charitable and philanthropic institution, were complied with, the great respect paid alike to the subject and the place, form a pleasing and characteristic feature of the age, and must afford an inexhaustible fund of pleasing reflection to the contemplative Christian. May we not hope that these reasons, and the general satisfaction afforded by the performance, will induce Bishop Cameron to grant his permission for another oratorio at a future period? We cannot close the subject, without offering our meed of praise to Mr. De Monti for his extraordinary exertions, which the shortness of the notice required."-Glasgow Chron., May 23d, 1818. TO THE EDITOR OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE. SIR-There are two or three words in your paper of last Saturday, on which I beg leave to animadvert a little. They are in the paragraph relating to the oratorio in the Catholic chapel-The great respect paid alike to the subject and the place. I hope that the highly respectable company which assembled in the Catholic chapel, last Thursday, paid great respect to the subject that was said or sung there that day. I can conceive no subject so important and interesting to a devout mind. It embraces nothing less than the salvation of the world by the incarnation and death of the Son of God. I think it impossible that any Christian should make this a subject of amusement; and it was right to regard it with all possible respect and devotion. But it appears to me somewhat strange, that they should have paid the like respect to the place. Does the writer of the paragraph really believe that the building is as much to be respected, or to be regarded with the same kind of respect, as the most solemn passages of the word of God? Does he in fact believe that the stones and timber of the Catholic chapel are more holy than the materials of its neighbour the town's hospital; or of its other neighbour, the glass bottle manufactory? I know there is a church every stone of which is holy; but this is neither the High Church of Glasgow, nor St. George's, nor the Tabernacle, nor yet the Catholic chapel in Clyde street. The society for educating Roman Catholics is founded upon the best principles, and is entitled to the liberal support of Protestants. In teaching poor Catholics to read, we do not profess to make them Protestants; and it is not fair to represent us as having become Catholics, because we patronize such an institution. But if it be true that we paid respect alike to the subject, and the place where the oratorio was performed, we have embraced one of the worst tenets of popery-we are putting the work of a man on a footing with the work of God. The writer of the paragraph expresses a hope that Bishop Cameron will grant permission to have another such exhibition. And is it come to this, that the Protestants in Glasgow must have the permission of a Roman Catholic bishop to sing the praise of their Maker; that they must use only such words as he shall prescribe; and that these words must be, to the most of those who use them, in an unknown tongue? If it be possible that any person should consider it as a matter of amusement, then the permission of the bishop is nothing less than a popish indulgence to commit sin. I am, &c. A PROTESTANT. TO THE EDITOR OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE. SIR:-Having perceived in your paper of Thursday a letter from "A PROTESTANT," I beg leave to remark, in very few words, on the matter which it contains. Nor let it be understood that it is the spirit of recrimination which makes me trespass on the public, but of exposing the weakness and futility of censorious bigotry: 'Curst be the verse, how well soe'er it flow, desire I saw the paragraph which your correspondent alludes to, and am certainly astonished at the handle which he has made of it: paying respect to the house of God seems to have given him very great offence, and drawn from him a question as ridiculous as it is shameful:"Does he (the writer of the paragraph) in fact believe that the stones and timber of the Catholic chapel are more holy than the materials of its neighbour, the town's hospital; or of its other neighbour, the glass bottle manufactory?" According to the same principle, I suppose your correspondent would assert, that the ground whereon Moses stood, when he beheld the burning bush, was not more holy than the green of Glasgow; or that the temple of Jerusalem, which I believe was partly composed of "stones and timber," was not more sacred than the theatre: yet we are informed, in the sacred scriptures, that our Saviour was so offended at the disrespect paid to his house, that he not only reproached the buyers and sellers therein, but even personally chastised them. Were we to analyze all things that have been called holy, we would find them to consist in substance of mere matter; but the union or combination of matter, its application to pious purposes, and its consecration to Almighty God, certainly is not unworthy of being "called holy," and consequently deserving of a more sacred regard than the property of a glass-blower, or even a town's hospital. From the remark of your correspondent respecting popish indulgences, I was led to examine the Douay Catechism, from which I learn that the meaning of an indulgence is entirely different from what he would insinuate; indeed, if it were the case that popish bishops could have granted indulgences to commit sin, Henry the Eighth would never have professed himself a Protestant. Thank Heaven! "the phantoms raised by bigotry and by prejudice have fled before the light of reason;" the darkness which for a time overspread our horizon, is dissipating into the more chastened ray of liberality and philanthropy; and the institution for the education of Roman Catholics, if it still meet with the encouragement which already has marked its progress, will be a lasting monument to future ages of the charity of its supporters and conductors. I am, sir, yours, &c. AMICUS VERITATIS. CHAPTER II. ANSWER TO AMICUS VERITATIS:-A. V. PROVES HIMSELF A CATHOLIC. NO PLACE HOLY EXCEPT AS THE DIVINE PRESENCE MAKES IT SO. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN HOLY AND UNHOLY PLACES ABOLISHED BY THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GOSPEL DISPENSATION. INDULGENCES. BULL GRANTED TO THE HOUSE OF KILRAVACK. HENRY THE EIGHTH. LETTER OF PAX:-DENIES THE STORY OF AN INDULGENCE GRANTED TO THE HOUSE OF KILRAVACK. LETTER OF AMICUS VERITATIS:-HERVEY QUOTED AS AN AUTHORITY FOR REGARDING CHURCHES AS HOLY PLACES. PROTESTANT INDULGENCES. ONE GRANTED BY LUTHER. ANOTHER BY LUTHER, MELANCTHON, AND SIX OTHER DIVINES. CATHOLICS OUGHT TO BE ALLOWED TO UNDERSTAND THEIR OWN BELIEF. TO THE EDITOR OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE. If I were to choose the name of an opponent in controversy, I would not fix on one more to my mind than AMICUS VERITATIS. I see, in your paper of Thursday, a letter under this signature, containing some remarks on my letter which appeared in your paper of the Thursday preceding; and, presuming your correspondent to be what he calls himself, I shall proceed to reply, without the least apprehension of "making one honest man my foe." If I had been sure that the writer of the paragraph relating to the oratorio was a Catholic, I should perhaps have expressed myself in a manner somewhat different. I should not have put it as a question, whether the writer regarded the stones and timber of his chapel more holy than the materials of its two conspicuous neighbours; I should have taken it for granted that he did. But this would have made no difference in the nature of my remarks. The writer was speaking of a congregation, the bulk of whom were Protestants, and he stated that they paid great respect alike to the place and to the subject. This I thought could be true only on one or other of two suppositions: either that they had abandoned their Protestantism and become Papists, or that they considered the subject as a mere matter of amusement, and then they might respect the place as much as the subject. I did not suppose that Christians could make so solemn a subject the matter of amusement; I could not allow myself to believe that so many of my friends and neighbours had all at once become Papists, and therefore I concluded that the reporter, whoever he was, had given an unfair statement. AMICUS VERITATIS comes forward to vindicate the statement, and the sentiments implied in it, with regard to the holiness of the place; and he does so candidly and plainly, so as to make it evident that he is a Catholic. He of course believes the chapel to be as holy as a bishop can make it; I believe so too; and yet I believe it is not more holy than the bottle-work or the town's hospital. Persons who believe that a priest can create his own Creator, or that he can, by the use of certain words, turn a little bread and wine into the real body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, may very easily believe that a bishop can turn an ordinary building into a holy place; but Protestants-I mean enlightened and consistent Protestants-believe neither the one nor the other; and what I originally found fault with was the statement which represented a Protestant assembly as regarding the place with the like respect as they regarded the most solemn passages of the word of God. was not more AMICUS VERITATIS is perfectly right when he says, "According to the same principle, I suppose your correspondent would assert that the ground whereon Moses stood, when he beheld the burning bush, holy than the green of Glasgow." I frankly confess that I regard the one as no more holy than the other, but for the divine Presence which was manifested on the former. Wherever the Almighty makes himself known, by visible or sensible tokens of his presence, that I should regard as a holy place; but I have never heard of him doing so in the Catholic chapel, and therefore I must be excused from putting it upon a footing with the place where Moses stood in the wilderness, or with the temple in Jerusalem, where, in a mysterious but sensible manner, the Almighty communed with his people from between the cherubims, and from above the mercy-seat. Your correspondent forgets that these things belonged to a dispensation which has long since passed away, and given place to a better one. In the hour of our Saviour's crucifixion, the vail of the temple was rent from top to bottom. The holy place was then laid open to all the world, and it was a holy place no longer. From that moment there was no house in the world more holy than another, and the words of Christ began to be fulfilled:-" Neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father: but the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship him in spirit and in truth." I most earnestly recommend the consideration of this subject to AMICUS VERITATIS; and, if he be indeed what his name imports, I hope he will soon see and acknowledge the absurdity of considering any thing holy which is made by human hands. It is an assembly of Christians, not the place in which they meet, that is the house, or a house of God; and such a house I believe to be holy, because Christ is present with them, though they be but two or three in number, and because they are holy persons, saved by his grace, and sanctified by his Spirit. This house is not the work of man; it is a "building of God." A word or two on the subject of indulgences. My remarks, it seems, led AMICUS VERITATIs to look into the Douay Catechism, to see what an indulgence is. I wish he had indulged me with a quotation, to assist my understanding with regard to the modern meaning of the word; for I am not so rich as to possess a Douay Catechism. But I do not need any modern writing to inform me that the pope claimed and exercised the power of dispensing with the law of God, and granting permission to commit sin. For instance, he professed to relieve individuals and whole nations from the obligation of an oath. He claimed farther the power of granting to individuals and families a full remission of all their sins, past and future, which probably would operate as an encouragement to commit sin, seeing the persons knew beforehand that they had got a full pardon. I am assured by a reverend gentleman of this city, that he has seen a bull of the pope, granted as a special mark of his favour to the head of the ancient family of Kilravack. It is signed by the then pope's own hand, and grants the most pleasing remission of all their sins, to all the branches of that family, from the time of granting the bull to a period of which there are about sixty years yet to run. I am not at present disposed to turn over books of history, else, I doubt not, I could easily show that it was no unwillingness on the part of the pope to grant indulgence to commit sin, which prevented him from indulging Henry the Eighth in his wicked project. It is not fair to call that man a Protestant, who did little more than transfer the headship of the church from the pope to himself. It is gratifying to be informed that the Catholic schools are flourishing; but it ought not to be forgotten that they originated with, and are chiefly supported by, Protestants. While the Catholics were lavishing thousands of pounds on the decorations of what they foolishly called the house of God, (while a plain building might have served their purpose,) they were suffering their poor to grow up, and to perish in ignorance; and it might have been so still, but for Protestant benevolence. It is amusing to hear a Catholic charging his Protestant neighbour with bigotry, and thanking Heaven that "the darkness which for a time overspread our horizon is dissipating into the more chastened ray of liberality and philanthropy." I suppose the time here referred to is that which has elapsed since the reformation, and of course the light which is now about to arise is that of the dark ages! I am, &c. A PROTESTANT. |