Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

very law of nature, by deciding that he was at liberty to send his favourite minister, Strafford, to the scaffold, notwithstanding he himself was conscientiously persuaded of the earl's innocence? He will not now have to complain that I depend upon one or two solitary cases: let him answer these, and I can furnish him with more.

Now, sir, after all which has been disproved, will your correspondent again come forward and endeavour to enforce his odious calumnies? Will he again spout out the noxious venom of religious intolerance and bigotry? O how shameful and obstinate a thing is bigotry! "To what end," says Mr. Philips, "is argument with the bigot? No philosophy can contrive-no humanity can melt-no miracles can convert-no religion can reclaim him. In his hands the gospel is a murderer, and God a demon. He has no pity, for he cannot feel; he has no piety, for he cannot forgive; his prayers are curses-his communion death-his vengeance eternity. Red with the fires of hell-reeking with massacres of earth-and righteous with the blasphemies of heaven, he erects his cannibal divinity upon a throne of skulls; and true to the primeval archetype, feeds even with a brother's blood the impious flame of his rejected altar."

When your correspondent remains silent, I intend, if time and op portunity will permit, to reply to the challenge which he made in his letter of 23d ult., but, in the mean time, shall proceed to take notice of his letter, dated 24th June, &c.

I am, sir, yours, &c.

GLASGOW, 3d July, 1818.

AMICUS VERITATIS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE.

SIR-AMICUS VERITATIS has "often considered it as an extraordinary phenomenon in the history of the human mind, that, in Great Britain, catholics are not allowed the faculty of understanding their own belief." If ever they possessed this faculty, I should like to know who has deprived them of it. I believe, however, few of them ever possessed it; and I question if A. V. himself does so. Does he understand transubstantiation, or does he not believe in it? Does he understand how the real body of Christ can be in a thousand places at the same time, and eaten whole by thousands of individuals, perhaps a thousand times in their lives? If he does possess the faculty of understanding this, he is a greater man than I took him for.

66

But I suppose he means that we do not allow papists to know what their belief is. Of the myriads of declaimers against popery," says he, "with which this kingdom abounds, from the unlettered female who reads theological lectures to her pupils in the nursery, to the right reverend divine who instructs his brethren the clergy of his diocess, there is not one who does not appear to claim more accurate knowledge of the catholic doctrine than the very catholics themselves." Now there appears to me nothing wonderful in this. If the papist, like other sects, professed to think for themselves, and to believe what was the result of their own investigation and reflection, it would be unjust to charge them with any thing but what they professed at the time.

If any man, or any class of men, tell us plainly what their faith is, we ought to give them credit for what they profess, and no more. But if any man tell me that he belongs to a church whose authorized standard of faith is before the world, and whose practice is well known to the world; that he adheres to that standard, and approves that practice, then I am not bound to take his word for the faith or practice of his church. I judge from her standard and general practice; and if his private judgment be different, I tell him he is a dissenter, he has forsaken the faith of his church. The faith of the church of Scotland, for instance, is as well defined in her standards as perhaps any thing of the kind can be; her practice also is known to the world; and it is very possible that an episcopalian, or an independent, may know what is the faith and practice of Scottish presbyterians, better than many of the very presbyterians do themselves.

Papists do not profess to exercise their own judgment in matters of faith, or to believe any thing different from what their church believes ; and as this church is infallible either in her body, or arms, or head, it is not certain which; as she believes now what she always did, and ever will believe, I am not obliged to take the report of her faith from any modern Papist, who may feel himself ashamed of some of the frailties of his old mother, and wish to conceal or deny them. I go to their authentic records. I appeal to their own historians, their own divines, whom they hold in great veneration, their own popes, who are generally by Papists believed infallible. From these sources, and from the allowed practices of the church, any man is capable of acquiring as "accurate knowledge of the catholic doctrine as the very catholics themselves." Nay, I could bring young females from the nursery, not "unlettered" ones, indeed, who really have more accurate knowledge of this subject, than perhaps nine-tenths of the Papists in Glasgow. I do not say they know more than A. V., for I believe he knows more than he chooses to make known.

Let the Papists in Scotland, in the present day, come honestly forward, and tell us what is their own belief, without respect to any other authority. Let them confess that the church of Rome had become very corrupt both in doctrine and practice, as is perfectly evident from all authentic history; but that they are not answerable for such corruption; that they renounce all that is really corrupt in the system, and are determined to think and act for themselves according to what they find in the bible;-let them do this, and then we will not judge of them by what we find clearly established against the church of Rome, but according to their own professions, and their own practice. Then we will not call them Papists, or even Roman catholics; but give them any name which they may choose for themselves as dissenters from the church of Rome. If, however, they will cling to Rome as their dear and only mother; if they will maintain that this is the only true church; that she never was, and never can be wrong:-then we arc entitled to draw the veil from the bloated face of the mother of harlots, to show her to the world as she is: and those who maintain that she is innocent, and holy, and infallible, have no right to complain, if we ac cuse them of consenting to all her abominations.

Every word of this applies to A. V., and PAX, and their fellow Papists. They find themselves in a situation in which it is impossible to

maintain and practice popery in all the grossness of it. The atmosphere in which they move is too bright for their works of darkness. They cannot prescribe to their penitents a certain number of stripes on the bare back as an atonement for their sins. They cannot set their fine ladies, or even their poor old women, to walk nine times a day round the chapel in Clyde street, over the hard stones upon their bare knees, in order to procure the release of some soul from purgatory. They cannot send their secret agents in the dead hour of night to snatch away from his family some person whom they suspect of heresy, to be cast into a dungeon, never to be heard of more;-though some lines quoted by A. V. in his letter of the 25th June, about the knife driving, the blood flowing, the pincers tearing, and the flesh quivering, make me more than suspect that he was thinking of the inquisition, and wishing that he had me in it. I say that they cannot do these things in Scotland. They are obliged therefore to assume the appearance of humanity, and moderation, and common sense; but while they maintain that they are of the church of Rome, and that this church is the same that ever it was, we do them no injustice when we say that they would be what Papists formerly were, if they had the power.

Some people have an idea that the popery of the present age is not so bad as the popery of a former age; and this is reckoned a charitable and liberal view of the matter; but Papists themselves do not receive this as a concession in their favour, or thank those who make it. They will not admit that their religion has changed in any point whatever. They would gladly have us believe that it was always as harmless as it now appears in Glasgow; and for this purpose they deny that ever it was what all history represents it to have been. They deny facts as clearly established, even by their own historians, as any fact of history can be; and with the most unblushing effrontery affect to wonder that we will not take their word in opposition to all other evidence. Besides the history of past ages, we know from the present state of popery in those countries where it reigns in all its glory, that the human mind is enslaved as much by it as ever. The pope is still looked up to as their God upon earth. His authority is supreme in matters of religion and morality. As if the law of God were not sufficiently strict; as if men were not wicked enough by the violation of its precepts, he can actually create sins and then forgive them; he makes that sinful which was not so, and then he can grant pardon for money. He can grant indulgence, for instance, to marry within the forbidden degrees; and it is difficult to say what we cannot do. He has prohibited the formation of societies for circulating the bible. has restored the inquisition, and the order of Jesuits; and has, in short, done every thing in his power to bring Europe again under subjection to his dark dominion. I ask AMICUS VERITATIS, if his religion be not the very same that prevails in Spain, Portugal, and Italy? If any person in any of these countries were to write or speak as freely against popery as he does against Luther and the reformation, would it not be at the risk of his life? His is the same religion that opposes heresy by force: he must approve of this, because such is the will of the holy church which cannot err; and though he cannot oppose error here by torture and the inquisition, it is not unfair to presume that he would do so if he could. His system at least leads to this: and if his own hu

manity would not suffer him to do such a thing, it must be because he is not so bad as his religion.

A. V. says further, that "objections which have been a thousand times refuted, are confidently brought forward," &c. I challenge him to show that any one of the objections which I have brought forward has ever been once refuted. It certainly "is in vain that catholics disclaim the odious tenets which have been imputed to them; in vain that they appeal to their professions of faith, and the canons of their councils." All this certainly is in vain, while they avowedly adhere to a system, the iniquity of which is known to all the world.

I hope PAX is come home by this time, as I intend a little more plain dealing with him; after which I shall attend to A. V., who, in two letters, has laid himself open to such an exposure as he will not like. I am glad, however, that he is writing; because it leads him to divulge what his own sentiments are on the subjects of religion. He has plainly avowed some of the grossest errors of popery: and it makes the work much easier to me, when I get this directly from himself, than to be obliged to seek for it in the bulls of popes, and the canons of councils. I am, &c.

July 2d, 1818.

A PROTESTANT.

TO THE READERS OF THE GLASGOW CHRONICLE.

As the controversy between me and the advocates of popery is likely to take a more extensive range than was at first contemplated: and as it is not likely that the editor of a public newspaper will be able to afford room for all that will be written on the subject, consistently with due attention to other matter. I have resolved to give my sentiments to the public in another form. While I express my thanks to the editor, for his ready admission of free discussion on this, as on every other subject, which would not likely have been done by any other in the city, I have often had occasion to regret that he could not print fast enough, and that my letters sometimes lay in his hands a whole week before they were given to the public.

I had a letter prepared for the Chronicle of this day, containing a variety of matter on the subject of indulgences, with extracts and animadversions on the Douay Catechism, which some unknown friend was so kind as to send me through the Chronicle office: but as the editor must delay printing it, and as, from the pressure of other matter, I can never be certain when I shall come before the public in a newspaper, which must be open to all the world as well as to me, I have resolved to publish what I have to say farther upon the subject, in the form of weekly numbers under the title of "THE PROTESTANT."

I have also to express my thanks to some unknown correspondents, who have written me very friendly and complimentary letters. One of them, who subscribes himself Pillsem, offers to substantiate a fact, with regard to indulgences granted in Scotland in the present day; but, before I can make public use of his communication, it is necessary that he favour me with his name and address, with liberty to refer to him in case the fact be contradicted.

The first number of THE PROTESTANT, containing the letter intended

for the Glasgow Chronicle of this day, will be published on Saturday first, and may be had of all the booksellers. The price will not be more than to cover the expense; and it is particularly recommended to the attention of Papists.

July 14th, 1818.

A PROTESTANT.

Advertisement which appeared in the Glasgow Chronicle.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC.

If answers have not appeared to all the letters published in the Glasgow Chronicle, under the signature of "A PROTESTANT," it is not because AMICUS VERITATIS was silenced by the absurd reasoning and the calumnious imputations against the most numerous and most respectable body of Christians in the world; (absurd, indeed, when Pope Clement VIII. was represented to have granted a dispensation to Henry VIII, six years before he was born, and sixty-one years before he was Pope,) but because the letters of A. V. have been refused insertion in the Glasgow Chronicle, under pretence that the other party had withdrawn. AMICUS VERITATIS, therefore, leaves the public to judge how far it was consistent with impartiality to give insertion to aspersions against Catholics, and to refuse insertion to the refutation of those aspersions.

Glasgow, 16th July, 1818,
VOL. I.-7

« ПредишнаНапред »