OCR Text |
Show Controversial Dialogue Between a Presbyterian and His Catholic Brother, Leading Up to Former's Conversion. Said John Milwood to his Presbyterian Presbyte-rian brother, at the conclusion of last week's debater "In confessing the fallibility fal-libility of your sect, you have confessed that you have no authority from God ' to teach his word. Then you have no authority for declaring what was the primitive faith; and then none for saying say-ing that the church has corrupted it." "But the Romish church," replied James, "has forfeited her title to be considered the church of God by authorizing au-thorizing superstition and idolatry, for evidently no church that authorizes these can be the church of God." John Milwood begins this week's installment in-stallment w ith the reply w hich follows: XXIV. "That is something to, your purpose, and you will be entitled to a judgment if the evidence sustains you. You take now, the only ground from w hich you can legitimately frame an argument against the church. Every previous ground you have taken has been untenable, un-tenable, because it required the authority author-ity to maintain it which were contesting, contest-ing, and which you had not, and were obliged to presume to be in the church herself. You undertook to prosecute her under the law of grace, and failed I for want of a court of competent jurisdiction. ju-risdiction. As she is presumptively j the supreme court, under the law of grace, you could under that law institute insti-tute no process against her; for to every allegation yens could make she had only to plead want of jurisdiction. The only possible way of prosecuting her is under the law of nature, and it is only by proving her to have violated some precept of that law that you can obtain judgment against her. The law of nature falls, to some extent, under the jurisdiction of reason, and reason, to that extent, is its legal keeper and judge, and has the right to sit in judgment judg-ment on its infractions. As the law of nature and that of grace both have j the same origin, are enacted by ths same sovereign lawgiver, and as the latter confessedly presupposes the former and confirms it, it can never authorize what the ' former prohibits, any more than the former can authorize author-ize what the latter prohibits, unless we may suppose, what is not s'uppos-able, s'uppos-able, that God may be in contradiction with himself. The law of grace transcends trans-cends the law of nature, but does not and cannot enjoin what it forbids. As superstition und idolatry are undeniably undenia-bly forbidden by the law of nature, if you prove that they are authorized, or in any sense sanctioned by the church, you prove that she is not and cannot be the church of God. But she does not authorize or sanction them; she strictly forbids them. Thus, in her catechism for children she teaches the child to ask and answer: " 'What is forbidden by this .(the first) commandment?' " 'To worship false gods or idols; otto ot-to give anything, else whatsoever the honor which belongs to God.' " 'What else is forbidden by this commandment?"- " 'All false religions: all dealings with the devil; and inquiring after things to (ome, or secret things, by fortunetellers fortune-tellers or superstitious practices.' " 'What else?" ; " 'All charms, spells and heathenish observation of omens, dreams and such like fooleries." " 'Does this commandment forbid the making of images?' " 'It forbids the making them so as to adore them; that is, it forbids making mak-ing them our gods.' " " "Does this .commandment forbid all honor and veneration of saints and angels?' " 'No; we are to honor them as God's special friends and servants, but not with the honor which belongs to God.' " 'And is it allow able to honor relics, ciucifixes and holy pictures?' "'Yes; ..: with the inferior and relative rela-tive honor, as they relate to Christ end his saints, and are memorials of them.' ' " 'May we, then, pray to relics and images?' ''nr. " 'No; by no means; for they have no life or sense to hear' or help us. "Here, then 'is' evidence enough that the church denies your charge. The burden of proof is on you, and you must prove her guilty of superstition and idolatry." "And I am ready to prove It. The reformers charged her with idolatry, and tve have never ceased from their day to reiterate the charge." "But a lie, though a million times repeated, is none the less a lie. Nobody disputes that Protestants have accused I the church of idolatry, but that is not j to the purpose. You must prove your allegation." " I hy, you might as well ask me to i rove that there is a sun in the heavens. heav-ens. All the world knows that the church of Rome is sunk in the greatest idolatry and the foulest superstition." "Words, words,- brother; give me the proofs."' ... .1 , "Proofs! You need no proofs. The fact is undeniable, and nothing but the grossest impudence on the part of the Romish church could ever dream of tienying it." . "No advance in the argument. Irother. Have you yet to learn that the unsupported assertions of a man who admits that he speaks without authority au-thority are not . proofs? Here is the church, on the one hand, teaching her children, in the very first lessons she teaches them, to abhor Idols and all superstitious practices: and here are iou. on the other hand, accusing her of superstition, and that wrost and u ost abominable species of superstition supersti-tion idolatry she in possession to be presumed to be the church of God. and you presumptively a rebel against God. and a calumniator, until you .make Kood your charge. Prove,' then, the charge, or withdraw it." "The reformers proved it, the greatest great-est and best of our writers have asserted as-serted it: it is a question settled, res adjudieata. Has it not entered into history? Do you not read it in the very ekmentary book for children? Look at the great and enlightened state of Massachusetts! Mas-sachusetts! She Prohibits by law all sectarianism in her admirable system cf schools, and the introduction into them of any books which show any pieference for one, religious denomination denomina-tion over another: and yet. she does not hesitate to tiermit the introduction of looks which teach that Papists are idolators and image worshipers. Have we not. in every land w here we had the l ower, prohibited the Roman worship? Why haw we, the only friends of religious re-ligious liberty, why have we. who have poured out our treasure and our blood to redeem the world from papal tyran-ry tyran-ry and superstition, why have we done this, but for' the reason that we have not dared tolerate sunerstition and idolatry?" "Why did the Jews. God's chosen people through whom the Messiah was to come, and -who were hourly. ex- : pecting him and praying for his coming, com-ing, crucify him. between two thieves when he did come, but on the pretext that he had a devil and was a blasphemer? blas-phemer? Did the fact that they falsely false-ly accused hiin. and then crucified him on that false accusation, supported bv false witnesses, render them the less guilty?" "Do you mean to say that so many-great many-great and good men, so many .pure anil holy men, the glory of their age. their country, and their religion, have all conspired to bear false witness against the Romish church? The thing is incredible," in-credible," . "More so 'than that the Jewish nation na-tion conspire'8 'to cruciTy their God? I know nothing about your great and good men, your pure and holy men; but I know that whoever accuses the church of idolatry, or any species of superstition, utters as foul a lie as did the wicked Jews who told our Lord he had a devil, and that he blaphemed. No doubt, it is an easy matter to prove the church guilty, if all you have to do is to bring a false accusation, assume your own sanctity, and then conclude it must be well founded or you could not have made it. But your logic would be more respectable, if from the falsity of your accusation you concluded your want of sanctity, if the clrtracter of Protestantism is a presumption against their conspiracy to bring a false accusation, accu-sation, the character of Catholics is a still stronger presumption against their having conspired to uphold and practice prac-tice idolatry; for the great and pure and holy men who have lived and died in the Catholic faith, granting you till you can pretend to. are as a thousand to one of those of Protestant communions. commun-ions. But you forget that I was brought up a Protectant, and that to talk to me of Prottstant sanctity is ridiculous. ri-diculous. I am acquainted with Protestants Pro-testants and with what they facetiously call their religion. Our dear mother. too, was brought up a Protestant, a. Presbyterian, and yet what did she tell me on her death-bed?-' "What did she?"- "No matter now; but sh did not die a Presbyterian." "Did not? AVhat mean you?" ' "Some day I may tell you. but you are not now worthy to hear." "Did my father know-?" "As much ap you, and no more." "Did anybody know, but yourself?" "Yes." "Do you mean to insinuate that a popish priest was smuggled into our home?" "O my wise brother, you do hot know-all know-all things. Angels of mercy, messengers messen-gers of grace, are sometimes sent even where the ministers of Satan fancy they do and can tind 110 admission. All things are possible with God. and nothing noth-ing is too good for him to do for those who are obedient to his grace." "Am I to understand that my mother on her death-bed renounced Presby-terianism. Presby-terianism. and became a papist?" "She did not die a Presbyterian. You may recollect that during the last week of her life she refused to see Mr. Grimface, her old Presbyterian pastor." pas-tor." "True, and my father and I thought it strange; but as we had no doubt of her being one of the elect, it gave us no great uneasiness. But there was no Romish priest within 200 miles of us." "I have no doubt that my mother died in a state of grace; but more I will not tell you, till you prove or withdraw your charge against the church." "But why did not our mother tell us all. as well as you: of her apostasy?" "She knew both your father and you, and that, if she had told you, she would have been denied the last consolation con-solation of religion; and after she had received them, there was no opportun ity, till she became unable to do so. But your change prove or withdraw it." "I will prove it. but you must excuse ex-cuse me now. Our conversation has been long, and T am fatigued. But tomorrow, to-morrow, God willing, I will prove that the Romish church is an idolatrous church." "Be it so. But remember and prove it, or I shall require you to own that Protestantism " "Is of the devil. J accept the alternative. alter-native. If I fail to establish the charge of idolatry and superstition against the Romish church. I will consent that the 1 reformers be branded as calumniators, and that Protestants are and have been from the first acting under the delusion delu-sion of Satan." "See that you keep your word." - The brothers separated for the rest of the day, and James, though pleading fatigue, betook himself to his library to look up his proofs and prepare for the morrow. He felt that all depended on the Issue he had joined, and that, if he failed to justify his charge, he could no longer pretend to uphold the reformers. Hitherto his brother had kept him discussing the law of the case; but now he thought he saw a chance of entering upon its merits, and of introducing his witnesses. How; he succeeded will be related in the next 1 chapter. (To be Continued.) |