OCR Text |
Show Cbe two Brokers. y3ssson j Controversial Dialogue Between a Presbyterian and His j Catholic Brother, Leading Up to Former's Conversion. I The author. Brow nson, closing his soliloquy, the dialogue between the two brothers is renewed. Pondering over his defeat, the Presbyterian brother, laid it to yielding the management of the argument to his Catholic brother, and his not having been sufficiently on j his guard against John's sophistry and Jesuitical cunning. Finally James concluded con-cluded that if he could not define and establish Protestantism, . he might, at least, disprove Catholicity, and thus justify the Reformers in separating themselves from the Church. Editor I. M. C.J XIII. as soon as James had come to this sage conclusion, an opportunity was found of renewing the discussion. This time it was John who opened it. "Well, brother." he said, "have you succeeded in finding a definition " of Protestantism to your mind'.'" "I wish to consider Protestantism now. only as a protest against the er- I rors anj corruptions or" popery. Here you affirm and I deny, and consequently consequent-ly the laboring oar is in your hands." -Not exactly, my prudent brother. (You affirm Catholicity is corrupt. You I are. then, the accuser, the plaintiff in action, and must set forth your charges and sustain them. The principle prin-ciple of law is, every man Is to be presumed innocent till proven guilty. The Church must, therefore, be presumed pre-sumed innocent till the contrary is made to appear." "The Church claims to be an ambassador am-bassador from God. and to have the right to command me in his name. She must bring credentials from God before I can be held to hear or obey her. I demand her credentials." "AH in guod time. But not too many things at once. You shift the question ques-tion before you get it fairly stated. You begin by charging the Church with being corrupt and. without offering of-fering any proofs of her corruption, you proceed immediately to demand her credentials as the ambassador of God. This will not do. Corruption implies im-plies integrity: and the plea that the Cht.rch is corrupt concedes her cre-. cre-. dentials and merely charges her with (exceeding her authority, or with hav-j hav-j ing abused it. This plea concedes her 'authority, but the demand for creden-j creden-j tials denies it. You cannot, therefore, plead at one and the same time, want of authority and corruption or abuse of authority. You must elect one or the other and confine yourself to the one you elect." "I am no lawyer and do not under-stand under-stand special pleading." "Hut you are an educated man. and are to be presumed to understand, at least the ordinary rules of logic, and therefore that the same thipg cannot be both conceded and denied in the same breath. You cannot say that the Church is corrupt, has abused or misused her authority, and yet deny her authority. Wrhen you deny that she has ever received authority from God- you declare ner. in quantum ec-desia, ec-desia, a nullity from the beginning, and to allege the corruption of a nullity nul-lity is absurd." . "Be it so. The Romish Church never nev-er received authority from God, or, tri other words, was never divinely commissioned." com-missioned." "Possession is in law prima facie evidence evi-dence of title. The Church is in pos session, and has been so from time immemorial. im-memorial. The presumption is. therefore, there-fore, in her favor, and you must ad-,mit ad-,mit her title or set forth good and valid reasons for contesting it." "Prescription does not apply in the case of the Church." "It is admitted in law and there-, fore by the roason of mankind as a general principle. If you deny its application ap-plication in the case on the Church', you allege an exception to the general gen-eral rule and must show a reason for it." "Prescription does not give an absolute abso-lute title. 'but simpry a presumptive title against adverse claimants. It presupposes the existence of the estate es-tate to be-conceded, the title of w hich is vested in some one, and if to presume pre-sume it to be in the existence of the estate is the matter in question, it Is idle to plead possession or prescription. What is not, cannot be possessed. The estate, in the present case, is the divine di-vine commission has at some time been issued, possession may, I grant, be pleaded as prima facie evidence of title in the possessor. But I deny that such a commission as the Romis'h church claims to have "received has ever been issued. You must prove, therefore, the fact of such commission before you can plead possession or prescription. "Possession implies the object possessed. pos-sessed. Evidence of the possession is. therefore, evidence of the existence of that which is possessed. Consequently Consequent-ly just in proportion as there is evidence evi-dence that the church has possessed, or claimed and exercised, with the general gen-eral consent, the commission in question, ques-tion, and as her having claimed and exercised it with this consent is presumptive pre-sumptive proof of title against adverse claimants, is there presumptive proof that the commission has beeh issued." "Quod nimis probat. nihil probat. proves too much. A pagan or a Mahometan Ma-hometan may say as much." "If either paganism or Mahometan-ism Mahometan-ism claims a similar commission and can, as the church be said to be in possession, the fact is, in like manner, presumptive evidence of title' till the contrary appears, I both concede and contend. Nothing can generate nothing. noth-ing. The claim to a divine commission commis-sion must have had some origin, and, on the principle of law, that every man must be presumed innocent till proved to be guilty, must be presumed to have had a good origin till the contrary con-trary is proved. False religions imply the existence of the true religion, as counterfeit coin implies the genuine. The claim to divine commission, if it be really made by either paganism or Mahometanism, is therefore prima facie evidence that at some time, to somebody, a' divine commission has issued. is-sued. If no such commission had ever been given, it is not conceivable that it could have been claimed. No one wuld eVer have falsely claimed to be an ambassador from one court to another, an-other, if no genuine ambassador, or nothing in the same order, had ever been known or heared of the sending send-ing of ambassadors must have become a general custom. before anyone, not duly commissioned, could have conceived con-ceived the project of palming himself off as one, or could have hoped for any success in tne attempt to ao it. The fact of possession, where it could be pleaded, would be a presumption of title . in the Mahometan or pagan, in like manner as it is in the case of the Ca.tholic. Hence the church, where she has never been in possession, when presenting herself as an adverse claimant, claim-ant, always produces her credentials, and gives good and valid reasons why th'e present occupant should be ousted, and she placed in possession. I admit, therefore, all that the argument implies, im-plies, and deny that it proves too much. "But admit it, and every mad enthusiast en-thusiast who claims to be divinely commissioned must be presumed to be so till the contray is shown. "Not at all. His claim to divine commission is, if you will, a presumption presump-tion that at some time, to somebody, a divine commission has issued: but not that it has issued to him; for he Is net and never has been in possession. He -must show a reason for his claim before it vim be admitted. I "At least the principle applies to lYutestants its well as to pagans nn ' j Mahometans. ;liiil you i;m no inure 'j piead prescription against us than j against them. "I have admitted the plea uf pr-- sumption, in the case of paganism and Mahumetatiism. on the supposition th.tr they are really in possession, a fact. However, which I let pass, but do nui concede. Cut Protestants cannut pl-'ad prescription because they arc ii.;. and never have been in possession, and because be-cause they ,,, ,-ot even claim to be. since you. in their name, deny that the commission in question Ui t ver issued. "But conceding fiiar there was a presumption pre-sumption it; l'.ior of tho church at. the epoch of the reformation, and that the reformers were not at liberty to separate from her without cause, th'.-.-cannot be said now. The church is n.f now in possession. The rf-'omv.-rs ga ve good and valid reasons tor separating from her communion, and she ha; been condemned as a usurper by the judgment judg-ment of mankind. The question is not now on ousting her from a possesion she has held from time immemorial, but on reversing the judgment rendered ren-dered against her. readmitting In r to a nossession t'ri.m which h.. Ivi.. I I ejected by due process of law. "When was the judgment you speak . f rendered? and where is the record of the court? I "The fact is one of public notoriety, j and all the world now laughs at tli" I ridiculous pretentions of Rome. I "Do you in.-iudo in all the world the 1 pagan and Mahometan worlds? "Why should I not? "It may be doubted whether the question has really ever cora to them in such a shape that they can be said to have pronoun -t-i t judgment upon ir: ' and as they reject Protestantism whenever when-ever it pretends to be Christian, no less than Catholicity, they might possibly be as unsafe witnesses for a Presbyterian Presby-terian as for a Catholic perhaps even more so. f "Let them go. mean bv all th world all the Christian worid. Chris- I tendom so called. f "You mean to sissert. then, that Christendom has pronounced judgment against the Catholic Church? ' I "Yes. against the Romish Church." j "You distinguish without a difference. I The church mi communion with th I Church of Rome, acknowledging its pontiff for its supreme head on earth. is the only church which, by the con- j sent of mankind, is or ever has been f denominated the Catholic Church." I "She should be denominated the f mother of harlots." ; "So that Protestant communions might claim to b- her daughters. But no more of this. Have Catholics, who remain in her communion, pronounced judgment against the Church?" "Perhaps not." j "And they are as two. if not three, to one of a!l who bear the Christian name." "I am sorry to say they are." "And I am not sorry, and would to God there were none but Catholics on the earth." "That is. you would, if you could, i exterminate all- Protestants." "Yes. if making hem sincere and humble Catholics were exterminating them. But if Catholics are the great I majority of Christendom, how can yon f. tell me that Christendom has pro- .; j nounced judgment against the J Church?" 1 "You may have it so." j "Then your position is. the Church is condemned by all by whom she is condemned.' This may be granted. But . these are a small minority, a mere f handful, of those who bear the Chris- f tian name. E!y what right do you pro- i nounce their judgment the judgment F; of mankind?" f "Protestant nations are the more en- I lightened and advanced portion of : I mankind." ' j "Is that a conceded fact?" . j "Is it not?" j "Do Catholics concede It?" ; f "Perhaps not." ; i . "They are the great majority, and. , as they deny it, how can you put it forth as generally conceded?" "The denial of Catholics amounts to , nothing the fact is as I allege." , "Tn whose judgment?" s "In the judgment of all who are competent to judge in the premises." '. I "Who says so?" I "I say so." - ; "On what authority?" : I "The fact is evident, and cannot be f questioned." I "But it is questioned and denied by - Catholics, who are as five to one to ' " your Protestants." "They w'ill swear to anything their f priests tell them. Their denial is not I to be counted. They are not to be per- , ' mitted to testify in their own cause." "As much as you in yours. Their denial de-nial is as good as your assertion, till ' .-you .-you show some reason why your assertion asser-tion is to be preferred." -, ' "I tell you Protestant nations are the most enligntened and advanced ' portion of mankind, as is well known." "Well known to whom? To them- selves?" ; "Yes, if you will." ' "By what right are they both wit- i nesses and judges in their own cause?" "By the right of being the most en- s lightened and advanced portion of mankind." . : (To Be Continued.,) |