enquiry respecting the religious tenets, for which you are individually answerable. But I need not remind you that our real question is respecting the doctrines speculative and practical, which are to be ascribed to your Church; such, in short, as may fairly be considered as making up its SYSTEM.

And here I must protest against being tied down to a consideration of those doctrines only, which are now delivered as articles of faith. These alone, it may be, are to be ascribed, as a matter of course, to you, and every one else who adheres to the communion of your Church; but the Church itself is answerable for all those doctrines, which having been promulgated by high authorities within it, by popes or councils, or writers under the immediate direction of such authorities, and having been long and extensively acted upon, are still undisclaimed, much more those which are still retained with favour at Rome. Let me not be misunderstood. I fully admit that, in general, a full and plain disclaimer of such doctrines by individuals may fairly be considered in relation to those individuals, the same as if the doctrines themselves had never been maintained. But they must, I contend, still be regarded as forming a párt (though not equally with articles of faith

a prominent part) of the system of the Church of Rome, so long as they are cherished or retained at the seat of government, and by the highest authorities of that Church.

Still, it is my purpose, and I will not intentionally depart from it, to confine myself to such authorities, as cannot, I think, on any fair ground be objected to, and such as, I expect, you will not yourself venture to reject: the Boman Breviary, for instance, "restored ac

cording to the decree of the Council of Trent, "and published by command of Pius V." possessing, therefore, exactly the same authority as the catechism of the same council, set forth by the same pope,-the acts of other general councils, the bulls of popes, and the works of writers, to whom you yourself, or your own admitted authorities, expressly refer. I shall also not scruple to cite one or two other authors of high reputation, not for the purpose of making your Church responsible for the tenets held by them, but as witnesses of the fact that certain tenets were held at the time they wrote.

Having premised thus much, I proceed to follow you in your own order.

The first particular, on which you undertake to state the doctrine of your Church, is " De"votion to the Virgin Mary, the Saints; re

spect to the Cross, and to the Relics of the "Saints."*

I shall beg leave to divide this particular into two, making the "devotion to the Virgin Mary " and the Saints," the subject of my present letter, and reserving "the cross, relics, and images," for that which will next follow.

On "devotion to the Virgin Mary and the

Saints," you first give us a quotation from the council of Trent, and from the catechism published in pursuance of its decrees, and then cite other more popular works conformed to the same authorities.

The following is your statement of the doctrine of the council.

"The Saints, reigning with Christ, offer up "their prayers to God for man. It is a good "and useful supplication to invoke them," (surely, Sir, this is not quite an adequate translation of bonum atque utile esse supplicitèr eos invocare, it is good and useful suppliantly to invoke them,) "and to have recourse † to their prayers, help, and assistance, to obtain fa"vour from God, through his son Jesus Christ

66

66

our Lord, above, who is our Redeemer and

* Book of the Roman-Catholic Church, p. 100.

+ Confugere.

"Saviour."* "This," you say, "is the decree "of the council of Trent."

66

Now from this the natural conclusion to be drawn (it has, in fact, been drawnt) is, that your Church gives to its members only a recommendation, not an express command, “suppliantly to invoke the Virgin and the Saints." I can discover nothing more imperative in what you further say on this particular, for the Trent catechism is cited by you only to show that "God and the Saints are not to be prayed "to in the same manner." I must, therefore, consider you are stating this to be all for which your Church is here responsible: it recommends its members to make this invocation.

Dr. Milner, indeed, in his "End of Controversy," has been bold enough to affirm, that the "council of Trent barely teaches that it is

good and profitable to invoke the prayers of "the Saints;" and he adds, "hence our di"vines infer, that there is no positive law of the "Church, incumbent on all her children, to

66

pray to the Saints." Bossuet in like manner declares that "the council of Trent contents "itself with teaching the faithful that this

* Sess. XXV. de Invocatione Sanctorum.

+ Vid. infra.

+ Page 252.

practice is good and useful to them, without saying any thing more.'

It must be my business, therefore, to prove that your Church is responsible for a good deal more; and I will prove it from authorities acknowledged by yourself.

Now the very decree of the council of Trent from which you, and Dr. Milner, and Bossuet, have made the extract cited above, (which extract you are pleased to call the Decree,) nay the very words, which immediately follow your quotation in the very same sentence, denounce as impious the denial of the position, "the saints enjoying eternal happiness in hea"ven are to be thus invoked."† Is this 'barely teaching that the practice is good and

"that

profitable?" Does this justify the inference "that there is no positive law of the Church, ❝ incumbent on all her children to pray to the "saints ?"

Again, the Creed of Pope Pius IV. to which you refer as "an accurate and explicit summary "of the Roman-Catholic faith," and to which Dr. Milner has subscribed under the sanction

*Exposition of Faith, sect. V.

† Sess. XXV. Illos, qui negant sanctos, &c. invocandos esse, impiè sentire."

Book of the Roman-Catholic Church, 5.