blood has not taught us thus to live and thus to pray, but the Spirit of our Father who is in heaven.

What would be thought of his consistency or sincerity who should pray earnestly in the morning that he might redeem his time, and devote it as a precious talent to God, and then deliberately and habitually gave all its hours to the most frivolous amusements, the most childish vanities, and perhaps even to dissipation and excess? By what spirit is he animated who prays in the morning that he may be filled with all grace, and in the evening goes for an answer, not to the social prayermeeting or to the closet, but to the gin-shop, the temple of an idol, viler and more destructive than Moloch himself? Did the Spirit of God help that man's infirmities, and assist him in prayer, whom you heard in the morning entreat, with great apparent earnestness, that the love of Christ might ever constrain him—whom you heard confess before God that he was not his own, that he was bought with a price, that he was his who made him and who redeemed him; and yet is surpassed by no one in the entireness of his devotion to himself and to the world; who has many opportunities of doing good, but neglects them all; who, supposed to be a servant of Jesus Christ, has many applications from his fellow-servants for his co-operation in the service of their common Lord, and rejects them all? No; such persons may have another spirit besides their own dwelling in them; but in such dens of selfishness and insincerity the Spirit of truth and holiness and love the Spirit of the living God-can never dwell. Bootle.

may

V.-IS ROME GUILTY OF IDOLATRY?-No. 1. ALTHOUGH it is not within the scope of the 'Record' to enter into a consideration of those political aspects in which Popery be regarded, there is a large field for investigation connected with its dogmatic teaching, and the religious bearing it has on the future and eternal well-being of men. The great efforts at present making by the adherents of Rome to extend its ecclesiastical system in this country, the inroads it has already made and is about to make, favoured by the legislation of England, into neighbourhoods where hitherto it has been known only by report, the accession daily made to its ranks of able, acute, and subtle expounders of its doctrines,-these reasons, together with a not uncommon ignorance in our churches of its real features, and of the documentary evidence that can be produced against its errors and superstitions, have induced the writer to lay before the readers of the 'Record,' in a few papers, such arguments and testimonies as shall not only develope the real character of the Papacy, but likewise aid them in any conflict they may be called

to endure with the Jesuits and priests now so lamentably abundant in this Protestant land.

On no topic are the partizans of Rome more sensitive than on that which it is proposed to make the subject of present discussion. The question asked at the head of this paper will be met with a most indignant denial.

"Idolaters!" says Dr. Wiseman, "know ye, my brethren, the import of this name? That it is the most frightful charge that can be laid to the score of any Christian? For, throughout God's Word, the crime of idolatry is spoken of as the most heinous, the most odious, and the most detestable in his eyes, even in an individual; what, then, if committed in a mass, by millions of men? Assuredly they know not what they say, who deliberately and directly make this enormous charge; and they have to answer for misrepresentation-yea, for calumny of the blackest dye-who hesitate not again and again to repeat, with heartless earnestness and perseverance, this most odious of accusations, without being fully assured-which they cannot be-in their consciences and before God, that it really can be proved."-Lectures, vol. i., p. 93.

Nevertheless, it is the writer's profound conviction that the charge is sustainable, and he will be much mistaken if the grounds of that conviction are not such as to lead an unprejudiced reader to the same conclusion. Dr. Wiseman appeals to the Bible, and to that in the first instance we will go. Its decisions ascertained, authentic passages from Romanist writings shall then be produced, to illustrate the agreement or discordance of Romanist doctrine and practice therewith. Assertion shall go for nothing on either side. Evidence the most unquestionable shall be alleged, and the sincerity of Dr. Wiseman's exclamations of horror and indignation be adjudged by the reality of truth.

The least attentive reader of the Bible cannot but be struck with the stress which is everywhere laid upon the necessity of a pure worship of God-one entirely free from the idolatry and its attendant practices in which the nations of the earth were involved at the time of the promulgation of the law. The Supreme Being claims the entire service of man, his creature, and calls for a correspondent homage and submission to his will. Any interference with that prostration of spirit before Him, or any transference of the honour and obedience that are his due, is treated as the worst of crimes. Instead of referring to a host of passages illustrative of this, it will suffice to quote the first and second commandments, or the first only, as it is regarded by the Church of Rome. "Thou shalt have no other Gods before Me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any like

b 2 M 2

ness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down (adorabis, Vulgate,) to them, nor serve (coles) them: for I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, &c." (Exod. xx. 3, 4, 5.) It is repeated in Deut. vi. 13: "Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve (servies) him, and shalt swear by His name. Ye shall not go after other gods." And our Lord, in his temptation, employs this command as an all-sufficing answer to the request of Satan. (Matt. iv. 10.) "Thou shalt worship (adorabis) the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve (servies)."

It is obvious that here is a claim to exclusive service, veneration, and obedience; that the reverence and service to be rendered cannot, without the highest guilt, be given to any other, or others, than to God; that it is an act of the greatest impiety to bow down to images of human manufacture; that, in short, the thing forbidden or the actions denounced is idolatry. To God alone must religious service be rendered, and before Him alone must every knee bow in reverence and adoring worship. Conscious that the doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome do at least seem to oppose this command, and run counter to its plain and universal declaration, the compilers of the Catechism of the Council of Trent proceed, under the section occupied in an exposition of the commandment, to justify the invocation and honouring of saints. To the two parts into which the command is divided, the Council thus addresses itself, asserting the propriety of those dogmas and practices this commandment would appear to be specially framed to denounce.

"It is a good and useful thing suppliantly to invoke the saints, and to flee to their prayers, help, and assistance, because of the benefits bestowed by God through his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Redeemer and Saviour, and those men think impiously who deny that the saints are to be invoked, or who affirm that they do not pray for men, or that to beseech them to pray for us is idolatry, or that it is contrary to the word of God, and opposed to the honour of Jesus Christ, the one Mediator between God and men, or that it is foolish to supplicate, verbally and mentally, those who reign in heaven. Let them teach also that the holy bodies of the holy martyrs and others living with Christ are to be venerated by the faithful, since by them God bestows many benefits upon men. Moreover, let them teach that the images of Christ, of the virgin mother of God, and of other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches, and due honour and veneration rendered to them. Not that it is believed that any power or divinity resides in them, on account of which they are to be worshipped, or that any benefit is to be sought from them,

or any confidence placed in images, as was formerly by the gentiles, who fixed their hope on idols. But the honour with which they are regarded is referred to those who are represented by them; so that we adore Christ, and venerate the saints, whose likenesses these images bear, when we kiss them, and uncover our heads in their presence, and prostrate ourselves.” *

It is very manifest that this portion of the proceedings of the council is drawn up with extreme care. For that the honour to be paid to the dead and to their images seems at least opposed to the command, cannot for a moment be doubted, and was so felt to be by the members of that assembly. It therefore most sedulously keeps out of sight the actual forms of invocation adopted in the devotional services of the Roman communion, and ventures not to specify these ceremonies and forms of prayer, which, when addressed to the dead but glorified saints, cannot be and are not idolatrous. It is true that idolatry is denounced; that the use of images and the worship of saints are declared to be right, good, and useful only when properly carried on; and that care should be taken to prevent a superstitious use and reverence, so that the ignorant be not led into false doctrine or dangerous error. But if they are accursed who fall into the error, no less accursed are they who shall teach or think in opposition to the decrees, although it may appear to them, as it did to the fathers of Trent, that the doctrines and practices thus established are opposed to that commandment which is the law and rule. of all religious worship. The earnest desire expressed by the council, that abuses should be avoided and abolished, shows that it either knew or feared the existence of those abuses, and that, therefore, the dogmas it enunciated bordered very closely on the regions of superstition and idolatry.

But notwithstanding the explanations and disclaimers of the council, and the pious horror of bishop Wiseman, the church of Rome can be convicted of the very heresy it disclaims of the very crime it denounces. Its practice, its approved and universal practice, the best commentary upon the text given by the council, bears out most fully the charge.

The commandment consists of two distinct parts:-1. A positive; 2. A negative. They shall be taken in order. The first claims an exclusive homage and worship for the Divine Being, the Maker of all things. For the purpose at present in hand, it is not necessary to consider whether that homage and worship is to be called latreia, or douleia. It is admitted by all, that religious service, homage, and veneration are the sole, due right of the God

* Canones et Decreta S. Conc. Trid. Sess. xxiv. Cramp's Text Book, p. 346.

of heaven and earth. There is of course a worship or respect which is due to every creature, varying with his rank and position, that may be called civil, social, or municipal. But there are forms of respect, reverence, homage, or worship, which are peculiarly religious, and have respect alone to God, and ought only to be employed towards Him. We may exhibit a civil worship towards all who are over us; a moral worship to every one who surpasses us in virtue; but a religious worship to God alone. This seems to be the force of the words-"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Again: the command forbids not only a religious regard to other beings, to the displacement or entire obscuration of the divine unity and glory, but also the exhibition of religious respect to others as well as to God. None other being must be conjoined with him in worship, or worshipped at the same time, i.e. as well as He. His glory he will not give to another. As the object of human hope and adoration, and the giver of salvation, He must stand alone. Beside Him there is none other Saviour. For all that constitutes man's blessedness and highest joy, he must alone be sought. Now the first part of the decree quoted above is opposed to this command, and, in practice, the invocation of saints, fleeing to their prayers, help, and assistance, is idolatry—a substitution for, or a partial displacement of, or a religious worship conjoined with that which is the sole right of the Most High. This I proceed to illustrate.

Such

The chief acts of religion "are adoration, praise, and thanksgiving, oblation of ourselves to God, sacrifice, and prayer, which ought to be the daily employments of a Christian soul."* is the statement of a catholic, but to which one or two things more will presently be added. The term sacrifice applies or refers to the mass; in other respects the definition may be received as a fair and correct statement of those things which make up religious worship. A due worship of God consists in ascription of all good to Him, in seeking all things in Him alone, and in having recourse to Him in "Hence arises prayer, every want. hence praise and thanksgiving, these being attestations to the glory which we attribute to Him."+ Adoration, in which we exhibit our reverence to Him, and self-abasement, in which we surrender ourselves devoutly and obediently to His will, make up that action or worship we call religious, and by which we show our dependence, our love, our obedience to Him in whom we live, and move, and have our being. Let the same actions be

* Garden of the Soul, p. 6.

f Calvin. Nec. of Reformation, Tracts, i. p. 127, edit. 1844.