Now this, let it be well observed, is the exact position of the faithful Protestant. As witnesses we are forced into separation from the great mass of professing Christendom. We werecompelled at the Reformation either to abandon truth, or to quit the church which claims to itself the name of Catholic. And what is the subject matter of our protest? What are the points for which we struggle? If we were to search throughout the English language for any one short sentence, which should contain at once the sum and substance of our Protestant profession, I know of none that could be so exactly suitable as that with which the Holy Ghost has furnished us,—“the witness of Jesus and the Word of God.” The whole of the Protestant controversy branches out from this one passage: it contains the germ of the whole argument.
Now there is something very cheering in this conclusion. We are often taunted with our disunion from the (so called) Catholic church: we are often reproached because we are in a state of separation. But we give thanks for those reproaches. They are amongst the title-deeds of our inheritance; they help to prove us what we wish to be, the saints of God, and the witnesses for Christ. Had the Spirit of God described the saints in the latter days, as united under one vicar upon earth, as swaying the sceptre of unresisted power, as exercising lordship over kings and potentates, as reigning triumphantly through the known world, then indeed we should have trembled. But now it is the reverse. Our position is exactly that ascribed to the saints of God in prophecy; the position of Rome exactly that ascribed to the man of sin. The Scriptures tell us plainly that the saints in thelatter days must stand aloof from the great apostacy, raising against it the voice of protest; and it fills our heart with gladness to find ourselves in that exact position. The saints of God are described in prophecy almost by the very name of “Protestant.” We are not ashamed, therefore, of the blessed title, but following the guidance of the prophetic Scriptures, we had rather far be called “Protestant” than “Catholic.” He that sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God, he is sure to claim for himself the name of Catholic, but he that is the servant of God must stand out boldly as the unflinching Protestant for Christ.
(2) This also is the security of the saints.
To stand against the apostacy of the latter days, they must be drawing truth from God himself, and deriving life from Christ himself. They must listen to God himself, as speaking to them in his own inspired word, they must be kept by Christ himself while they believe on him as their only Lord. Their strength lies in this, that there is no curtain, no veil, no cloud between the soul and God—no second Mediator to convey the truth to them, or to convey them to Christ. They go straight into the presence of the Father: they learn his own word from his own lips, and they are ushered into his presence by his own well-beloved Son. So it is that they “overcome by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony.”
This is their safety against error. In the doubts, and dangers, and delusions of the latterdays, they rest on that which is infallible. Holy writers may mislead; human guides may fail; the most attractive ministers may become spellbound by the seductions of the day; but the Word of God remains unaltered and unalterable; and the saints of God must stand secure, being taught by the Spirit to depend on it alone for truth.
This is their security against a fall. They bear their testimony to the glories of Christ’s grace, and meanwhile they rest secure in it. As witnesses for Christ, they are believers in Christ. The foundation on which they build is Christ himself. They lean on his atonement, his all-sufficient sacrifice, his perfect and complete redemption, nor can all the storms of hell prevail to shake their safety. The anchor of their soul entereth into that within the veil; and though they may here be tossed and troubled, no trouble, no turmoil, no distraction can tear them from the anchor that is fixed fast in the sanctuary of God. They derive their strength from Christ himself, as seated at the right hand of God; they live with him in the enjoyment of a direct and immediate union with himself; “Their life is hid with Christ in God:” and no man can rend the bond; no distractions can burst the union; nor can all the devils in hell combined prevail to pluck one single saint out of the faithful hand of his redeeming Lord. “I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
And now, dear brethren, to conclude. I have preached these sermons under the deep conviction that clouds are gathering around us, and that our great sifting time is near. Eighteen hundred years have nearly passed since the Saviour said, “I come quickly.” Nor are there signs wanting of his approach. There is to be seen throughout the world a breaking down of fixed principles of religious belief, a spirit of un-settlement brooding over the minds of men, and a loose indifference to the unscriptural claims of Rome. All this is predicted as a sign of his approach. Let us then stand fast in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ alone. As pardoned sinners, let us cling to the cross; as justified believers, let us go boldly to the throne of grace; as God’s elect, let us rally round the banner of the Lamb. Then men of expediency may forsake the truth in the hour of its need; men ignorant of their bibles may be carried off by the seducing spirits of the latter days: men of unbelief may scoff alike at our fears and hopes; but Christ will hold us fast in his own right hand till the day of his coming. Clouds may gather, black as hell; storms may burst, terrific in their crash; but we shall be kept safe in the pavilion of our God, till we join the one, vast, harmonious hymn of praise, which will swell up from the whole company of God’s elect, to welcome Christ as he comes forth in his kingdom, the Redeemer, the Advocate, the Strength, the Salvation of his saints.
The4th Rule of the Council of Trent respecting Prohibited Books:—
“Since it has been found by experience that if the Sacred Scriptures are allowed everywhere without distinction in the vulgar tongue, more harm than good arises in consequence of the rashness of man; let this be left to the judgment of the Bishop or Inquisitor; so that with the advice of the parish priest or confessor he may allow the use of the Bible in the vulgar tongue, when translated by Catholic authors, to such persons as they may consider capable of receiving not injury, but an increase of their faith and piety, from this kind of reading: which permission they must receive in writing. But any one who shall presume without such permission either to read or to possess them, shall be forbidden the absolution of his sins, unless he first restore the Bible to the ordinary. Booksellers also, who shall sell the Bible in the vulgar tongue to anyone without the aforesaid permission, or shall in any other way provide it, shall forfeit the price of the books, to be employed in pious uses by the Bishop, and shall be subject to such other penalties as the Bishop may think it right to inflict, according to the character of the offence. Regulars may neither read nor purchase them without receiving permission from their prelates.”
N.B.—It is very important to observe that this rule refers to Roman Catholic versions, i.e., to their own authorized translations, and forbids even the regulars to possess a copy without permission from the Bishop.
The following extracts from the letter of the present Pope, dated 8th of May, 1844, show that the decree of the Council of Trent is still in full force with reference to the circulation of the Scriptures:—
“To return to Bibles translated into the vulgar tongue. It is long since pastors found themselves necessitated to turn their attention particularly to the versions current at secret conventicles, and which heretics laboured, at great expense, to disseminate.
“Hence the warning and decrees of our predecessor, Innocent III., of happy memory, on the subject of lay societies and meetings of women, who had assembled themselves in thediocese of Metz, for objects of piety and the study of the Holy Scriptures. Hence the prohibition which subsequently appeared in France and Spain during the sixteenth century, with respect to the vulgar Bible. It became necessary, subsequently, to take even greater precautions, when the pretended Reformers, Luther and Calvin, daring by a multiplicity and incredible variety of errors, to attack the immutable doctrine of the faith, omitted nothing in order to seduce the faithful by their false interpretations, and translations into their vernacular tongues, which the then novel invention of printing contributed more rapidly to propagate and multiply. Whence it was generally laid down in the regulations dictated by the Fathers, adopted by the Council of Trent, and approved of by our predecessor, Pius VII., of happy memory, and which regulations are prefixed to the list of prohibited books, that the reading of the holy Bible translated into the vulgar tongue, should not be permitted except to those to whom it might be deemed necessary to confirm in the faith and piety. Subsequently, when heretics still persisted in their frauds, it became necessary for Benedict XIV. to superadd[96]the injunction that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the holy Fathers, or otherlearned and Catholic authors. Notwithstanding this, some new sectarians of the school of Jansenius, after the example of the Lutherans and Calvinists, feared not to blame these justifiable precautions of the Apostolical See, as if the reading of the holy books had been at all times, and for all the faithful, useful, and so indispensable that no authority could assail it.
“But we find this audacious assertion of Jansenius, withered by the most rigorous censures in the solemn sentence, which was pronounced against their doctrine, with the assent of the whole Catholic universe, by the sovereign pontiffs of modern times, Clement XI. in hisunigenitusconstitution of the year 1713, and Pius VI. in his constitutionauctorem fideiof the year 1794.
“Consequently, even before the establishment of Bible Societies was thought of, the decrees of the Church which we have quoted, were intended to guard the faithful against the frauds of heretics, who cloak themselves under the specious pretext that it is necessary to propagate and render common the study of the holy books. Since then, our predecessor, Pius VII. of glorious memory, observing the machinations of these societies to increase under his pontificate, did not cease to oppose their efforts, at one time through the medium of the apostolical nuncios, at another by letters and decrees, emanating from the several congregations of cardinals of the holy Church, and at another by the two pontifical letters addressed to the Bishops of Gnesen and the Archbishop of Mohilif. After him, another of our holy predecessors, Leo XII., reprovedthe operations of the Bible Societies, by his circulars addressed to all the Catholic pastors in the universe, under the date of May 5th, 1824.
“Shortly afterwards, our immediate predecessor, Pius VIII. of happy memory, confirmed their condemnation by his circular letter of May 24, 1829. We, in short, who succeeded them, notwithstanding our great unworthiness, have not ceased to be solicitous on this subject, and have especially studied to bring to the recollection of the faithful, the several rules which have been successively laid down with regard to the vulgar versions of the holy books.”
And again.
“Let all know then the enormity of the sin against God and the church which they are guilty of, who dare to associate themselves with any of these (the bible) societies, or abet them in any way. Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, delivered in former times by apostolic authority against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the Holy Scriptures translated into the vulgar tongue. With reference to the works of whatsoever writer we call to mind, the observance of the general rules and decrees of our predecessors, to be found prefixed to theindexof prohibited books: and we invite the faithful to be upon their guard, not only against the books named in theindex, but also against those prescribed in the general prescriptions.”
These extracts prove beyond the possibility of controversy
(1.) That the rule of the Index of the Councilof Trent has never been permitted to fall into abeyance, and has never been repealed. From the time of its enactment it has always been, and now is, the binding law of the Church of Rome. It has been constantly enforced by Papal authority, and is especially commended to the careful attention of the faithful by the authoritative letter of the present Pope.
(2.) That no Roman Catholic is permitted on any pretext to read, or to possess a copy of the Bible in his own language, without a written order from the Bishop or Inquisitor. It matters not who is the author of the translation, whether Protestant or Romanist, whether Luther or the Pope himself; if any man either possess or read it, for that offence he is cut off from absolution and thereby from church communion.
(3.) That since the days of Benedict XIV. it has always been, and now is, unlawful under any circumstances to read any version without notes. God’s word is not allowed to speak for itself; man’s gloss must accompany it; the truth is forbidden in its simplicity; they are afraid to allow the people to read even their own version, without superadding extracts from “other learned and Catholic authors.”
(4.) That these versions with their notes may not be possessed or read unless they are first approved of by the Holy See. Query. How many versions approved by the Pope exist in the whole world? Is there one in England? It is of course difficult to prove a negative; but those who are best acquainted with the subject assert that theyhave never been able to discover one. See Venn’s Letter to Waterworth, Jan. 15, 1845.
(5.) That the Church of Rome attacks the broad principle of the general usefulness of the Bible. The Pope does not merely discuss the comparative merits of this or that version, but goes boldly to the great question, whether the reading of the Bible is really useful for the people. The Jansenists, according to his own account, asserted that the reading of the holy books “had been at all times, and for all the faithful, useful, and so indispensable that no authority could assail it.” This he declares to be an audacious assertion, and pronounces it withered by the unanimous condemnation of the whole Catholic universe.
THE END.
LONDON:G. J. PALMER, PRINTER, SAVOY STREET, STRAND.
[5]The use of this double rule may be seen in any Roman Catholic writing. Take e.g. the 1st decree of the 25th Session of the Council of Trent. “Since the Catholic Church, taught by the Holy Spirit, has learned from the Sacred Scriptures, and from the ancient tradition of the Fathers, that there is a purgatory, &c.” Here is an appeal to two sources of divine truth, Scripture and Tradition.
[6]Art. VI.
[9]This appears very plainly from a letter of the present Pope, dated, 8th of May, 1844, and addressed to the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops. He complains of Bible Societies, as “Pretending to popularize the holy pages, and render them intelligible without the aid of any interpreter.”
[10a]Eph. iv. 11,12.
[10b]Acts xx. 28.
[10c]2 Chron. xv. 3.
[12a]Hab. ii. 2.
[12b]John xvi. 13.
[12c]Eph. i. 17.
[13a]1 John ii. 27.
[13b]In the letter itself, Leo says, “Reprove . . . that the faithful entrusted to you, (adhering strictly to the rules of our congregation of the Index,) be persuaded that if the Sacred Scriptures be everywhere indiscriminately published, more evil than advantage will arise thence, on account of the rashness of men.” The congregation of the Index, is a congregation appointed by the Church of Rome to draw up a list of prohibited books. In the 4th rule they condemn the free circulation of the Bible. See Appendix A.
It should be observed that these extracts refer not to Protestant, but to their own Roman Catholic versions. See Mr. Venn’s letter to Mr. Waterworth, January 15th, 1845.
The present Pope agrees with his predecessors. In the letter above referred to, dated May the 8th, 1844, he says, “We confirm and renew the decrees recited above, delivered in former times, by apostolic authority, against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the Holy Scripture translated into the vulgar tongue.” The motive for these restrictions appears very plainly from another passage in the same letter. “Watch attentively over those who are appointed to expound the Holy Scriptures, and see that they acquit themselves faithfully according to the capacity of their hearers, and that they dare not under any pretext whatever, interpret or explain the holy pages contrary to the tradition of the holy fathers, and to the service of the Catholic church.” Here are two standards of interpretation laid down, tradition, and self-interest. The Romish Preacher must not preach even God’s truth, if it does not happen to serve the purposes of Rome. It seems very strange that an infallible church should be so afraid of the infallible word. Appendix B.
[19]Sess. VI. Can. 11. “Si quis dixerit, homines justificari vel solâ imputatione justitiæ Christi, vel solâ peccatorum remissione, exclusâ gratia et charitate, quæ in cordibus eorum per Spiritum Sanctum diffundatur, atque illis inhæreat; aut etiam gratiam, quâ justificamur, esse tantum favorum Dei, anathema sit.”
[23a]James ii. 10, 11.
[23b]Gal. iii. 10.
[24]Article xii. “Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God’s judgment, yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith; inasmuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known, as a tree discerned by the fruit.”
[25a]Job xxvii. 7.
[25b]Luke xv. 7.
[25c]Coloss. i. 10.
[26a]John xv. 8.
[26b]Hooker on Justification.
[27]Psalm xix. 3.
[30]The doctrine of supererogation is worse still. According to it some men do more than is required, and not only satisfy God’s law themselves, but gain a superfluous merit which may be made over to their less perfect brethren. Catechism of the Council of Trent, Part II., De Pænitentia, 109, 110, “The extreme goodness and clemency of God must be chiefly praised for this, that he has granted to human weakness that one shall be allowed to make satisfaction for another, which indeed belongs especially to this part of penitence, for as with reference to contrition and confession no man can mourn or confess for another, so those who are indued with divine grace can perform in the name of another that which is due to God. Whence it happens that in one sense one man is found to bear another’s burden.”
[31]1 Pet iii. 18.
[35a]“Præterea est purgatorius ignis, quo piorum animæ ad definitum tempus cruciatæ expiantur, ut eis in æternam patriam ingressus patere possit, in quam nihil coinquinatum ingreditur.” Part I. Art. v. §§ 5.
[35b]This is sometimes denied, when men wish to recommend the doctrine to Protestants, but it stands written in the book. “Purgatorius ignis.”
[36a]Large sums are left in legacy, and paid by surviving friends, in order that masses may be said for souls in purgatory.
[36b]Catm. part I, Art. v. § 5.
[37]1 Pet. iv. 12.
[40a]Rev. iv. 8.
[40b]Luke xvi. 22.
[41a]Acts vii. 55.
[41b]Phil. i. 23.
[42]Phil. i. 21.
[44]Psalm xxiii. 4.
[47]“Si quis post acceptam justificationis gratiam, cuilibet peccatori pænitenti ita culpam remitti, ut reatum æternæ pœnæ deleri dixerit, ut nullus remaneat reatus pænæ temporalis exsolvendæ vel in hoc Sœculo, vel in futuro in Purgatorio, antequam ad regna cælorum aditus patere possit; anathema sit.”—Trent Sess. vi. Can. 30.
I never could understand how the Church of Rome reconciles this decree with its doctrine of extreme unction. The Council of Trent decrees, Sess. xiv., Extreme Unction, Chap. 2, “The matter of the Sacrament is the grace of the Holy Spirit, whose unction blots out all such offences, and remains of sin, as still require expiation.” “Cujus unctio delicta, si quæ sint adhuc expianda, ac peccati reliquias abstergit.” If this be true, what sins remain for expiation in purgatory? What can be the use of masses for the dead? Surely the priests of the Church of Rome cannot believe their own decree; for if they did, it would be nothing short of robbery to receive fees for extricating souls from purgatory. They are already free through extreme unction.
[49]How miserable is the confidence of a poor dying Roman Catholic! He trembles at the thought of purgatorial fire, and leaves money to the priest that masses may be said for his release. If the priest happen to forget him, in purgatory he must remain. Nay, more! If the masses are offered they may be worthless, for the Church of Rome declares the intention of the priest to be necessary to a sacrament. Trent, Sess. vii., Can. 11. “If any man shall say that the intention of doing that which the church does is not required in ministers while they perform and confer the sacrament, let him be accursed.” The priest, therefore, may perform all the masses, and get all the money, and yet if his intention happen to be wanting the poor soul would profit nothing. This places the soul in purgatory at the absolute mercy of the priest on earth. The Rev. James Page, in his “Letters to a Priest of the Church of Rome,” gives the following passage from the “Master Key of Popery,” written by D. Antonio Gavin, in which he, who was himself a priest, gives an extract from the private confession of a priest, being at the point of death, in 1710. “The necessary intention of a priest, in the administration of baptism and consecration, without which the sacraments are of none effect, I confess I had it not several times, as you shall see in the parish books; and observe there, that all those marked with a star, the baptism was not valid, for I had no intention; and for this I can give no other reason than my malice and wickedness; many of them are dead, for which I am heartily sorry. As for the times I have consecrated without intention, we must leave it to God Almighty’s mercy for the wrong done by it to the souls of my parishioners, and those in purgatory cannot be helped.” Oh! that we could persuade our poor Roman Catholic brethren to trust at once to the great High Priest, who blotteth out all sin by his own most precious blood!
[52]Mal. ii. 2.
[53a]Psalm lxix. 22.
[53b]Sess. xiii. De Eucharistia, Section 4, “Sancta hæc synodus declarat per consecrationem panis et vini conversionem fieri totius substantiæ panis in substantiam corporis Christi Domini nostri, et totius substantiæ vini in substantiam sanguinis ejus.”
[53c]Catm. Part ii. De Eucharistia, Sec. 32, “A pastoribus explicandum est non solum verum Christi corpus, et quidquid ad veram corporis rationem pertinet, velut ossa et nervos, sed etiam totum Christum in hoc sacramento contineri.”
[53d]Sess. xiii. Canon 1, “Si quis negaverit, in sanctissimæ eucharistiæ sacramento contineri veré, realiter et substantialiter corpus et sanguinem unà cum anima et divinitate Domini nostri Jesu Christi, ac proinde totum Christum; sed dixerit tantummodò esse in eo, ut in signo, vel figura, aut virtute; anathema sit.”
[54]Sees. xiii. Can. 6, “Si quis dixerit, in Sancto Eucharistiæ Sacramento Christum unigenitum Dei Filium non esse cultu Latriæ etiam externo, adorandum: atque ideò nec festivâ peculiari celebritate venerandum, neque in processionibus, secundùm laudabilem et universalem Ecclesia Sancta ritum et consuetudinem, solemniter circumgestandum, vel non publicè, ut adoretur, populo proponendum, et ejus adoratores esse idololatres; anathema sit.”
[55a]Sess. xxii. 2, “In divino hoc sacrificio, quod in missa peragitur, idem ille Christus continetur, et incruentê immolatur, qui in ara crucis simul seipsum cruentè obtulit.”
[55b]Sess. xxii. Can. 3, “Si quis dixerit, missa sacrificium tantum esse laudis, et gratiarum actionis, aut nudam commemorationem sacrificii in cruce peracti, non autem propitiatorium, vel soli prodesse sumenti; neque pro vivis et defunctis, pro peccatis, pœnis, satisfactionibus et aliis necessitatibus, offerri debere; anathema sit.”
[56]Isa. xliv. 16, 17.
[57]Art. 31.
[58a]Art. 28. “The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper is faith.”
[58b]Dr. Cumming states that there are no less than 37 passages in the Bible in which there is a similar form of expression. Lectures, p. 147.
[61]The words would not prove the doctrine of the Church of Rome, even if the soul and divinity were not added as they are. The utmost that could possibly be proved from them is, that the bread was his body, and the wine his blood. There is not a hint at the doctrine that the waferaloneis a whole Christ, including both body and blood. Indeed the addition of the words “This is my blood,” distinctly proves the contrary, it shows that both were not united in one. To avoid this obvious conclusion is, I suspect, the reason why the cup is withheld from the laity.
[62]The Council of Trent appears conscious of this absence of all scriptural authority, for in its decree respecting the adoration of the wafer it appeals to tradition only. “Pro more in Catholica ecclesia semper recepto.” Sess. xiii. 5.
[63]If the intention of the Priest be wanting, then, according to the principles of the Church of Rome, all the worshippers of the Host must be idolaters, for according to their own Canon, (See page49,) without his secret intention no change takes place. In such cases, therefore, the bread remains bread, according to their own doctrine; and to worship it with latria (the honour due to God) is manifest idolatry.
[64a]Rev. i. 18.
[64b]John xvi. 7.
[65a]Acts i. 11.
[65b]Acts iii. 21.
[71a]Rev. i. 1.
[71b]Matt. xxiv. 33.
[72]Luke xxi. 25–27.
[73]Mark xiii. 7.
[76a]3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.
[76b]ἡ ἁποστασία.
[77]See also Eph. ii. 20–22.
[78]Tertullian, who lived in the second century, says of the letting power, “Who can this be but the Roman state? the division of which into ten kingdoms will bring on Antichrist, and then the wicked one shall be revealed.” De resurrect. carnis, c. 24. And in his Apology, “There is especial necessity that we should pray for the emperors, the empire, and the general prosperity of Rome, for we know that a mighty power threatening the whole world and the end of the world itself, is kept back by the intervention of the Roman empire.”—Apol. c. 32. Cyril says, “This the predicted Antichrist will come when the times of the Roman empire shall be fulfilled, and the consummation of the world shall approach. Ten kings of the Romans shall arise together, in different places indeed, but they shall reign at the same time; among these the eleventh is Antichrist who by magical and wicked artifice shall seize the Roman power.” Catech. 15, c. 5. See Newton on the Prophecies.
[80]Verse 9.
[81]E.G. The exaltation of human tradition, Coloss. ii. 8, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” The doctrine of justification by works, to overthrow which is the single object of the Epistle to the Galatians. Worshipping angels and professing to be wise above that which is written. Coloss. ii. 18, “Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility, and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, Making religion consist in forms that can never satisfy.” Coloss. ii. 20–23. Exaltation of the priesthood, 1 Pet. v. 3, “Neither as being lords of God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.”
[83]Remember especially the doctrine of intention (page49.) If in the consecration the priest think proper to withhold his intention, then the wafer remains a wafer, and no change takes place. If the priest think fit to will it, then the wafer is the very person, body, nerves, soul, and divinity, of our living and reigning Lord. The creation of the Saviour is therefore made dependent upon the uncontrolled will of the priest. What is this but to exalt himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped?
[84]These blasphemous titles were not only given to the Pope by the flattery of orators, but with the acts of the Council were afterwards published by papal authority. At the inauguration of the Pope he sits upon the high altar in St. Peter’s church, making the table of the Lord his footstool, and in that position receives adoration from the people. The following language was addressed to him in 4th Session of the Lateran Council: “Our Lord God the Pope; another God upon earth; king of kings, and lord of lords. The same is the dominion of God and the Pope. To believe that our Lord God the Pope might not decree, as he has decreed, were a matter of heresy. The power of the Pope is greater than all created power, and extends itself to things celestial, terrestial, and infernal. The Pope doeth whatsoever things he listeth, even things unlawful, and is more than God (et est plus quam Deus).” See Newton on the Prophecies.
[85]Matt. xxiv. 24.
[86a]Verse 17.
[86b]It is remarkable that these unclean spirits appear to aim at political influence more than at personal persuasion. “They go forth to the kings.” The prophecy therefore prepares us for a time when governments shall support popery in opposition to the feelings of the people.
[89a]μάρτυρες.
[89b]Rev. xx. 4.
[96]In his controversy with Mr. Venn, Mr. Waterworth alluded to this injunction as a repeal of the 4th Rule. In this he was at variance with the Pope, for his Holiness says it was an addition to it.