portant fact, that in the last century, and in the fourteenth, and as far back as the fifth age, the practice of confession existed, as it does at the present day. In every age from the time of Christ it has been practised, and experience has proved it the most effectual restraint that religion has ever imposed upon vice, on passion, and on human frailty. Who can tell what crimes it has arrested? What virtue it has preserved and purified? What restitutions, of reputation and of fortune it has caused to be made? How many sinners it has stopt in the down-hill path to destruction? Voltaire and Chillingworth and a hundred others, not Catholics, have pronounced the most splendid eulogies on confession. These disinterested witnesses will furnish you ample proof on this point. But my friend before he closed, uttered one word, while he read from the catechism of the council of Trent “fixing a price, &c." for the forgiveness of sin. Now in the name of truth, in the name of this community, I ask him for the proof, for 1 pronounce it absolutely false.

MR. C. explained that he did not say it was done by the council of Trent.

He says that we have exalted the confessional to an equality with the throne of grace. Well might it be the footstool of that throne, if its pure principles were carried out. On the throne, or in the confessional, it is the same God that pardons the penitent sinner.—[Time expired.]

MR. CAMPBELL rises

Three o'clock, P. M.

The gentleman challenged me this morning upon an important point, viz. that Protestants cannot make an act of faith-that is, be perfectly certain in their belief of the holy scriptures, or of Jesus Christ. accept the challenge. It now only remains for him to appoint the time when, and the place where, and I will meet him on that point But that is not the question for to-day. Let him not think to take me off, by raising incidental and foreign questions. They may remove the ennui of the audience for a while; but his time would have been better spent in answering my allegations on the great question. 1 have heard not one answer, as yet, to the question, "What gives general councils their infallibility?" and various other points of great moment to his cause: to which he had better attend, than to propose new debates. I will remind him of another question which he had better solve. How can a thousand fallibles make one infallible?' Do they, by meeting together, become infallible? or, by an ecclesiastic combination, give out infallibility? This would have been more instructive than much of what the gentleman has given us. He observed at one time that the Jansenists were a Roman Catholic sect. But again, he says, that they are not Roman Catholics at all! To preserve the union of the church, their plan is a very easy one. When persons dissent, cut them off. While Jansenists agree with the majority of the church, call them good Catholics: when they dissent, as they do in some very cardinal matters, call them heretics in the bosom of the church: but not of it. But the gentleman's explanation of the council of Trent will never satisfy Protestants. The council of Trent at one session, had forty-eight bishops, forty-five of whom were very ordinary men. They decided that the Apocrypha and the Vulgate were authentic; that the Latin Vulgate is the true and

only authentic copy, more authentic than the Greek original. These matters had often been discussed before amongst Romanists; but were finally adjudicated by the council of Trent. The modern doctrine of Catholics is, that a simple majority is infallible. "That the opinions adopted by the majority of the bishops are for an infallible rule of faith." So says the worthy bishop of Strasburg; but the proof is another matter. Now the present doctrine is, that twenty-five bishops, being the majority of forty-eight, are infallible. The opinion of a majority of a council, then, is the essence of infallibility. Father Paul, who writes the history of the council of Trent, a good Catholic, truly! says, beardless youths were sent to that council by the pope to obtain majorities for his measures-That the pope sent packed juries, who in every question were expected to support his measures.' So provoked was the good Catholic with the aberrations of Trent, that he solemnly asserts that the bishops of Trent were "a pack of incarnate demons." I think I quote his very words. He was complaining that the pope had hired and sent off young men from every part of the empire to vote as he pleased to dictate. So much for the infallibility of cecumenical councils.

6

My friend has pronounced glowing encomiums upon the pure virginity of the Roman priesthood, and has extolled the purity of celibacy, as essential to perfect holiness. That these priests have not been such immaculate purities, half the decrees of these very councils attest. Half their legislation is about the specks and blemishes of this virgin priesthood, as if they assembled for the purpose of hiding their shame. The bishop quoted Rev. xiv. 4. and was not ashamed before this audience to apply it to marriage. I blushed for our audience, and could not but be shocked with the freedom of attack upon the ordinance of God. Marriage is the oldest and most venerable institution in the history of man. God himself instituted and celebrated it, on the flowery banks of Eden in the state of primeval innocence and bliss. It was then and there said: "It is not good for man to be alone." I believe with Paul that marriage is honorable in all. And as for purity; earth knows no purer, no holier state than that of holy wedlock. And could I tell-or dare I tell before this assembly, but half that I have learned of that virgin state of which my friend has spoken with such warmth; he would be slow to learn who could not perceive, that "forbidding to marry," one of Paul's attributes of the grand apostacy, has been the fons et principium, the fountain of untold pollutions in the hierarchy of Rome. In times of persecution, and of great distress, it may, indeed, be prudent, as Paul advised on such occasions, to refrain from marriage, and for some great and laudable purpose, it may be convenient, to prefer a single state; but that youth, male or female, who for the sake of greater purity prefers celibacy, has yet to learn the very first principles of both religion and morality; and is as far out of the tract of truth and reason, as he that would cut off his own hands to prevent him from plunder.

It is essential, in my opinion, that the bishop be a married man. Indeed, the Holy Spirit by Paul has decreed, that he should be the husband of one wife. As my opponent is a bachelor, I ought, perhaps to ask his pardon. Did he, indeed, possess all the other qualifications, I should withhold my vote to his becoming a bishop so long as he continued a "virgin." To preside over a christian congregation, he should have all a christian's feelings and experience. He

should know experimentally the domestic affections and relations. He should study human nature in the bosom of his family. There is a class of feelings, which no gentleman, of single life, can comprehend; or in which he can sympathise: and these are essential to that intimacy with all classes, sexes and duties, which his relations to the church often impose on him. If he does not know how to rule a single family, and to enter into all its customs and feelings with practical skill, how can he take care of the church of God? So argues Paul: and so must I reason and judge.

Next to his remarks against marriage, as necessarily less pure than celibacy; I was sorry to hear the gentleman defending "white lies," and "little sins." When I think of the nature of sin, and the holy and immutable laws of God, against whom it is committed, I see no difference between one sin and another. There may be great and little sins as to their temporal relations and consequences: but when HE against whom every sin is committed, and that divine and holy law, which is violated in the least offence, is considered; we must say with the apostle James, "He that offendeth in one point is guilty of all.” It may be the veriest peccadillo on earth: but in Heaven's account, one sin would ruin a world, as it has done, for he that keeps the whole law and yet offends in the least point, is guilty of all. He that said, not a jot or tittle of his law shall fall to the ground-He that magnified his law and made it honorable, will suffer no person to add toto substract from, to change or to violate a single point with impunity. I wish the gentleman would come up to the point and defend his Catholic rule, that I might fully deliver myself on this subject; but I have as yet given a very few instances of the impurities and immoralities of his rule of faith. But from the specimen given, I would ask, does it not teach the worship of creatures and the images of creatures— does it not countenance idolatry? Does it not command the invocation of the spirits of dead men and women? Are not multitudes of saints invoked, of whose abode in heaven there is no witness on earth? Does it not pay religious homage to beings, who by nature are not God? Does it not blaspheme the name of God, and his apostles and prophets, who are in heaven? And, may I not add-does it not annul the laws of God, and by a system of unparalleled casuistry set aside every moral obligation?

The gentleman represented confession as a christian duty. So it is; but not auricular confession; not confession to a priest. Leo I. opened the flood-gates of impurity by ordering and substituting private confession to a priest; for public confession before the whole congregation. The last entrenchment against the rapid declensions of public morals in the fifth century, was broken down by their dispensing with public for secret confession. All sensible historians, or, rather, commentators on historic facts, agree that there was no greater check to flagitious offences than bringing the defaulter before the whole congregation; and this being commuted into auricular confession, inundated the church with unparalleled impurities and immoralities. "Confess your faults one to another," is not, whisper your faults into the ears of your priest! Why do not the priests, on this their proof, confess their faults to the people?-confess to one another! But this authorizes no man, no woman, to degrade themselves by falling upon their knees before an old or young bachelor, and telling to him all their impure and sinful thoughts, words

and actions. And ought he then to say, as if the sin were committed against him, "I absolve thee?" This is the climax of folly on the part of the penitent, and of impiety on the part of the priest !

There is no ear but God's to which our errors and our faults ought to be confessed. The secrets of all hearts are his; and he has graciously assured us that he will hear the acknowledgment and penitential confessions of all who approach him through the one Mediator. Is there more condescension or mercy in a Roman priest than in God? No, my friends, there is no ear more ready to hear than his; and he only can forgive. To suppose the contrary, mistakes wholly the christian institution, and argues consummate ignorance of God. It is wholly incompatible with the genius of the religion, and repugnant to both the law and gospel. And with what propriety, modesty, piety, males and females, old and young, should mutter their sins and secrets into the ears of any bachelor, priest, or confessor, as if his ears were a common sewer or conduit to carry down to oblivion the impurities of mortals, I cannot even conjecture, unless to give them power over the penitents. I opine that I am yet in the pale of logic, though I am upon a very unpleasant theme.

The gentleman objects to some of my reasonings. He says that the church has fixed no tariff of sins! Does he wish me to tell the whole story? Is not the principle clearly asserted in the penances already read? Why fix a penance of three days for violating the sabbath, and twenty days for breaking a human fast? For insulting his parents he must do penance for three years; for rebelling against his bishop he must do penance all his life! He who kills a common man does penance three years; but he who kills a priest must do penance twelve years!

The gentleman says there is no possibility of effectual pardon from a priest, unless contrition be sincere. A word from Ligori here:

"In order to receive the sacrament of penance rightly, perfect contrition in the penitent is not required, but it is sufficient if he have attrition."-Id. ib. N. 440. The saint proves this in his exposition of the 4th chapter of the 14th session of the council of Trent:-Id. ib. [Synopsis. p. 105.

Will the gentleman explain what he means by attrition? · I have, perhaps, said enough on this topic to prepare the way for my speech to-morrow morning on the "sea serpent!" But while on the whole premises of the rule of faith, and the mutability, fallibility, and tariffs of the Romanist sect, I beg to read, in the words of the most illustrious of the champions of Protestantism-The great Chillingworth:

"Know then, sir, that when I say the religion of Protestants is in prudence to be preferred before yours; as on the one side I do not understand by your religion the doctrine of Bellarmine or Baronius, or any other private man amongst you, nor the doctrine of the Sorbonne or of the Jesuits, or of the Dominicans, or of any other particular company among you; but that wherein you all agree, or profess to agree, the doctrine of the council of Trent: So accordingly on the other side, by the religion of Protestants, I do not understand the doctrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melancthon, not the confession of Agusta or Geneva, nor the catechism of Heidelberg, nor the articles of the church of England, no, nor the harmony of Protestant confessions; but that wherein they all agree, and which they all subscribe with a greater harmony, as a perfect rule of their faith and actions, that is the BIBLE.

"The BIBLE, I say the BIBLE only is the religion of Protestants, whatsoever else they believe besides it: And the plain, irrefragable, and indubitable consequences of it well may they hold as matter of opinion; but as matter of faith and religion, neither can they with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, without most high and schis

S

matical presumption. 1, for my part, after a long, and (as I verily believe and hope) impartial search of the true way to eternal happiness, do profess plainly that I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot, but upon this rock only.

"I see plainly, and with mine own eyes, that there are popes against popes, councils against councils, some fathers against others, the same fathers against themselves, a consent of fathers of one age against a consent of fathers of another age, the church of one age against the church of another age: Traditive interpretations of scripture are pretended, but there are few or none to be found: No tradition but only of scripture can derive itself from the fountain, but may be plainly proved to be brought in, in such an age after Christ, or that such an age it was not in. In a word, there is no sufficient certainty but of scripture only, for any considering man to build upon. This, therefore, and this only I have reason to believe: This I will profess, according to this I will live, and for this if there be occasion I will not only willingly, but even gladly, lose my life, though I should be sorry that christians should take it from me.

"Propose me any thing out of this book, and require whether I believe or no, and seem it never so incomprehensible to human reason, I will subscribe it with hand and heart, as knowing no demonstration can be stronger than this, "God hath said so, therefore it is true." In other things, I will take no man's liberty of judg ing from him; neither shall any man take mine from me. I will think no man the worse man, nor the worse christian, I will love no man the less for differing in opinion from me. And what measure I mete to others, I expect from them again. I am fully assured that God does not, and therefore men ought not to require any more of any man than this, to believe the scripture to be God's word, to endeavor to find the true sense of it, and to live according to it."[Time expired.]

I am pursuing my opponent, to-day, though various assertions, and vain endeavors to establish against the Catholic church, the charge of immorality. I said, that the grace of penance was, in our estimation, so powerful, that there is no sin which it may not efface by the mercy of God. This, Mr. C. says, is a proof of our immorality! If it be immoral to lift a heart-broken penitent from the depths of despair, and tell him there is hope in God, my friend is right. Catholics believe that there is no sin which God cannot forgive to sorrowing man. One drop of the infinitely precious blood which was shed for us on Calvary, is more than sufficient to cancel the iniquities of a thousand worlds: "If your sins be as scarlet, saith the Lord, they shall be made as white as snow." (Is. i. 18.) "Come to me, all you that labor and are burdened," says Christ," and I will refresh you." (Matt. xi. 28.) "But," we are told, "the scripture speaks of an irremissible sin, a sin against the Holy Ghost." That sin, my friends, is indeed a deadly one. That sin is, obstinately resisting the known truth, and final impenitence, the almost inevitable consequence of suffering ourselves to be blinded by religious prejudice. This sin is more common than many (alas! too many) are willing to believe. They are in that way of which the scripture says: "It seemeth to a man right; but the ends thereof lead to death." (Prov. xvi. 28.) To such Christ solemnly declares that "they shall call upon him, and he will not hear; and they shall die in their sin." Such persons as these, find it easier to accuse our church of a few riots in Rome, or elsewhere, which all the power of religion could not have prevented, (and the only wonder is that they did not occur more frequently,) than to study her divine evidences, believe the mysterious truths she proposes, and practise the holy lessons she enjoins. But I must hasten to answer the multitude of heterogeneous questions which my friend has proposed.