Front matter
flUv
i n^:f
KM.
Preface
Discussions on the various questions of religion have ever been and still are matters of inevitable necessity, because Christianity and its dogmas have ever been and still are impugned by those victims of passion, prejudice, and error — the schismatic, heretic, and infidel. The true minister of Jesus Christ is thus compelled to make religious controversy an important part of his studies, as it is only by this mean he can, with the help of God’s grace, bring back these unfortunate wanderers to the fold of Christ. If angry feelings are sometimes engendered by these discussions, the fault lies with those who first raised the standard of rebellion against the teaching of the lawful pastors, whom Christ commissioned to feed his lambs and his sheep, with the bread of life and the Word of God. To elucidate truth, is the object of free discussion ; and to all who are properly qualified for the task, ample scope should be given. Catholics, as regards their doctrines, court publicity ; because they are fully aware, that the more these are tried and examined, the stronger will be the conviction of their truth in the mind of the sincere inquirer. Of this, ample proof will be found in the multitude of late conversions, — conversions, be it observed, not of the vulgar and illiterate, but of the brightest ornaments of the age, — not of the interested and worldly, but of men who proved themselves ready to sacrifice every worldly advantage for the sake of conscience and truth, — conversions, not of the victim of passion, as is the case when a stray Catholic becomes Protestant, but of men whose minds are pure and
Preface To The Second Edition
The rapid sale of the former edition, — its approbation by many clergymen in Scotland and by several in Ireland and England, — the fact of its appearing in a very elegant American edition, approved by the Right Rev. Dr Hughes of New York, and by the American Catholic clergy and Catholic press, — combined with the antipathy of modern religionists to its publication or circulation, and the unwilling testimony wrung from them as to its efficacy in supporting truth, — all these motives, strengthened by a desire to put down error and establish truth, have induced the author to give to the public a second edition. Busied with the various duties of a heavy and important mission, lie regrets that circumstances have not allowed him to make this edition more worthy of his readers and patrons. He has, however, made alterations and important additions, which, with an improved arrangement of the matter, may, he trusts, render the work more generally useful.
Contents
Chapter, page
I. Reasons for examining the Catholic religion, ... ... 1
II. Rise and Progress of Protestantism, ... ... ... 8
Chapter I. Reasons For Examining The Catholic
RELIGION.
Question. Can tliere he more than one true Church f
Answer . No ; for the Scripture tells, that there is but one faith, as there is but one Lord and one baptism (Ephes. iv. 4, 5) ; that there is but one fold and one Shepherd (John x. 16) ; that the children of the Church of Christ should be one, as Christ and the Father are one (John xvii. 20) ; that we are one body in Christ. (Rom. xii. 5.)
Q. Is not this truth plain also from other reasons f
A. Yes; God cannot teach contradictory doctrines. There is but one revelation made by him ; that revelation can have only one true meaning, and hence that Church only, which gives the true meaning of God’s revelation, in teaching her children, can be God’s true Church.
Q. What then would you say to the multitudes who profess so many modern , contradictory creeds ?
A . I would say, according to Scripture and reason, there can be only one true Church. That one is somewhere — search for it — •“ Try all things, and hold fast that which is best.”
Q. What say you to the man who professes a modern religion , merely because he was horn in it, and when he came to the use of reason, found himself a member of it?
A. I would say, that, on the same principle, a man may be a Jew, a Mahometan, or Pagan, without incurring the dis¬ pleasure of God.
Q. What advice would you give those who examine all our modem creeds, hut never think of inquiring into the ancient, universal religion of Catholics ?
A. I would, in the first instance, pray for them, because this indifference is the effect of early prejudice, of the impres¬ sions left on their minds by incessant misrepresentation ; I would then advise them to pray, that God would enable them to extend their inquiry to Catholicism, since we find truth often where we least expect to find it.
B
CONTROVERSIAL CATECHISM.
Q. Would you add any thing to this admonition t
A. I would tell them to reflect, that the whole world was once Catholic ; that their forefathers, till very lately, were all Catholic ; that the kings whom they admire for their great¬ ness, the philosophers they admire for their wisdom, and the saints whom they admire for their holiness, were all Catholic.
Q. What if they call all these idolaters ?
A. Then, as idolatry is a mortal offence to God, they must reconcile themselves to the awful thought, that the souls of the whole Christian world during fifteen hundred years are now in hell for their idolatries ; for the whole Christian world during all that period was Catholic.
Q. What if they say , Catholics are Catlbolics because they are unenlightened , unlettered simpletons ?
A. Then they must maintain, that the whole world was such for fifteen hundred years ; that Augustine, Jerome, Basil, Leo, Gregory, Tasso, Pope, Dryden, Bourdaloue, Fenelon, Massillon, and ten thousand other such lights, were fools and idiots.
Q. Would you add any thing to the above ?
A. I would say, as Hume and others have remarked, that, at the time of the Reformation, the most enlightened nations, such as France, Italy, and Spain, remained Catholic, whilst the more barbarous nations of the north embraced Pro¬ testantism ; and that, even now, when the whole Christian world is enlightened and learned, the greatest part is still Catholic.
Q. Is there any thing to induce us to remain Catholic , hut the love of truth and the most solid conviction, that our Church is the only true Church of Christ ?
A. No ; we have adhered to our faith amidst all imagina¬ ble difficulties ; our religion in practice is laborious ; its duties numerous, painful, yet indispensable ; confession, fasting, absti¬ nence, the mortification of every passion, are all, with us, realities, not mere names, as they are with others ; indeed, the Sunday and every day duties of a good Catholic are so labo¬ rious, that they would tire the energies of human nature, were it not supported by a divine hand. v Q . Besides the difficulties we have in the practice of our religion , have we had other and greater difficulties to struggle with in our adhesion to Catholicism f
A. Those who read the penal code, containing the laws enacted against Popery during the last three hundred years, will be quite satisfied, that God alone preserved our faith, — that there is nothing human in our attachment to it.
Q. What have we suffered by some of these laivs t
REASONS FOR EXAMINING THE CATHOLIC RELIGION. 3
A. The loss of our estates, which were transferred to others ; the transfer of our Churches to government preachers, or, as in Scotland, the absolute destruction of these Churches ; our Church lands, the patrimony of the poor, given to the corrupt minions of unprincipled governments. Education, either at home or abroad, was forbidden to us under the most severe penalties. Indeed, the persecutions we have suffered for our faith, in these Protestant countries, have been such, that the eloquent Burke says of them : “ Never did any
thing more savage proceed from the perverted ingenuity of man and yet, after all, we are still Catholic ; after all, our religion is progressing.
Q. Have we not suffered by misrepresentation as well as by persecution f
A. Yes ; ministers of modern religions have laboured to prevent inquiry into Catholicism, by misrepresenting our creed ; according to them, we trust in our own works, not in Christ ; we worship the saints ; we never read the Scriptures ; we believe man to be infallible ; we hold that man, as man, can forgive sin ; we think the Pope can give leave to commit sin, &c. Now all these are simple falsehoods : we believe none of them.
Q. Has not this systematic misrepresentation been very in¬ jurious to Catholicism ?
A. It has kept the people of these countries for centuries from inquiring into the nature of our religion ; and it is only of late, that Protestants have learned to penetrate the veil of falsehood our enemies have cast around us, have discovered our real doctrines, and are daily embracing them.
Q. Do not these ministers labour earnestly to impress the public with the notion , that our doctrines are absurd ?
A. Yes ; and by this have prevented many from inquiring ; yet how unfounded is this assertion ? If our doctrines are absurd, why are they believed by five-sixths of Christianity ? why are the learned the best Catholics ? and why is it, that it is the most learned ministers and laity of Oxford and Cam¬ bridge, who are daily becoming Catholics ? We have con¬ verts in every class of society, from the nobleman to the mendicant. The former, by becoming Catholic, has much to endure ; and the latter is refused even a cup of cold water, because he has become a member of the Catholic religion ; and all this is endured for the sake of our absurd doctrines !
Q. Are not attempts made , even now , all over these kingdoms, to seduce the poor, and especially the young , by the offer of food and raiment f
A. Yes ; the educated, the instructed, and comfortable Ca-
CONTROVERSIAL CATECHISM.
tholic is beyond seduction ; and the snare is set by heresy foF the hungry and the naked.
Q. Do these seducers succeed even icith the poor ?
A. No; for no sooner have their poor vietims tried the reli¬ gion of their seducers, than they feel the remark of Dr J ohnson : The lacerations of conscience, which they instantly experience, make them hasten back to the altar of their fathers to deplore their apostaey, and implore forgiveness. — Life of Johnson, vol. ii., p. 99.
Q. Is there not something very striking in the conversions of the present day ?
A. Yes; the most enlightened men of the Protestant Church, even multitudes of her ministers, are crowding, of their own accord, into the Catholic Church ; whilst the igno¬ rant and bigotted portion of the Protestant community are labouring hard, but without success, to seduce, not the educated, but the poorest and most ignorant, of the Catholic body.
Q. Is there not something in the Catholic clergy , when com¬ pared with the clergy of other persuasions , to induce men to doubt of the reformed religion ?
A. Yes ; they are an independent body of men, who will not be bought by any worldly advantages. From the Pope to the humblest priest, we find them, not time servers, or the servants of any government, but boldly denouncing sin, whe¬ ther it lurk under the purple of the king, or the tattered rags of the beggar.
Q. As men having the care of souls, are they not much more laborious than Protestant ministers ?
A. Their lives are one continued toil; they are poor; they are refused by their office every luxury except the most ordi¬ nary food and raiment. Th-eir perpetual study and learning; their attention to the sick bed of every dying Catholic, be he poor or rich ; their heavy vestry duty, which compels them to take weekly, monthly, or, at the outside, yearly cognisance of the conscientious state of every Catholic, points them out as men who really have the care of souls. How different is their duty from that of the Presbyterian minister, who has no other spiritual connection with his flock, than what is derived from the delivery of a dry piece of ethical morality once or twice a week !
Q. Can yon give any other reasons to induce a prudent Pro¬ testant to doubt of his religion, and to induce him to inquire ?
A. Yes ; many reasons r Our religion existed in the world fifteen hundred years before Protestantism had even a name; and even our enemies admit that it was founded by Jesus ChrisL
REASONS FOR EXAMINING THE CATHOLIC RELIGION. 5
Q. But they say , it became corrupted ?
A. Yes; but if so, then they must maintain, that Christ failed in his word ; for he says, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ; that he will be with his pastors all days ; that his Holy Spirit will teach his Church all truth for ever. (Math, xvi., xxviii., John xiv.) Nay, he adds, that he died to make her a glorious Church without spot or wrinkle , holy and without blemish ; and his Apostle calls her the pillar and ground of truth. (Ephes. v., 1 Tim. iii.)
Q. Does he say any thing else , which proves the above assertion to be an impiety ?
A. He prays that all who should believe in his name may be one as he and the Father are one, — a prayer which could not have been heard, if his Church had fallen into error. (John xvii.)
Q. Have you any other reason to induce an honest man to doubt of the reformed religions t
A. Yes ; to prevent men from being tossed about by every wind of doctrine, and to perfect the elect, Christ appointed, not the Bible , as reformers do, but apostles, prophets, evan¬ gelists, pastors, and doctors. (Ephes. iv.)
Q . Were there no abuses in the Church before the Reformation ?
A. Yes ; and in every age there were wise and foolish virgins, wheat and cockle blended together. These abuses were the work of individual Catholics ; the faith and moral teaching of the Church were always the same as they are at present.
Q. Have not Protestants reason to doubt of their faith , when they consider the men who founded Protestantism f
A. Yes, and strong reason. These were men of the most licentious character; and surely God would never choose such immoral persons to reform a Church established by his divine Son.
Q. When Protestants consider their ride of faith in its result , have they not reason to tremble ?
A. Yes; for by making every man a judge of the Bible, they have filled the world with jarring and contradictory sects, each making war on all the rest ; instead of the one united family for which Christ prayed, the one fold and one Shepherd, the most Babylonish disunion, as to folds and shepherds, pervades the entire Protestant world.
Q. Must not a sensible Protestant doubt seriously, when he finds that even the Bible is not followed as a rule by his coreUgionwts ?
A. Surely, when he finds them baptize infants, abrogate the Jewish Sabbath, and observe Sunday, for which there is b 2
CONTROVERSIAL CATECHISM.
no Scriptural authority ; when he finds them neglect to wash one another’s feet, which is expressly commanded, and eat blood and things strangled, which are expressly prohibited in Scripture.
Q. Do not the perpetual changes of Protestantism give ground for doubt ?
A. Certainly ; since a changing religion, which assumes a new face both as to faith and morals in every age and every country, cannot be the religion of Christ, which is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.
Q. Should not a wise man doubt of the first principle of Protestantism, when he reads the words of St Peter, — 2 Peter i.20, iii. 16?
A. He must not only doubt, but be certain, that the prin¬ ciple of private interpretation is erroneous, since that Apostle says, that no prophecy is of private interpretation , and that many things in the Scripture are hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest to their own destruction.
Q. Should not a Protestant doubt , when he finds that he him¬ self holds tradition as a guide ?
A. Yes ; if he would but reflect, that he has nothing but Catholic tradition for keeping the Sunday holy ; and that, amongst many other things, it is by Catholic tradition only he knows the Bible to be the Word of God.
Q. Is not the Church of Christ one fold ?
A. Yes; yet not two Protestant sects are exactly the same ; nay, you will hardly find two Protestants who have the same faith on every point.
Q. Is not the Church of Christ holy , without spot or wrinkle?
A. Yes; and whether we consider Protestantism in its founders or in its doctrines, it is not holy. Its founders, as we shall shortly see, were immoral men ; and it held, and now holds, most immoral doctrines ; for example, the doctrine of predestination, from which it follows that God is the author of sin, that man must sin.
Q. Is not the Church of Christ Catholic, or universal ?
A. Certainly; for Christ told his Apostles to teach all nations , to teach all truth , and that he would be with them all days ; yet, the Protestant Church has not existed all days, she is only of yesterday ; she does not teach all truth, for no two Protestant sects teach the same doctrines; she is not the Church of all nations, nor even of any one entire nation on earth.
Q. Is not the Church of Christ apostolical as to orders , doctrine, and mission ?
A. Yes ; yet Protestants, instead of being able to trace
REASONS FOR EXAMINING THE CATHOLIC RELIGION. 7 their orders, mission, and doctrine, back to the apostles, can trace them to Luther, but no further ; even the English Church has no certainty that its ministers have orders ; and as to Calvinists, their ministers are mere laymen.
Q. What does Chillingworth say on this subject ?
A. He says, that “perpetual visible succession, which could never be wanting to the religion of Christ.... is wanting to the Protestant religion.” — Athence Oxonienses , Bliss' edit, vol. iii. col. 86.
Q. Did Christ say , that his Church would be infallible , that the gates of hell should never prevail against her, that his Holy Spirit would teach her all truth for ever ?
A. Yes ; yet all Protestants hold their Church to be fallible.
Q. Would a wise man remain a member of such a Church ?
A. No, certainly; he might as well be a Pagan : he has no security for salvation, as he has no certainty, whether he is believing truth or error.
Q . What does Edmund BurTce say of the Protestant religion ?
A. That it is “ no description of a religion at all, or of any principle, religious, moral, or political, but is a mere negation.” — Letter to Dr Lawrence.
Q. What do eminent Protestants say of the Catholic Church f
A. Hooker acknowledges the Church of Rome “to be of the Family of JesuS Christ.” (Eccles. Polity.) Bishop White says : “ He never doubted the Church of Rome to be the visible Church of God, wherein our ancestors did profess the true faith, and were saved.” (Defence of his Way.) Dr Barrow admits, that the most learned Protestants have owned the Church of Rome to be the Church of Christ.
Q. What lesson should a wise , educated Protestant learn from all these reasons ?
A. He should weigh them well ; and, in doing so, he will find abundant reason to doubt of his own religion, and power¬ ful inducements to examine the Catholic faith.
Q. How should the sincere bid unlearned Protestant act in this important matter t
A. As his salvation depends on his being a member of the true Church, and as he sees crowds of learned ministers, induced by the above reasons to sacrifice their worldly prospects, and embrace Catholicism, he should, without delay, commence an earnest inquiry after truth.
CONTROVERSIAL CATECHISM.
Chapter II. The Rise And Progress Of Protestantism
DRAWN FROM THE WORKS OF LUTHER HIMSELF.
Section I
Q. What is Protestantism ?
A. A new religion, invented and propagated by a person called Luther.
Q. Why do you call it a new religion ?
A. Because, viewing it as a body of doctrine, no such divinity, either as to faith or morals, was ever known, taught, or believed, by any sect in the world until Luther’s time.
Q. Was not the same divinity taught some centuries earlier by the Albigenses, Waldenses, Hussites, and Wickliffites ?
A. No; these sects professed errors of a very different kind. The Albigenses taught that there were two Gods and two Christs ; they reprobated marriage, denied all the Sacraments, as well as the resurrection of the body. The Waldenses aimed at plunder ; they declared it a heinous sin for a magistrate to condemn to death for any crime ; according to them, it was a mortal sin to take an oath ; the clergy became reprobates by holding one farthing’s worth of property. In other things these deluded fanatics were Catholic ; they held the Sacraments, Mass, Transubstantiation, and Purgatory, &c. The Wickliffites maintained, that man must sin, that God approves of sin ; yet, with evident inconsistency, they declared that all power, whether of the priest or magistrate, is forfeited by the commission of one mortal sin ; they concluded, that as they themselves were all free from sin, so all power belonged to them. As to the Hussites, their doctrines were those of Wickliffe, their principles were seditious and unchristian, and plunder was their object.
Q. Did Luther and his reforming brotherhood teach nothing in common with the Christian Church then existing ?
A. A few of the great leading truths were still retained ; but there is scarcely one article of the Christian faith, which was not denied and rejected by one or other of the reformers.
Q. In what year was Luther born ?
Q. Where 'was he born ?
A. In Eisleben, of Prussian Saxony.
Q. Of what religion were his parents ?
A. They were Catholics, and so were all his ancestors.
RISE AND PROGRESS OF PROTESTANTISM. 9
Q. At the, time Luther was horn , what was the religion of all Europe f
A. All believed what the Catholics believe at the present time.
Q. Was Luther himself a Catholic for any time ?
A. He was a Catholic until his thirty -fifth year.
Q. What ivas his state of life f
A. He was a monk of the order of discalced Augustinians.
Q. As such, had he made religious vows ?
A. At the age of twenty-three years, he made vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.
Q. W as he hound to keep these vows ?
A. Without doubt, since he made them after mature reflec¬ tion, and of his own free will ; because the Prophet says (Ps. xlix.) : “ Pay thy vows to the Most High and God himself says (Num. chap, xxx.) : “ If any man make a vow to the Lord, or bind himself by an oath ; he shall not make his word void, but shall fulfil all that he promised.”
Q . Did Luther obey this command of God by keeping his vows %
A. No ; he violated all the three ; he apostatized, — he married Catherine de Bore, a nun, like himself under vows, — and he positively disobeyed every ecclesiatical authority.
Q. Was this man in reality the founder of the Protestant religion , and the first of that sect that ever appeared in the world ?
A. Most certainly; for no minister, no congregation, no body of Divines, professing Protestant doctrines was ever heard of, until his time.
Q. What inference do you draw from all this f
A. That Protestantism cannot be the religion of Christ ; because, if the Church of Christ required reformation, a God of purity and holiness would never have chosen such an immoral character — an apostate, a wholesale vow-breaker, a sacrilegious seducer — for that purpose.
Section II
Q. What was it that induced Luther to attack the ancient Catholic faith, and invent a new creed ?
A. Pride and jealousy. Pope Leo having granted an In¬ dulgence, Luther’s pride was mortified, because the com¬ mission to preach that Indulgence was given to the order of St Dominic.
Q. To what did he allow himself to he driven by this pride and jealousy ?
A. To attack in itself the doctrine of Indulgences.
Q. Would the Catholic Church have blamed Luther had he merely attacked the abuses or avarice of individual Catholics ■?
CONTROVERSIAL CATECHISM.
A. No, certainly. He erred in this, that under pretence of reprehending abuses, he assailed the true faitli on the subject of Indulgences.
Q. What was his next step ?
A. He posted on the gates of the Church of Wittemburg ninety-five articles, which he wrote, and which contained many things not in accordance with the doctrines of the Church.
Q. Were these articles refuted ?
A. They were, and with much cleverness, by some Catholic Theologians, to whom Luther replied with a haughty insolence unworthy of a Christian.
Q. What hypocritical pretence s did Luther make in 1517, during these disputes t
A. He pretended that he wished to teach nothing but what was conformable to Scripture, to the Holy Fathers, and approved by the Holy See. (T. 1. Ger. Edit. Gen. p. 12.)
Q. What did he write to Jerome, Bishop of Brandenburg $
A. That he wished to decide nothing himself, and that he wished to submit all his doctrines to the Church. (Ibid, p. 54.)
Q. What did he write to Pope Leo in 1518 ?
A. That he would listen to that Pope’s decision as to an oracle proceeding from the mouth of Jesus Christ. (Ibid, p. 58.)
Q. What did he promise to his religious superiors ?
A. That he would be silent, if his adversaries were placed under the same restraint.
Q. What inference do you draw from all this ?
A. That he was either a hypocrite, who did not intend to fulfil his promises, or that he was quite satisfied of the truth of the doctrines which he impugned, since otherwise he could not conscientiously promise silence and obedience.
Q. What other consequences do you draw ?
A. That a man bursting with pride, envy, jealousy — a disobedient hypocrite — was not the person to be chosen by God to reform abuses, if any such existed.
Section III
Q. What took place at Augsburg between Luther and Car¬ dinal Cajetant
A. The Cardinal required of him, that he should retract his errors, which Luther refused, appealing at the same time to the most celebrated Universities of Germany, and to that of Paris, and pledging himself most humbly to submit to their decision. (Ibid, p. 119 and p. 14.)
Q. Did he stand by that appeal ?
RISE AND PROGRESS OF PROTESTANTISM. 11
A. No; he appealed a short time after to the Pope. (Ibid,
Q. Did he abide by this second appeal ?
A. No ; he next appealed from the Pope ill-infortned to the Pope well-informed. (Ibid, p. 205.)
Q. Did he stop even here ?
A. No ; he then appealed to a General Council. (Ibid, p. 351.)
Q. Did he abide by this resolution to submit to the decision of a General Council ?
A. No ; at the Diet of Worms, he declared flatly that he would not submit his doctrine to any Council. (Ibid, pp. 448, 450, 452.)
Q. What do you conclude from such conduct ?
A. In the first place, that Luther must have been extremely fickle to appeal to so many judges, and to abide by the decision of none. Secondly, that he knew his cause was bad and his doctrine false, since he would not submit it even to the best judges. Thirdly, that he must have been brimful of sinful pride and obstinacy, since he preferred his own single judg¬ ment to that of the whole Christian world.
Q. But did not Luther promise to abandon his errors , if any one would prove them such from Scripture ?
A. Yes ; but this was only an artifice to enable him more freely to propagate them ; because he well knew that the Scriptures may be wrested into any, or every meaning ; that he could give them any sense he pleased, as the Mormons, the Muckers, the Methodists, and the Free-Kirkmen do at the present day : the Scripture is made to teach all sorts of contradictions.
Q. What was his real object in this subterfuge ?
A. He wished to impose his monstrous errors on the public, as truths bearing the sacred stamp of Scriptural authority. Had he been sincere in his appeal, he would have said : I shall leave it to the Church to decide whether my doctrine is conformable to the Scripture or not.
The opening of the book is shown; the full text loads in the reader.
Loading the full text…
The end
You’ve reached the end of Controversial catechism : or, Protestantism refuted, and Catholicism established, by an appeal to the Holy scriptures, the testimony of the holy fathers, and the dictates of reason ; in which such portions of Scheffmacher's catechism as suit modern controversy are embodied.