rile GltEA'l‘ co.vt‘1t0VERSY- Continued from First Patro- aenaflgon, with novels 1--'-—"""’-"-.-I.’-.-——— « - , deal of - rainy and it gieat_ and min popular that but thinly dl82u|8£¢£(;:fi:'r'n_Lawi: se,.,,,,.,_ reading such a8 W0 , , .' 9 V . _ me”, were Dluuin s 01 111° “““'°' m°"‘wre},g evolution, and l‘yn- iiuotts with their ""’°"" otentialit of GNV3 “’i‘.." W" atat0‘no":a:f¢.’&(‘l1ltl’lVgilt!!]L toa)de- "”“"”" . 5”.“ ‘B12334? and he was not surpi-‘yr-it mill 01 0°“ 5 fig?‘ hen‘, avowed by professedly um‘ 1‘ msbeneons had followed it. _If hcll weren't :?:‘:.:r.:::.‘:*..:‘.°:.***.....' mm «mm wr- ‘a'1‘;(l‘1't.)yl).88 :“l:§thll‘l?t:..0f the age came the impicty rce. ‘at nt r - ’°""":‘.‘i.i.'l£ a:t.:‘:;:.. oil. :.::.‘..3. 233.23? 3,032 ‘fllidlhfi only remedy for the existing evil was field to bee return to that Church winch roteeted woman by making uiarrizi_;:ea sacra- mental rite. Next came. as chiiractei-lstic of the ‘gm the amount of dishonesty and corruption as seen in the coininercial ‘O _ and Dolitical world, from which btit one power sound redeem the country. and that power was the Catholic Church. Pl'0l-tsiilillflldlll was powerless to do it now, as she had been in the past. Here the lecturer recounted tiie tri- umphs of ttie Catholic Church in the first three centuries, its victory over Gothic vandals and Musical hordes, and told how, -luring flve cen- turies, the preservation of learning had been almost entirely the result of the Church's care. It was not liberty, but liberalism that the Church coiideiiiiied. “Site was not oiJP059d *0 progress and civilization, nor to intellectual culture. This was shown by the iiistituiioiis of learning site had fostered in olden times and in 1* the Catholic school houses that could be seen in " every city and town thriughout this land. If education was the foe to the Church that it was claimed to be. why not give her her share of the odicational fund and so hasten her death? [Aptilause.] But people uiigiit say the (Jtiuicli should be l1l‘0g"355‘Y°- as were all other things. '1he progression of some churches was filly indicated by the weather vanes on their spires, but he held that a Church might be immovable and uiichiiiigetibie as the Catholic Church was, and yet exercise a pro- gl'(3i3SlV81Ilflllt‘l'iC8 on the world around, and he really and sincerely believed that the time would come when the nations would pray for unity under the banner of the one true Church, and when that time came for this land of the free what pen or tongue could portray her glory.” The speaker then thanked his audience for their kind attention. and bade them good night. Vvhich Is the True Church? To the Editor of the Globe-Democrat: KIRKWOUD, 15:10., January 23, 1878.—"Thou hast made us, 0 Lord . for 'I‘hyse1f,and our hearts are restless until they repose in Thee." (Au- gustine); Which is the true Church? By way of introduction, it will be necessary to show the cliaractei'istics or marks of the true Church, and I can not conceive liow Christ, as a divine law- giver, could organize His Church without these marks. They are: 1. The law of Christ must form a rule of moral conduct and a standard of faith. 2. The organization of the visible Church must follow from the character of Christ as a law- giver. 3. That a visible association of men can not con- ‘ tinuc to exist without government. 4. All laws intended for the government of men should provide some tribunal to deterniiue what the LAVV i:s. 5. That actual infallibility must be found in the Christian association. visible Church. and sanctity of the visible Church. These being the ('.i'la1'Lt'Ci.€l'1.~3Ll(iB, or marks of the true Church, whzch of those claiming to be the true Church is in fact such? Can the Protestant. Churches, . bined. be the true -Church? lf While P-1'()i.}€'Sl.llfll8 deny that the true visible Ciiurcii is infallible, they gciicrally concede that she is so protected by divine power, that she re- mains alivziys the true visible (ll'iui'cli, always teaching the true faith. tection and infallibility, it is most difficult to see. Nor can it be well seen, how the theory of a true visible (}l'lllI'Ch, always teiicliing the truth, can be rcroiicilcd with the right of private interpretation in the last resort. It -would seem that such a Cliurch should he speaks, as she always, in the coiiteinplation of . this theory, speaks the truth. _ 1’ - The principle is distinctly adiiiitted that when i the Cliurcli should teach error, the gates of hell » would prevail against her, and the .pi'oinises of Clii-ist would iieccssarilvfail. Froni this admis-. Slut) it nUC£3SSfll'l1y follows that the true Church. could never teach error. It would then seem to , be a very plain proposition that whatever exist- ing party of professed Chrisl.itiiis claims to be the , true ’Ul'llll"Cll,, must show a continued line. of an- ‘ cestors to the age of the apostles. Under the ad- missions ofall parties, the title to the true Church has always re.-:i'ded in some one. As we can not conceive of the co-ntiiiued ftilfillineiitof the prom- ises of Christ without. the continued existence of the same Ciiurcli, always teaching the same faith and united under one Government, as was the case in the days of the apostles, so it follows that the party who claims this identity must trace the title back througli the same continued and existing associatioii. The Church, in the days of the apostles, was unques- tionably a visible, teaching, g‘(.)V€l'l]l11g', united association of living men. She posses:-cs all the vital eleincnts of continual existeiice; and, in contenipl.-ition of the theory of our Lord, is at . glorious i-nst.it.uLioii, W-liicli ‘ ‘Spread;-. itiiclivitied——opera.te-s unspent.” The parties have conceded (‘3el'l£'l.lll things upon the record, and aiiiong thcni are these: 1. I‘l'iat Christ did 0i"g'2l.lllZ8 a perpetual, visi- ble and united associatioii of m-eii, called "The Ci-iiirch. ’ ’ 2. Tlia.t-. He gavel.-o this Churclia law for its goveriiment, communicated in liiitnan lau- , uage. " 3. That He promised his unfailing protectioii to this Church, in fulliiliiig all the duties pre- scribed by the law. 4. That such protection has always been given, and such an institution has always existed: The concession of these facts ' in truth, a is si-ibstantiiil settlement to the whole’ question, as to the Pi-otestaiit claims. As each party claims the right to the same tliiiig, and to be now in posses- sion of it, the weight or onus of proof will lie equally upon each in the first. iii- stalnceid Butias the Catholic Cliurch is admitted to e 0 er trin any new existing part she l ' 1r)ii-ads out apriinictfaciie case, liable, it i§’true, 1%: e dii-proved ' but until disproved mustl e h -l E‘->0d_a8 alfaiiist them. Site has l'lOLl,l."lfLl,‘.," to do iiifiltijl the title can be shown prima facie to ‘be in ggme other party, extending back beyond theperiod of lieradmitted existence. As the title can only . exist in one party exclusively when title is sl 0 to be in one, it, of neccssityfexcludes allotheysll :1[I3i‘ll£lluthC1l)il“O(i)f1IB overcome brother testimony: ii re i’ot'cst.anL sects at the threshold, are 31“ veer » '. » in * i 1- orni. -new can assume any form and shape they please, sh i‘t hies nloi: léltlllilflll'it.lll5 anti! _()0lii‘.rll(llClpll'y. But. v n_ i iey o iissunic a cerain s iape ticy must gusdtagi it by C(ln£l)6l.€l]tt[)l'0Of. Theilr 'a’l}l‘§-,<.»;iit.ions n ieir proo ‘s mus C(ll‘l'eSpOl1£‘. icy can make their alleged true Cliurcli consist of any consistent requisites they please; but their proofs must C0l‘l'CSpCll(_l and show the continiied exist- fnce of a CllLllll‘(3"ll”Ilt')8f§SebtS£)!lg11.11886 l'(.‘ql‘.llSll7(3S. If we suppose iii‘ 16' rs re e.-slant p-irty is com- posed of those sects, called by some brtliodox or evaiigeliczil, such as Llll.il€l'8ti'lS, ].’i'esbyterians, fl.‘2l'“.”.li‘.‘.‘i‘~;. ‘”.?.“i.‘.*:t"‘.‘.“‘.?.'.‘.3.‘.‘§’{§‘*;.‘.‘;‘ziE‘ll.’3°"l”‘“*t“”' ‘« - ’ ' " ucru ‘ll’ rue Church this'would be as compared with the con- fessions of all parties! Different and contra- dict.-ory doctrines, separate, independent, and distinct orgaiiizations, with no common govern. gilfllllltéltllllghdéhtgolpgoslng tge cllniituiiittid visilble _ ' us o to ay rill‘-‘ll. we] be 3%h’df3f;‘tl:;ldll:i0?(;'llI§C1tt1 being, that it '5‘ was with- , ‘But the greatest difliclilty would be (his; A3 mtlly and at allwtirsnooiit “i}.3;“',§, H3]? ghee“ Dim?‘ - _ z - a ‘s o‘ t fiipostles till the present. era. Hdvingyassnmelg his shape, they must find a Cliurcii composed of barties separately governed, professing the .~;~ame conti-adictoiy creeds. W here, then, can they find such aChurch? No such conglomemtion f sects existed at the dawn of t.he co-called Refill: motion. or at any other period. If, on the con- trary, in opposition to the provisions of the I creeds themselves, we hold all their difl‘cl'eiiccs 1 as only about iinmaterial matters and that in reference to such points Christ made no revela- tions at all, then we reduce the articles of {mm to every small and insigiiilicant number and crowd the system into very narrow limits’ with the_moral cert.aiiii.y of liaviiig soon to renidclel ii, the same doctrines that Hill‘; ' at an mines’ Churrli is now acsunied to ho‘d 'inrlr)(?c‘>‘inl1])l(E)s3-(Elle? J ' M‘ ' I ‘ ‘ ‘ ; 0 this same independent fragnients, separated from each other upon more imiiiaterl.-il questions. éVllel‘6,l.lle11, could they be foul-,6? No Such 1 "V . ' ‘ ‘ ' It -- ‘i ‘*1 ‘ - 0l'lE;}.(l)t!gxisted at the dawn of the Reformation, in‘éf“i(\"%(t§htehl; each ]i’i'ote(§ltanl. party, as claim- , ' V c cusive rue ‘c _ . 1:; (testers must he found. And cVl:l'Cl'C’ ggllil gigyabe I iTlie Vaiidois held several fiindamental that . tlat no Irotestant sect could stand; and v;,..,j,,i’;’v gliilailled. when they joined the Cal- . 1- no; t _ . ' ., 1,, hmehohepmmu cfiltall) eiro.. . So of 0my.exwm1ed.b. k ii. .nil _these two sects A130,“ mne~cemac_ ‘H. sniall i;>ortion_ of the way. i: now can this Vbe:_!i(li;ts iéemain to be filled up. And i’ C.lla.~mx‘il~cc,,Vr(u‘ng,‘ cgi«e,MOiily -by filling up the nwmod of S“-hpnqymg tn ré Breckeni-iagels new wry by indivjdml , we '§‘.I8C.l.lV8 records of his. turns. Here 1 ,'m.n’m‘°n 07 “"3 301??" _ . ct us look int h l$[)(?:l kin of ' l‘ . 9 3 is new method. ‘ 9-” l. 18 lbscuritie 1‘ man iiiiioiig 1"oie3gfa"fi-L8 3 '3 H01)’ Writ. 130 f01.(,mU, expm sad mmiwuatsh more clearly and learnedE:"igiish-dlviueoffthiel an B31911)’. 8 “But wliut. You will 'r"pi lefstawlshed Ohmfihi t_ian..--,_m Lliose who see, Vyaiélgiiishto Chris. light, the dispeiisations of God to nu; ‘ma m'r°"g 6. That the executive power must exist in the . That God has, by miracles, attested the faith singly or com- Wbat difference there - can be between such certain and l1llfa11lt!Igpl'0- . implicitly heard when she ’ A “W1 M13 Rice. some few years afterwards, Mr. . ..- a.-_——.... .......-..._.....-....- one word: Open in citiier 'l‘cst.ament, and tell me, ivltiiout dis- fiulgse. is there nothing in it too hard for you to uiidei-stand.’ If you find all before you clear and easy, you may thank God for giving you it privi- ltfl-lc Wlllclijlle has denied to iiiaiiy thousands of sincere l_ielievers." (Discourses, 133.) W hilt ls‘i;‘~-itig to becoine of his children? They “"3. °,""l°"“Y Hi It dilemma, and that in-i-pared by it divine Iit\\'-maker, as I will show. "It is one of the niost_forctble reasoiis why God should have niailea direct revolution to iiiini, that he could not justly punish men unless no first ‘pre- scribed’ His law. F‘:-inn the same reason it fol- lows that it is the duty of the law-inuker to create a _conipetciit tribunal to construe the law; for without such a tribunal the publication of the law is very imperfect and does not afford that reason- able means of certainty that every just system should -upply.” We will suppose it l(.‘lIi-‘|lll01' to put forth acmle of’ laws, drawn up with all attainable accuracy, while we are forced to convey our ideas through so changeable and imperfect a medium as human laiigtiage, and addres.-ed to so frail a mind as that of man, and that he should have constituted no tribunal to determine what he meant, and should leave the pefiltie to Whom this code was given for a great number of yeai-s, and should then return and call them up in judglneiit before him. What a strange medley of opinion he would find regarding the construction of his law. lie would sail to them: "You have miscon- strued and violated my laws, and I niustpuiiish you," They would answer: "That is a hard case. You did not treat us fairly. You gave us no authorized triliuiial to decide for us, whose (lei-isioiis from time to time would have settled difficulties, and upon which we could have relied fora correct interpretation of your law. You left each one to interpret for himself, at his own peril, and you left no means to secure this agreement." And to such uiiaiiswertible logic as this, what could the leglslatoi-justly reply? In vain would he say: "lily law is plain, simple, and casilv understood. It scarcely needs construction." They would reply: “Truly and verily, the wisest fneii among us, while they declare it plain, differ most e.-rscnliziliy as to what it means. TheY‘CllI1 not all uiiderstand ‘plain’ alike.” Now, apply this to the Christian system. If such a. tribunal be iiecessai'_vi'ii political governineiit, is it not even more so in the—Christian system? And if judicial infaliibiiiiy is found in political government, ac- tual iiifalllbility ought to be found in the Christian association. And if God expects us to obey His commands (as he certainly does), and has left us without the means of knowing whatflis coin- mands are, He has certainly left His children in a dileinma from which there is no escape, and cer- tainly, as a lawmaker, failed. Dr. Spring says: “The Bible is a plain book. and easily under- sl‘.o0(l.” (Dis. 36.) St. Peter, the apostle, speaking of the Epistles of St. Paul, says: “In which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable, wrest. as they do other scriptures. unto their own destruction.” (2 Peter, iii, 15, 16.) Dr. Spring says, "easily understood,” and St. Peter says, ‘ ‘hard to be understood.” W11-ch is right, the apostle or the Protestant? And these things were not only hard to be iiiiders_*.ood, but they were import-ant and necessary to be believ- ed, because, if wrested from their true meaning they led to destruction, just in the same way as did the l’lllSC01‘ls'i.l'uCLl0l'l of other portions of scripture. St. Ireiiacus, the disciple of St. Pelv- carp, the disciple of St. John, among others, gives these testimonials: “There being such proof to look to we ought not still to look ainoiigst others for truth, which it is easy to receive from the Church, seeing that the apostles most fully coinmltted unto this Church, as unto a rich rc- pository, all whatever is of truth, that every one that willeth may draw out of it (the Church) the drink of life. For this is the gate of life; but all others are thieves and robbers. Therefore, we ought to avoid them, but to cling with the utmost care to whatever is of the Church, and to hold fast to the tradition of truth.” ‘ ‘An ordinance to wliich_many of the barbarous nations who believe in Christ assciit, having sal- vation written, without paper and ink, by the the Old tmtlltioii.’ ’ tiniaiis, nor lV1lll'C10lil(438 before Marcion, nor, in inerated above, before there arose inventors and bi-giniiers of each perverse opinion." (Adv. Haeres, 1, iii, c.- iv.) . In these and other extracts the holy niartyrgives a most beautiful historical description of an in-. and united Cliurcli, in whose communion salva- tion was to be found. But I must proceed with my subject. If there were any true Chin-cti in the world at the time of the Reformation other titan the Catholi-c Ciiiircli, it was the uiiquestioned duty of Lutlier and all l’rotestants to join that Church, not reform it. Could they li0l. find it? could others find it? ' And if no one could find it, what sort of a true, visible, univeri-:a‘l Church was it? W hat right had they, under the admissions of all parties, to organize another true Church when one already existed‘? It the errors of the to recent? And when men tell us, in one brcatli, ital, and that at the date of the Reforruation there’ did exist such a'Church soinewliere, -andthat - such was the Vaudois; breath, tell us they held d-octrines never taught by the law of Christ, and that their trite Church needed reform itself, 'Wl1i':tl‘. -can-we ge'tiiei'? If they had assured us that there was a true false C-liiircli, we could have understood them just as well. The man was a good. holiest fellow.‘ True, he did steal six calves. And truly did Luther say, “I stood alone.” And if the be not the true Cliurcli, then truly did the Book of Homilies of the Clzurcli of England, say: "So that the clergy and laity, leitriied aiiii tinleariied, all ages, sects anti degrees of men, women and “ children, of whole Ciiristendom (ti hoi'ril_l1e and drcadtul thing to think), have been at once drowned in abominable idolatry, of all other vices the most detected of God and most daiiinablc to man, and that by the space of 800 years and more-—to the destruction and subversion of all good ieligion universally.”--Book of I-Iomilies (IIom., 8, p. 261, ed. of So..for Pi-opitgaling Cliristiaii Knowledge) . pronounced. in the 35lli of the 39 articles, “to contain goodly and vvtiolcsome doctrine, and necessary for these times.” And really this is candid and manly lzi.ngua.e'c. “It is full, defi~iiitc and’ certain. '.l.‘l‘lE’.‘l'é is no studied. aiiibittuity--no cowardly evasion. It does not“pe.lieriii a double sense.” It comes up to the precise point. It does not attempt. to mock and degrade your understanding by pro_tending the existence of true ancestors tli-at never could be found. It admits there were none. It speaks boldly and tells a plain story. '1.‘h-ere 1.8 no con- cealment, and, truly, it was “a liorrible and dreadful thing to think” that Christ. had forgot- ten His promises. And, truly, if Prol;est,iint.ism be true, it is based upon “a horrible and dread- ful” state of case. The idea that there was a. visible teaching Church, and yet that such a Church could fail, would seem ent.irely inconsist- ent with the purposes of its orgauizniou, with the character of Clirist as a divine law- niaker, ' and with His actual promises. Such it supposition is based upon the iii- correct idea that it was necessary for Clirist to make a law and Ol"._‘2‘£l1llZ8 a Church. That having exhausted His powers in the efioi-~t., or become ottierwise employed, or for some reason, He cast the Church upon earth, as a ves- sel in the middle of the occziii witiiout :1. pilot; and having retired to his apartiiieiits, He said: ‘ ‘-Let her travel.” And the idea -that the true Church could teach any single error and remain the true Cliurcli-—t.hi-it she couldhe rcforined in inatters of faith-or iliat 1 she could be composed of contradictory creeds, W011!“ Seem mi-Wfily illogical, and untrue in everv Particular. And we could just as readily believe that more chance was the origiiiator and pro- Jector “Of all the Wondrous worlds we see,” as that any union could continue to exist in any association of men, under the I’:-otestant princi- ble of individual interpretation in the Illa-E resort. Taking the admissions of the parties as I find them, I am forced to conclude that the Protest- ant sects. taken separately or all combined, or in dil1'ercnt combined parties, have, each and all, wholly failed in showing any title to be called the true Church. And before they can make any coiisistent case they must go back and amend their allegations-«begin again at the beginning, withdraw their admissions, deny that Chiist was any law-giver, that any visible, universal, teach- ing Church was ever intended, and insist that Christ proiniilizaied no law and organ- ized no Cliurcli, but that _ He incre- |.V discovered p re-existing truths, before undiscovered, and that, like any other philoso- pher, He left the truths He discovered to be taiight by those who pleased, and in the manner they plea.-cd._ This l.h_eory would atleast be con- sistent with itself. And well may Mr. Campbell savz "Pi'otestants have all conceded too much in every age and_pei-iod of this coiiti-oversy.” (De- bbie: 0- and 1’U|'U811. 49-) And this is U'llCIl1‘KJlle SWISS. and may not be true in another- They have certainly conceded too much for their causie, and may have conceded too little for the truti. 'l‘hat the Catholic Church has always claimed to be the true Church, and to teach only the doctrines she received, in successioif from the apostles, is not denied by P1-01;: estants, during the period of tier admitteij existence. So long as they admit her to have existed, so long do they admit her to have claimed thus to act. As to the alleged period when the Catholic Churcli took its rise, Protest. acts are as much divided among themselves as they are about other (important questions. In his debate. with Bishop Put-cell, Mr. Campbell at first fixed this period at A. D. 1,054, but subs-equeiitly fixed the time of the commenceinent. of the de- l>.“euei'ac_v of the Roman diocese,aiid the sel)arat.ioii of the true from the “grievouslv coi'itaiiiiiiatcd” Church, about the year 250. liutin ms debate C. further extended the existence of the Church of Rome 19 the second ceiitiiry. , “Taylor and U_lh€1‘_$. he says. “have shown tliatxall the al)O_l1llllai.lt)ll8§)’f Popery were batched in the sec- :([){llléIe §;3)l7l;l1l'Y. (Debate C. and R. 423). M1'.. ‘ °Diiring-i_.he flrst five centuries of the -Christian era,‘ i.I‘l1BdbIlui'Gll, tliiougli)‘becorii’i’ug gradiia.lly'cor. E1136. Ilbelhot become 1api‘sts. 1 (lil,, 293,) M,-, .‘ . eve, gives the Catholic bll1Il‘Cii about tllflselclilfisiisllliéglnlllng as any other Protestant. By .- ons of all, she is at _l-east a thousand years older than any of the eXlBl.lng_ Protestant sects. She has, then, an aiiinitted visible exist- ence for the period of thirteen out of the eigbtegn hundred years of the Christian era. But the cel- ebrated Dr. Middleton, in his "Free Inquiry," are .,,oWsm0Se who have up n nkind? We at first. contends that the chief corruptions of V glfllén,-Eafiipipl (In; high ham .,,,,,‘,’,,,,,.°§{§; gglgsghllfit glojpgiy, astilile cagllsfitheni, were introduced in the _ ‘o s it sad us into all truth.‘ if - _ V I‘ . our an A 1th centuries. He says that i-l1x8flltVaS:.-dl.Gdn10I human folly. founded ?)!Ilh;80fiea ita‘lii:iIla Prmesmm authors’ as Tmmson’ Mar’ _ ,°“1”i°1‘lJ1'6latton of Scr.lpture, Iansweg-in .,.im~a' D°“W°“: Dr. Waterland, Dr. Ber- - . ’ I n‘ ‘ “id °“1°1'Bi who admit that your Bibles; take the first page spirit, in their hearts, and scdu1ously'guarding 1 “For before Valcutinus there were no Valcu-'5 fact, any of the other inalignant sentiment enu- . fallibly governed, and format reason, a uiiiversal i It’ they could not, how i Vattdois were i.l‘lfl:lt1g, why were they required - that the trite Church must be visible and pe'rpet:- 1 and then, in the next * believe? How can we put these two theories to-ii Catholic Cliurch l fit. Tunis @lIiI,,I~gQi.3l*U.1b~f-$»,]f‘l‘l't£l!£‘l”&f, msnhsii flllsralng, §i:ll‘ti1iat”‘y 2’s‘,13'Z8. miracles cmitiniied during the first three centu- ries, unwarily betrayed the Protestant cause. After stating that“ nvci-_v one must see what a re- seinhlancc the principles and priicilccs of the fourth t2Cllllll'_\'-, as Hill)‘ at-e described by the nimtt eminent I;«iU_llH'$ of that age, bear to the pi'es¢‘pt rites of the Popish Ciitii'cli,” he says: 19)? uriiiiting the ltoiiianists but a single 880 Of '“”" iicles, aftertlic time of the ttl’°‘“‘.°*‘. W0 31”!“ 1'0 eiitangletl in it "'si.-riefi of diilicniiies _wlieiico we can never fairly t3.Y‘iI'iC£I.Lt3 otiisclves tlii \’v'c ullpw the same powers also to tho prcsellt age.’ (Lit- ed .'ililiiei' s 1«.‘iid oi Controversy, Let. xxil.) 'l‘his, I must sayiigatiii, is candid and mainly liiiiguage. But while l’i‘ot.c-taiits dcnv U185 the Church of Rome, which has had - all admitted existence from between the secolld and sixth contiii-ics to this time, extended back to the very days of the apostles; they have all ad- mitted the cuiitiiiucd existence of a Church . W31’ blc and teacliiiig, cliiiliiing to teach only the doc- ti-nit-s received from the apostles, and to ‘be the true Cliurcii. Thus the Cllul'(5l1 from which the Noratiaiis sepaiutcil in 250, and the Ilontltlblfi 1" 311, was that Church, and then cotitalned 1130 overwlicliiiiiig niiijority of all Cliristiitns. The existcinze then of a (.‘liurch, at so cttI‘|Y3 _da.V after""tiio apostles. claiming thus to have rpcclved and thus to teach, and to be the true. Ciiiirclll will make out a pnmafacie case until til.-5lll't)V(:ll. lien, t,hercfui'e, we are referred to the Novatians and Doiiatists, who not only separated but perished and disatJ!l°31'f3d "‘ a few centuries (as if the tl'_lt6 _LhuI'Gh could die), we can not say the claim is at all disturbed. but we must say it is strengthened. from the failii re of proof atraillfit 1% , Those, therefore, who say the Catholic Cllllrch was not the true Chnrch,mnst show some Church existing coiitinually, both before and aflerthe alleged birth of that Cliiirch. When. l’«110|‘<9f0l'8. they attempt to do this b referring us to two sects that soon dlsappeare , they °e”**"“1! 3311- But the advocates of the Catholic Cliiirch brink’ in all the Cliristiaiii writers of the i first five ceilin- ries, from St. Ignatius, the dis siple of St. John, to St. Gelasius, in 492, and from these they bring a mass of testimony that is entirely conclusive. I I I Rome and Civil Liberty——By Rev. Dr. Falconer. To the Editor of the Globe-Democrat: ST. LOUIS, January 22, 1878.--When the ques- tion of the "corn laws” was before the British Parliameiit, a speaker said, “No new argument can be presented on this subject.” Yet the dis- cussion went oii, from mouth to month. “N11 the public was ripe for action. Even were it true with regard to the present controversy that “nothing now” could be said, it does not follow that further discussion is useless. Discussion is the life of free institutions. But, as a matter of fact, the present discussion has barely touched 5 many grave questions involved in it. Much liasbeen Well said, and some things un- wisely said, on both sides. But so far the discus- sion has touched chiefly the strictly theological phases of the issue between Protestantism and Romanism. - These are primary, it is true, but there are secondary questions involved which. in their practical working, are of primary ‘interest to every Christian and to every citizen. ' In order to get at one of these, let me in a few words relate a principle or two alreadydiscusscd. The Protestant idea of liberty has ccrtainlv been cai'~icattired by ' at least one of the writers on the V other side. It is not license. It does not tend to anarchy. It is personiil freedom regulated by law. It is quit,e well illustrated bv -the liberty guaranteed to every citizen under the Constitu-_ Lion of the United States. Personal liberty, by a law of reason, extends just as far as inilividuality does, and no farther. One step beyond that and you touch those principles that _ceii.stitt_ito the Jndividual mau_ a. social beiiig—pr1ii— clples which unite the race into a bl’0tl'lc1‘ll0t)Ll, and -upon which social and civil iiistitutions are based. . Reason lie-re recognizes law, obligation, and the rights of oth- crs. I-’ci'sonal liberty is Iil~lli’3l.l‘ttl.-Gd in the history of our political parties. It is the personal right (liberty) of any citizen to belong to either, to neitlier, or to change from one to the other, as he may judge the one or the other to be in truest.ac- cord with the great principles of the Const.itu- tion. At present we have at least three (3) theo- finaiicc; as many on the subject of temperance; so with other subjects. As citizens we claim and _ exercise the right, under the Constitution, to em- brace either side of any one of these questions witliin the piirty of our choice; and if no existing party suits us, we claim the right to solicit others to join us in _ form- ing a new -party. We do this, not because we think the old parties unconstitutional, but because we 1.Illl‘.k‘l.lley are wrong or silent on some points which we deem imp'ortant‘.. ‘ Old par- ties, having grown great and strong, command- ing large niiijorities, may have forgotten some lirst principles, and sacrificed principle topower. Human nature can not be trustedwltli unlimited power. But suppose some party could trace its origin to our “forefathers,” and thereupon‘ set» up a claim to exclusive at-ltIlOl'liJY, and attempt to control the Courts, and enforce its own precedents and :'iiitcrpi'ctatioiis, and dictate ouredil.ori:ils,and write out our ballots, where would be our pet'- tion and fraud? Suppose our Supreine Court to our Coiistittition and subversive or its letter and spirit, how long would its members remain tinlnipeached? Now, as adinitterl by both p_art_.ics in this con- world. The Bible alone its courts have no legislative functions. The stat- utes of the Lord are written. It belongs to liti- man reason, 2iid.ed.b_v such lielps, human and di- vine, as are within iieacli, to ll'il.8l"pl'Ci}. It is n.o rational OCji:‘.Cl.l0ll that different minds, on some points, rezicli d.fl"ei'eiit or modified conclusions in ini.erpret1ng Revelation, or the science of the- ology, any more than it is to the same state of things in any other science. The rnateria medicco is the pily'sici;in’s Bible. but dlll'ei"eiit. ‘ ‘schools’ .’ of medicine are no reflection on the science, nor on the practitioners. l‘i'otcstants appear to dif- fer more than they really do among theiiiselves; and it may be admitted tliat aseparate denomina- tion for every clistiiictive idea is not wise; but still, under God, and in reason, it is the right of any party to exercise bcrsoiial liberty in that; as in other niattcrs. Protestants have always protested agiiiiist any autliority in such matters beyond the tiutliority of the Bible, as interpreted by their own reason. An angel from heaven could not make at man believe an lll'll'e2tSt)l]tiDle thing. Now, Bishop Baltes, in his Alton lecture, as published in this morning's GLOBE-DEMOCRAT, brings out the Catholic doc- trines more clearly than did Bishop Rvan. He distinctly claims that the "CIllll'Ch,” and not the Bible, is the moral and spiritual guide. Of course he claims that this "Ciiurcli” is divinely ap- pointed and qualified to be such a guide, but Prof-estaiits make short work of that‘. hi;-;li claim by dcuianciiiig the proof. Proof there is none . Even when he atteiiipts to prove it from the Bible, we deny the cori'ect;ness of his int,e'rpretation, and, pray, who is_ to be umpire? His quotations from our Savior,and from the prop uecies of l)a-in‘iel,Pro- testaiits would and do inl.eri.»i-et squarely agaii'ist_ him, with the advantage of reason and history on their side. Who is to decide? He would say, "the infallible Pope. ” We would say the Pope is falli- ble; has no better re:.tsoniiig or iiiterpretiiig facultvtlian an average .lZ’rot.csl.ant,anil is utterly destitute of any official authority but litiiiian. What now? Resort. to force, if so be force is at‘ hand. You can make nothing else of it. But the ‘moment you resort‘. to force as an incentive to faith, you strike at the root of all Ill)eI‘l.y--p(~)1'- soiial, civil, as well as religious. Just here the American citizen is interested. He may sheet’ at the present ‘ ‘couti‘oversy” as somelliiiig that does not in the least concern him, but he forgets that his liberty to do so is really involved in this question. Let him follow Bishop Ryan’s advice-—go to Catholic sources for in- foi'mat‘ioii--atid he will find that: the claim of this ‘ ‘Church’ ’ authority covers every part of liberty worth contending for. Be patient. a l.'ll(')l.’tl6lil;‘ and 1 will show vou the difference. I’l'()LCSL£lni.:l do seek to in uence civilization, legislation, courts, ctc.; but how? Bv bringing the simple truth of God to bear upon the reason and con- science of men. By seeking to purify morals. By educating the iiiasses i ii the right use of rea- son and conscience, so that they can intelligently govern themselves. But how does Rome seek to "influence? By. au- thority, by control, by force. Is there proof of this? I’1cnt.y of it. I will siiinniarize for the sake of brevity. According to the “ciicyclicail” of Pope Pius IX (1864). and his “syllabus” of 1861, both in harmony with other documents of the same and other Popes. and of “Councils,” and which any man can examine for himself, the fol- lowing claims are distiiictly ll‘l2.tl.le: (1). The right to coiiilemu all who hold the doctrine of the liberty of conscience and worship. (2). The ri,<.rlit to condemn the‘liberi.y of speech and the freedom of the press. (3.) Tiiat the Stale-civil auttiorit§,'——lias no right to periiiit its citizens to , profess whatever religion they may deem true. (4.) That the State has no right to assist its sub- jects who may Wish to abandon inonasteries or 00|lV0DlS- (5.) That the State has no rightto up- hold it inarriuge not solemiiized by the form pre. scribed by. the Council of Trent, even when the form by which it was soleiiinized is sanctioned by civil law. (6.) That temporal causes Whether civil or criininal, to which ClCl'g_Vlllell are; parties, shall be tried by ecclesiastical tribunals. (7). That in any conflict of laws the ccciesiastic. al shall prevail over the civil. (9). '1‘lial, me State has no right to establish and control edu. cational institutions. (10). That the study of pliilosophy and science should be subjected to ecclesiastical authority. (11). Tiittt the Statue with its rulers, is and should everywliere and al: ways he stibordinate to the Roman Pontiil‘. (12), That civil liberty tends to ~cori=upt the morals and minds of the people. Now, American citizens‘ study these few of many pi‘o])0sili0ns, the full text and date of which can be given . Are these more Questions of what you. l1llCiel'Btltt‘ld by ‘‘faith.',’? Norare they the hasty utteiuiices of ii'respo‘iislble individuals. but the aiitliorized promulgaiions of the Vatican. If these announcements are not“ex catliedm H who can tell wiiat is? hlone but the iiifitilible 1 Pope is aittliorized to define the phrase ex cathed-ra. A ' - Limited to questions of morals, do you say? But who - is to define “niorals” or "Il'iltl1”? "Whether, theiteforc. ye eat or drink, or what. soever ye do (woijsliip, vote, legislate, lead a regiment or publish a neivspapei-), do all to the glory of God.” ‘that is comiiretiensive, Bible morals. Who shall determine whether or not const'itiit.io~u. Its O R yourproposed mode of doing any or all of these J rice, with zealous advocates, on the subject of . tliinizs (including mat-rings), is for the "r:10l‘)’ 0‘ God"? '1‘l'iere is absolutely no escul)61'\“"“ ""9 ' charge that Rome claims the right to control X0111‘ civil as well as your religious liberty. in fact. these two liberties can not be separated. If I have the divine aiittmi-itv to coin cl it man to be- lieve and woi-ship ii certain way. have the r ght to compel liliii to vote and light. it certain way. I have the right to jiidue and coiniiizintl. 1 113'“ logically the right to enforce oliedienve to my coininaiiils. This ltome claims and has pi'tu'-H00“- and always does p:-active where she has the powciu In this l'tL'.‘3pt3CL she is true to her bonswd inotto, semper cmlcm, etc. _ I know that out’ writer in this controversy said that the Chnrt-.li of R-niie had always been ‘the “frieiid of fi-eouoni,” and that a certain pl'_leet was lauglied at i-ieci.-nilv for vcntui-inga siinlltlr reinark in Belfast, Ireland. unsnppoi-ted l'tflllll!‘K8, in the item of historv. ‘"111 in preseiice of existliig facts, indicate either an lll(‘l'(ltl»l)lC ignoriiiice on the part of somebody. 0!‘ a scliootod efl'rontei'y on the part of those who make them. ' I“-li’lllltttt(?ly, American citizens, asarule. DY virtue of the wisdnm.of their fathers in discard,- ing the ilogiiizis of Pius Episcopus, scrivus scrvofitm Del. are able to judge of the truth of such asser- tions for themselves. They need but 100k around them. The ntitural resources and ad- vantages of Ireland surpass those of Scotland. Whence the vast superiority of Scotland in social and religious and civil freedom? Or closer still. since objection has been Inltde £0 G0nl.l‘l1Si.lll£1' the north with the south of Irelllnfl. whence the iniinifcst difi’e-rence between Belfast and Cork? whence the superiority, with less natural advantages, of New Eiigland over Mexico? Why will not Brazil compare wiili the United States? What is the trouble with Spain and Italv in comparison with Great. Britain? Protestants believe that if the gospel is Lh6‘°])0\V6i;(lf God,” “the salt of the eat-tli,” and “the llizht of the world,’ ’ that these virtues will be manifest in the life and institiitions of the people and nations that receive and practice it. And when they flnd_tiiis expected and predicted fruit. even though it be imilertect, not fully developed, they conclude that the roots of the tree and the moisture of the soil are not far off. There are men on both sides who will contend with more zeal than knowledge, for small tliiiigs; but the mass of thinking Protestzints are far less concerned about the flgiiicnt of “organic succes- sion,” the questionable dogma of pui'g-atory, the irrational and therefore incredible dogma of "ti'aiisu,bstantiation," and the small matter of the mere mode of CC1ell1‘a.i'.lilg an ordinance or peiformiiig an act of worship than they are about the great Cod-giving principles which enter into and underlie man's riglits, liberties and duties. If the ecclesiastical system, includiiie its dost- mas, which has reached its climax in the dogina ofiiifaliibility, were logically carried into effect, society everywhere would lie uiidera civiland spiritual despotism. W. C. FALCONER. Bishop Baltes’ Discourse Reviewed by a. Baptist Clergyinan. To the Editor of the Globe-Deinocrat: ULNEY, ILL. , July 26, 1878.—-I notice that the Bisliop’s arguments rest on the sandy founda- tion of the infallibility of not only the Pope but of all the teachers of the Romish Church. He can never produce a particle of proof for such infalli- bility. I also notice that while Baptists do not believe in the infallibilitv of the ministry they recognize it as essential to the conversion of the world and the feeding of the flock; so essential that the Bible, in only the hands of the ministry, may long perpetuate the Church. Though the minis- try, like our Courts, is not infallible, God has promised to protect it forever from apostacy. Yet, the people are to search “the scriptures daily whether,” the things we speak are so; (Acts, xvii, 11), not our comments or notes on them, but the scriptures. notes on them-—-look at them through our specta- cles. Read Psalms cxix, 105; II Tim ., iii, 14, 15, 16; Luke x, 25, 28; xvi, 29, 31. Sev- eral of the epistles are directed to the Ohui'cbes——"to all that be in Rome, * * called to be saints.” Rom., i, 7; I Coin, i, 2; Gal., i, 2: Eph., i, 1; Philip., i, 1; Col., 1, 2. But, we are informed, the people wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction. But I reply (it), this most positively. contradicts the 2311116. flow can the word of God he "a lamp unto my feet and alight unto my path;” how could they learn from “Moses and the prophets;’’ how were the Scrip- tures understood by Tinitittiy from childliood. and how are they able to Blake us ‘ ‘wise unto salvation,” if they are ii stumbling-bliock to hell? The trouble with Romanistzs is, not that the Sci-iptiii-es turn men to destructioii, but that they turn them from Romani-iii. The preaching of Christ and his apostles was often wrcsted by their hearers to their own destrtictiou because they would not prayerfully sonal liberty? wliere our security against corriip- ; would set up a new code (if lass utterly foreign ‘ ti'overs.-y, there is a spiritual kingdom in this weigh it; and, in that way, and only that way,tl1e Bible is dangerous. reads the Bible will find it a. “lamp to his feet and a light to his path ;’-’ but all others will find it a ‘ ‘savor of death unto death.” Paul said the Scriptures are able to make “us wise unto salvationg” our Catholic friends say, no, no, they are able to make us wise unto dani- nation, unless read through Catholic spec- tacles, But they meet us with Pet:er’s words: “Some thiiiszs hard to be iinderstootl, which they that are unlenrned and unstable wrest, as they do also otiierScriptures,uiito their own destrtiction.”But if this means what Romanists claim it mcaiis, I ask (a) how the scriptures can be ' ‘a lamp to our feet and alight unto our path,” ti_on?”' (Ll) Why did the apostles write their epig. ties to all the members of the Cliurclies? (c) Hmv could the Bereaiis have been helped by Se?.l.1'Ci]ll'lg’ “the Scriptures, whether these things were so?’ ’ But Peter never tizought of sayiiig what Ronian- isis make him say. Bengal says these iinleariicd persons are those “ivitbout heavenly lea:-ning.” l’etcr says these wrest not only the Scriptures “l.iard to be uiidei'sl:ood,” but “also the other Scriptures.” Iherc confidently afllrm th:-ii. this class of persons have never been benefited by any teacliiiig, that they were the ones‘ who wi-ested the preacliiiig of Christ and His Apostles to "their own destrucl.'loii”; and I deny that “since the world began” any Romanist can find where any but these have wrestod the SCl‘iplu1‘es to their own destruction. I challenge them to the task. ’ From the continual ivresting of these words of Peter, to wrest the Bible from the people, I siig-. gest.-—and that in kindness, too—-whether there may not be daiiger of there being some who claim special qualifications for nionopolizing Scriptural interpretation, who are wresting the Scriptures to ‘ ‘their own destruction.” But the Bishop tells us that the Churches, dur- ing the first centuries, did not have the Bible. and that such was the case during the middle a es. g(a). This is somewhat true. The Churches which grew into Romanlsm did not decide’ upon the genuine apostolic writings till 397. (b). Butit. seems they were generally agreed what were genuine long before this. No one ac. quaintcd with the early history of the Church, I think will qiiestioii this. Tllfiy had made several trarislatioiis before this, the “fathers” are full of their quotatioiis, the epistles from the time of the apostles were read in all the churches, and their pastors explained these to_ them-V every Lord’s Day. Yet, the Bishop's address leave-' the im- pression the people lill'3W little of the Word of "God; when, in fact, it was continually before them. nle. Bfore me lie long extracts from their writ- ings, before the period ‘of which the Bishop speaksas settling the can..n, full of Sci-iptural qiiotatgons. Anyttiing lacking from all not hav. ing it Bible on t.lici_i' tables was supplied by the freshness of traciition, as i~e,<2:ulai;ed by the Bible. But‘. we are now so far from the apostolic age that traditions make “void the commandments of God.” Rcacllllattlietv xv, 6. Then, in the dark- est ages, the Baptists_hiive had the Bible to a sufficient extent. to guide them. In a Confession of Fiiith, or A. D. 1120, before me, the Baptists say: "We acknovvledge for sacred ctinoiiical Scriptures the books of the Holy Bible.” “In Ar- tlcles of Faith the ‘authority of the Holy Scrip. tures_ is the higliest, and for that rea- son it is the standard of judgiiient; tpat _Whateocver doth not agree witli the word of (Ji'0li‘lS to rejected and avoided. The decrees of‘ It t.ll}ll‘LlS dlld Coiincils ate only so far to be-up. pioved as they agree with the word of (spa. The reading: and knowledge of the Holy Scriptures is open to and is iieccssziry for all men, the. laypy as well as the clergy. and, moreover. the writings of the apostles and prophets are to be read rather than the com ments of men.” They sought fora knowledge of the Bible more t.hz_in_for1ine gold, and were the first to translate it into a modern 'laiigii_age for the people. On account of the SCal']Cli,y of ctopics tflitaytwere acctistoinéid to cfzom. mit urge D01‘ ions 0 1 o_ memor . no o the (Riiiiiisli) inquisi.tors relates the}; he met a poor rustic who could repeat the book of Job without ornittlingf a W;t})i'(l, and tlhal‘. it was not un. }i1‘£’elS{l]ilmCl‘1)l!.‘ €tlll'Ilel’l’nl1l’).~‘tt(?f themglcl a;I‘lBSi.‘?I:ie0nifN%)W , - ‘ . ‘ I Y heart. R«_miuiiist,s exerte'.l their utmost efforts to keep the bible from the people, but still God pre- served the Bible and His Church. -Bl'eltle1'lllS, in chapter 8, again.-t tbem—-he was a. Romaiiisl-— says merchants sold the Bible thus: "Sir, will you please buy these trinkets? hladam, will you iookkaft lx.»'l1t‘§;3 ll9tlllI(lk(:'l‘CliilTCISli, cg‘ piecels of nefsdllc W01" 0 v. can u or iein cieap. f, ‘fi£.tIir the pm~c.l'ia_se, the question were asked, ave you aiiythins: more? the salesman would reply, “Oh. yes, I have _corumodit_ies far more vziliitifble Lllllll‘ these,‘ and I will make you 3 pres- 1 1 - . 3‘ . ,, §‘y‘%“» °.-.‘..'f.‘3.‘.‘.,"‘. "ill-.‘?i‘.3‘..i?3.?.i?.‘il.‘.l ““;.§’ ‘.’.-“.1..‘i’2i" ‘’‘“.‘i a hurt ' 1- _n ‘ - ' . ceed . lite iucstiiiizible jewel I spoke of is the word of- God.” W liittier has put into his mouth: “ ‘Oh, lady fair, I have luster ‘dings Than diamond flash of the jeweled crown on the lofty brow of kings; Awoiiderful pearl of exceeding price. whose virtue shall not decay, - yet a gem which a purer blessing oti thy way.’ small, meager book, folding robe. he took. prove as much to thee. . Nay, keep thy gold of God is free.’ ’ to the pure Word of God, L 0388 But such fccblo and ‘ Rome says search our ' The man who praverfully bow “aretthey able to make us wise unto saliva-_ (c). . The Baptists were guided by only the Bi- 800 Whose light shall be as a. spell to thee and ii The cloud went off from the pilgriin’s brow as a Uncmtsed with gold or gem of cost, from his ‘Here, lady fair, is the pearl of price; may it ,’I ask it hot, for the Wort} Yes. the Bishop is very incorrect in represent- ing that the people have not always had an. , , notwith- sianclmi: Romanists have endeavored to deprive the people of an open Bible. The "ll!"-W of hell" have - never prevailed airziinst the Chiiri-.h. In the language of two cinlueiit his-i l.l)1‘llIn8, not Bttpililiut “The Baptists tray be re- garded as being‘ from old the only religious de- iiomiiiation that have continued from the times of the apostles. as a Christian society who have kept the Evangcliirul faith pure through all ages iiithcrto. The coiistittitlon, never i.iei'vei'te.d. internally or externally, of the society of the Bali- tists, servos tliom as proof of iiiattriitli coii_ti-sled by the Romisli Cliurcli ’* ’* * * that tlieir own is the olilei-it Ctiurch society.” (;lerciiie<‘i. ll. Nodes-l. ll»-rvormde Kerk. t.Vi.. 1319» 13- 143" noted and traiislatcd by W. R. Wil_ii_aiiis, D.D. lilo man will call in question the ltl)llllY 0f D“- who wrote the above. But the Bisiiop concluded there are 3 KY0?“ many tliousiiiid errors in the Bible‘, Now. 1-119 Bisliop inust know whatever are l.|l4‘,$Q errors the)’ are oiilv ei*rors of tixtiisltitiolis. St:-tinge that one of Bishop Buttes’ inforniatioii should not dis- tinguish between iiifiillihility of the Bible and fallibility of its renderings. Vei'il_v,_ ‘his mind seems very much coiifu.-sod on lnfallihility. _ Tile objection of the Bishop equally allllllefi C0 the translations of ally writings, even to the language of t.iie infallible Pope. If the BINC is not It safe guide because of some imperfect rou- deriiigs, those infallible decisions of the Pope's are not safe, for they, loo, ll1llSl»Fl.1iI0l'Il'0lll im- perfect;renderings; nor is any writing translated i)erinont and Ypoij , trustworthy. But as the translation of any secu ar docunieiit, though imperfect does not render it an unreliable instrument for which it was written. so the transliition of the Scriptures does not render them an unreliable "lamp unto our feet and light unto our path.” The Biz»: hop must know that no intelligent man ever said the Bible has been so imperfectly trans- lated as to render it an ‘ ‘unsafe guide in all things necessary to make us wise unto siilvation.’_’ He must know that Presbvterlan who said it. con- tained 12,000 false renderings never intended by that that they rendered it unreliable. All schol- ars, i.he Bishop, too, if he has ever compared the “Pi-otcstaiit" Bible with the oi'~lgiiials, know the false renderings are on only minor matters. Yet, after all his charges against the Bible, cal- culated to create and foster iiifidelity, he_con— doscends to tell us he does not oppose the Billie! But I would like to know why the Bible was in cluded in the index of prohibited books under Pius IV, in 1564; under Clement VIII, in 1598; under Gregory .XV., in 1622, and in the_ hull of Unlgenitas of Clement X1, as well as under the Brief of Pitts VII, in 1816. This Brief condemns the use of ‘translations of the Bible that have not been approved, and allows the use of only such editions of the Bible as have been sanctioned by the ltomish Cliiircli, and furnished with Romish spectacles or inter- nretations. Moreover, it demands of every lay- man that he have the special permission of the priest in case he reads the Scriptures. Whv have Roinanists torn to pieces and burnt the Bible if they so love it? For Roinaiiist friends I have only the kindest feeliugs,btit I can not forget the record of Rome’s_ opposition totthe Bible, as written in the Bishop's sermon on its “errors,” being inaccessible to the people, an insufficient’. rule of faith, in the bloody record of the past. its smoke and ashes, and in its condemnation of the Bible in so many‘ Romish docuincnts. The plea, they want the people to read it while they dare not‘ int.erpret;it for themselves, is only deceptive; for God Al- mighty gave the Scriptures as a “lamp unto our feet and a. light unto our path,” and not Roiiilsli spectacles. ‘ “How precious is the book divine, By inspiration given? Bl'l,'..‘,‘l1L as a lamp its doctrines shine, To guide our souls to heaven.” W. A. J ARRELL. Dr. A Catholic Pi-iest’s Reply to Rev. Bette. To the Editor of the Globe-Democrat: - ST. JOHN'S CHURCH, CARROLLTON, ILL., Jan- lost his patience. extended expostulation. lishiucnt on the globe. rem. only true Church. fact alone, viz: The nianifcst variance the small body of Ritualists is in with the rest of the Epis- copal Church. Will the Rev. Mr. and supported by it? What a man lievc, that he Will not practice. well. Now. the whole of the of our Lord in the holy eucliarist. VGSLITIBIIIJS. not. people deny it without censure, your Church . the holy 8l'lGhlll‘lSi., the Christian sacrifice, etc. recently of D1‘. Mackonochie. The Rev. Mr. Bctts sect, like those he and confined to England nice, and the English. and them in their own language. What provision for the nations of the whole world, which, as it is genuine. fercnt cities of Gvfilrlllally. those Chtirches there? What business field. What do you call your conventicles language, a hierarchy in full possession? “two to one." We all but what does that prove? Catholicity of the Anglican heresy. Wardly dispi'opoi°tioiiate. ages. my dear sir. _ . Church was, and still is. one--absolutely one. fiddi . 9) erlas . spoke with her infallible voice: um7tits!” then is your unity? DOi.Ol'IOi.ln inlldcls. , guard the "dt==post'tu.m fidei..”’ on the altar is nothing but mediaeval nonsense. If the Rev. Mr. the sliaiii candles Catholic altars, I have nothing to answer. those bear the reproach who deserve it. will be satisfied. rem. nor ad fidcm in this discussion. platform with Pl'0t€Si.aDt.8. flu. . ----.‘...-.-aim manists” sortie slight inc Catlioliciiv, not i such. ing the sciiism of Henri’ V111. Ul'e«’tI1tC! aboth by its i-iirht name of Pmteslant. is done we must continue to use that uiifortiiniite “adjecl'ive’ ' which, _ Belts’ last. Sunday's sermon, went ovorto Isn- glaiid from Lluriiiziliy, ftitiiitl tilt ilttluigetit f-l.-~‘l0l'- mother in the Episcopal Church, clung to her in all her vicissitudes and to-day yet sticks to her in spite of the honest effort Mr. De Kovcii et al. made in get rid of it last fall in Boston . To the Editor of the Globe.-Democrat: sure, I have carefully read Bishop Baltes’ ser- mon of last. Sabbath cvcuino‘. nishcs matter for edifying thought. While I do [ not propose to review all the points of‘ that scr- mon in this letter, I must notice a few of them. In another letter I may review his stateineiits on the early history of the Bible . Church of Rome. the Bible, “as understood by Protestants ,” and concludes that the only thing left us is the infalli- bility of the Church of Rome. Catholics do not meet the fatal objections urged against the infiillioility he assumes for o cuss the here--that has been well done by Di‘. others. ‘_ their inability to vindicate their assumed ‘ _infzil- libi|ity,” in not attempting to wrestle with its objections. , that in resortiiig to Catholic ‘ 'iiifallibility’ ’ as the only source of , , ,, Bishop has resorted to a very fallible ‘ ‘infallible counselor.- volved in the Bishop’s sermon. but it essentially involved the infallibility of every priest, lilsllop, Archbishop, etc. that, as they are teacliers, Pope will avail the people, for , falliblc teachers ury 25, 1878.-The Rev. Mr. Belts has evidently In one and the same breath he declares my “criticism” scarcely worthy of no- tice, and yet "pauses” long enough to make an But nobody need be surprised. Ii‘aiher Bett'._8 can not be expected to be more consistent than the Church of which he claims to be a “priest,” and which is, to say the least, the most inconsistent, Janus-faced estab- However, let us go ad _good. I have said that the Episcopal Church tolerated no less than four distinct crceds in her bosom, and a variety of opinions besides; and that,there- fore, she could lay no claim to the mark of unity which characterizes the Catholic Church as the I will now prove: it by one, Bette grant that discipline and worsliln are d'ire.ct and lea'iti- _ mate offspring of clouma-—promp‘ted, illustrated pmmn‘ does not be- Very elabors.-l.c, beautiful and minute. ceremonial of the Catholic Church centers in the dogma of the real presence For this mys- tical though real presence we build altars-, orna- ment them with the ofl‘ei'ings of natiii'e and art, burn wax candles, incense and wear eucliaristlc The Rev. Mr, Belts knows this, and because he and his rituali.-itic confratres believe in the real presence, therefore they raise altars, ~ burn incense and waxcandles, wear cliasables, copes, stole and albs and study the Catholic Councils with at just appreciation of the old in- junction, ‘ ‘Sa-new scmcte sum‘. tractanda! ’ ’ If your "Catholic Church” is one in faith, my dear Mr. Bette,‘ how does it come that all of the Episcopa- lian cleiggy do not act like yourself and your ritualistic confi'eci's ii:i New York and Eiiglz-.ncl? The doctrine of the real presence is either an ar- ticle of faith in the Episcopaliaii Church, or it is If it be, then how can its iiiinisters and withotit rc- proacli _and witliout scriiples of conscience? If it is not‘ do flcle, then you, my dear sir, are in open rebellion _ against the creed, and the living, S}’)8tlklll,‘.;’ authoritv of I trust that; Fatlier Betts does not consider me having "dust in my eyes” when I tell him tliatl am not entirely ignorant. of the “dicta” of the Episc0pa.'iia.u Bi;-iliops i'cgardii-lg Nor could I well escape noticing the atitliorii.a- tive ‘ ‘act.a” of this “Catliol'ic Church” with ref‘- ci-ence to the practical exercise of these doc- trines in the cases of Tooth, Ridesdale, otc., and denies that the Roman communion outiiumbers, among English speak- ing people. the Anglican.- He may t.ry to do so, and tliereby prove to his and our saflsfaction that the Episcopal Cuurcli is not Catholic--a more rciaudiates--merely local, her colo- Supposing, per a.bs2.tl~- d-wm, the Polish, Boiicuiiaii, Italian and Spanish Catholics should wish to go over to your Church, could any of your Episcopalian ‘ 'priests” address is there in your newly 11tli.0i'lCd ‘ ‘Catholic Churcli” as ‘everybody knows, the Roiuan Catholic Church embraces with acatliulicity which is as marveloiis Althouitn you are filled with a wonderful zeal for proselytism, yet I have not heard of a German Anglican "prlest.” in any of those little Churches you established in the dif- have You call the Roman CaLl.l‘lu1l.C‘UhUI‘Ci'1 scliisinatical in this counti-—y, be- cause an An;,*'l1C£lll Bishop had preoccupied the in Germany and Italy, where there is, in your own The good rector of Trinity boasts of the number of Enlscopaliaii clergy-—tliat'. it outnunibers ours are aware of that fact; Certainly not the The large number of its ‘ ‘Bishops, priests and deacons,” compared wit); the whimsiciil small iiuinber of its comintinicaiits (no more than the Catholic popu- lation of New York and Brooklyn Dioceses alone) makes the impression of ‘an army in which the number of officers compared to privates is awk- Like others of his tendencies, the reverend tren- tleman loves to harp on the theological and pull- proofs of unity and senti- iie shadow or skeleton of desist from call- ttnti Eliz- Uiiiii that Otherwise, we can in-ver like the poor waif in F‘:ittitii' Yours, truly, A. I. SAUER. A Baptist llliiilsnteryoii _Blshop‘Ba.ltes. OLNEY, ILL. , Jttntiarv 23.—-With no little plea-' It clearly states the Bishop's position, and fur- 1. The Bishop's arguments equally fatal to the he denies the iiifallibllity of Now, so long as _ the Church oine, the Bishop has nothing left. To dis- “lnfallibility” question is unnecessary llollaiid and Our Catholic friends have confessed Let it then be forever remembered, “iiifitl1ible’ ’ counsel, the ,L‘O_t)(l Not only is the dogma of an infallible Pope in-. The truth of this ai»i>e:n's in they must _be infalli- bleilus the guarantee that the iiifallibtlity of the are liable to misuiidsrstaud infallible teach- ing, and so teach the people; or they are liable to be bad men and tie;-ignedly mislead thé people. Such there are in all relig- ious bodies. So, then, inasinucli as :iii_infallible Pope does not insure infallibility of 1113 priests, bishops, etc.. I ask, where is our hope, lI.We are Wholly dependent on the Cliurcli?_ Let any one Z call to mind the corruption of the ‘ Catholic clergy in the dark ages. and then ask... where is the hope I01" infallible teaching for the people. A "I’i'otestant’_’ can protect tiimself by t.lie Bible; but a Catholic. in- asmuch as the Church is above the Bible, is help- less. Here the iiifallilile Cliurcli is “found waut- . ing,” and here the good Bishop’s sermon falls. 2. The Bistiop’s argurnent involves one infal- libility as clearer than ai'iot.lier infzillibility. Though he says the Bible,accoi'd1iig to ‘ ‘Protest- ant lllLCl‘l.lI‘8LltLl0ll," is not infallible, I presuine he believes in the absolute iiif':-.i1lil.nlity of the Bible. Now, the position that infallible inter- pi;eters of the Bible tare essential to, its under- standing assumes that God inspires the inter- preters to speak more clearly tlianwhe did the writers of the Bible !_ Why, in the name of common se.nse,did He not ii'isini-e the writers to speak with the clearness with which lie is assumed to inspire their interpreters? Oi-,wh.V the Bible at all? Why not inspire the iutei_~pret.- ers with the truth, in lieu of its iiiterpret.iii:i_oiis? ° '_l‘hink. Cue iiifetllibility to clear up tlieatt11U1§§ll1' ty and blunders of another infallibiiityl This Doint equally holds good with. reference to “tra- dition ;” for why traditioii in a Church where there is iiifallibility? Why not inspire the Cliurcli to teach the assumed ti'adii.ionary teachings, in- stead of preserve and interpret them? 3. The Baptist position with reference to the relation of the Bible and the Church. Baptists heartily agree with Cu holics in their 1878.‘ ‘hill Giiliii -llllliililiiil. The Leading Journalof the Mississippi Valley. :-—........_._.._.._»......._...————u-¢ Always Fresh. Enterprising and‘. Reliable. Accurate in News and Fearless: in Comment. The GLOBE-DEMOCRAT, since its estab- lishmeut. in 1875, by the consolidation of thei two Republican morning newspapers of St. Louis, has maintained an unquestioned place in the front rank of ‘Western jouriialism. Its. growth in business and circulation has been: steady and uiiinterrupted, and as its multi- tudes of readers will testify, its growth in, all the essentials of a first‘.-class newspaper has kept steady pace with the advancement of its p£ttl‘0l”ltt;;‘e, until to-clay it stands with- out a rival‘ in"the Mississippi Valley or the Northwest as to all that the people expect’ from a first-class journal. ‘ - Politically, the GLOBE-DEMOCRAT is and- has been Republican in seiitiuienlraiid convic- tion. Believing that the Republican party, by its record in the past and by its pledges to: the future, is the safest guardian of the pub- lic welfare, and the organization most likely to secure good government to the people and to protect the rights of all, we have steadily- striven for the advancement of its standard in. all public conflicts. We have at the same- time aimed. and shall in the future aim,i to be holiest in criticisin and faitiiftil in. i'eeord—--to express opinions candidly putt to tell the truth fearlessly. No cause can: be advanced in the minds of intelligent people by suppressing the truth, or by _a.ttempt.lng to ‘ color the facts of every day history. The demand of the age is, first and above all, for the facts in every im- portant c:ise,wliethor it relate to our political, our commercial, or our social life. “The truth, with honest criticism.” is the most position on the perpetuity of the Cl'iui-cli-that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” But Baptists dissent from the view of their Cath- olic fricnds as to how God makes this p__romise Baptists believe He preserves the Chui'c_li (a) by the Bible, (b) the Spirit, (c) and His provi- deuce. ' . Briefly stated, Baptists believe God made His Church a teaching body, and that she teaches her members tnrougli the Bible, as taught by her niinisters and by their reading it, The Spirit does not inspire, but illuminates lier ministers. The. Bible in all essential points being clear, her ministers as a class will thus ever teach the truth. exalted motto which the conductors of an newspiiper can adopt. or which they can hope to live up to. In this spirit we have en- deavored to treat all public questions, with- out regard to the effect upon those who may be temporarily in place and power. Much has been recently said about a con- flict between Capital and Labor.“ The GLOBE- DEMOCRAT recognizes no such conflict as ex- isting in the present, or as possible in the futti re ofthis country. It relies upon the intel- '.l‘lie iiiembers have the same Spirit to illuminate them, but are to ' be taught of ministers. because the ministers devote so much more time to prayer and study. As Paul praised the Bereans for searching the Scriptui'es to see whether “ these things are so,” so do Baptists urge their members to do. (Acts, xvii, 2.) Roinanists assume more than Paul, and I$a.—Dli':5LS since, for they will not the people to try their Lesion- ing by the infallible ‘Bible, but compel them to read through tlieir glasses. Then God’s Providence that was over Israel is over the Church. Thus the Baptist. Church has. in the laiiguasre of twogcinineni.Pcdo-haptists,‘ ‘ been the only Christian society which has contiiiiied t'.hi'otigliii‘llages and preserved the Evangelical doctrines of i'cligion.” ‘ This prepares the way to meet the Bi~sliop’s reference to Bible destitutioii; for there has never been an age. in which the Il]llllSl.C1"?‘UI the true Ciiiirch have not had access to the Bible. As to the people being desti- tute of the Bible (a), in Czod’s provi- dence placing the Bible. in their hands we have the proof He did not desiszn tliis as the per- iniincnt. and normal c0iidii.loiil,(b) , and as this is so, tile Bl:-llo])’S argunient is falluclotis (c), and all it proves is that under God's care the Cutircli may be preserved for it time lhl‘('oll;;,'ll the Bible in -only the miuister’s hands. This we willingly agree to. But, unless the Bishop denies the benefit of the Bible t.o the people, he must admit the liighest efficiency of the Clitircli can be a_tt..aincd only with the Bible in the liands of the people. , 5. Protest-aiii.s gettine.‘ anything out of the Bi- ble. (ii) Neit.liei' have RCi'l’ll'llllSl-S been ‘:i;.;°recLl. (b) Their agreciiient; is not an agri--eiiieiit; of doc- trine, but they are, so far as they are a. uiiit-sucli Ghlt‘II_Y from a1'biLrat'y bower-—ii'oii bonds; cer- tainly nota desirable unit." (c) Pi'otestunts are not one body, but are as much one in docti-iiie as Rome. (Ct) i-Baptists, the only visible Cliurcli, are more so. (-.q) The dlsagreeinent of doctrine lll'll0l'l9.‘ Pi-otestaiits is not due toBiblic-at interpre- tati.on,btit ti. iieglcct of Bible study, and to the fact that they come from Rome and have never fully refoi'rned——i'etaiiiin,e.' considerable of Romlsh er- ror. Dorner says the Reformation was toosooii ceased. Not the Bible, out Rome, is the chief cause of Protestant. divisions. W ill Rome accept; the Baptist challenge to ciebate? W.A. JARREL. The Real Presence. To the Editor of the Globe-Democrat: SPRlNGF11:lLD, ILL., January 24. 1878.-—In your issue of the 19th is publish-e,d a short article signed M. W. H. desiring to know what Christ. meant when he said: Except ye eat of the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. My friend would assume itto mean the real presence. Let us grant it (for the sake of argu- ment). Then I say that your Church deny to the laity one element inthe. Eucharist contrary to the ‘conimiind of Christ. Drink -ye all of it. In this your Church have set aside the commandments of men. This daring infringement you are forced to admit is dii".|.C'tly contrary to the Apostolic Church, the custom indeed never having been sanctioned till 1415. According to your View our Loi-d_’s dis-’ course in John vi refers to the Eucharist. and must. be literally understood. This you will admit, for on the literal interpretation of this passage your spiritual teachers ground their second scripture ai'gtiment'. in favour of the real presence. Let us view in this lttrlit. Let us consider it (as your Church eiijoins) as (strictly litei-al, and remeinbei that this is the word of Clirist and, moreover, as in- terpreted by the leaders of your faith. In your Bible, John vi, 53, “Then said Jesus unto them, Amen, amen, unless you eat‘. of the flesh of the osophical opinions of the Fraiiciscaiis and Domin- icans, and other “aniiabls orders” of the middle Opinions and dogmas are not identical, In lnatters of faith the Catholic If those monks delighted in fussing and ql1l'tl‘l“€‘.llllg acrirnonloiisly with each other about opinions, wiiv, that‘ did not affect faith. But; the divisions in the Episcopal Cliui-ch cer- tain to l11llU.el'S of vital iinportaiice. They _ touch revealed ti-uttis-—tlicy affect the deposition As long as the F1'lli‘iClaoCitl‘l8 and Domini- cans desired to clisedify Christianity by wran2;ling about onliiions , the Church said: ‘ ‘In d-tlbiis lib- But when aqiiestion of revealed truth arose, she, the pillar and the ground of truth, ‘ ‘In izecessm-its Tliere is more in that "interesting: interview’ ’ I had with the sexton of St. Thomas’ Church than the Rev. Mr. Belts lets on there is, and he knows it, too. If there subsists such a discrepancv in meters of faith between sexton and rector, where But in this model “Catholic C'll11l‘0h" W9 "'11." exllect trreater discrepancies than this. It has “ wardens’ ’ who are no commu- 1liG‘B of Alton, whose Bi.-shop has given you I‘rotesi;aiit.s eiiotigh of iiiigzittil palzul-um last. Siiiiday, and your fasticiiouslasto If, moreover, and in coriclusioii, Fill.-hel‘ Bolts was scandalizeil by‘ the ‘ ‘imperfectly rciidered” Latin in our service, this iigiiiii non pC?'ti»'Itt3‘t ad If, illiwevel‘, he rejects the use of the Latin ‘for the holy sacri- fice on the ground of its uuintelligibleness for the people. then he again descends upon the same A man who abhors ,Pi-otestantisin, as the rector of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the Holy '1‘ririity-—he, at It least, should try to‘ give us “scliisinatical Be- your own reason , and you will you must resign your reason to me.” our dutv to dissent. to the Ciiurch . J-O Leo-authorities with the Bible? it be saved, for they are not permitted to drink of This you yourself must municated such as did not receive the sacrament St. Ambrose says he who receives the mystery otherwise than Christ; appointed (that is, but in one kind when He hath appointed it in two) is unworthy of the Lord, and he can not BELLEVILLE, ILL. , January 24, 1878.--Is there room for one more layman in your free fight, or reading in the works of Robert Hall, the great English Baptist, an argument on 'private iniorpretiition which I would like to see answered and refuted, if possi- ble, by one of the many masters of logic who Not having the The Roman Catinilic Church claims the ri,qht, the exclusive i'ir:hi.. of When , The iooptiiarlty of the GLOBE-DEMOCRAT, she points us to the Sci-iptiii-es themselves; “upon I this rock,” etc. , etc; "read for yt')lll‘S(‘.iVt".‘S; use find that _ She clin- cedes to us the right of _private judgment quoad hoc as to this point, andso far forth as its exer- cise is necessary to convince us that we have no rightof priva_te jiidgnient. In the event of our never becoiiiiiigso convinced, always supposing an honest exercise of our reason, it will remain In the other event, it be- comes our duty as honest uien to place ourselves within the fold and acknowledge our allegiance . But for this investigation. is not theprtght of private interpretation conceded by the Church to every human being; and that, too, though all the Fatliers and Councils are cited as ligence oftlie masses to see that any conflict’ of the kind would be prcjtidicial to all tlie/ in- tere*st.s involved, and that jiistice and right are the best arbitrators between differing opinions repre'sent'ing opposing sides. The GLOBE-DEMOCRAT will, so far as its in-‘ fluence extends, endeavor to state fairly and. C tojudge iuipart.ially in all questions of this kind which inayiaiise. Its aim will be to preserve -an equal balance, and to ...,.:;e on the one hand fair wages for labor, and on the other fair opportunities for capital. The proprietors of the GLOBE-DEMOCRAT can point with pride to the record which this journal has made in the past as an enterpris- ing, active and energetic collator of current: news--political, local and coinmerclal. In this respect they have had no rival in St. Louis, or in the VVest'. With a vigilaiit corps of i'eport.ei's in the city, and of c0'ri'espoiid- cuts at all the prineipiil news centers East and \Vest, they have obtaiiied, without i'egard to, expense. a.ud in advance of all their coi:em- poraries, the leading incidents of ezicli day.’s liistory, and in iiiaiiy notable instaiices they have distanced all Western rivals in the fullness and detail of the news thus obtaiiicd. For the fullness and accuracy of its Com- mercial and Market‘. Reports -the. GLOBE- DEMOCRAT has been especially noted in the past, and with renewed exertions in this direction, we can safely promise‘to holdin the future the pl‘C(3’3tIi()l1Ce already won. 'Il.‘EB.BA.'S: Postage Prepaid on all Editions. DAILY, BY IVIAEIJ, SINGLE COPIES 3' Times a VVeek per anniim..............$l2 O0 6 Times a Week per aiinum..............'11do CLUB RATES: 6 3 Copies 7 times a Week, per copy.......$11 00 3 Copies 6 times a. week, per copy....... 10 50 5 Copies 7 times a week, per copy....... 10 50 5 copies 6 times a. week, per copy....... 10 00 and any additional numbers at some rates. Subscriptions will be received to commence at anytinie. ...__ ._._..;........_.........._.__............_.......... snivii-WEEKLY. Single copy, per annum... 50 Club of three,per 3 00 Club of five, per 2 75 TRI-WEEKLY, Composed of the Semi-Weekly and Sunday edition of the Daily. Single Copy, per annum.................. ....$6 00 Club of three, per 5 50 Club of five, per copy........................‘l' 5 00 WEEKLY. Single Copy, per annum..................$l 50 With the view of placing this Popular edi- tion in iiicreased numbers througliout. every Westei.'n and Southern State, we have pre- pareda SPECIAL RATE son CLUBS, which will be furnished on applicatioii. Indiice- ments are off'ei‘ed wliicli will enable every coiiiiiiiiiiitv to form a club, and thus procure their reading at a very low rate. POSTLEASTERS and oiliers desiriiig to act as Agents, are in- vited to correspond with us. andthe t€tl’lll3i.We offer, make it the-best paper to Work for in the West. . SUBSCRIPTIONS must in all cases be accompanied with the money. Send by postal 0 ‘tiers or registered. letters, at our risk. ’ Address _GLOBE PRlNT|NG 00., , ST. LOUIS M6,