Page images
PDF
EPUB

self OFTEN, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now ONCE in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men ONCE to die, but after this the judgment; so Christ was ONCE offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." (Heb. ix. 25-28.)

Read also the first ten verses of the 10th chapter, the whole argument of which is, that the Levitical sacrifices were often offered, simply because they were shadows, and had no innate value; but that if any one of them could have put away sin, the repetition would at once have 'ceased.' The apostle then proceeds

"And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: but this man, after he had offered ONE SACRIFICE for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by ONE OFFERING he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is NO MORE OFFERING FOR SIN. (Heb. x. 11-18.)

Is it possible for language to go beyond this? Had the mass existed in the apostle's days, and had he wished to denounce it, could he possibly have found

[ocr errors]

language more clear or decisive? In fact, the mass can only be defended at all, by directly denying the truth of all the apostle's statements. The Romanist must assert, plainly, that " by one offering" Christ hath not 66 perfected for ever them that are sanctified;" that" the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" does not sanctify the believer in him; and that it is necessary that Christ "should offer himself often," for that he hath not "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." All this must the defender of the mass affirm, and when he has gone thus far, it is certainly by no means surprising that he should wish to have the Bible put out of sight. It is impossible for him not to be conscious that to a plain honest student of God's word, the opposition between his statements and those of St. Paul must appear altogether total.

Such, then, is the scriptural view of this question. In conclusion, we have wished and endeavoured to state as fairly as we could, such proofs and arguments as we could find in any Romish writers, in defence of their view. But in truth, their array is so scanty as to be almost invisible. They quote Malachi i. 11: "In every place incense shall be offered unto thy name, and a pure offering." They also quote the case of Melchizedec, who offered bread and wine, and who is said to be a type of Christ.

Nothing, however, can be clearer than that the use of these texts in such a case is a reversal of the true laws of interpretation. We ought to interpret figurative and obscure passages by such as are plain and beyond doubt. But in this case the Romanists require us to interpret the plain and explicit language of our Lord, and of St. Paul, by reference to

the figurative language of Malachi, and the typical language applied to Melchizedec! Into such an argument it would be a waste of time to enter.

Their only remaining prop is found in their usual resort to the fathers. Several of these have called the Lord's Supper' a sacrifice.' We admit it; but in what sense do they use the term? Clemens Alexandrinus says,' our earthly altar is the assembly of such as join together in prayer, having as it were a common voice and mind. For the sacrifice of the church is the word ascending as incense from holy souls, their sacrifice and their whole minds being open to God.' And Tertullian interprets the very passage in Malachi, on which the Romanists so greatly rely, thus: Here spiritual sacrifices are meant, and a contrite heart is shewn to be an acceptable sacrifice to God.'2

Never, then, surely, was so strong a case on the one side, opposed by so weak an one, on the other. Take the plain narrative of scripture, and it exhibits to us the Lord's Supper' of the Protestants; but nothing in the least resembling 'the mass' of the Papists. Turn to the records of the early church, and again we find a simple commemorative festival, without the least trace of the gorgeous ceremony in which incense, and bell-ringing, and lighted candles, and genuflections without number, deck out a service, wherein the laity, in place of bread and wine, receive a fragment of a wafer,-while the priests profess to be offering a sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead.' Look, then, to the doctrine of the apostles touching sacrifices, and we find that "by ONE OFFERING" Christ" HATH perfected for ever 1 Stromata, Lib. vii. p. 717. 2 Adversus Judæos, Ch. v. p. 188.

them that are sanctified." No refuge remains, then, for the doctrine of the mass, save in the last resort of the Romanists, the grand magazine of all kinds of opinions, the countless tomes of the fathers, whence sentences of every hue, and proving or disproving, in turn, every doctrine and every practice of the church, may at any time be found. The main argument, however, derived from this source, is, that the Supper is often called a sacrifice. We admit this without hesitation; but we shew, in reply, that the term 'sacrifice' is so vaguely and indiscriminately used in their writings, as to render it absurd to base any doctrine on this single expression. And so ends the discussion, which surely terminates, however imperfectly conducted on our part, in favour of that mode of observing our Lord's last command, which approaches the nearest to his own practice and example.

XIX.

ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.

THE PARDON OF SIN; PURGATORY; AND
INDULGENCES.

A FEW subjects yet remain, which demand a careful and patient investigation. One of these is the Pardon of Sin, as preached by the church of Rome; with its two branches, Purgatory and Indulgences. Let us devote a few moments to a serious consideration of these doctrines.

In bringing the mind to these topics, it will be impossible to forget that remarkable circumstance, which stands recorded as giving rise to the German Reformation. There is no reason to suppose that in other respects it differed from the usual practice of the Romish see; but as having caused so great a revolution in the state of the visible church, it will ever remain peculiarly distinguished in the page of history.

In the year A. D. 1514, and even under the direction of one of the most acute and intelligent of all

« PreviousContinue »