N*. Good day, James. James. Good day, Sir.
IV*. Well, James, I am come to continue our inquiries into the truth of Roman Catholic doctrines.
James 1 am glad you are, Sir, and much obliged to you. Bill M. has been here since, and angry at my being so sure of the Bible being the word of God, and that I am so happy because I see that God has forgiven me, and that I have found salvation in Christ. He says I am turned fanatic, and that my head is turned, and what not. It tried me a little, but I know I am happy, and my wife helped me. And it was only what he had said to me before. And when I turned to Scripture, it came to me just with light and power; it was like another book to me; so I was not shaken really. If a man sees the sun, it is hard to persuade him he does not see it, though he can't explain to another how he comes to see it, only that God gave him eyes: but I should like to hear something more about the church, for that is what he always comes down upon. I expect he will be here to-night, and perhaps, if it is not too much to ask, you would have some conversation with him about it. My woman would be glad to hear, too, if you have no objection.
N*. Not the least; we will wait to speak of the church and authority till M. comes. I am glad he will be here, we can have our questions fully out. We will take, however, Roman Catholic doctrines from their own authoritative sources, which is still better. However, he can recall any point I might forget, which will be an advantage. As to their arguments, I have Milner's "End of Controversy," which I know is distributed largely in cheap editions so that I suppose we shall have the best arguments which they have to produce. Meanwhile there is a point I can touch on (for which we had not time the other day), I mean purgatory, because it is directly connected with the all-sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice which gave you, through grace, such comfort the last time I saw you. The Romanists teach that there are two kinds of sins, mortal and venial. The first, they say, deprives the soul of sanctifying grace, that is, the grace that makes us friends of God, and deserves hell:-venial sin does not deprive us of this. It does not, spiritually speaking, kill the soul, so their catechisms speak. The Council of Trent declares that the grace of justification is lost by mortal sin. Venial sin, however, according to the same authority, does not exclude from grace, but by mortal sins men are sons of wrath, and enemies of God. They say that if a man dies in mortal sin he goes to hell, but if he dies in venial sin he goes to purgatory; or if his mortal sin has been forgiven, and he is again justified by penance, he may go to purgatory to satisfy for the penalties that may remain after forgiveness.
James. What is purgatory?
N*. They are very shy indeed of saying what it is. Our friend, Dr. Milner says:-"all which is necessary to be believed on that subject is, there is a purgatory and the souls detained there are helped by the prayers of the faithful, and particularly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar." That is the same as the Council of Trent, only they anathematize any one who denies that, after men are freed from the eternal penalty of their sins, they have to satisfy in this world, or in purgatory, the temporal penalty to which they are liable for them. They do not tell us what it is, and forbid curious questions, only there is, they say, a place of temporary punishment. In the catechism of the Council of Trent it is called, however, the fire of purgatory, in which the souls of the just are cleansed by a temporary punishment, * Those who get in must stay there till they have paid the very last farthing, for so they apply that text; yet their friends can help them to get out by prayers, alms, and particularly by the so-called sacrifice of the mass. Now all this you can easily see (however little clear it may be) goes clean against the whole testimony of God as to the forgiveness of sins. They ground it in their reasonings on the impossibility of a soul suffering for a small sin as it would for murder. They put a person under vindictive temporal punishment, which does not purify, but satisfies God. They are always laboring to get people out; indulgences are used to spare people part of this temporal punishment due to sin, as they say, but " no one can ever be sure that he has gained the entire benefit of an indulgence, though he has performed all the conditions appointed for this end."(** How different is Scripture. God does chasten for sin with a view to our holiness, even when we are
perfectly forgiven-He, for our profit (it is said), that we may be partakers of His holiness. That, the heart
\ assured of His goodness can easily believe, and bless Him \ for it. He speaks to us (as it is beautifully said) as unto children: " My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him." It is also true that God governs and shows sometimes His displeasure against sin in this world. And He has so ordered the world that he that sows to the flesh of the flesh reaps corruption;-but a vindictive penalty-when a man is not in the flesh at all, as to which God can be satisfied by the man's sufferings in this or another world, or by his friends' offerings with which no purifying is connected, but which serve merely to buy him off from God's hand, who will not let him go till the last farthing is paid, is a horrible blasphemy against the truth and grace of God. The Scriptures do not teach us thus. What should you say, James, to the thought that, after God had forgiven you, and declared that He would remember your sins and iniquities no more, God was going to put you into the fire or some other horrible pain, till you paid Him the last farthing of these temporal penalties?
(* It is singular enough the obscurity and inconsistency of the Catechism of the Council of Trent on this subject. In the article on the descent into hell, besides what I have just quoted, after speaking of purgatory, it is said: "The third kind of abode is that in which were received the souls of the just who died before Christ, and where, without experiencing any kind of pain, supported by the blessed hope of redemption, they enjoyed peaceful repose. These pious souls then, who in the bosom of Abraham were expecting the Savior, Christ the Lord liberated, descending into hell." (Vol. 1, p. 123,3.) Shortly after, in the same article, it is said, speaking of the descent of the just: " They all descended, some to endure the most acute torments; others, though exempt from actual pain, yet deprived of the vision of God, and of the glory for which they sighed, and consigned to the torture of suspense in painful captivity." Is being consigned to the torture of suspense in painful captivity peaceful repose in the bosom of Abraham? Were the holy and the just held in painful captivity in the bosom of Abraham? Is that the picture which Scripture gives of it? The fire of purgatory is the second thing. Limbus patrum is the third kind of abode, where there was no pain, but peaceful repose. Yet some were there to endure the most acute torments. In a further passage it is said: "And the souls of the just., on their departure from this life, were borne to the bosom of Abraham; or, as is still the case with those who require to be freed from the stains of sin, or die indebted to the divine justice, were purified in the fire of purgatory ". (p. 127, II.) Hence the souls of the just who were enjoying peaceful repose in the torture of suspense must have been perfect souls. The others were in the fire of purgatory as people are now. The Jews' belief is that Abraham descended from time to time to deliver souls. Bellarmine insists that it is a material fire,-a strange thing for souls to suffer from. But what is more important, he declares that the element of sin (the fomes peccati) is gone by death, because sensuality is extinguished; habits, not. But they must soon be gone too, nay, at once, though that is not the case in this life, because there will there be no contrary and resisting element as there is here,-nor is purgatory for these habits, as adults who die directly after baptism, and martyrs do not go there. Yet neither baptism nor martyrdom destroys them. After reasoning thus, and saying purgatory was for none of these, he adds:-" There remains, therefore, the penalties of guilt and venial sins-which may properly be called the remains of sins, on account of which purgatory is. But these remains, it is sometimes certain, are purged in death: sometimes it is certain they are not purged, sometimes it is doubtful which happens, and it is most probable they are partly purged and partly not purged." Vol. 2., Bellarm. De Purg. Lib. 2. cap. 9., 7 (p. 370): " Restat ergo reatus pcenw, et peccata venialia, que proprie dici possunt reliquiee peccatorum, ob quas est Purgatorium. Has autem reliquias aliquando certum est in morte purgari: aliquando certum est non purgari aliquando dubium est, quid fiat, et probabilissimum est, partim purgari, partim non purgari;" and preceding and following sections. I cite this because it is thus clear from the highest authority of the Roman Catholic church that it is not inward spiritual purifying, for sensuality is extinguished by death,-not even habits, but the penalty of guilt and venial sin. It is strictly penal and satisfactory; and secondly, it is exactly for that (" the remains of sin," which extreme unction takes away) that men go into, purgatory; which is noticed farther on. The pains of purgatory, says Bellarmine, are most horrible (atrocissimas). It cannot be said how long they last; they may diminish gradually. This he proves by visions. He enlarges upon the proofs of the horrible pains compared with anything here. In result, for the slightest faults (if Pope Gregory the Great is to be believed), and with no view to purify from lust or sensuality (for that is extinguished), justified holy souls in a state of grace are kept in torment as a mere penal satisfaction.
One catechism defines it ".a place of punishment where souls suffer for a time, before they go to heaven;" but the Council of Trent and the creed of Pope Pius give us no help here.)
(** Milner's " End of Con." Letter 42. On Indulgences, " of what it really is," (sec. 4. of second par. of Letter 42.). Bellarm. De Indulg. Lib. 1. cap. 12.)
James 1 never could think that.
N. No one who knows God's truth could, James. It revolts every thought that God has given to us of His grace and of Himself.
James. But, then, what do you say to the murderer not being punished more than one who had committed a small fault?
N*. I say that if they turn to God through Christ, they are both washed clean, as white as snow, even if the sin was as scarlet. The whole argument, James, denies Christian truth. No person renewed in heart will call any fault small which comes from the carnal mind, which is enmity against God. We know that if we are not redeemed and justified and born again, we are all children of wrath; that if we are, though we may be chastened for our profit, God imputes to us no sin at all, as Paul says, Rom. 4, "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth no sin," quoting Psa. 32, because Christ has, for those who by grace are in Him, borne
and satisfied perfectly for them all; that (Heb. 10) by one offering He has perfected forever them that are sanctified; that, if they are really Christ's, they have a new nature (Col. 3:10); that Christ Himself is their life (Col. 3, Gal. 2:2020I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)); and that when we die we are absent from the body and present with the Lord (2 Cor. 5); that God has made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light (Col. 1). In a word, we believe in salvation through, the work of Christ, and a new, divinely-given, nature. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses from all sin (1 John 1) God forgives and cleanses from all iniquity. It was when Christ had by Himself purged our sins that He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high (Heb. 1). What do we want of a purgatory, if we are perfectly purged and cleansed, made (as Scripture speaks) as white as snow! They would persuade us that God has given His Son for our sins, that He has borne them; and yet, that for those who die in grace, who are really in Christ, all whose sins Christ has borne, cleansing them in His precious blood, -interceding for them in virtue of it if they have failed
(1 John 2)-God has still a prison in order to punish them grievously for the very sins which Christ has borne, and that He will exact the last farthing of them!
James. That's not Christianity, I'm sure, nor the God of the Bible.
N*. It is not, James: and what strikes me in all the doctrines of Popery is that they deny the grace and truth that came by Jesus Christ, His own grace. But a word as regards degrees of guilt. Even in eternal punishment Scripture speaks of a difference, of few stripes and many stripes (Luke 12:46,4746The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. 47And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. (Luke 12:46‑47)); but that is in eternal punishment when Christ comes to judge, as you may see, verse 46; and they are all alike shut out from the presence of the blessed God, and that is what is infinitely dreadful; while if, through grace. they have been brought to repentance and faith in Christ, if they have really been made partakers of the divine nature
(2 Peter 1:3,43According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: 4Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Peter 1:3‑4)); the Lord imputes no sin to them. The Romanist reasoning supposes that the sinner who is in grace has to answer for his own sins, and hence it makes the difference of great and small. Christianity teaches us that if' a man be in Christ, Christ is He who has answered for them, and that hence none is imputed to him at all. But he does look for purifying by the word of God in whatever details he may need it, and by chastening in the flesh when it is called for; but he has a new nature, and, if he dies and leaves this world of discipline, he will not have his body or flesh remaining at all. He departs and is with Christ: falls asleep in Christ, Jesus receiving his spirit. He could not look on the God who has loved him, given His Son for him, justified him, cleansed him in Christ's blood, made him His own child and declared He would never remember his sins, as a God who would after all put him into torment till he paid the last farthing:
James. That's true; I see, plain enough, it denies the very nature of Christianity, all if tells you of God and all the feelings it gives towards God for His love. Why the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost; I begin to feel it now and see in the Bible that it belongs to the Christian; and there would be an utter end of that, if it was true that God was going, after saving us by Christ, to put us into prison till we had paid the last farthing. No: I believe Christ has paid the last farthing for me (blessed be His name), and that He ever lives to make intercession for me. I do not know what kind of a religion that is, but it is not real Christianity, that I am sure; though I do not say good people may not be blinded by it.
N*. No: its character is not divine-Penances to satisfy an exacting God, purgatory if you do not do enough, multiplied rites and ceremonies to quiet the conscience without purifying it, no confidence in God as a God of love, no resting in thankful peace on the efficacy of Christ's work, no childlike confidence in a Father's goodness taking away fear; these are not the grace and truth that came by Jesus Christ, nor their fruits. The system really sets aside grace and puts us under the terror of an eternity which we are not—fit to meet. It pretends that Christ's blood was shed to bring the Old Testament saints to Paradise, but that the Commandments are given for us to merit it by. Then, there are ceremonies to eke out our failures; and, in spite of them all, and of a sacrament that is to wipe out the remains of sine (for so, they say, extreme unction does, which Christ's blood, however believed in, has not done of itself), we are to go to purgatory and finish the payment to a God who will have the last farthing. It is.
neither God come down to us in love (and that is what Christ really was on earth, and as to His love He surely is not changed), nor we reconciled to God by the death of His Son, which Scripture says that we who believe are. Forgive me, James, if I speak earnestly and warmly when I think of the wrong done to God's love and to the efficacy of Christ's precious blood by it.
They can give a thousand cunning explanations about purgatory, which after all are but straw before the Word of God; but the end is that the poor soul under this teaching needs, and feels it needs, purging in order to be with God,-does its best, is not purged; gets the sacraments, is not purged; and then goes to purgatory, and God knows when it will get out. For see what a poor case it is after all. A man is absolved, has the viaticum, the benefit of Christ's sacrifice; and then is anointed, Which is declared to wipe away the remains of sin,* and then after all goes to purgatory. What is that for? Not to
purge him,-for the remains of sin are wiped away (I
use the terms of the Council of Trent*) by extreme unction; what does he go to purgatory for after that? The natural conscience feels it must be to purge the soul, not merely to satisfy a vindictive God,-but, if it be, then the sacraments have not done it. And though they have had masses before which have not kept them out of this prison, and they get masses said to get them out when they are in, yet we never know when they will get out after all. They are helped, but we are not told
(that is carefully avoided) whether the satisfaction is judicially received for the satisfaction of another: the offended judge is not bound to receive. It is probable
it is,-but they are only suffrages, not satisfaction necessarily applied..And remark, here, that it is with no view of benefit to the souls that are in purgatory that they are tormented. God does chasten men in this world (and to this Roman Catholics appeal); but we read, " he for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness." God may bring in judgment, like the flood or the perishing of the Israelites in the wilderness; but, in this last case, it is said: "As I live, saith the Lord, all the earth shall be filled with my glory.' It was His public government in this world vindicated. But Bellarmine says, the souls in purgatory are sure of their salvation, that death has wholly taken away the principle of sin in them, nor is the purgatorial fire to correct evil habits that have been acquired. It is purely completing so much punishment imposed on them, satisfying a penalty. And for that they are in horrible. torments, perhaps till the resurrection.
James. Well, how can people be so blinded? For I cannot believe if a soul is -forgiven and purged, God could take pleasure in tormenting it, and if it is not purged, then their absolution and sacrament and unction
are worth. nothing after all. Purgatory and they cannot both be true, that is plain. Ah! when a man is in the
-blessed light, he sees clear even if he be ignorant, because he knows the love of God and the value of the precious blood of Christ.
N..Yes, James, he is taught of God; and what concerns his soul is as clear as daylight, ay, and what God
is too, though he have much to learn. We have considered what purgatory is for the soul when compared with the truth of Scripture; we will see the value of their proofs of it by-and-bye. In the meanwhile see how their doctrine of the intercession of the saints hides the grace of Christ.
The Word of God teaches us that the blessed Son of God came down to earth and got, as. Scripture beautifully speaks, the tongue of the learned to speak a word in season to him that is weary (Isa. 1. 4). We are told that He was in all points tempted like as we are without sin; that we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of Our infirmities, but that, having suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted (Heb. 2:17,18;4. 15, 16): so that I can come boldly to a throne of grace to find mercy and grace to help in time of need; that if I sin, which I can never excuse, still I have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins (1. John n.). Here then God teaches me I have a throne of grace to which I can come boldly, and a high priest who understands all my weakness and sorrows, and feels for me in them, and if I have sinned, One who has made propitiation for the sin. Now that is all I want. It is holy ground to go on, for no sin is allowed at all, but it suits my heart and my wants: On the other hand, what does the intercession of the saints and Mary tell me? It says to me:-No, you cannot come boldly to the throne of grace. Christ is too high, too glorious. He does not and either will. not or cannot feel
The present Pope, in his encyclical letter of '49, says that the Virgin "by the foot of Virtue bruised the serpent's head,' and who, being constituted between Christ and His Church, and, being wholly sweet and full of graces, hath ever delivered the Christian people from calamities of all sorts." "For ye know very well, ven. Brethren, that the whole of our confidence is placed in the most Holy Virgin, since God has placed in Mary the fullness of all good, that accordingly we may know that if there is any hope in us, if any grace, if any salvation, it redounds to us from her, because such is His will Who hath willed that we should have everything through Mary." M. Olier, the founder of the Seminary of S. Sulpice (quoted
for my wants and sorrows as others do. Mary has a more tender heart. The saints can enter better into my wants,-are nearer to me. In vain has the Son of God become a man on purpose to know and to bear my sorrows, to assure me that He feels for me in tender love and compassion: others (if I am to believe the Romanist doctrine) are more suited to me. I must get them to go and. move Him to love me and enter into my sorrows and get what I want from Him for me. And if I have sinned, instead of trusting to His intercession who has made propitiation for me, I must get saints to do it, who never could, nor ever have done it. Did they ever when in the form of God become a poor man for me? Did Mary ever do so, or shed her blood for me?-And see how it denies the grace of God. Is this getting saints to go because I dare not go coming boldly to the throne of God because it is a throne of grace? I had rather have the heart of Him who became a man of sorrows for me, and shed His blood for me, and is the one only high priest than all the Marys and all the saints (blessed as they may be in their place) that ever were.
I speak with you. James, of the substance of these things, and compare the Roman Catholic system with the truth, with what Christianity is as given to us of God; because you have not lost it as given of God, but are rather come to it really in your heart, and thus can understand the difference. Romanism is not the Christianity of the Scriptures at all, not God's Christianity: grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
James.-Thank you, Sir, thank you. It does me good, and clears up many a point for me. It does make a wonderful difference when one knows there is such a thing as grace,-knows God's grace ever so little, as shown us in Christ. When one has learned to have confidence in God's goodness, one sees the whole system is false, that it is not grace; that man has to work and suffer to satisfy God; he may have sacraments to get grace and works to merit glory, but it is no God of grace, that he has to do with.
N. But they will not allow you, James, to have confidence in the love of God or to be assured. They cite the words-" no man can know love or hatred by all that is before him," to prove that no Christian can be assured. - James. W ell, I do not see if a Christian believes that God gave His only begotten Son for him when he was a poor sinner, to say nothing of His love being shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, how he can doubt that God loves him. No doubt the grace of God must work in his heart to make him really think of it, or care for it, or believe it; but if it does, he must know God loves him, and he is bound to believe that the blood of Christ cleanses him from all sin.
N*. Surely he is, James, but this is formally denied by the Council of Trent,* and every Roman Catholic.
by Dr. Pusey in his "Eirenicon," vol. 1. p. 104), said:-" We are very unworthy to draw near unto Jesus; and He has a right to repulse [rebuter] us, because of His justice, since, having entered into all the feelings of His Father from the time of His blessed Resurrection, He finds Himself in the same disposition. With the Father towards sinners, i. e., to reject them; so that the difficulty is to induce Him to exchange the office of judge for that of advocate; and of a judge to make Him a suppliant. Now this is what the saints effect, and especially the most Blessed Virgin!"
I will add here, from a prayer book, "St. John's Manual," recommended (1856) by John Archbishop of New York, some of the devotions to the Virgin. "I worship thee, O great Queen; and I thank thee for all the graces which thou hast hitherto granted me: and especially I thank thee for having delivered me from hell, which I have so often deserved I place all my hopes in thee and confide my salvation to thy care."-Saint John's Manual, p. 886, and in p. 887, "By thee we, have been reconciled to our God; Thou art the only advocate of sinners ... We have no hope but in thee, O most pure Virgin.". the Virgin, "saw an infant covered with wounds streaming blood ... ... . he began to weep; but he saw the infant turning away from him He had recourse to the most holy Virgin, saying, Mother of Mercy, thy Son rejects me." The Virgin reproached him with renewing the passion of Jesus. " But because Mary knows not how to send away disconsolate a soul that has recourse to her, she turned to her Son to ask pardon for that miserable sinner. Jesus still appeared unwilling to forgive him; but the holy Virgin, placing the infant in the niche, prostrated herself before him, saying 'Son, I will not depart from thy feet till thou dost pardon this sinner.' Jesus then said: Mother, I can refuse thee nothing; thou dost wish me to pardon him, for thy sake I pardon him: make him come and kiss my wounds.' The sinner came weeping bitterly, and as he kissed the wounds of the infant, they were healed. In the end Jesus embraced him in token of his pardon; the sinner changed his conduct, and afterward led a holy life, enamored of the most Holy Virgin!"
What shall we say to such statements? The images, in the first place, are the living persons; they do not, as falsely alleged, merely recall these. Real idols! Mercy is in Mary, not in Jesus. It is a denial of His own words; "Him that cometh unto me, I will in no wise cast out." It is for Mary's sake that Christ pardons the sinner. And what place has His blood-shedding, which is stopped (!) by the sinner's repentance through Mary's grace. Is it possible to have a more complete subversion of all truth 1 Upon its folly I offer no comment. Their excuse is that "Jesus is the only mediator of justice between men and God,.. but because men recognize and fear in Jesus Christ the divine majesty which resides in him as God, the Lord wished to appoint another advocate, to whom we could have recourse with less fear and with more confidence. This advocate is Mary.... There is need, then, of a medium with the mediator Himself. -S. Bernard. Serm. in Sign. Magn., quoted in Liguori, Vol. i. chap. vi., section yr. Again she is compared to Abigail with David: "She knows so well how to appease the divine justice by her tender and wise prayers, that God Himself blesses her for it and, as it were, thanks her for thus keeping Him from abandoning them to the chastisements which they deserve." Note that She is a mediatrix of justice really in these stupid blasphemies; or what does appeasing the divine justice mean?)
** It is the common doctrine that the Virgin has more power in heaven than God, that the mother can command her Son. I have had it stated to myself, by poor Roman Catholics. Nor is this the ignorance of the poor: Bernardine Senensis teaches, Serm. 61. Artie. 1., cap. 6. "All things are subject to the command of the Virgin, even God himself." (Quoted by Ussher, Answer to a Jesuit's challenge, p. 417, where there is a great deal more to the same purpose.) It is expressly founded on a mother's having pre-eminence and being superior to a SOD. The words in Latin are "sequitur quod ipsa benedicta Virgo sit superior Dee." It follows that the blessed Virgin herself is. Maria]. Part 9., Serm. 2. And so it is said that God has reserved the supremacy of justice but given up to the Virgin the supremacy of grace. And such is the tenor of their practical teaching. Thus in "The Glories of Mary" by Liguori (Vol. 1. chap. 3. sec 2), a Limier after saying
James 1 see it is impossible for a true believer to receive for a moment their doctrine. It denies the grace of God, and the real efficacy of Christ's work, so that His love is never known, and the soul has never true peace, and penances are put in the place of inward purity.
N.* That is the truth. Scripture tells us of divine love, and its sweet and blessed comfort known in the soul; of purity, inward purity, required, but communicated to us by a new life, by one being born of God and enjoying the renewing of the Holy Ghost; of the perfect efficacy of Christ's sacrifice once for all, so that being justified by faith I have peace with God through Jesus Christ our Lord; and then of walking thus, through His continual grace, in the favor and fear of God, with the assurance that when I am absent from the body, I shall be present with the Lord, and finally, be glorified with. Him. They tell me of meriting heaven by my works; of satisfying God for my sins (even if forgiven), of multiplied sacraments and ceremonies and penances, and when I have done all, to go to hell or to purgatory. And if the blessed Son of God has died, it is only to give efficacy to the sacraments which leave me in this evil case after all. It is a poor kind of religion. They tell me I cannot be saved out of it,-and yet, if I am in it, I cannot after all tell whether I am saved or not.' Well, I do not believe that the God of grace meant to leave a man there. I believe He gave His Son that I might have peace in my soul, and be happy, according to His holy nature. Not that I might remain ignorant, after all, of His love and of my own salvation. I read that the revelation of Christ was " to give knowledge of salvation to His people by the remission of their sins;" and that peace by Jesus Christ was preached because As has made peace. And I see that Romanism deprives us of all the present blessing of the Gospel altogether. But here, I suppose, is your neighbor. James. Sit down, Bill. This is the gentleman I told you of. See Cat. Con. Trid., pars. 4., cap. 14, sect. 16 (vol. 2. p. 389). Bellarm. De Indulg. Lib. I., cap. 3. sect. Ir. This, Sir, is Bill M.
N*. Good day, M. Bill M. Good day, Sir. of the true religion,, M., and whether the Roman Catholic system is the true one. Hitherto we have mainly compared it with the substance of Christianity as it is set out in Scripture for the comfort of us poor sinners. But it is all fair to hear what you have to say for the system which you have adopted, and would persuade James to adopt, and I propose we should take Milner's " End of Controversy " as a kind of text book, as that is largely circulated by zealous Romanists to win Protestants by to Roinanism, and printed cheap by your friends, as giving the best possible account of their doctrine, and overthrowing Protestantism.
Bill M. The Church alone can judge of the truth, Sir, and we must submit to her authority or we shall never arrive at it.
N*. Well, but we are Christians, what you will call Protestants, professing to believe sincerely in Christ, and you must show us the truth somehow. We do not, at any rate, yet own the Roman Catholic system to be the true church. I do not, of course, conceal from you that I am very far from thinking it so. It will not do to say the church teaches so and so, when you have not yet shown us what is the true church; but I shall gladly hear all you have to say. You have sought to bring James here- to turn Roman Catholic, saying you alone have the true church, and I have sought to guard him against it. You, or. Dr. Milner himself, can tell us what that which you call the true church says on the points in controversy; but you cannot use the authority of the church to me before I believe that that to which you belong is so. Indeed, there would be another thing to prove, namely, that the church has authority to teach. I believe it has not, but that the Apostles had, and subordinately, the ministry, those whom God has called to it, though these last not so as to-be any rule of faith. I am quite ready to discuss the question of the church's authority: it is of all importance; but we cannot use it till we have it, and as your famous Dr. Milner has discussed the different points we can see what your best authorities have to say. We will discuss the true church like all the rest.
Bill M. I do not know whether I ought to argue with you, because, till you submit to the authority of the true church, you cannot see the truth.
James. Well, but then you must confess you have nothing to say for your doctrines. You used to praise Miner's book, M., to me, and say nobody could answer it.
Bill M. When once the church has pronounced, I believe.
N*. You must first show what is the church. But besides that, this is not receiving the truth, yourself, in the love of it. And if you think we are in such deadly error and do not seek to convince us, you are answerable for our souls. Besides, it is not enough to show me where the true church is (I believe I am in the true church these many years): I must have the truth of God for its own sake. I believe in the authority of the word of God, and one way of knowing whether that which calls itself a church is the true church is to know what it teaches. And when your doctors write books on these points, they do try to persuade us. They must, or we should not be persuaded; though, strange to say, they never give the holding of the truth of God as a mark of the true church.
Bill M. But you cannot tell what the true sense of the Bible is. There the church alone can guide you.
N*. I do not see, if I humbly depend on God's grace, why I cannot understand what St. Paul says as well as what Dr. Milner says; and if I cannot understand all Scripture, I can see where it directly contradicts your doctrine. Besides, you circulate Dr. Milner's book, and I suppose, therefore, I can understand him, and surely I must examine what his book says. You must think me capable of that; or am I to swallow all he says, too, as gospel without inquiry? If you are going to convince me by Dr. Milner's book, you must let me examine what it says. You have put the things before me, and I must examine them. I am surely not to believe Dr. Milner as infallible. I am willing to take him as correctly representing what the church of Rome wishes to say; though as authority, I must take the Council of Trent and what is called the Catechism of the Council of Trent. I do not wish now to discuss the true sense of the Bible, though I shall freely refer to it, if needed, as you do not deny its authority, and I shall leave it to its own authority in the conscience. Nor can I swallow all manner of evil doctrines which you may have propounded to me by putting them in the gilded pill the church.' If you are going to convert me to your system, I must know what it is. We were speaking of Purgatory, and, if you please, we will finish that subject, and then speak of the Church, or rule of faith, or any other point you please; only you must let me speak plainly without being offended. I would not willingly hurt any man's feeling: it would be a sin to do so; but when we are discussing the truth, we must have the truth.
Bill M. Oh! to be sure. It is better to speak all plainly out. I shall not be offended.
N* You will have no objection, then, to my taking Dr. Milner's "End of Controversy" as my guide in learning what Roman Catholic views are, as it has been given to so many for that purpose. This is the best and readiest way, even while referring to any other authority desirable. Allow me now to ask you what is Purgatory?
Bill 3. It 'is a place of punishment for venial sins and for anything that remains of the temporal punishment of forgiven mortal sins, into which Christians dying in a state of grace go.
1-5*. Well, I suppose that is pretty correct. Dr. Milner says (Letter 43.), "All which is necessary to be believed by Catholics on this subject, is contained in the following brief declaration of the Council of Trent: -' There is a Purgatory, and the souls detained there, are helped by the prayers of the faithful, and particularly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar' " (Sess. 25. De Purg.). This is singularly vague, carefully vague. What is Purgatory? do people suffer there? what do they suffer for? what are they helped out of?-Of all this the statement tells us nothing. Yet on this is founded all the system of masses for the dead, massesmultiplied according to the wealth of the dead man or his family (for the poor stand a poor chance here), and the anxious terror of the living; on this was founded all the dreadful traffic in indulgences. Yet the Catholic is not bound to believe that there is any suffering at all. But Dr. Milner is right: I seek in vain for any authoritative instruction from the Roman rule of faith upon the subject. What is left vague, may be filled with terror, and so, in practice, it is. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, however, gives us a little further insight into it. Speaking of Christ's descent into hell, it says: " Hell, then, here signifies those hidden abodes, in which are detained the souls that have not been admitted to the regions of bliss" (Vol. 1. p. 123). And, then, after speaking of the hell of the damned, it says: Amongst them (the places called hell) " is also the fire of purgatory, in which the souls of the pious, being tormented tor a definite time, are cleansed,* that an entrance may lie open to them into the eternal country, into which nothing defiled entereth." And then it is left to the minister in these words: " The truth of this doctrine, founded as holy councils declare on Scripture and con- firmed by Apostolical tradition, demands diligent and frequent exposition, proportioned to the times in which we live, when men endure not sound doctrine." The Editor adds from Donovan's Latin and English Catechism of Council of Trent the passage in full:- truth is, the Romanists are very shy of saying much on this head, because the statements of the Fathers are as contradictory and as full of confusion as they can possibly be. Here we are told Abraham's bosom is in hell (hades). Tertullia says (when a good Churchman): I think that hell (hades) is one thing, Abraham's bosom another.
(***Ad inferos. Rom. Cat. De Symb. cap. 6.; Quaes. 6, Vol. 1. 124. Quibus de causis Christus ad inferos descendere roluit " Wherefore before he died and rose again the gates of heaven were never open to any one; but the souls of the pious when they departed from this life either were borne into Abraham's bosom, or, which also now happens to them who have something to be cleared away (diluendum) and be paid (persolvendurn), were purged in the fire of purgatory."-So, 2, 3. "The souls of those pious persons who, in the bosom of Abraham, expected the Savior, Christ the Lord, descending into hell, set free.')
" Praeterea est purgatorius ignis, quo piorum anima ad definitum tempus cruciatas expiantur, ut eis in aeternam patriam ingressus patere pos sit."Catech. Rom. cap. 6., sect. 3.
" There is also the fire of Purgatory, in which the souls of just men are purified by a temporary punishment, to qualify them to be admitted into their eternal country, into which nothing defiled entereth."- Donovan's Translation, Vol. 1. p. 123, 2. Art. 5.
Augustine says that Abraham's bosom is to be thought a part of hell (hades); elsewhere he cannot tell,-thinks it may, but says he cannot find it is so called; and doubts if any one could endure its not being taken in a good sense, and, therefore, does not see how it can be hell. Again, he says the bosom of Abraham is the rest of the blessed poor whose is the kingdom of heaven. In the first letter alluded to he refutes Christ having taken all out.
St. Jerome says: " Our Lord Jesus Christ descended into the furnace of hell, in which the souls of sinners and just were kept shut up, that without any burning or hurt to Himself He might free from the chains of death those who were shut up there" (in Dan. 1:33And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; (Daniel 1:3)). Still, I suppose we must take this only as applying to those that were His. He says (in Lam. Jer. 2:33Israel was holiness unto the Lord, and the firstfruits of his increase: all that devour him shall offend; evil shall come upon them, saith the Lord. (Jeremiah 2:3)): " Therefore, the Redeemer called on the name of the Lord out of the lowest lake when in the power of His divinity He descended into hell, and, the bars of Tartarus being destroyed, tearing away His own whom He found there, ascended conqueror to the upper regions." Thus then all the just, all that belonged to Christ, would be delivered. Again, yet further (in Esaiam vi. 14), " hell is the place of punishment and torment, in which the rich man clothed in purple is seen, to which also the Lord descended that He might loose the bound out of prison." This was hardly Abraham's bosom, as Augustine often says. Indeed, he ventures on rather slippery ground for an orthodox Father, the pillar of Romanism (in Eph. 2 cap. 4). "The Son of God, therefore, descended into the lower parts of the earth and ascended above all heavens that He might not only
fulfill the law and the prophets, but also, certain hidden dispensations which He alone knew with the Father. For, indeed, neither can we know how the blood of Christ can profit the angels and those who are in hell, and yet we cannot be ignorant that it did profit them." Whatever this may mean, it is clear that the preceding statements overthrow the idea of His simply delivering those who, in quiet repose, were awaiting the Redeemer's victory. I suppose the bars of Tartarus were hardly round Abraham's bosom. Can there be a greater confusion and ignorance? I do not quote as many different speculations as there are fathers. But saints may thus learn what the Fathers' writings are worth.
I add only these to skew that it is no individual mistake of Jerome's. Ambrose (de Mys. Pasch. 4) says: " Christ being void of sin, when He descended to the bottom of Tartarus, breaking the bars and gates of hell, recalled the souls bound by sin, the dominion of death being destroyed, out of the jaws of the devil into life." So, many others. Now, this was not delivering merely those in repose. Either all the just were in repose and better off than Christians who go (I may say) all to purgatory,- and then those fathers are all condemned; or else they were in purgatory, and this deliverance of peaceful souls in a distinct place from purgatory, as taught by the Catechism of the Council of Trent is all wrong. And what is come of those that were in purgatory, none can tell. St. Augustine will help us out a bit, perhaps (Enchiridion 110. 29) " When, therefore, sacrifices, whether of the altar or of any alms-giving, whatsoever are offered for all baptized persons deceased, for the very good they are givings of thanks; for the not very bad they are propitiations; for the very bad, even if they are no help to the dead, they are certain consolations of the living. But to whom they are profitable, they are profitable either to this, that there should be full remission, or at any rate that damnation itself may be more tolerable."-Albert the Great teaches that that must mean purgatory; but the famous master of sentences, as he was called, Peter Lombard, declares that it is not to be denied that it is
accepted for the punishment of those who are never to be set free. All who are in purgatory are middling good:-the least bad, who are never to be freed, are middling bad, and their pains may be mitigated. They can do better, it seems, than what the Lord taught as to Abraham and Lazarus: but oh! how we see the wild unbridled imagination of these Fathers. They had lost the plain truth of Scripture and wandered in every uncertain and unstable thought of their own imagination.
James. Well, it is strange doctrine. It is a terrible thing after one is justified and in a state of grace to go and suffer in a kind of temporary hell-fire. And there we must go, and that just if we are in a state of grace. What do you say to that, Bill?
Bill M. It is no good arguing on religion. How could you expect me to explain everything? The church says there is a purgatory, and we are warned not to look curiously into it, and be taking notions to ourselves.
N. Yes, my good friend, but we are not looking curiously into it. We are paying attention to what is taught in the Catechism of the Council of Trent; and according to that, though the doctrine be inconsistent and contrary to itself, if I am to take the general statement-it would have been far better to have been a godly Jew than to be a godly Christian.
Bill M. But that Catechism is for the clergy, not for us.
N. Yes, but the clergy are to teach according to it, and according to the consent of the Fathers. But we will pass on. I will quote Bellarmine's account of purgatory as he is of very high, perhaps the highest, authority among Roman Catholics; for as to the consent of the Fathers, it is out of the question. On this point he says, what is so called is "a certain place in which, as in a prison, souls are purged after this life which have not been fully purged in this life; that thus purged, namely, they may be able to enter into heaven where nothing defiled will enter." Yet the same Bellarmine distinctly declares that lust has ceased in death, that evil habits are not corrected in purgatory, that it is purely a penal satisfaction for sin-that is, no purifying or purging at all. See what he says as to satisfaction, lust being gone. 'Well, I deny purgatory as a wholly false, unscriptural idea, and 'as a denial of the efficacy of the work of Christ. I read in Scripture, "the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin." God declares of the sanctified (and they only, it seems go into purgatory), that "He will remember their sins and iniquities no more." I find that. when we are absent from the body, we are' present with the Lord; I am taught to give thanks to the Father who bath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. I find that the poor thief went, the same day he died, straight into Paradise to be with Christ. Hence for the true Christian the fear of death is wholly taken away. He is already one spirit with Christ, and he knows that to depart and be with Him is far better. Christ has borne his sins in His own body on the tree; and he has not himself, therefore, to bear the consequences of them. He has a wholly new life by the quickening power of Christ. Christ is his life; and when out of this sinful -flesh, he is in every sense clear from sin for event.
trusting therefore to these, let us go with full courage to our Redeemer Jesus, with full courage to the Council of Patriarchs, with full courage to our Father Abraham, let us go boldly to the assembly of the saints and gathering of the just."
He had no idea of going to purgatory here, for those [named] are not there; he names going to Jesus Himself, and that with entire courage, on our death.
We might quote Jerome too, but of him I will speak, and Augustine, we have seen, had no settled thoughts. He supposed indeed that the day of judgment itself was a kind of purgatory, Enchiridion, 67, De Civ. Dei,16. 24, Psa. 103:55Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is renewed like the eagle's. (Psalm 103:5); Psa. 6 As to Cyp. De Mortalitate-one would have to quote the whole tract. Nothing can be clearer as to the immediate blessedness of all the righteous. The righteous are called to refreshing, the unjust to punishment; it is his part to fear death who is unwilling to go to Christ,-proving and insisting that thus there is for the servants of God peace, their free, their tranquil quiet. It is not going out but going elsewhere, and, time's journey finished, you pass to what is eternal. Who does not haste to better things " We injure Christ," says Tertullian, "when we do not with undisturbed mind accept others being called away; as if they were to be pitied. They have obtained their desire.' Tert. de Pat. 9. Quaest. et Resp. ad Orth. 75. The souls of the just go into Paradise, to meet and see angels and archangels, according to the vision, also of the Savior Christ Himself, and according to what is written, " absent from the body and present with the Lord;" but the souls of the unjust go into the regions of hell (Hades), as Nebuchadnezzar. Greg. Thaum. The good man will go rejoicing into his own eternal house; but the wicked will fill all things with their complaints.
If De Virginitate be not of Athanasius as the style and some doxologies would show, it is later. The writer says: "There is no death for the righteous, but translation, for he is translated out of this world into everlasting rest." There is the same truth in Macar. Hom. 22., but it may be alleged to concern the saints,—the holy servants of God. The devils receive the wicked, he says, and drag them to their own place; choirs of angels the holy servants of God. Of any other place he does not speak. But in Hom. xxvi., he puts the case of conflict, two persons in the soul (as he says), and where is the soul to go, thus drawn two ways? He replies, that the Lord, seeing you strive, and sometimes with all your heart, will separate you from death at once, and receive you into His bosom and light.
Hilary insists on all being settled at death; referring to the rich man and Lazarus, and Abraham's bosom as eternal bliss; but though judgment is to come, still the case is settled in death. There is no putting off or delay, for the day of judgment is the eternal retribution of blessedness or punishment; but the time of death holds each one meanwhile by its own laws, either Abraham, or punishment keeps each one for judgment. He then insists on confidence, which is more than hope, and refers to John 5 he that believeth on me shall not be judged.. End of Tract on Psa. 2 I do not quote more passages at length.
Basil and Gregory Naz. teach in general the same truths, the orthodoxy of the last may be questioned. We see from these the general faith of the church. The Hypognosticon once attributed to Augustine is equally clear.
"As for any third place we utterly know none, neither shall we find in the Holy Scriptures that there is any such." Lib. 5. Nor do the Roman Catholics deny that those who go to purgatory are forgiven and justified, and the principle of sin, (peceati fomes) is gone. It is penal suffering from God after guilt and sin are wholly gone. I do not give the Fathers as any authority, but as showing the common current belief. Alphons. de Castro and John Rochester, I give from. Ussher,-the rest from the original authors. I will speak further on of the real origin and history of purgatory, and of Jerome and Augustine more particularly. Bellarmine is not quite honest on the point, as he quotes the use of passages such as 1 Cor. 3, by old writers which he himself declares cannot be applied to purgatory, because it embraces all, and others as to praying for saints, which proves nothing, because, whatsoever the ground, for they find it hard to say, they prayed for all saints (even the Virgin Mary), that is, for those whom they held to be in heaven already. It may be for glory (Bell. de Purg.; lib. 1. 7), and this some said "for glory given to them among men," for all is darkness and confusion. Indeed Bellarmine's quotations are not to be trusted. He quotes Hilary on Psa. 118 in proof of purgatory (De Purg. lib. 1. 10, section 38), leaving out the words which precede his quotation, and which wholly set aside the idea of purgatory. He says we have to undergo that unwearied fire; but Hilary says, "the day of judgment in which we are to undergo," etc., and goes on to say that thus the sword is to pierce the blessed Virgin Mary's heart too-and how could we desire it then? Either he borrowed his quotation, or he is willfullya dishonest.)
Bellarm. de Purg. lib. 2. 100. 4.
Bill M. Do you think, a murderer, and one who steals an apple will be punished in the same way?
N. Are you then an unbeliever, M?
Bill M. No I am a good Catholic.
N* You are reasoning as an unbeliever would. What you8 say is as if Christ had not died for those go to heaven. I do not say that the murderer and who steals an apple will be punished alike; though we are very bad judges of guilt. It was by stealing an apple that men were driven out of God's presence and the earthly paradise; because they had given up God for an apple, and because lust and sin had come in. The tree is proved by its fruit, and one wild apple proves that the tree which bears it is wild and good for nothing as well as an hundred would. I do not say some men have not broken through more restraints of conscience, have not sinned against light so as to be beaten with many stripes.
But this has nothing to do with the matter we are speaking of, namely, of those that are forgiven, who are going to heaven, who are justified and sanctified; for purgatory is for none others. The question is not, therefore, about the degrees of punishment for the lost, but of the saved (and according to Bellarmine all in purgatory are all even, sure they are saved, and so indeed they might well be since none others go there); and I say as to such, that, whether they had been murderers or apple stealers before, they are cleansed from all sin. They are, as Scripture speaks, as white as snow if their sins had been as scarlet. When I have washed anything, the question is not how much dirt it had before, disgusting as that may be if the dirt be there, but whether I have washed it perfectly. Now the Scripture tells us Christ has washed us perfectly, and I believe it. We are made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. If we are saved, we have a new nature, and that is a holy one. We are made, says St. Peter, partakers of the divine nature. And when we die nothing remains but this holy life which is born of God. Guilt is gone, all impurity is gone; and in due time we shall have a glorious body too. Purgatory denies the efficacy of Christ's work and the reality of receiving life from God. It upsets your own doctrines (as I said to James) for, as guilt is wholly removed, extreme unction, which wipes away the remains of sin, must be false, or else one that has been anointed has nothing to go to purgatory for, for men, we are told, go there for the remains of sin.
Bill M. Do you mean that the soul (when it goes out of the body) is fit for heaven or paradise?
IV*. Certainly, or how did the thief get there. I see the whole system of Romanism to be the very contrary to the gospel of peace. In that-in the Christianity of the Scriptures-I see a God perfect in holiness, but one " rich in mercy," who loved the world, and gave His Son, that whoever believes in Him might not perish. God, I see, is love. Christ the blessed Savior gives Himself to bear and put away our sins that we might draw near to God without fear: as it is said, to give knowledge of salvation to His people by the remission of their sins." It is with a view to our being happy before Him, serving Him without fear. He gives His Spirit to them that believe, as a spirit of adoption and joy, the Holy Spirit; but it is given, says St. Peter, to all them that believe. Thus heaven is opened to them, and Jesus has entered as their forerunner, the joy of heaven is in their souls beforehand, the love of God shed abroad in their hearts, and by that Spirit which is the earnest of their inheritance till the redemption of the purchased possession. Having peace with God, they stand in God's favor, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God: If they are tempted and tried, the blessed Jesus has been tempted in all things like them, sin apart; and having suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted. In a word, God is a source of joy because He is a Savior, and a gracious help in every trouble. He finds me in misery, lost, going to hell, and warns me of it, and that if I go on in the broad road I shall surely come there. But when He is turned to, when Christ is really believed in, He takes me out of that position and saves me. In so doing, He puts me in a place of joy and peace before Him, and He makes me know all this by His word and Spirit. Romanism is the very opposite of that. It brings me before a terrible, exacting God when I am a Christian. It brings me by a series of ceremonies (after Christ has done all) into a position where I, even if a true Christian, have still to answer for my sins,-may very likely go to hell for them,-must do penance (unless I compromise it by an indulgence) for present failings; where I am always dreading eternity, and uncertain what is to become of me at last, only sure that God will exact satisfaction of me; that in any case I must go to purgatory into the fire, and make satisfaction for my faults, and that God will not let me out thence till I have paid the last farthing. Forgiving priests I may find, a tender-hearted Mary, kind interceding saints, but a forgiving God who loves me, cleanses me, a tender-hearted Savior,-that I cannot have in Romanism. Even if I am forgiven as to damnation, and if Christ Himself has effectually died for me, and I die in a state of grace, God will have the last farthing of me after all. This, as to the whole spirit of it, is contrary to the God revealed in Christ. God manifest in flesh, God become a man to die for me.
That God I know. But that when He has done all that for me, He is going to exact the last farthing of me,
and throw me into a fire of anguish till it is paid, that I do not believe. Such a God is not the God who has
come to save us by Christ. It is another, and morally speaking, a false one. It makes God one who lays heavy burdens on the human heart when we have to say to Him. Christianity does spew us what an awful burden
we are bringing on ourselves if we have not to say to Him, but shows us joy and peace if we have. It calls
us from every burden of sin and of sorrow to find rest in Christ; and it shows me He was willing to take my burden on Himself, that I might be free. Christ says: " Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." Is it rest to be put to do penance for my sins, living; and, even if saved, to go to purgatory for them when I am dead? And all this just to sustain the power of those that impose the penance and profess to be able to help people out of-when they could not help their getting into-this terrible fire.
James. How plain and true it is! Oh, if God had not been a God of grace to me, where should I have been.-But, I had no thought the Romans believed all this.-What! penances while they are alive, and then the last farthing exacted when they die, and they forgiven and justified all the while I And, as you were saying, sir, told all the while that by extreme unction the very remains of sin are wiped away!
Mrs. J. I am sure we ought to feel for them and pray for them, too; but it is sad to think any could be so ignorant of what God is.
Bill M. But by your system a man may say he is justified and go on sinning and go clear to heaven.
N*. So man always reasons when he does not know what grace is; but Scripture says,-purifying their hearts by faith. Revealing God's presence to a man is not the way to make a man sin. Besides, if a man has a part in God's righteousness it is by being born again, and thus he loves obedience to God and what is holy. Most true it is that we need grace every moment, but Christ has said: " My grace is sufficient for thee, for my strength is made perfect in weakness." And besides, if, through carelessness, we get away from God's presence and fail, Christ intercedes for us; and God will warn us outwardly and inwardly; and, if we heed not the warning, will chasten us. But tell me humanly speaking, who will be most anxious to keep himself clean: one who is spick and span clean and going to meet the Queen,-or one who is dirty and does not know whether he ever will go out unless it be, to be hanged?
Bill M. Well, I suppose the man that was clean, N*. And he must know he is clean.
Bill M. Of course.
N*. So with the Christian. He knows he is cleansed to meet Jesus, and he seeks to be clean in his walk.
going to meet Him.-We know, says the Apostle John, (mark that word " we know ") " that when He (Christ) shall appear we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is; and he that bath this hope in Him purifieth himself even as he is pure." So the Apostle Paul: "Therefore we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord, for we walk by faith and not by sight. We are confident and willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore we labor, whether present or absent, to be accepted:" or, as in your Rhemish Testament, " to please Him." People forget that a new nature, the new man as it is called, is as necessary and as much a part of Christianity as is the blessed sacrifice of Christ. Your objection is just the one that was made to the Apostle Paul's teaching, because he taught this very doctrine (Rom. 6), and he spews that Christ, who is his life, having died to sin, the true Christian, reckons himself dead-cannot live in the thing which he is dead to. We have a part in the righteousness by having a part in the death, and so reckon ourselves dead, crucified with Christ. Having a part in death is not living on. How, says he, can we that are dead to sin live any longer therein. But, if I deny that I am dead, I deny I am justified and righteous; for it is only by having a part in His death that I am justified. And it is real life and grace, and these will spew themselves in a man's walk.
But we can come to the proofs. I deny that any such thing as purgatory is found in Scripture. When we have examined that, we must see what you all allege from the Fathers. Not that I attribute the smallest authority to them, or believe anything as revealed truth but what is in the Word of God; but as we are reasoning about it, it is fair to meet all you have to say. It would be quite enough to say they reveal nothing, and have no authority at all; nor would I allege them, for the smallest thing; but as you do allege them we may examine what you allege. I own to you I have a very poor opinion of them from what I have read of them, without meaning to say they have no historical value. We have the highest authority for saying we must have what was from the beginning. But that is Christ and the Apostles—none of it elsewhere. And John says: " he 'that is of God heareth us." Hearing what the Apostles say themselves is the test of truth; and he who continues in what was from the beginning (and I repeat, the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists alone are that) shall abide in the Father and in the Son.
James. Where is that, Sir?
Bill M. They do not reveal anything; but they must know the truth better than we, and no sense ought to be received from Scripture but according to their common consent as to the meaning of it.-So says the Council of Trent (Sess. 4.).
N*. Are you sure they do agree?
Bill M. To be sure they do; and the Church teaches the doctrine they agree in.
N*. It would be a poor thing to have to wait for the truth till we had read all the Fathers. But I think you will find, even in our short inquiries, they are far from agreeing on the subject which occupies us, or indeed on any other.
However, to our proofs. The first that Milner notices is drawn from the second book of Maccabees. He tells us that he has a right to consider these books as Scripture, because the Catholic Church so considers them. Now, first, I do not admit the Roman system' to be the Catholic Church: but I leave this till we come to that, question. But no Church ever took them to be canonical Scripture for fifteen hundred years. Augustine declares the Apocryphal books inferior to the other Scripture, and Jerome, who was the translator of the Bible at the request of Pope Damasus, and whose translation, called the -Vulgate, is declared authentic by the Council of Trent, and so held by all Romanists, says, in his preface, that Judith and Tobias and the books of the Maccabees the Church indeed reads, but does not receive them among canonical Scriptures (Preface to the books of Solomon). So Ruffinus (published with St. Cyprian's works). He gives the list of canonical Scriptures, exactly as Protestants receive them, and not merely as his opinion, but declaring that they are the books which, according to the tradition of the ancients, are believed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit Himself. And having given the list he adds: these are what the Fathers have included in the Canon. But, however (he adds), it is to be known that there are, also, other books, now called Apocrypha; and adds, which all they have willed should be read in the Churches but not anything be produced out of them to confirm as authority anything concerning the faith. So Jerome-thus also these two volumes the Church reads for edification of the people, but not as an authority to confirm ecclesiastical dogmas. So Athanasius, or the author of the Synopsis ascribed to him, says-they were not put in the Canon, but read to the Catechumens; and in his festal letter again gives the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, pronouncing the strongest blame on those who might pretend any other were Scripture (1. (62) 767).
This is the constant testimony of the early Church. Cyril of Jerusalem, gives the same list of the Old Testament, and does not admit the Maccabees. The Council of Laodicea forbids any others to be read in the Churches, and gives the same list. The Apostolic Constitutions (which of course I do not cite as of the Apostles, but which show the early judgment on this point) give us the same list—2. 57, and that for reading in the Churches. The only exception, or apparent one, is that the African Churches, as represented by the Council of Carthage and St. Augustine (though Augustine makes a formal distinction between some books and others, and he says that they are not canonical), call the Apocrypha canonical too: but Augustine admits at the same time that learned men did not doubt that two of them were spurious, that is, not written by the professed authors, but says that though they were so, they were received by the Western Churches. We learn also how little weight he attached to the word. Canonical. He says that people ought to attach most authority to those which were received by all the Churches; and that in those which were not received by all, they should prefer those received by most and the more important Churches. It is clear none of them were even received in the Eastern Churches, nor were they in the Churches of Gaul, as both the Hilarys show. Hilary of Arles tells St. Augustine, writing to him on predestination and free will, on occasion of the Pelagian controversy, that the Churches of France around him rejected one testimony he had produced, because it was cited from an uncanonical book.
Not only so, but a Pope, and a very distinguished one indeed, who earned the name of Great,-Gregory,-says, Moral xix. 13 (34) on Job 29, " Concerning which we do not act out of order if we produce a testimony out of books which, though not canonical, are published for the edification of the church;" and then cites Maccabees.
Thus we have the constant sense of the doctors of early ages; and, referring to the African church, Cardinal Cajetan, one greatly employed by the Pope about Luther, says, The words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the rule of St. Jerome, and, according to his judgment, those books are not canonical, that is regular, to establish those things which are of the faith They may be called, however, canonical, that is, regular, for the edification of the faithful, as received and authorized for this purpose in the canon of the Bible: with this distinction, thou mayest discern what is said by Augustine, and written in the Provincial Council of Carthage. Thus he reconciles, as others have done, the statements of the African prelates with the universal judgment of Christendom.
Further, we have a list in the middle of the third century from Origen, the most diligent student of scripture, in his Commentary on the 1st Psalm (De la Rue, vol. 2. 29, quoted by Euseb., His. Ec. 6. 25), bearing exactly the same testimony as to what is canonical. We have a list of Melito's, about the close of the second century, given by Eusebius, 4. 26. He says he has given, in extracts written by him, a catalog of the books of the Old Testament received of all, which I have thought necessary to put down here; and then he gives the same list as all do, but not the Apocrypha. Epiphanius, B. T. 7. vol. 1. 122, confirms this same list as being received by the Jews, though not speaking of his own judgment. But Christendom is not all we have to look to, nor, indeed, the principal thing; because the Old Testament was committed originally to God's people Israel, to the Jews.
Bill.M. But you are not going to make infidel Jews an authority?
N*. I am not speaking of infidel Jews, who are now scattered because they rejected Christ; though in this, even, they are more faithful than Rome and her doctors; but of those of whom Paul says that the oracles of God were committed to them. The Old Testament was committed to Israel as God's people; nor have they at any time failed in keeping it. Now, they recognized the books we receive as canonical, and not those which the Council of Trent has wickedly added. This is a matter of undoubted history; indeed, the Apocryphal books are not extant in Hebrew at all. But further, Josephus also states it in a very formal manner, and adds that there were books written since Artaxerxes, but that they were not esteemed worthy of the same faith as the others, for there was no regular succession of prophets He declares, " We have not a multitude of books, discordant and opposed to one another, but only two-and-twenty, embracing the history of all time, which are fully esteemed to be divine;" and thereon enlarges on their divine authority and the empire they obtain, from youth up, over the Jew's mind. He gives then their number and triple division, as held by the Jews. But there is yet more and incontrovertible authority, which quotes them according to this same division, as the law, the prophets, and the Psalms. That is, the Lord Himself quotes them, these same books, as of divine authority, as a known set, to the exclusion of all others; and declares, too, in another place, the absolute authority of the Scriptures-" The scripture cannot be broken."
But I will appeal to yourself, and James here, or any man in his senses that fears God, to say if this book, the second of Maccabees, can be inspired? Here is the writer's own account of it, at the beginning 2 Mace. 2. 23, " All these things, I say, being declared by Jason the Cyrenean in five books, we have tried to abbreviate into one; for, considering the multitude of books, and the difficulty of those who wish to occupy themselves with historical accounts by reason of the multitude of events, we have taken care, for those who wish to read, that there should be pleasure for the mind; for the studious, that they may commit it more easily to memory; for all who read, that profit may be conferred on them. And for ourselves, indeed, who have undertaken this work of abbreviating, we have taken on ourselves no light labor, but, indeed, a business full of vigils and toils.' Then he describes the different style of authors and abbreviators: to the former belongs truth in details; to abbreviators, studiousness of brevity, according to the given form, and adds he will -begin his story, " for it is foolish to be diffuse before the history, and then short in the history itself;" and finally he closes thus (2 Mace. xv. 37-39): " With these things I will make an end of the discourse, and if, indeed, well, and as suited the history, this I myself also would wish; but if less worthily it is to be pardoned me-for as drinking always wine or always water is unwholesome to us, but to use both alternately is delightful, so to those that read, if the discourse be always exact, it will not be pleasant: here, therefore, it will be closed."
Now, I ask you, is it not a blasphemy to say that " if it was well done, it suited the history, but if less worthily, it was to be borne with," was said by the Holy Ghost?
Mrs. J. And surely they do not give that for Scripture, sir?
.N*. It is the very book which Dr. Milner quotes as Scripture, on the authority of the Catholic Church, to prove purgatory.
James. Why, Bill, how can you receive such things? I never could have thought it possible. I am not learned, but sure no one that had a respect for God could ever say that that was inspired, or that the Holy Ghost could excuse Himself, and say that what was badly done was inspired, or that He had done it.
.217*. Well, James, I do not think M. has much to say for himself in this matter; but note this, that the citation of this passage has proved to us another point-that the Romanists have falsified Scripture, and have flown in the face of the constant testimony of the Church for fifteen centuries, whatever value that may have, and of that, too, of the Jews, as divinely-appointed keepers of the Old Testament, who have given a testimony as to what is holy Scripture, sanctioned by the Lord Himself, but rejected by what calls itself the Catholic Church.
But this is not all: the passage (2 Mac. 12. 39), even on their own showing, can have nothing to do with purgatory, but denies all their doctrine. The men who were slain in Maccabees had votive offerings to idols
about them, and therefore had fallen in battle, and hence had defiled themselves with idolatry* but purgatory is for venial sins, not for apostasy to idols. And it is hard to tell what was to free them then. And we must remember there is not one word in the law or the prophets which Christ owned of any such a purgatory, and that He sharply condemned the tradition of the elders who make thereby the Word of God void. Dr. Milner ventures to quote no others from the Old Testament. I will give a list from Bellarmine; you may easily see whether they apply. They prove only one thing, that I can see, namely, that they could find nothing in Scripture for it.
Tob. 4. 18: this is also apocrypha, a history of an angel, accompanying a good young man as a dog, and
helping him to drive a devil away from his nuptial chamber with a broiled fish's liver.
Mrs. J. And do they call that the Word of God?
N*. They do.
Mrs. J. Well, well; but pardon, Sir, you were giving the list.
N*. 1 Sam. 31:1313And they took their bones, and buried them under a tree at Jabesh, and fasted seven days. (1 Samuel 31:13); 2 Sam. 1:1212And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until even, for Saul, and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword. (2 Samuel 1:12); Psa. 37:1;65. 11; Isa. 4:4;9. 18 Mic. 7:88Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy: when I fall, I shall arise; when I sit in darkness, the Lord shall be a light unto me. (Micah 7:8); Zech. 9:1111As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water. (Zechariah 9:11). This last verse runs thus: " BY the blood of thy covenant
I have brought thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water." I may add the proof here, for it is edifying. He says that many apply this to the limbus of the Fathers, as he is said to bring them out; but Luke 16:2525But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. (Luke 16:25) proves there is no water to console them, and there is in Abraham's bosom, for Lazarus was comforted there. Hence he adds, that Augustine held that Christ visited those tormented in hell, that is, in purgatory, and delivered many of them. To return to Dr. Milner's proof's.
I need not notice 1 Cor. 15:2929Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? (1 Corinthians 15:29), because the Apostle does not give a hint that he is speaking of Jews; he is speaking of being baptized. And supposing he were, I know not what Jewish superstitions have to do with Christians. We are all baptized unto death, and of that's being the sense (comparing ver. 28) I have no doubt. The only thing such a quotation proves is that they are very hard run for a passage. The proof from the expression " Abraham's bosom" is soon answered: the Catechism of the Council of Trent contrasts it with purgatory How Dr. Milner reconciles it with honesty to quote it for purgatory I cannot tell. The force of the expression, however, is evident. Abraham had, for the Jew, the highest and most blessed place in the other world, and to be in his bosom was to be in the next best place to him, as the beloved disciple in Jesus' bosom, when at the table. Besides, Dr. Milner says Lazarus reposed there. Is it repose to be in purgatory? All this is too bad.
Again, Christ in spirit went and preached to the spirits in prison. This is the prison above-mentioned Abraham's bosom. He says, But Christ went into Paradise. This day, He said to the thief, thou shalt be with me in Paradise. Do they preach in Paradise? or is Abraham's bosom (and, still more, is Paradise) a prison? It is perfectly evident that the Lord uses Abraham's bosom as a place of special favor and blessedness. The poor man died and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And again, Now he is comforted and thou art tormented. Did the angels carry him to the fire of purgatory to comfort him, after his sorrowful life on earth?
James. Why, Bill, that can't be. Is it not plain that the Lord meant to show that the poor man that had so sad a portion below had, after all, if we think of the other world, a better part than the man that had his good things in this life? And surely that cannot mean making satisfaction to God in torment? But I don't quite see, sir, why the poor man went there and the rich man to hell.
.N*. I believe the Lord loves the poor, James. Still, alas! of course, all the poor do not go to Heaven because they are poor. But the force of the Lord's history, I believe, is this:-He is, in these chapters of Luke, showing the grace that seeks and receives poor sinners, as the lost sheep and the prodigal, and at the same time opening Heaven to our view, and teaching us that we ought to use this world in view of the next, and not as the place of present rest and comfort. You know the Jews had been promised riches and blessings here, if obedient, because in that people God was showing His government on earth: but after Christ was rejected this was no longer the case, and the veil was to be rent. in His death, and saints were to take up their cross daily, and heavenly th;ngs were to be their portion and reward, as, in very truth,: they always were; but now it was plainly and openly so, even as Christ speaks in this same chapter, calling them their own things: earthly things were only in their hands for a. time, as another's. Hence the Lord draws the veil, as it were, and shows that a poor man, whom a Jew might have thought to be under judgment for his sins, went straight to Abraham's bosom-that is, to a Jew's mind, to the best place in the other world; and riches, instead of being a proof of God's favor, had shut the man up in his own selfishness, for he had slighted the poor man at his door; the dogs had more compassion than he; and when the other world came, he was in torment. He had had his good things.
James 1 see, sir, it is all plain enough: and, indeed, if one sees God's ways in the. Bible, all becomes plain by degrees.
N*. We must wait' upon the Lord to be taught, James, and He will surely instruct us. He has graciously said, " If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of
God who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not."
So the Lord opened the understanding of the two that went to Emmaus, and so He does now.
Bill M. But you cannot deny that St. Augustine held a middle place.
N*. You know the Romanists hold two middle places, one where the Old Testament saints were, before Christ came, and another where the yet incompletely purified just go now; and here I cannot exempt Dr. Milner from the charge of dishonesty.* He says, Christ descended into hell... the prison above mentioned, or Abraham's bosom; in short, a middle state. And he says, What place, I ask, must that be which Our Savior calls Abraham's bosom, where the soul of Lazarus reposed among the other just souls, till by His sacred passion He paid their ransom.... not Heaven, but evidently a middle place, as St. Augustine teacheth. Now, if he had answered his own question, Dr. Milner knows very well he must have said " limbus patrum (i.e. the place where they say the saints dying before Christ were), and not purgatory" (which, in the Roman Catholic doctrine, is entirely distinguished from the limbus patrum). This is wholly and wittingly deceiving, for he adds (after speaking of Abraham's bosom), " It is of this prison, according to the holy fathers, that our blessed Master speaks when he says, '1 tell thee thou shalt not depart thence till thou hast paid the very last mite.' " That is not Abraham's
'bosom. Now this they do apply to a middle state, but not to the limbus patrum. Christ delivered the patriarchs and the others from that, and it is now quite empty. They were at perfect rest, they tell us, suffering no pain. All this is attempted to be passed upon us as a proof of purgatory, with the expression, " in short, a middle state. '
Further, he says, As St. Augustine teacheth. Now Augustine says:-Neither is it to be believed that Abraham's bosom, that is, the habitation of a certain hidden rest, is any part of hell (Letter to Evodius). But Dr. Milner refers to De Civit. Dei, 15. 100. 20 (it should be 20. 15). Augustine does not say a word of purgatory there, but says: " For if it does not seem absurd to be believed that those ancient saints also, who kept the faith of a Christ to come, were in places as far as possible from the torments of the impious, but in Hades (or hell, not the hell of the damned) until the blood of Christ, He, having descended also to those places, should bring them up immediately; thenceforward the faithful good, already redeemed thus at the price of that blood poured out, know nothing more at all of Hades until having received their bodies also they should receive the good things they deserve."
Hence his notion, whatever it is worth (and it is really worth nothing at all-it is a mere notion, and I will produce an opposite one from himself in a moment, but such as it is, it is here), would prove that Abraham was clean out of Hades now, and whatever middle place he is 'in is not purgatory, nor ever was; and moreover, that since the death of Christ the faithful redeemed have nothing to do with Hades.
But Augustine has said more than this, for he speculated, and very wildly, too, on all sorts of subjects. He elaborately argues, reasoning on the text, " He has loosened the pains of Hades" (hell), which was then applied to Christ's descent to hell (though an undoubtedly incorrect passage in the Latin translation) *but insists,** for
that reason, that, as evidently the patriarchs and prophets go even there where Abraham was, Christ could do nothing for them as to loosening the pains of Hades (or hell), a word which he declares was never yet found to be used in Scripture in a good sense, for they were not in it, and the great gulf fixedly separated them at an immense distance. And he wonders if any one could dare, if the Scripture had said Christ, when dead, went into Abraham's bosom, not mentioning Hades or hell, to assert He had descended into hell He says that, if it is nowhere read in the divine authorities, it is not to be believed that that bosom of Abraham-that is, the habition of a certain secret quietness-is any part of hell at all. Now, it is quite true that the Catechism of the Council of Trent says it is. How they manage about the consent of the Fathers, I do not know. I believe, in all this utter confusion, one knew nearly as much about it as the other. How blessed is the simplicity that is in Christ! To depart and to be with Christ is far better, knowing that if we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord, and desiring rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord. The more I see of the Fathers, the more I see what darkness and confusion they were in; only I was to answer what you should bring forward. A word more, therefore, from St. Augustine. He declares that (Letter to Evodius iii.) he does not see what Christ could have conferred on these just who were in Abraham's bosom, from whence I do not see that, according to the beatific presence of His divinity, He had ever left them. As also He promised the thief, that in the same day on which he died he should be in Paradise with Him, when He was going to descend to loose the pains of hell. So that before even He went into Hades He was in Paradise and Abraham's bosom, and even before, by His beatific wisdom, and in Hades, or hell, by His judicial power (Epistle to Evodius). He says, indeed, that loosing the pains of Hades might apply to Christ Himself, as there follows, " in which it was impossible for him to be holden." This is undoubtedly the sense, only the true word is having loosed the pains of death. If Augustine had only looked to the Greek!
On the whole, he seems to think it best to think that Christ's soul descended to hell (Hades), His body remained in the grave, and His divinity in Abraham's bosom, and to believe that the thief was with Him as God in Paradise. As to preaching to the spirits in prison, he is inclined to think (Epistle to Evodius) it was by His spirit in Noe. Peter speaks only of the souls then disobedient, an interpretation which I have no kind of doubt is the true one. Peter speaks of the spirit of Christ in the prophets; so here in Noe. The Jews, who expected a glorious Messiah in the body, had only His presence in spirit, and were a small minority. So in Noe they were a small minority, and Christ was only there in spirit; but those who despised that, are all in prison, to await the judgment of the great day. We are saved, like Noe, by death and resurrection in. Christ, as he, in a figure, was. In Genesis God says, "My spirit shall not always strive with man, but his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." It would be monstrous to say that these were the only ones to whom more time would be given, and they be preached to when dead; for those only are spoken of.
Augustine refers also, in this letter, to 1 Peter 4:66For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. (1 Peter 4:6), as well as to 1 Peter 3:19,2019By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. (1 Peter 3:19‑20). There it is said the gospel was preached to them that were dead. He prefers the sense of dead in sins; I believe it was simply when they were alive, hence to be judged accordingly (as said verse 5). The truth is, this letter is an answer to one written to Augustine on the former passage, and the writer had used the expression that Christ had emptied, or made void, Hades, or hell, which he questions, speaking uncertainly as to this-as to whether souls could believe after they were there. And a second question raises more nice points, too, into which it is not necessary to go. But he arrives, on the point that now occupies us, at exactly the opposite conclusion to Dr. Milner, namely, that Abraham's bosom had nothing to do with Hades or hell, that it was Christ's spirit in Noe, and that preaching to the dead meant the dead in sin, but allows his friend, Bishop Evodius, to think otherwise if he liked.
As to purgatory, he does speak of it elsewhere, but with the greatest possible uncertainty, so that to say he taught it is alleging what is false. He speaks of the subject in three different places, and in all of them in reference to 1 Cor. 3-he shall be saved, yet so as by fire-and using the same arguments, and, indeed, in a great measure, the same words. The places are, De fide et operibus 15. and following (or 24 and following); Enchiridion de fide, spe et charitate 69 (or end of 18); and De civitate Dei, 21. 26.
In the first, he is resisting persons who viewed the text as meaning that if men believed and were baptized they were on the foundation, and, let them live in whatever sin they might, they would be saved; passing through certain pains of fire, they would be purged so as to obtain salvation by the merit of the foundation. This he resisted by a multitude of texts. Some other sense, he said, must be sought for, and that this text is one of those of which Peter speaks as hard to be understood, and adds, " When I consider it, I had rather hear more intelligent and learned men." He then puts the case of Christians living in a lawful state, but while never denying Christ for pleasure, yet not living in a self-denying way, and consequently having grief and distress when they lost the things. Those who sought
only to please God were building gold, silver, and precious stones; those who please themselves though Christians, wood, hay and stubble. All would be tried by fire and tribulation, and the latter feel the loss, yet be saved, as on the foundation. Then he adds, " Whether in this life only men suffer these things, or whether after this life certain judgments of this kind follow, my understanding of the passage is not abhorrent from the principle of truth." At any rate, he says, however we interpret it, the living wicked will not be saved.
In the Enchiridion, after going over the same ground, and saying it happens in this life that man is so proved, he says, that some such thing takes place after this life is not incredible, and whether it be so may be inquired, and it may be discovered or remain hidden, etc.
In "the City of God" he insists that it cannot be what is said in Matt. 25, as in 1 Cor. 3 all go through this probation; and after speaking of self-willed, unsubdued, though Christian souls, he says, After the death of the body, until they come to that which is to be the last day of remuneration and damnation after the resurrection of bodies, if, in this interval of time, the spirits of the dead are said to suffer a fire of this kind, which they do not feel who have not had such morals and such loves in the life of this body, in order that their wood, hay and stubble should be consumed, but which others feel who have carried that kind of building with them, whether there only, or here and there, or, be it so, here and not there, they find a fire of transitory tribulation, burning worldly things, although not imputable to damnation (or pardonable as regards damnation) I do not oppose, because, perhaps, it is true. As to Psa. 37, there is not the smallest proof that what he says refers to purgatory. He does frighten the people (for it is to the people he speaks here) with a terrible fire, more terrible than anything in this life; but he may refer to his purifying work of the day of judgment, which is quite as likely, or seems so.
Now, no Christian soul who knows what it is to be cleansed from all sin could be shaken by confused notions of possible punishment such as this poor father debits here. It is as poor a foundation to build anything on as could well be thought of. Had he looked soberly at the passage, he would have seen it applies to those laboring in the ministry in the world-builders in the Church; and that the things destroyed are not bad works but bad building, so that the man's labor was lost, though the builder was saved-yet even he as a man that just saves his life out of a fire.
As to the controversy-for as to Divine truth such statements are not worth a thought, and only show what an unstable foundation the doctrine of the fathers is-as to the controversy, it is not purgatory he speaks of for all saints go through it. He insists on that as its distinctive character; whereas into purgatory only those go who need partial purging. He adds, as a possible interpretation of it, persecutions when martyrs are crowned and all stand good; others are consumed in it if the foundation is not there; others saved, but suffer loss. He instances Antichrist also as a possible explanation.
To show how little he can be reckoned on, I may add that he holds that the judgment of the last day itself, the final judgment, will be purgatorial fire for some. He saw nothing of the judgment of the quick in this world, and so misapplied Mal. 3:1-61Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. 2But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap: 3And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. 4Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years. 5And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of hosts. 6For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:1‑6) to the judgment of the great white throne (De civitate Dei, 20, 25); and when Malachi says the sons of Levi shall offer sacrifices of righteousness, he applies it to their being themselves offered up to God pure when thus cleansed, "for what could such offer more grateful to God than themselves;" and then says that that question of purgatorial pains, to be diligently treated, must be put off to another time.
He thinks that thus they will offer perfectly, the floor being purged, and they that need it purified by fire.
That I may complete, however, the doctrine of the fathers on this subject, and show how sure a foundation they give for us to build upon, Origen tells us (and Dr. Milner quotes him among the holy fathers as an authority, and he was very early in Church history indeed), that we shall want the sacrament to purify us after our resurrection. Having spoken of purifying of women after child-birth, " If because the law is spiritual, and has a shadow of good things to come, we can understand that a truer purifying will happen to us, I think that after the resurrection from the dead we want the sacrament, washing us and purging us; for no one can rise again without filth, nor can any soul be found which is immediately free from all faults." That is comfortable doctrine. -(Origen in Luc. Horn. 14.-De la Rue, 3. 948)
James. Well, how can you, or Dr. Milner, bring such confusion and uncertainty for us to build our faith on? The Bible is a thousand times clearer and more certain than all this. I understand, plain enough, thank God, now, that the blood, of Jesus cleanses from all sin, and that God purifies the heart by faith, and that I am born again, and have a new nature in Christ; but all these doubts and dark doctrines could only blind and puzzle the mind.
Bill M. But I did not quote them.
James. No, but Dr. Milner, in the book you gave me, quotes different places in them; and now I have heard what they say, I doubt if they understood the gospel at all-at least, what redemption really. is.
.AT. It is just what they did not, James. The evil that pressed so sore. upon Paul, even in his time, had
now overrun the Church, as he forewarned it would; and true saints, as surely Augustine was, having lost the full sense of the value of Christ's work, indulged in all kinds of speculation, and were in confusion and darkness as to doctrine. They had lost the truth of the full value of Christ's sacrifice, that by one offering He has perfected forever them that are sanctified. Hence, each had to get clear somewhere of his own sins, each differing in degree from another, and having to answer for them in proportion, and as there was nothing in Scripture, none knew exactly how.
James. But is that all you have for purgatory?
Bill M. No; there are a number of holy fathers who are quoted, as you may see, in Milner, and passages of Scripture, too.
N. I will refer to one of them, as one on whom the Roman Catholics build a good deal (the rest will be soon disposed of)-I mean Jerome (Adversus Jovinian, lib. 2. 23). Jovinian denied human merits, and said all were equally saved who persevered in the faith of Christ, and opposed celibacy. Jerome, who was a very violent and abusive man, * though called a saint, was furious, and St. Augustine was severe upon him, too. In this work he refers, to the same text of 1 Cor. but does not say a word of purgatory, and contradicts Augustine expressly. Augustine, from the text, refutes those who used the passage (Matt. 25) by showing that every man's work would be tried. Here Jerome says that he whose work remains will be saved without being tried by fire, and there is a certain difference between salvation and salvation. This is an attempt to answer Jovinian, but not a syllable about purgatory.
The truth is, Jerome expresses himself so strangely about the matter that some accused him of denying eternal punishment, and say that Augustine refers to him in rejecting certain views on it. At all events, one thing is certain, that it is not of purgatory, as held by Roman Catholics, that he teaches. In speaking of punishment, as contrasted with perishing, he quotes: " They that have done good unto resurrection of life, they that have done evil unto resurrection of judgment," adding, to explain it (a gross misapplication), " those that have sinned without law shall perish without law" (that is, an impious person, who perishes altogether); he that has sinned under the law shall be judged by the law, and shall not perish. That is pretty interpretation; the sinner with light won't perish, the sinner without it will, contrary to all righteousness and the Lord's express teaching. But, at any rate, in Jerome's statement, the judgment, in which man does not perish, comes consequent upon resurrection; that is, it is not purgatory at all.
The passage on which he is mainly charged with denying eternal punishment'* is in his Commentary on Isa. 66 I do not know that there is more than gross confusion, and, I must say, excessive ignorance of truth.. But I will trace his views more closely just now. It will help us to understand the truth of purgatory. But one has really only to read the so much-vaunted Fathers, to see the utter worthlessness of their doctrine, and their excessive perversion of Scripture. I have paid attention to these two writers, because they are the two great teachers of western or Latin Christendom, and are the real source of the establishment of these doctrines there, though we have seen that one of them affirms quite another doctrine, indeed both, namely, that of the final judgment itself being a probationary fire; and the other saying that, as to the fire after death, he could not tell; he did not oppose it, for it might be true, but repeatedly ex- pressing his doubts about it, and declaring that several of the Scriptures relied upon, in his judgment, meant another thing. But both showed that of the clear and Scriptural doctrine of redemption and the forgiveness of sins and the perfect cleansing of Christ's blood, they were wholly ignorant. It was practically lost in the Church. Superstition and horrible corruption had come in like a flood.
As to the other Fathers, a single remark will suffice for them; they speak of prayers for the dead, not of purgatory. This was the common practice, to pray for all the dead, that they might have a part, or a speedy part, in the resurrection to glory, or in the first resurrection. They were remembered in the sacrifice of the altar. But this had no possible connection with purgatory, for they named patriarchs, apostles, prophets, mar
tyrs, and the Virgin Mary herself. I suppose, M., you do not think all these are in purgatory?
Bill M. Of course, they are not; they are all in Heaven.
James. In Heaven! and what do they pray for them for?
Bill NI. Well, I did not know they did.
(*Bellarmine attempts to say it was only commemoration at the mass; but that is false. Epiphanius speaks distinctly of prayers for them.)
N. I dare say not, but Dr. Milner did very well; and, I must say, if he had been honest he would not have quoted them. If he was only proving that superstition and false doctrine and immorality came in very soon into the professing Church, I should have nothing to say; the true thing to say would be that they characterized it; but that it was yet fallen into modern popish doctrine is not true. Faith is not shaken by the corruption of the early Church; and you shall have proofs of that corruption, because the Scripture foretells it as plainly as possible, saying that on the departure of the Apostles the evil would break out, that the mystery of iniquity was already at work, and that in the last days perilous times would come-men would have a form of piety, denying the power of it; and Scripture warns men to hold fast by the Scriptures.
James. So it does; I remember that, to be sure. How blind one is when one has not them in one's heart! And yet how good God is; He has saved me from all this confusion I did not know of.
N*. We shall get on this point when we touch on the authority of the Church and Scripture. We will try and finish with purgatory. One of the books quoted is a treatise of Tertullian's, which he wrote when he had left the Church, and refers in it to a fanatical teacher, whom he calls the Paraclete, or, as we should say, the Comforter; for Tertullian, the first and one of the most distinguished of the Latin fathers, left what you call the Catholic Church as insupportable.
(life. As to how the change came about, he says nothing; but in looking for glory for the saints, it must be their being honored among men, and refers to St. Augustine's statements, calling it Scripture; thanksgiving for very good, prayer for middling good, and a solace to middling bad, and tells the Archbishop that whether it be so he leaves to him to investigate. The poor Pope made a sad blunder in quoting Augustine as Scripture, for that word about martyrs is St. Augustine's. Thus the liturgy was changed: still, the prayer for rest for those asleep in Christ remains. The force of this has been felt, and, in a modern Roman Catholic Prayer-Book, approved by the Archbishop of New York, it is said to be for souls in purgatory, though it is expressly for all who rest in Christ (omnibus quiescentibus in Christo).
I do not know that I need go farther into the fathers. I admit that they prayed for the dead, and remembered them at the Eucharist. Their ideas were wholly unscriptural, and full of confusion-' but what they held was not the Romish purgatory, but what was entirely inconsistent with it. It was a doctrine which arose from their having entirely lost the sense of the completeness of redemption, and got back to the Judaism. which St. Paul so contended against; so that when a person stated that all true believers persevering in the faith of Christ were alike saved, he was cried out against as a dreadful man. I have already quoted them as to their view of men going one of two ways after their death.
As regards the Scriptures quoted, I have spoken of 1 Peter 3:1919By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; (1 Peter 3:19), and 1 Cor. 3:13-1513Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. (1 Corinthians 3:13‑15). The fire would try the work of every man who was a workman in God's house. This was the day of the Lord to be revealed by fire. But that is not purgatory. The work is the work of the laborers, not the conduct of Christians at all, and the day of the Lord, not purgatory; and it is alike evident and admitted, that it cannot be applied to the Romish doctrine of purgatory, because every one's work is to be tried. As regards not going out till men have paid the last farthing, I have not the least doubt that it was addressed to the Jewish people, with whom God was in the way while Christ was there, and they have been delivered to the officer, and are still under judgment, and will remain so, till they have received the full chastisement under which they are lying, and then will be brought to repentance and blessing. This may not be as clear in Matt. 5:2525Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. (Matthew 5:25), but it is as clear as possibly can be in the parallel passage in Luke 12. 54—-59. St. Augustine, Sermo 9., Sermo 109., and Tract. in Joh., 45., refers both the passages to the day of judgment in contrast with this life, and does not hint at purgatory.
As to the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, the incontestible meaning of the passage is that as is expressed in the gospel of Mark, it " hath never forgiveness." The Jews believed in an age to come, in which, under Messiah, there would be a far fuller revelation of God's grace and favor than under the law; and, in a general way, they were right. The Lord declares that this sin would be forgiven in neither-that is, never forgiven at all. Besides, this text, if applied as Roman Catholics apply it, would not prove purgatory, but deny eternal punishment, for purgatory is for those who are forgiven and justified; hence this passage cannot apply to purgatory, for this sin is not to be forgiven, and it would mean that the unforgiven, the lost, would be forgiven in the next world. In Gregory the Great we find another view of purgatory. In general he rejects it, but admits it in a very small degree, referring to the last passage I have quoted. He quotes a number of passages to prove that we shall be, in the day of judgment, as we are when we die, and that now is the time to settle all with God-John 12. 35; Isa. 49:88Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; (Isaiah 49:8), quoted by Paul;
2 Cor. 6:22(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succored thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.) (2 Corinthians 6:2); Ps. 117.—concluding from which sentences it is evident that such as any one goes out of this world, such he is presented in judgment. But, however, concerning certain light faults, it is to be believed that there is a purgatorial fire before the judgment, and he refers to 1 Cor. 3 as the proof; but, however, as I said before, for little and the very smallest sins, such as " idle speech*, immoderate laughter, or the sin of carefulness in family matters," &c. And then he gives us an altogether novel explanation of the passage in 1 Cor. Augustine makes gold, etc., to mean works so good that they stood the fire; for Jerome, it was salvation without going through the fire at all; Gregory does not notice them, but speaks of iron, brass, lead-such dreadful sins that men are wholly lost. He says,-However the passage may be understood of the fire of tribulation applied to us in this life, however, if any one take it as speaking of the fire of future purgation, it is to be diligently considered that he says he can be saved through fire, not who shall have built on this foundation iron, ' brass, or lead-that is, greater sins, and therefore harder,
And then already insoluble-but wood, hay, stubble, that is, the very smallest and lightest sins, which fire easily consumes''. (Dial. Lib. 4. 100. 39). How fire consumes sins, every one must judge for himself.
The result is, purgatory has infinitely more influence than the truth: note what it is. A man, according to Pope Gregory, can build on the foundation-that is, on Christ-iron, brass, lead, such dreadful and indissoluble sins, that he goes to hell, and that no man is free to die in peace; for, for the smallest, he must go to purgatory. Christ has fully and effectually cleansed from none. To hell, however, no Catholic who goes to the priest can go. If a man neglects the Church, he goes to hell; at any rate, if he does not confess once a year, he is in mortal sin: but for the most grievous sins he gets absolution on his confessing them-prayers and fasting, perhaps, for penance; but for not finishing these, or for venial sins, he goes to the horrible fire of purgatory, so that is really the only thing to fear. The most dreadful sin can be built on Christ, according to Pope Gregory, and a man not go to hell; but Christ saves none but some rare martyr from purgatory, the true and real place of suffering; all must go there. And that is Catholic Christianity!
Scripture, not history, is the warrant for doctrine; but the historical fact is that half the Church, and the oldest half of it, never held purgatory, nor do to this day (the other half, when expressing their personal faith, spoke in a way entirely contrary to it), but had, when the true knowledge of redemption was lost, and the purifying power of ceremonies and works came in, some mere vague notion of an intermediate state, or its possibility,
or a purgatory fire in the judgment of the last day, which ripened gradually, in the West, to the fact of a purgatory stated, as we have seen it, by Gregory, at the end of the sixth century, but then only, if these were just, for very little sins, such as idle words. Before that, prayers for the dead were offered, but then for all departed in peace, including the Virgin Mary. I give a specimen from Chrysostom: "We offer to Thee this reasonable service for those that are absent in the faith-our forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets and apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, religious persons, and every spirit perfected in the faith, but especially for all-holy, spotless, over-and-above-blessed, God-bearing and ever-Virgin, Mary."
The importance of this is that it shows that all that Dr. Milner says of the connection of prayers for the dead and purgatory is without foundation, and is, I must say, disingenuous. I have quoted quite sufficient of the fathers' denying purgatory; I only fear that it might be supposed that I attach any importance to their opinions. From Epiphanius we may find both doctrines of going to the Lord and prayers for the dead combined. Aerius had objected to prayers for the dead, just before the time of Augustine and Jerome, saying, What good could it do them? Epiphanius answers, What can be more useful, more opportune, more worthy of admiration, than the hearing the names of the dead: first, in order that those present may be persuaded that the dead live, nor are reduced to nothing, but still exist and live with the Lord; then, that that most religious doctrine may be preached by which it is evident that those who pray for their brethren think well of them-that they are gone on a journey. But the prayer which is made profits them, though it may not cut off all the sins: but it is profitable in this, that, for the most part, while in this life we fail, voluntarily or involuntarily, that something more perfect may be signified, for we make mention at the same time of the just and of sinners, of patriarchs, prophets, apostles, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, bishops, authorities, and all of the whole universal assembly, that Jesus Christ the Lord, receiving a special honor, may be separated from the rest of men, &c. The Lord Jesus was, of course, not prayed for; His mother, Mary, we have seen, was.
The statement of Dr. Milner, that the Greek Church holds it, is an unworthy statement. The deputies did agree to it at Florence. The Emperor was pressed very hard by the Turks, and looked to help from the west, and so came to get the Greek and Roman Sees and systems united. The Greeks strongly resisted purgatory, saying they were afraid it would lead to Origen's doctrine, that there was nothing else for any one-no eternal punishment. However, they did yield; but their concession was rejected with outcries on their return. They themselves said they had been deceived, and the doctrine is denied to this day, and they remain separate from Rome as before.
Alphonsus de C. (Adversus omnes haereses) admits that in the ancient writers " there is almost no mention of purgatory, especially in the Greek writers, and that there fore by the Grecians it is not believed unto this day.' So Fisher, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Rochester, " that no orthodox person now doubts whether there is a purgatory, concerning which, however, amongst the ancients, there is either none, or, at any rate, very seldom indeed, mention (rarissima). But among the Greeks, even to this day, it is not believed." I give the quotations from others, but there is no doubt of their correctness.
Neither this reference, then, to the Greek Church, nor that to the fathers proves anything, save that the statements of Dr. Milner are unfounded. The fathers cannot be trusted for doctrine a moment. Justin Martyr declares that it was impossible that the Supreme God could assume a body, and that it was not He who appeared to Abraham. He, I may say, all the early fathers, if we except the good and gracious old Irenmus, held that there was no personality of the Son till the time of the creation. Hardly any of them-none, perhaps, but Irenaeus—before the Council of Nice, were clear as to the divinity of Christ. All this came from the same source as purgatory, a mixture of Judaism and Platonic philosophy; so, indeed, did saintly and angelic mediation. This mixture of philosophy and Judaism at Alexandria in Egypt, was the fertile cause of corruption in the Church. A few words as to the true origin of purgatory.
The Romanists do, as heretics always do, take a hard passage, which people do not understand, and use it for their false doctrine. If one knows the right interpretation, one can answer at once, and say, " No; it means so-and-so:" but if you cannot, you are exposed to be led away by false interpretation, because you do not know at all what the passage means. One may be guarded by other plain truths, but, as to such a question, a person has nothing to answer. But the true source of the doctrine of purgatory is a mixture of Judaism and Platonism. Roman Catholic authors refer to both as being the same doctrine in substance as the Romanist doctrine of purgatory; and so they are. It will help us, if I give you here a sketch of the history of purgatory. No one denies that the modern idea of purgatory is found nowhere so closely stated as in Plato. Dr. Milner admits and insists on it; and Bellarmine, De Purg. L. 1. 100. 2., appeals to Plato, Cicero, Virgil, and the Mahometans, to prove that it is according to natural light. Now what does that mean? That redemption and the complete putting away of sin by the work of Christ for the believer-his heart being purified by faith- having been set aside, natural conscience (having the sense of faults
in it, having nothing else to make amends for these faults according to their gravity, and unable to quiet or purge itself here) looked with hope and fear to some satisfying for them, or being purged from them hereafter; that is, that Romanism, through the loss of the knowledge of redemption, is a return to heathenism, or, at best, to the instincts of natural light.
I will now give the statement of Plato. After a pretty
elaborate description of Hades, or the infernal regions, he continues: " These things being so, when those who are departed come to the place where the demon" carries each, first they are distinguished in judgment, both those who have lived well and piously and righteously, and those who have not; and those who seem to have lived in a middle way having come to the Acheron, having ascended the vehicle for each, they come to the lake, and there they dwell and, being purified and paying the penalty of their unrighteous deeds, they are absolved, if any one has acted unrighteously, and have the rewards of their good deeds, each according to his desert. But those who seem to be incapable of being healed, because of the greatness of their sins,-having committed either many and great sacrileges, or many unrighteous and illegal murders, or whatever else such-like they may be involved in,-these a fitted fate hurries away to Tartarus, whence they never get out; but those who have committed such as may be healed, yet great sins.... are kept a year, and, if need be, more, till they obtain release from those they have injured for the wrongs done; for that is the penalty adjudged them But those who are esteemed to have excelled as regards living piously, these, liberated and removed from their places on the earth as from prisons, going away to the pure dwelling place, dwell over the earth. And of these same, those who have been adequately purified by philosophy, live without pain all time after, and come into a better habitation than these, which it is neither easy to describe, nor is there now time." And again, " If a soul depart in this state (a good one) it departs to what is like itself, and invisible-what is divine, immortal, and wise, and, coming there, begins to be happy, is freed from the contagion of human ills, and is in the society of the gods. But if it shall depart contaminated out of the body, it will be, when separated, impure.° Those who have passed through life justly and piously, when they die,
go to the isles of the blessed, to dwell in all happiness, without any evils. But he who has lived unrighteously, and without God, will go to the prison of vengeance and punishment, which they call Tartarus. But they who have committed the worst unrighteousness, and on account of such unrighteousness cannot be healed any more, of these examples are made. These cannot, indeed, any longer be helped who are incurable, but they help those who see them, when they see them, for their very great sins, suffering most painful and frightful sufferings forever."
(**Demon, with Plato, is an instrument of Divine agency, not bad as such.)
(*** Plat. Phazid. Sect. 118, 119. Eus. Prxp. Ev. (553), Lib. 11. 27 to 38, from (568) Gorgias, near the end. Section 164, 168.)
All this was borrowed from Egypt, as different points show, though made up into Grecian philosophy, as in other parts we find him stating the Egyptian doctrine of the transmigration of souls, accompanied with another doctrine greatly taught there afterward, that the soul existed before, and came down to dwell in the body, two natures making up one person, as will be found in the places I have quoted from. But, though in a heathen form, we have the Roman doctrine of saints who go to heaven, the wicked to hell, and a middle class to purgatory. So Virgil, when Zneas goes down to Hades, he is told by them in purgatory: When life leaves with the last light (of day), not yet is every evil over to the unhappy, nor all corporeal infection wholly gone; and it is altogether necessary that many things should have grown up as part of ourselves in wonderful ways;' therefore, they are exercised with penal torments, amp' pay the penalty of old evils." And then he speaks of different punishments before they go to Elysium. And, further, in the Odyssey, souls complain that sacrifices have not been offered for them, to get them out of this place. So Ovid, Fasti, lib. 2. 33.
Plato teaches the pre-existence of the soul (Phaedo, 223) and transmigration. Only true saints, who had kept alone from every snare of corporate existence went, it is suggested, to God: so did Pythagoras. Philo, the Jew, held the pre-existence of the soul, as Plato, and that the air is full of demons up to the moon; and the lower, or inferior class, were disposed to be earthly, and came into bodies. This came from Indian or Egyptian heathenism. Why do I speak of these things? Because the great early doctors of the Church, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, were educated in Platonism; Origen, too, embraced the whole system-transmigration, and the renewal of the whole series of the soul's history in another earth. Jerome and Rufanus (Latins), and, even in part, Ambrose, followed Origen in a great deal, as did Gregory Nyssene, and many others in the East.
Origen was followed and defended till the fifth general council. Jerome and Augustine, who hesitated, as we have seen, about it all, led in the notions of the Western Church. But Origen held that angels, devils, and men, were all on the same footing of responsibility, though in different states; and withal, that all would be ultimately saved: punishment was only purgatory for any.
Ambrose we may speedily dismiss, the only difficulty being that he directly contradicts himself. But that is nothing with the fathers. His doctrine, in result, is, that all professing Christians will be saved, and heathen unbelievers, that is, Christ's enemies, will not; that Christ chastens those that are His, and consigns those who are strangers to Him to eternal punishment (Enar. of Psa. 118 Octon. 20., Sect. 24). As to the manner of it, he gives two directly conflicting statements. First, that there are three classes, the godly Christians, who will not come into judgment at all; those who have failed, though Christians, who will come into judgment; and the wicked, who will not come into judgment, abiding under wrath, so that it is not needed, Enar. in Ps. 1. 53 and 56. He held two resurrections, and the failing Christian class to be tormented between the two; but it is after their resurrection. To the third class he refers the passage, " they are condemned already." Those who have added good works to faith will rise to blessedness, not judgment. He rests on John 5:28,2928Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (John 5:28‑29), and the Revelation. But there is nothing clear as to when the resurrection to life or judgment takes place. In another place, he declares that all must pass through the fire, even John and Peter; that the flaming sword is in the way of Paradise (confounding the garden of Eden and the Paradise of God); and hence though John, the beloved of Christ, might escape death, he could not escape the fire, only such as John would be soon done with it.-Enar. Psa. 118 Octon. 20., Sect. 12, &c.
Jerome may be fairly said to have also held that all Christians would be saved; but his history demands a little more attention. He admired and quotes Origen, or his views, at least, largely. Ruffinus, a great friend of Jerome, translated Origen. This made him known, and he was widely condemned. Jerome attacked Ruffinus, and Ruffinus answered, it was no worse to translate him (Origen) than to cite him continually on these very points, without the smallest disapprobation. Jerome, though a saint, got badly out of the scrape, as Tillemont and Dupin, honest Roman Catholics, confess. He alleges all sorts of bad excuses, and, at last, says, if he had held the views, he did not hold them now. I will now give some of his statements, and the result. On Ezek. 1 verses 4 and 5, our God, he says, is a consuming fire, and, as the ember comes after the fire, so happier things will be afforded after the torment of fire which is for all believers (nobis omnibusque credentibus). C be delivered: we are to be in the fire, to give better things to the pure and purged; though, indeed, it goes farther than believers here, saying that after judgment and torments, comes the precious brightness to the sufferers, as the providence of God governs all things, and what may be thought penalty is medicine. On Eccl. 9 he records the opinion of some, that reason able creatures can offend and merit in another age, though death ends it in this, and he does not blame this. In the end of his thirty-fifth Homily on Luke, " agree with thine adversary quickly," lie gives getting out of prison, not as he excuses himself, and is pleaded for him, but as his own, the effect of paying the last farthing is that a man gets out; a minute sin soon paid; greater ones, longer; and, if they are very bad, how long will people remain? But it is all after judgment, but no one can say how long; it may be infinite ages. Finally, at the end of his Commentary on Isaiah, after quoting a series of passages, as alleged by others, to show punishment will have an end [citations which show utter ignorance of Scripture and the misleading of human imaginations, spiritualizing, as it is called, what is plain], after quoting, as the assertion of others, that this future mercy is hid for the sake of useful terror [which is Origen's doctrine], he adds, for himself, " which we ought to leave to the knowledge of God alone, who knows how to weigh both mercy and torments, and knows also how and how long he ought to purge," &c.; and then he closes, by saying, " and as we believe the torments of the devil, and of all deniers and impious men who say in their heart there is no God' to be eternal, so of sinners and impious men, yet Christians, whose works are to be proved and purged in fire, we think the sentence of the Judge to be moderate and mixed with clemency."
Worse doctrine one could hardly have, for Christians, who have light, are to be dealt with in clemency, even i f impious; but the impious heathen are to be eternally lost. With purgatory, it has nothing to do; it takes place after judgment, and of forgiveness, which is the groundwork of purgatory, there is no hint.
James. But, with all this confusion and darkness, why do they quote the fathers and make so much of them? This man does not seem to know the truth, nor grace either.
Bill M. How can an ignorant man, like you, judge these holy men?
James 1 do not know what they are, nor why they are called fathers; but I am sure what we have just heard is not according to Scripture nor God's truth, as, the Lord Himself and Paul, and the rest-that is, the Word of God-has taught it, and we are told to call no man father on the earth. But why is it, sir, so much is made of them, when such things are in them?
.N. It would not be so, James, with one who knew the truth and the Scriptures of God. But what is ancient is venerable in men's eyes, and the Word of God is too powerful for any one whose heart does not bow to it to hear, and they put it practically aside. The writings of these men are a matter of learning, the tradition of the elders not of conscience; and, besides that, we must re- member the influence and power of the enemy.
James. But, then, surely, sir, Paul and Peter and John, and all the apostles, and others, are more venerable than they are-the inspired Apostles of the blessed Lord, chosen by Himself; and so the other inspired writers? But these writers are not inspired.
N. Undoubtedly, James, they are more venerable; and we are specially charged to hold fast to that which was from the beginning, as the Apostles clearly were, and those called fathers clearly were not.
Bill M. But you will be taking a wrong meaning out of the Scriptures, and those men that lived hundreds of years ago must know better what the Apostles taught than we can.
James. Well, Bill (begging your pardon, sir, for answering; we are poor men, and understand each other), but surely the best way of knowing what the Apostles taught is to read what the Apostles say? I know we need God's grace for it, and I am ignorant of many things in Scripture; but, at any rate, the right meaning is certainly there to get, and it is not in what we have heard of these fathers at all; and I find it a great deal easier to understand, upon those things we have been speaking of, than what we have heard out of these books. Anybody can understand that if the writers of the Scriptures were inspired, they must have said it right, and perfectly rightly and better than those fathers, who were not inspired at all; and why can they tell me the matter better than those we know God sent to tell it?
Bill M. But it is the priest will tell you what the truth is; you need not be reading those books.
James. How can I tell that he is inspired?
Bill M. No, of course, he is not.
James. Then he is no better to me, as to this matter, than any other; and why can I not read the Scriptures that are for myself?
Bill M. You are too proud entirely. The priest is not inspired, but he teaches what the bishop teaches, and the bishop teaches what the Pope and the Church teaches; and the Scriptures were written in Greek, and languages you do not know.
James. Sure, it is not pride to listen to what God, says. The Lord Jesus commended a poor woman for doing it, and said it should not be taken from her; and I know that the New Testament Scriptures were written to all the Christian people, except a small part. How can I tell the priest teaches, or the bishop either, what the Church teaches? I cannot rest the salvation of my soul on that; it is resting it on man. I know what the Apostles and the Lord taught is right, and my soul can trust it for salvation; but you give me nothing for my faith to rest in, except fallible men, for that you do not deny they are: and, as to Greek and Latin, what are these fathers written in? I have no need to judge anything about them, for I rest my soul on the Word of God, that I know is His; but what I have heard of the fathers is very poor stuff, any way.
N*. Poor stuff, indeed; but it is what these doctors refer to, and the truth is, if you were learned, James, you would know that to refer to what the fathers teach is to put your foot on a quicksand, in order to have firm ground. They contradict each other, and contradict themselves, as, indeed, we have seen already.. But go on with Bill M.
James 1 have not much more to say, sir. You see, Bill, I have a soul to be saved, and I must have some sure foundation from God for it, and I have got that, and through mercy know I have got it, in the Word of God, in what you do not deny to be such. There I find that God hides these things from the wise and prudent, and reveals them unto babes. It was not through learning I found salvation and got peace in my soul, and to know I was saved, but by the grace of God.
Bill M. It is awful to hear you talk so. Know you are saved! Who can know that?
James 1 wonder you can rest a minute till you do know it. I do not mean to offend you, Bill, but what is your Church worth, if a man cannot know he is saved in it, after all? You would be a happier man, if you knew you were.
Bill M. Of course I should; who would not? But it is all presumption.
James. Not if a person comes honestly to Christ. He says, " Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest:" and through mercy I came to Him, and found rest. If you go to Him you will find it. Sure, He cannot deceive us, nor tell us what is not true; and he that comes to Him He will in no wise cast out.
Bill M. I suppose you are going to turn preacher; and what about all your sins?
James. And what did the blessed Lord give Himself for? was it not our sins? and His blood cleanses from all sin; and I have read, " by him all that believe are justified from all things," and, " their sins and iniquities will.I remember no more." That is the comfort, Bill, having God's own Word for it. And, as to preaching, I am no preacher, but only giving, as I ought to be able to do, a reason for the hope that is in me, I trust, with meekness and fear, as I read we should.
Bill M. And I suppose you may sin now as much as you please?
James. No, indeed; I have to watch and pray, lest I enter into temptation, and find I need it, too. But a Christian is a new creature, is born again, and hates sin; and there are blessed promises of help and grace for time of need, and that God will not suffer us to be tempted above that we are able; and, if we do fail (and we have no excuse, I know, if we do), we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He is the propitiation for our sins. But there is no work to put away sin but the blessed Lord's one offering of Himself, and that is finished and perfected forever, and He is set down at the right hand of God.
Bill M. But there is the holy, unbloody sacrifice of the mass.
James. Now, I know all your religion is a false one-forgive me, for being plain, Bill-for the Word of God declares that where remission of sins is, there is no more offering for sin, and, without shedding of blood, there is no remission. Now, either you have no true remission of sins in your church, or there is no more offering for sin; and an unbloody sacrifice is of no use at all. Ah! Bill, when one has learned the truth from God, and has the Word of God to rest on, one does not want learning to know these things. I am very ignorant of Scripture itself yet; but what one wants for the saving of one's own soul, one gets through mercy fast hold of. My missis, there, knows a great deal more of Scripture than I do; but, through mercy, I know what saves me. I wanted it, and through mercy I have got it; and I know what Scripture is, not by learning, but because I found the Holy God and a Savior in it, or it found me, perhaps I should say. Any way, I know what I have got, and where I got it.
Bill M. But how do you know you are not deceiving yourself all the while?
James. That I might well do; but God cannot lie, and it is on His word I rest-on what you do not deny is His word, what I know to be such. It found me out, revealed my sins and myself to me, told me all I was, and told me what Christ was. The Spirit of God (as it must for that), worked in my heart; I was convinced of sin; it was not I judged about it, it laid hold of me, was God's eye, that brought me naked before Him. No one, Bill, who has been under its power, doubts what it is; and it is always so, and is holy, and will have holiness. Besides, the Holy Spirit is given to those that believe, as it is promised; and he that believes on the Son of God has the witness in himself.
Bill M. I told you you would turn preacher; your head is just turned. I do not understand a word you say.
James. Well, Bill, I hope you may, and be as happy as I am, though I am a poor, ignorant, and feeble creature, and know only what I want for my soul's salvation; but I hope to learn more of this blessed book the Lord Himself has given us. But you were telling us about these fathers, sir. I was led on, talking to Bill M.; but it is well to know what they are. They say so much about them, and, of course, I cannot read them myself, and they make a wonderful deal of them.
N*. What you have been saying is far happier, and much more important, James, than all the so-called fathers. You would have poor work to do, to read the hundreds of volumes of them, if you even knew Greek and Latin. It is only because they make much of them, and you cannot tell what they are, and all that is unknown is apt to be wonderful, that it is well to know what they are. We were giving the statements by which they are alleged to support purgatory, and, I am glad to say, we have almost done. Of one more I will quote some passages, because he, as well as Jerome, is made a great deal of, and he will nearly complete our history. He is called Augustine-was a very ungodly, and, undoubtedly, became a truly godly man. As to poor Jerome, saint though he be called, he had an awful, and wholly unsubdued temper, and was abusive and revengeful to the last degree: however, he was a saint for Rome. I hope it was all right with him; but really, one can say no more. And now for Augustine.
What we have cited from Ambrose and Jerome has nothing to do with purgatory, but made judgment a temporary and purifying thing for all Christians, and was chiefly borrowed from Origen, admitted to be a heretic on all these points. But I will give you Augustine's statements, a good man, and partially led by what we have already looked at, but confessedly uncertain in his own mind; only he rejects positively the doctrines of the earlier fathers, Origen, Ambrose, and Jerome. In the twenty-first book of the City of God, chapter xxv., he had insisted that a man might outwardly partake of the Lord's Supper and not really receive Christ, that he who fed on Christ abode in Him, and that they were not members of
Christ if in sin. Then he takes up the case of being burned (1 Cor. 3), and first refers to tribulation. " So' he says, " as far as appears to me, that fire is found;" and goes on to declare it cannot be the eternal fire, as some have said, into which those who are on the left hand are cast, and that only those who are set on the Lord's right hand go into that fire, inasmuch as they are saved, though their work is burnt; whereas those who go into the eternal fire will never be saved, but punished forever- 21. 26, 3. Then, in 4, "if in the interval between death and resurrection, the spirits of the deceased are said to suffer this kind of fire, that their wood, hay, and stubble may be consumed, which those who have not such morals and affections in the life of this body will not feel, but those feel who have carried building of this sort with them, whether there only, or here and there, or therefore here, that it may not be there, they find fire of transitory tribulation, consuming worldly things, but pardonable as concerns eternal damnation, I do not controvert, for perhaps it is true." Death may belong to it. " Persecution, in which martyrs are crowned, or which any Christians suffer, tries both kinds of building as fire, and if they do not find Christ in them, consumes some works and builders, some without the builders, if Christ be &c. He was a good man, and knew what it was to have Christ, and could not confound the substance of the matter with chaff, however dark he might be on a passage, and owns he was. " There will be, too, in the end of the age, tribulation in the time of Antichrist, such as never was." Thus, his own mind rests on tribulation. He utterly rejects Origen's notions, taken up by Ambrose and Jerome; but, as I said, is partially led by their views, so as to admit the possibility of another purifying fire when a true Christian had allowed evil in himself. The application of 1 Cor. 3 to purgatory, Bellarmine assures us, is quite wrong, because there every one's work is tried, and that will not do for purgatory-Bell. de Purg. Lib.1. 100. 5, sect. 37, 38-and he rejects Augustine's own opinion, which is that of Gregory, that it is tribulation here; sect. 22, 26, 36. So little have we to trust in these doctors for unanimity of
judgment. But, in the Tract on Faith, and Works, 25 (15.), this same Augustine utterly rejects the opinion of
Ambrose and Jerome, though not naming them, and shows their views-to be contrary to Scripture where it is plainest, because of this, to him, obscure passage* in 1 Cor. 3, and quotes 1 Cor. 13; James 2:1414What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? (James 2:14); 1 Cor. 6:9,109Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9‑10); Gal. 5:19-2119Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:19‑21). " All this will be false," he says, " if they are saved by fire who persevere in such evil things, if only they believe and are baptized. And thus the baptized in Christ even who do such things will possess the kingdom of God." He adds a great deal more to the same purpose, which I need not quote. He then adds, 29 (16.), " Perhaps it will be asked me here what I think of the sentence of the Apostle Paul itself, and how I think it is to be understood. I confess I had rather hear more intelligent and learned persons, who shall so expound it, as that all those things which I have above recited should remain true and unshaken, and what I have not cited by which Scripture most openly testifies that faith profits nothing save that which the Apostle has defined, which works by love." He says, however, he will explain, as well as he eau, that if there is a faith which works by love, that faith will not suffer him to perish; he will be saved: but if he has with that allowed his heart to be attached to earthly things, " in losing them they suffer loss, and by a certain fire of grief, arrive at salvation." It is all poor and uncertain teaching, but of a godly man. On the same point, in the Enchiridion l8 (69.), referring to the same passage, he says, " It is not incredible there may be some such thing after this life and whether it be so may be inquired, and it may be discovered, or lay hid, that some of the faithful may be saved by a certain purifying fire, by how much they may have more or less loved perishing good things, by so much they may be more quickly or slowly saved." His doctrine as to good works shows how he lay open to these thoughts, and such uncertainty, for here we have a different doctrine from what he says in the tract on Faith and Good Works. In "the City of God" he gives both, but that the fire means tribulation, as his own view. In his book on Dulcitius's Eight Questions O. 14), he earnestly rejects Origen's doctrine of the salvation of the wicked, after a time of punishment; and, while mourning over those he cannot mend nor refuse at the sacrament, still bows to Scripture, that they are lost. But in the thirteenth chapter of the twenty-first book of the Civ. Dei, citing the Platonicians and Virgil, which I have already referred to, he accepts purgatorial pains between death and judgment, though rejecting (what Origen and Jerome and Ambrose taught) that all the baptized would be saved. But in the twenty-fifth chapter of the twentieth book of the Civ. Dei, he teaches from Mal. 3, that the day of judgment itself will be purgatorial for some, and as Malachi (who really refers to Israel) speaks of offering, he says, they will then offer, but it will be themselves when purified, for what offering could be more acceptable to God; they cannot offer for their sins when purged; but he puts off the full discussion of that subject to another time. He then goes on, as the sacrifices would be offered as of old, to state that they were offered in Paradise before the fall, and loses himself in other ideas.
James. But you say, sir, Augustine was a godly man, yet he is confused and uncertain on the plainest things in Scripture.
.N*. That is the very use of referring, as I have done, to the fathers. They are quoted, and Bill M. had referred to them as great authorities to you, and so does Dr. Milner and all Roman Catholic teachers. Nay, their Council of Trent will have no interpretation of. Scripture but what is by their unanimous consent. Hence it was well to know what they are really worth. Augustine was a godly man, and hence his spirit rejected the vagaries of Origen, copied by Jerome and by Ambrose, who must have had great weight with him as his spiritual father, but he rejects it all. But not knowing the fullness of redemption, as not one of the fathers did, nor that the poor thief could go straight into Paradise, to be with Christ because Christ's blood (who was in grace on the cross by him) had cleansed him from all sin, nor able, as Scripture Speaks, to " give thanks to the Father, who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light," they were at a loss what to do with the faults and failings of real Christians. Before Augustine, the purifying was held to be after the day of judgment: this he sometimes teaches-sometimes that it was tribulation here-sometimes between death and judgment; and then he put off its full discussion (but never took it up again), and wished some more learned man to treat of it-would not controvert its being after death, or here and not there, or here and there both.
But the seed of the doctrine was now sown. Gregory the First, of Rome, a great, but very superstitious man, whom sober Roman Catholics acknowledge to have stuffed the very book I quote from with absurd and incredible stories, thus speaks in it, founding his doctrine on the Lord's words, " neither in this world nor in the next "; which refer solely to the age of the law and that of the Messiah, a perfectly well-known Jewish distinction, of which he knew nothing. He says it is to be believed that there is a purifying fire for very light faults, but only for small, and the very least faults, as frequent idle talk, or immoderate laughter, or error of ignorance in immaterial things; and then refers to 1 Cor. 3, which, as we have seen, their great doctor, Bellarmine, says, can not apply to purgatory, and which Gregory says may he understood of tribulation in this life, but with the strangest application, saying, contrary to the rest, "not iron, brass, lead-hard things, and these, indeed, indissoluble; but wood, hay, stubble-that is, the smallest and lightest sins, which the fire easily consumes:" and then he adds, "only if a man has deserved it in this life." Dialogs, Lib.4.
James. But that has no sense, and the Apostle speaks of gold and silver, and precious stones, and what the teacher has built in his service. They don't seem to have understood the Scriptures at all, according to what you have quoted, sir.
N*. Nothing can be more foolish, as an interpretation; but they had all lost the doctrine of a complete redemption and purging of the conscience by the precious blood of Christ, and therefore all was dark to them. They had to make out some other way of clearing themselves, and hence penances and purgatory, and indulgences, and such like means. But this is all poor Romanists have to rest on. How different from the clear and sure testimony of the Word of God, with its holy claim on the conscience, and full and perfect grace for the soul, the constant presence of Christ before God for us, and His intercession unsought, for every need and every failure, in virtue of a blood and righteousness which never can fail, and sanctifying correction by His Word and Spirit in our hearts, with chastening, if needed, for our good, not as an exacting God, for " whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth," and for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness! But I have done my history of Purgatory. The doctrine had now come in, and soon after, the dark ages, when wickedness and corruption and superstition were at their height.
What do we see then as the result? Scripture does not say one word of purgatory, but teaches exactly the contrary. We have examined the pretended passages but when I turn to heathen philosophers and Jews, I find a system of doctrine to which the _Romanist doctrine is conformed. Nor is that all. These Jewish doctrines were mixed up with this particular class of heathen ones at Alexandria, as is well-known, and all the works of Philo testify. Now all the early learned fathers who imprinted the character of their doctrines on the Church lived at Alexandria. There was the great Christian Catechetical School, and the principal of these fathers were its masters, as Clement and Origen; and through these this mixture of Platonism and Judaism flowed into the Church. The fact of the accordance of these doctrines is not my statement alone; you see, Dr. Milner admits it, and says it shows how suited it was to human nature, which is quite true, only that the reasonings of philosophy were added; and Bellarmine, the Jesuit, and one of the highest authorities in Romanist doctrine, refers to Plato as holding these views, and Cicero and Virgil, and seeks to prove it thereby as of the common light of nature (Bell. de Purg. Lib. 1.; Prague, 1721, p. 348). So Dr. Milner, "it is conformable to the dictates of natural religion;" that is, punishment suited to the degrees of guilt is. Now, I do not deny this; moreover, Scripture speaks of it (Luke 12:47,4847And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 48But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more. (Luke 12:47‑48)). Before I answer this, let us recall the doctrines to which I refer.
Plato holds that the flesh is an evil part of the nature, which infects the soul, and that if it has wholly given itself up to vice, it would be given up to punishment for the advantage of others, as an example: if not, but that still any had not kept themselves free, they would be punished in Hades for a certain time, proportioned to their unpurged stains; that there were two instruments for the health of the body, exercise (gymnastics) and medicine, and if the first were not sufficient, the other was to be applied; that the spots of the soul were like the colors after a wound when completely well; the soul, at the end of its purification and punishment, would be rendered splendid and spotless. That is simply purgatory-purgatory from the natural need of the soul without Christ. Virgil enlarges a little on it: besides the torments of hell, he states the same process of punishment and purification, but he does not quite finish them off then; he sends them to Elysium, a place of blessedness, and then, after a. length of time, the hardened spots are wholly gone, and the ethereal soul is left quite pure. Other fictions were added; the souls quite pure, according to Plato, went off to the stars, according to their qualities, for they held (so Philo, the Jew) the stars to be living beings. All this was much borrowed from the Egyptians and Pythagoras. Hades was placed by them under the earth, and so by Romanists (as Bellarmine). This doctrine of Purgatory was connected with the famous mysteries of Eleusis. It was signified in the rites (says Plato) that he who was not initiated and the unperfected in them would go to Hades, and lie in mire, but that the purified and perfected person, when he departed, would dwell with the gods. So, they held that there were those who answered to the Romish saints- the heroes, who went to heaven at once, and were eternally happy. Here is Virgil's account of purgatory: " Moreover, when at the last ray life leaves, yet not every sorrow ceases to the unhappy, nor do bodily pains altogether pass, and it is altogether necessary that many things contracted by long usage should grow in a wonderful way into their very constitution. Therefore, they are exercised with penal sufferings and satisfy by punishment for the inveterate evils." This is not Tartarus, the hell of the condemned, but souls that can be purified, who are not yet fit for Elysium. You must not be surprised if we refer Roman Catholic doctrines to heathens; where we find exactly the same doctrine. All the language used by the fathers of the sacraments is borrowed from heathen mysteries, and that even in the language of the liturgies.
But there was another source historically of this doctrine, (I say historically for it was all the same reasoning of human nature that did not know the Gospel of salvation), -the Jewish doctrine. The Jews' notion (and the identity of thought is here also extraordinary) was this:- they say (as Cyprian, Ambrose, and hosts of others) that there is no place of repentance after death. This the Fathers repeat continually; so the Jews. It is true; but where redemption is not known the only resource is to keep people from sin by terrifying the mind always by the dread of an avenging God, falsifying his character. But then they make almost all Jews get out of the place of punishment because God has punished the best for all faults, and after punishing the wicked, must crown what they have done right. Even if one commandment be kept a Jew will be blest, so that between that and Abraham's help and Moses's, every child of Israel will see the world to come. God leans to the side of mercy, and it would not be just (they say), that a man suffered eternally for crimes which have often been light ones. Hence they have a purgatory for prevaricators in Israel, those who are not entirely good nor entirely bad. They pray to get souls out of it, and God releases them, and particularly at great days of expiation. It is even said that they sell indulgences to the people to get out quicker. Their purgatory is a part of hell beneath the earth. They judge that souls who have done both evil and good works will be punished for the evil and then be rewarded for -the good; so exactly says Origen, Horn. xvi.; on Jer. 5:66Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall watch over their cities: every one that goeth out thence shall be torn in pieces: because their transgressions are many, and their backslidings are increased. (Jeremiah 5:6)-If after you are on the foundation of Jesus Christ, you have gold, &c., and wood, &c., what would you have done to you when your soul quits your body? Would you enter into the holy place for the gold, &c., to pollute God's kingdom, or stay out for the wood and receive no reward for the gold, &c.? Yet neither is this just. He then quotes " our God is a consuming fire," " and says, there comes always blessing after threats and sorrow. And quoting falsely, I know not how, Isa. 40, insists on the word first (I will first retribute double their iniquities); first we shall suffer the torment for our iniquities, then be crowned for our righteousness. This is exactly Jewish.
Jerome, reasoning against Pelagius (who said that in the day of judgment, the wicked and sinners are not to be spared but to be burned), answers, You interdict mercy to God. When he says sinners shall cease out of the earth, he does not say they shall be burned in eternal fire -sin and iniquity (not impiety, which is not knowing God) according to the quality of the vices, after the wound of sin and iniquity receives health. It is one thing to lose the glory of the resurrection-another to perish everlastingly. This, too, was the Jewish notion. The resurrection is for Moses, the saints, and the righteous. In all this we see, no doubt, what suits nature, and how thoroughly the fathers have followed the crude imaginations of Jews and heathens; and then Rome has made a new system out of it, whose first definite traces are to be found in Gregory the Great, at the end of the sixth century. Only some went farther, as Origen, who held, as Bellarmine himself tells us, that there was no punishment but purifying punishment: he thought that souls had existed before and were then born into this world, and that they would go on purifying gradually till they purely enjoyed God. It is hard to say what place he gave to Christ in this. Gregory of Nyssa held the same views, and speaks of Judas being purified, of whom
Peter says, "he went to his own place," and the Lord "it had been good for him not to have been born." And throughout his works this doctrine is taught. Some looked shy-at him with- good reason;- but the great Romanist champion Bellarmine eulogizes him as admirable, and he was one of ten whom the Council of Ephesus said they were to decide all by, and one of those sent on a kind of visitation round the churches to see there was no Arian heresy.*
And now see the true character of all this.
Christianity has come finding man lost-justly lost by sin, and departed from God-has brought him salvation when he is in that state-has brought him life, eternal life. Christ is that life-a life holy in its nature, and which loves God and that which is good; he, it tells us,, who receives Christ, receives this life. Such is the positive plain declaration of Scripture; but that is not all. How can such poor, sinful, guilty creatures have confidence to come to God; to walk at peace with Him so as to come to His holy habitation hereafter, even if, quickened by Christ, they desire it? First, the Son of God has become a man, and lived amongst men to prove His love, and that He does not reject the vilest: He is the friend of publicans and sinners. God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. Hence, we see the very vilest (who could not venture near a decent person) come to Jesus-humbled surely, but received and told to go in peace. Thus God was revealed amongst men, that sinners, such as we are, might trust Him. But to enter into His presence in heaven we must be cleansed-justified. The same blessed One gives Himself for us; has given Himself for the sins, of all who come to God by Him; has borne their sins in His own body on the tree. Thereupon the Holy Ghost declares to us that they which believe are justified from all things; that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses them from all sin, and that God will remember their sins and iniquities no more. Hence we are assured of being with Christ directly when we die-absent from the body and present with the Lord-and we are called upon to give thanks to the Father, who has made us meet to be partakers-` of the inheritance of the saints in light. So the poor thief, who talked of being remembered when the kingdom came, was assured that he should be that very day with Christ in paradise. And the Holy Ghost is given to those who believe as the seal of God put upon them, and the earnest of their inheritance. And He is in them-a spirit of adoption -crying Abba, Father. Death they know is a gain to them-resurrection the time of glory. They know that when He comes He will receive all that have believed in Him, and they will appear with Him in glory.
Being justified by faith they have peace with God; holiness is their delight; glory and being like Christ their sure hope. If they fail, Christ is an advocate with the Father for them, and ever liveth to make intercession for them, and hence is able to save utterly and completely. Warnings they need; exhortations too, vigilance, prayer, and every other means, public or private, that God in grace has afforded them. If they carelessly fail, they have every ground to humble themselves in the dust, and confess their fault before God. If they do not own the warnings of the word in grace, God chastens them as a father that they may be partakers of His holiness; but they do not doubt that they have eternal life in Christ, because God says so, nor that the blood of Christ cleanses them from all sin, nor think that God will remember their sins and iniquities any more.
Instead of that, what do I find? Christ brought in as a foundation to begin with, and a man who is built on Christ as a foundation having still to answer for everything as much as if there was no Christ; he has to pay the penalty of his sins now or must do so hereafter, for God will have the last farthing. Sacraments there are to cleanse and justify-justified in baptism not from his actual sins (for as yet he has committed none) but when he has, a sacrament to purify him from guilt without purifying his heart. Nay, on the contrary, a sacrament which makes contrition unnecessary, and gives absolution on sorrow from a lower motive called attrition-a horribly unholy doetrine-forgiveness quieting the conscience without purifying the heart, but the forgiven man having still to satisfy an exacting God for his sins; unless this—temporal penalty, too, be excused by an indulgence. Then, when dying, other sacraments, no less than three, to quiet his conscience again; and then he must go to purgatory to pay and satisfy God still. And all this if a man is in grace forgiven, sanctified, and justified 1 It is not Christianity, whatever else it may be.
James. Well, how little one knows what Romanism is. I could never have thought it; but all these Fathers! I thought they were such holy people, all teaching as nobody else could. Why, they only make everything dark I think: the word of God is clearer and surer too. I see that plainly now, and then one has the words of the Apostles and of the blessed Lord Himself, and we are sure they are right. Oh! what a comfort for one's poor soul that is.
Mrs. J. But I do not know, sir, why one should trouble oneself with all these books and mazes of uncertain teaching when one has the Word of God. They are beyond poor folks like us, and if knowing the truth depended on reading them we should be in a bad way, while with my bible and the words of my blessed Savior all is simple and full of grace just suited to simple people: and then they are His own.
N*. Just so, Mrs. J.; they are His own. Oh I what a thought that is. They come with power, they come
with authority, and that is what no man's words can do;and then they come in grace to the heart-God's grace. Mrs. J. They do, sir.
N*. When God has become a man-when He can say, If thou knewest the gift of God and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have given-when the High and Holy One has come so low to be with sinners, the moment I believe it, I can have confidence in Him. I have much to learn; but to learn from one who loves us. If we reject His grace we have a debt we never can pay at all"; but if we have Him we have one who blessed be His name-has paid the last farthing for us. There is not the smallest need of your knowing the fathers. They may be interesting as a matter of history to_show_what went on in-those-days for-those-who—make research, and they are so; and in a very few indeed we see marks of piety and true grace, as in Irenwus of the more voluminous, and others I need not name here; but it is not in the books of those times you get the highest, parts of Christianity. They were almost all corrupted by heathenism and philosophical reasonings. I do not think you would find as much rubbish and false interpretation in any quantity of serious books of the same size nowadays. But men suffered then for Christ, and so did some of these very men. As to their consent in doctrines, it is all a fable. There never was more disputing and confusion about doctrine than in those days. They were holding councils on councils to try and settle it, and often the Emperors managed the matter their own way-by their power, by the banishment of those whose opinions they did not like, etc. In one great council they had, the prelates of one party beat the old Archbishop of Constantinople so that he died of it. And some of the other councils were not a great deal better, though not so violent.
Bill M. But I do not want you to read the fathers, but to hear the Church. I cannot answer as to all these fathers because I have not read their books: the priest would answer all, I am sure.
James. But you used to talk about the holy fathers to me, Bill, and how they all agreed from the beginning in one doctrine, and one Church, and all that.
Bill M. And so they did, I am sure.
_N*. You cannot, M., speak of the fathers, nor do I blame you for that, unless it is speaking of them without examining; but Dr. Milner has read them, and though I own. Scripture alone for an authority, we agreed to take his book as you had given it, and we were bound, as he had. quoted them, to examine what he said. Nor can I acquit Dr. Milner of dishonesty on this subject. As to the Scripture (1 Peter 3:1919By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; (1 Peter 3:19)): there is no preaching in purgatory we well know: Abraham's bosom, Augustine even assures us, cannot mean purgatory. As to 1 Cor. not only Augustine says it is most difficult; but Bellarmine declares it cannot apply to purgatory, for there all
-are to-go-into-the-fire,——But-as-to the -fathers it- is-worse,——-because he knows that prayers for the dead cannot be reconciled with the Romish purgatory, for all were
prayed for, even the Virgin Mary. This he must have known; so that to quote the fathers who speak of it as proving purgatory, is utterly dishonest, and to say " an intermediate state which we call purgatory." He knew very well it was not what they call purgatory. His statement as to the Greek Church is equally false: it holds neither purgatory nor indulgences. They do hold prayers for the dead, as in the earlier centuries; but reject wholly purgatory. Neither was " from the beginning," and we must have that or what is false. We have examined these fathers on the subject of purgatory pretty much at length, and we may leave it. You, I know, would like to take up the question of the Church which you think settles everything.
Bill M. Yes, it is no good arguing; we must get some authority to decide. And the Church, the Lord declares, is that authority, and tells us to hear it. What can you say against the Lord's own words?
N*. Well, M., we will take your own subject up next. It is fair you should have your turn; but for the present I think we have had enough. The Lord willing, we will take that up when we meet again; only remember, as far as we have gone, we have had all your friend, Dr. Milner, has to say for your doctrine. It is not taking a person who cannot be expected to know much of the fathers, and seeking to confound him. I can add, that I have looked into a more famous man still of your party, and that is Bellarmine; but it is the same in substance, and I do not see that he adds anything. material. He says, St. Chrysostom is quite wrong in his view. of 1 Cor. 3, for on this interpretation all would be saved. I do not know how he manages about the consent of the fathers. I suppose he was not thinking of it just then, yet this is their pet text on this subject. Bellarmine prefers Gregory which I have given you. For my own part what I see is this-the real source of purgatory is heathenism and Judaism, which were associated at Alexandria, where the first great doctors of the Church -lived.-At first-it took shape of purifying all completely in eternal fire. Still this was not generally accepted. It then took the form of prayers for all, because they had not fully the sense of Christ's having so atoned for believers' sins, that they were white as snow for God. They apportioned, therefore, to all some punishment-at the least the punishment of loss, not seeing God; or at any rate were uncertain and prayed for all, even for the Virgin Mary, with a view to their speedily seeing the face of God; but the idea of the purging process survived through, and in Augustine's time was a question as to which he doubted-Jerome speaking with such uncertainty that he is accused of denying eternal punishment. This was in the fifth century: in the end. of the sixth Gregory specifies the purifying very light sins; but doubts still. With School-men it was like other things formed into an elaborate system; but all this last part was only in Western Christendom. Greek or Eastern Christendom has never received the doctrine. I conclude: Scripture is positively and clearly against it, as destructive of Christ's work. The fathers are one mass of confusion as to it; its true source being heathenism and Judaism, and the oldest half of Christendom rejects it to this day. Yet it is practically the great doctrine of Romanism in connection with the Mass. It is to get people out of it that masses are constantly said. The, poverty of the system is shown, and the character it gives to God, in that it proceeds on the ground of God's exacting the last farthing (an interpretation denied by Augustine and Jerome), and that after the use of all the means the Roman system has at its disposal-absolution, the viaticum, and extreme unction which wipes off the remains of sin-so utterly unprofitable are they (by their own confession) that the faithful have to go to purgatory to get these remains burned out by the relentless and exacting hand of God.
Oh, what a difference from that holy grace of God that saves, cleanses, and gives life! N*.