54. Beauties of the Leopold Reports.-Puerility of the Roman Catholic Religion.

What a puerile religion the Roman Catholic religion is! How childish! How petty its cares! About what trifles it concerns itself! The Christian is truly "the highest style of man:" but the consistent Roman Catholic is not much above the lowest. Baraga writes as follows: "It would be of essential service to our missions, if there could be sent us cups, boxes for the holy wafer, rosaries, crucifixes-of the last two, as many as possible, for such articles cannot be bought here. How it is with church furniture and linen, you may easily think. Those given to me by pious persons are of great use to me, and I cannot be thankful enough for them." Cannot be thankful enough for boxes, rosaries, &c.!! His capacity for gratitude must be small indeed. We Protestants often feel that we cannot be thankful enough; but it is not for such trumpery as cups and boxes. When we feel and lament over the inadequacy of our gratitude, it is in view of the many and great mercies of God to us. I suppose our Protestant missionaries at Ceylon, and elsewhere, would not be so very grateful if we should send them a consignment of cups, boxes, &c. No: such things could not be of essential service to their missions. We do not understand converting people as the Roman Catholics do. They can regenerate and pardon, and do all the rest, in a trice. We have to bring before the mind of the sinner the great saving truth of Christ crucified; but they have only to put the little crucifix into his hand. I went, a short time ago, to visit a man under sentence of death, to talk to him about Christ and His death. I found him gazing intently on a little metallic image of Christ crucified, which a priest had left him. He seemed indifferent to all I said. The priest had prepared him!

In a note to Baraga's letter, we are told of a great number of Roman Catholic donations that are already on

M

their way to America; among them three thousand rosaries! What a number of beads! How their missions must prosper after this! A little afterwards, by way of inducing others to contribute beads, boxes, &c. it is said, "The good Christian rejoices to promote the external honour of the house of God, so that the inner man, by the splendor of the external divine worship, may be lifted to heaven." What a sage sentiment! How Scriptural! How philosophical too! This is truly a new way of being lifted to heaven.

But I must not overlook a letter of Bishop Fenwick, dated Mackinac, July 1, 1831. He writes: "On the second day after my arrival, Mr. M. and I preached at different times after mass. When the people had heard some sermons, confessions began; and from that time till the day of our departure, we sat on the confession stool from early morning till 1 o'clock, and in the afternoon, from 3 or 4 o'clock, till 10, 11, and twice till 12 at night. There were confessions of twenty, thirty, and forty years." What a prodigious memory they

must have had, who called to mind and confessed the sins of forty years! All that time they were waiting for a priest to come to them. There was the God who delighteth in mercy, to whom they might have confessed, as the publican dared to do; and there was "Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant," whom they might at any time have engaged to intercede for them. But that would not have been to act the part of good Roman Catholics. The good Roman Catholic does not go to the mercy-seat of God to confess his sins and obtain forgiveness, (that were an "iniquity to be punished by the judges"); but he waits for the priest to come with his confession-stool. The confession-stool substituted in the place of the mercy-seat! This is one of the doings of that religion which Austria wants to give us. God says to sinners, "Come unto Me;" and He promises that He will "abundantly pardon them from his throne of grace." (Is. lv. 7, and xxx. 18.) "Nay," says the priest, "wait till I come with my stool." Roman Catholics

may, if they please, go for pardon and mercy to the stool of confession :-but, my Protestant brethren, "Let us come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." (Heb. iv. 16.)

55. Supererogation.

This long word was coined by the Roman Catholics for their own special use, as was also that longer and harder word transubstantiation. Nobody else finds any occasion for it. It expresses what the rest of mankind think has no real existence. If the reader is acquainted with the Latin (that language which the church of Rome extols so high above the Hebrew and Greek, the languages of God's own choice—and in which she says we ought all to say our prayers, whether we understand it or not), he will see that supererogation is compounded of two words, and signifies literally, above what is required. It desig nates that overwork in the service of God, which certain good Romanists in all ages are supposed to have done. After doing all the good which God requires of them, then what they do over and above that, they call supererogation. It expresses how much more they love God than they are required to love him. He claims, you know, to be loved with all the heart, and soul, and strength, and mind. This is the first and great command. And observe, it is with all of each. Now, when the Roman Catholic has fully satisfied this claim, he enters upon work of supererogation; and all that he does in the way of loving God, after loving him with all the four-heart, strength, soul and mind-to the utmost of his power, is set down to this account, be it more or less. Might I just ask here, for information, if a man is required to love God with all his strength, that is, with his whole ability, how can he do more? It seems that whatever he can do, is required to be done. How Roman Catholics contrive to do more than they can, I, for my part, do

the

not know. It is a mystery to Protestants. We are in the dark on this subject.

Let me tell you something more about this supererogation. It expresses how much more Roman Catholics are than perfect. Perfect, you know, we are all required to be "perfect, even as our Father who is in heaven is perfect." (Matt. v. 48.) And in another place, even by Peter, it is said, "As He which has called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation." Now, when one is holy as He who hath called him is holy, and holy in all manner of conversation, in so far as he is more holy than this, (since all this is what is required) the surplus is set down to the account of supererogation! In other words, supererogation expresses the superfluous glory which men give to God, after glorifying him in their bodies and spirits, which are his, and doing all, whatsoever they do, even to the matter of eating and drinking, to his glory! See 1 Cor. vi. 20, and x. 31. This is supererogation. I hope the reader understands it.

Now, those who do these works of supererogation have, of course, more merit than they have any occasion for on their own account; and, as this excess of merit ought by no means to be lost, the church of Rome has, with great economy, treasured it up for the benefit of those who are so unfortunate as to do less than what is required; to whom it is, at the discretion of the church and for value received, served out in the way of indulgences. This is the article that Tetzel was dealing in so largely and lucratively, when Martin Luther started up in opposition to the traffic. Protestants have never

dealt in the article of indulgences.

By the way, the wise virgins of whom we read in Matthew xxv. 1-13, seem not to have been acquainted with this doctrine of supererogation; for, when the foolish virgins, in the lack of oil, applied to them for a seasonable supply, they answered, "Not so: lest there be not enough for us and you." (v. 9.) They had only enough for themselves.

1

But, say the Roman Catholics, are there not counsels in the Bible, as well as precepts-certain things which are recommended, though not required? If so, and a person, besides obeying the precepts, complies with the counsels, doing not only what is required, but also what is recommended, is not here a foundation for works of supererogation? This is plausible, but that is all. My motto being brevity, I shall not attempt an extended answer to it, but take these few things:

1. If there are counsels recommending things which no precepts require, yet obedience to these counsels cannot constitute works of supererogation, and accumulate merit, unless all the precepts are perfectly obeyed. A man must do all that is required, before he can do more than what is required. Now, has any mere man, since the Fall, ever perfectly obeyed all the commandments of God? Has any man done all his duty? If not, I reckon that no one has done more than his duty. We do not generally go beyond a thing, until after we have come up to it. A cup does not usually run over before it is full. But,

2. According to this doctrine of the church of Rome, men are capable of a higher virtue than God has required! They can, and actually do, perform virtuous and holy acts, which belong to neither of the tables of the law, and which are comprehended neither in the love of God nor in the love of man! Is this idea admissible? The Psalmist says, "Thy commandment is exceeding broad." But according to this doctrine, the virtue of the Roman Catholic is broader. I, however, do not believe it.

3. There is no counsel which does not become a precept or a command,-provided it be found that God can be more glorified by a compliance with it than otherwise. The thing recommended, if in any case it be apparent that the doing of it will redound to the glory of God, is ipso facto required, and becomes a duty. Take the favourite example of the Roman Catholics, celibacy; which, they say, is recommended, but not required.