that Church. We do not profess to give the words, but the idea of the writer. Now let us test the truth of this assertion. The decree of Pope Boniface VIII., is that "we declare, say, define and pronounce that it is altogether of necessity to salvation, that every creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” This is the decree as it now stands in the common extravagants.* Innocent III., who lived in the beginning of the thirteenth century, in his decretals, (lib. i. c. 33.) declares that every human creature ought to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, and that this subjection is absolutely necessarq to salvation. Pope Pius V. begins his Bull against Queen Elizabeth of England, with these words: "He that reigneth on high, &c. hath committed the one Holy Catholic and Apostolical Church, out of which the is no salvation, to one alone on earth, namely, to eter, Prince of the Apostles, and to the Roman Pontiff, successor of Peter, to be governed with a plenitude of power." (Cambd. Hist. Anno. 1570.) Pope Pius II, in his bull of Retraction (though he seems not to have been of the same opinion while Æneas Sylvus) says, "He cannot be saved that does not hold to the unity of the Catholic faith;" and Pope Leo X., in his Lateran Council, and in his bull therein read and passed, says, "we do renew and approve the same Constitution, (viz. of Pope Boniface VIII., above mentioned,) the present sacred council also approving it;"+ and Pope Pius IV., in his bull wherein he confirms the council of Trent, imposes an oath upon Ecclesiastical persons wherein. they swear that the Holy Catholic Church, and the

* Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanæ creaturæ declaramus, dicimus, definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate Salutis. Extrav. Com. Lib. i. Tit. 8. Cap, i.

† Constitutionem ipsam sacro præsenti Concilio approbante, innovamus et approbamus. Concil. Lateran. Sess. ii. p. 153.

Apostolic Roman Church is the Mother and Mistress of all Churches, and that this is the true Catholic faith, without which no man can be saved.” This bull, or as it is more commonly called, this creed of Pius IV., bears date, the ides of November, 1564, and concludes in the usual manner with threats of the indignation of God, and of his blessed apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, against all that shall infringe or oppose it. This creed was drawn up by Pius IV., in pursuance of an order of the council of Trent, and bears this title: "A bull concerning a form of an oath of profession of Faith." This creed is sometimes called the Trent Creed, and this "Oath," as they call it, all Ecclesiastical persons are bound to take.

Such a doctrine is unsuited to the enlightened charity of the present day, and it appears with a very ill grace in the creed of those who are continually crying out, "persecution," "want of liberality," "uncharitable." Romanists, with a dash of the pen, can send all-Protestants to hell (for they will not allow them even the privilege of purgatory.) But if Protestants presume to examine the tenets of the "Infallible Church," they are accused of persecution and illiberality.

But, how is this clause in the Trent Creed explained so as to give as little offence to Protestants as possible? In the "U. States Catholic Miscellany." Vol. ix, p. 294. It is said, "this clause implying exclusive salvation, is confined to the belief that the obstinate rejection of revealed truth, daily propounded is criminal." But by what church does the author mean, this truth is propounded? By Protestant Churches? No, for Protestants do not reject it as propounded by them: propounded by the Bible? No, for they do not reject that. But the Romish Church is meant; if Protestants reject truth as propounded by her, they are criminal.

But this does not clear up the difficulty. A little further on it is said, "as therefore the (Roman) Catholic is convinced, that the (Roman) Church is the pillar and ground of the truth, he concludes the profession of the articles proposed to him, declaring his belief that without this Catholic faith, no one can obtain salvation. But he does not thereby consign to eternal misery, such as inculpably might be ignorant of some particular doctrine." But what Protestant is regarded by them as inculpably ignorant of their doctrines? Are not all Protestants to blame, who, when able, will not come to the Church and learn her tenets? Again, what is meant by saying, that they are not sent to Hell, who are inculpably ignorant? Is not here an artful Jesuitical use of words to deceive the common reader? Is it not an insult to a man's sense, to tell him with all the gravity of an instructor, that the man who is not blameable is not blamed, that the man who is inculpable is not culpable! Is this the way to explain an article of religious faith? The question which Romanists are called upon to answer is, are not the Protestants, who are either acquainted with, or are willingly ignorant of the Romish doctrines, regarded as rejectors of that faith, without which, the creed of Pius IV, declares, "no man can be saved?" Let this question be answered categorically; and if they are not ashamed of their doctrines, nor afraid to avow them; if they have unshaken confidence in their being able to stand the test of scriptural examination, let them by plainly stated. If therefore they do not believe that Protestants who know their doctrines, or are wilfully ignorantof them and yet reject them, will not be saved, let them say so in plain language.

CHAPTER III.

WITHHOLDING THE SCRIPTURES BY THE ROMISH CHURCH.

"The Bible burns the Devil and the Pope burns the Bible!" Antidote to Popery.

Having examined the Pope's claim to supremacy, and the doctrine of exclusive salvation, we come now to notice a practice of the Romish church which at once fixes on her the character of anti-christ. namely, that of withholding the scriptures from thecom mon people. We shall hereafter examine the right of the Romish church to withhold the scriptures, and also the propriety of the practice; but at prèsent our attention will be confined to the fact of prohibition. It has been denied by papists that this is a principle of their church, and they are now very solicitous to do away such an impression from the minds of the people. But while they thus profess (in direct opposition to the principles of their church, as we shall show) to be favorable to the general circulation of the scriptures--they in fact prevent it all they can; and indeed to be consistent with themselves they must prevent it, for the people are forbidden under a heavy penalty, as we shall hereafter show, to understand the scriptures differently from the church. But can this be prevented if the scriptures are to be put into the hands of every body, unless they surrender their reason, and judgment, and sense up to the priest? and if this surrender be made, is it not a farce to put the Bible into their hands? What object can they possibly have in reading it, if they are not to use their reason and sense, which God has given them for the purpose, in endeavoring to understand it? You might as well give to the people the Latin vulgate at once.

Prefixed to the spurious copy of the Doway Bible, I find a letter purporting to be from Pius the sixth to Anthony Martini, now archbishop of Florence, on his translation of the Bible into Italian. Whether this letter be a forgery or not, I cannot say; but this I can say; that the following passage in it, is in direct opposition to an or der of the council of Trent, "for these (the Scriptures) are the most abundant sources which ought to be left open to EYERY ONE, to draw from them purity of morals and of doctrines to eradicate the errors which are so widely disseminated in these corrupt times: This you have reasonably effected, as you declare, by publishing the sacred writings in the language of your country, suitable to every one's capacity." In the "admonition" immediately above this letter on the same page is the following sentence: "To prevent and remedy this abuse, (the unlearned wresting the scriptures to their perdition) and to guard against error, it was judged necessary to forbid the reading of the Scriptures in the vulgar languages, without the advice and permission of the pastors and Spiritual Guides whom God has appointed to govern his church." Here we see it is the Pope's opinion that the scriptures should be open to EVERY ONE. But in the "admonition” which agrees with the council of Trent, as we shall presently see, it is said to be necessary to withhold them from some. This is a specimen of popish inconsistency. But the whole secret of the matter is this, Popish priests are commanded to withhold the Bible from some, and they are privileged by the church to withhold it from all, if they choose to consider them unworthy, or in danger of being hurt by it; so that while they boast of, and make a great noise about their right of permitting the scriptures to be read, they really practice on the privilege of withholding them from all they possibly can.

Therefore when a papist denies that his