Such being plainly our doctrine and authorized practice, every act of invocation of the saints is a solemn recognition of the one mediatorship of Christ; and it not only does not contain one element of idolatry or of superstition, but it positively and necessarily excludes both. And Mr. Palmer's effort to extract idolatry out of such a doctrine, is about as wise and conclusive as would be the effort to prove that mankind do not believe the sun to be the great source of light and heat, from the fact that they sometimes make use of artificial means to produce them!

Let us apply these undoubted principles to a few of Mr. Palmer's specifications, alleged to prove the idolatry of the Roman Catholic Church. To show that we are in the habit of paying to the Virgin honors due to God alone, he produces the following passage from the encyclical letter of the late venerable Pontiff :

"We address this letter to you, on this most joyful day, when we solemnize the festival of the triumphant assumption of the holy Virgin into heaven, that she whom we have acknowledged as our patroness and deliverer amongst the greatest calamities, may propitiously assist us while we write, and by her celestial inspiration may guide us to such councils as may be most salutary to the Christian Church.""

One must be very keen-sighted, indeed, to discover aught of idolatry in this passage. In different parts of the encyclical letter, the Pontiff distinctly recognizes the great mystery of the atonement, and that of the one mediatorship of Christ, and we are quite sure that he must have been greatly astonished, if he ever chanced to hear that a cunning seer of Oxford was able so far to penetrate into his most hidden thoughts as to discover in them a lurking propensity to idolatry, of which he was wholly unconscious. It was natural enough for the holy Pontiff to allude to the great festival on which his letter was dated, and to feel inspired by a theme so lofty as the triumphant glory of Mary in heaven. Could not the Virgin aid and assist him, by her prayers to her divine Son? Could she not obtain for him from that Son a heavenly inspiration? To prefer the charge of idolatry in such a case, manifests about as much wisdom in interpretation, as would be shown by a cynic who should charge one of our Fourth-of-July orators with downright idolatry, merely because, kindling with the fervor of his theme, he happened to say that he was inspired by the virtues and patriotism of Washington!

Nor does our stern censor exhibit greater discretion, when he tortures the following invocation of the guardian angel into idolatry: "Angel of God, who art my guardian, enlighten me, who am committed to thee, with heavenly piety; guard, direct, and govern me.” 2

We apprehend, that if one man may "enlighten, guard, direct, and govern" another, those "ministering spirits, who are sent to minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation," may surely discharge similar offices towards us. Else what is the proper office of those guardian angels, so often spoken of in the inspired volume? Do

1 Letter I, p. 15.

2 Ibid. p. 22.

3 Hebrews, i, 14.

they not communicate with, and act upon our spirits, imparting to .nem enlightenment and holy influence? Or are we to believe it idolatry to assert, that God sometimes acts through secondary causes? Mr. Palmer must have been sadly at a loss for evidence, when he alleged this beautiful prayer as an instance of Catholic idolatry.

He seems to have been similarly straitened, when he objected to the appropriate and touching prayer of Cardinal Bona to the angels, and especially to St. Michael, "the prince of the celestial army." Surely Michael, who fought with the dragon and conquered him, has not lost any of his power, but he can still triumph over Lucifer, whenever the latter dares assail the people of God. Like his first, his last victory will redound to the glory of God, from whom all his strength is derived; and there is, and there can be no idolatry in the case. In both triumphs his motto is contained in his name itself: "Who is like unto God?"

II. But we go a step farther, and maintain that the most "offensive " passages alleged by Mr. Palmer, as instances of "Romish" idolatry, either clearly explain themselves, or are sufficiently explained by the connection in which they are found, so as not only not to sanction, but expressly to exclude the least shadow of idolatry. Take, for example, the prayer to the Virgin, upon which he insists so strongly :

"We fly to thy protection, holy Mother of God, despise not our prayers in our necessities, but deliver us at all times from all evils (dangers?), glorious and blessed Virgin.”

This prayer, he himself tells us, is placed at the conclusion of the Litany of the Blessed Virgin, at every petition of which there occurs the significant pray for us; which explicitly sets forth the manner in which she is expected to protect us in our necessities, and to deliver us from danger. In the Litany itself, the distinction between prayer to God and prayer to the Virgin, is openly made and clearly marked. When God is addressed, the petition is Have mercy on us; when the Virgin is addressed, it is Pray for us. Was it ingenuous or fair in Mr. Palmer to conceal this obvious and palpable fact, of which he must have been fully cognizant?

Nor is he more candid in adducing as idolatrous a prayer of Cardinal Bona to the Virgin, the most objectionable part of which is contained in the following passage, according to his translation:

"Behold I fall down before thee, most gracious Virgin; I fall down and worship in thee thy Son, and I implore thy suffrages (prayers) to obtain that my sins may be blotted out, to reconcile the heart of thy Son to my heart, that He may possess me, and make me a man according to His heart." 3

This prayer speaks for itself, and whatever a Protestant may think of it, he can not certainly charge it with being idolatrous. The supreme adoration is evidently paid, not to Mary, but to her Scno dwells in the heart of Mary; and He, and not she, is evidenly the end object of the prayer. Mary is merely asked to obtain, by her prayer to her Son,

1 Letter I p. 23.

2 Ibid. p. 16.

7 fbid. p. I'

the remission of the petitioner's sins, and the perfect union of his heart with that of Christ. Where is the idolatry in all this?

We are next treated to a specimen of gross idolatry, in the shape of an incident recorded in the life of St. Alphonsus Liguori, who, while preaching "on his favorite subject, the intercession and patronage of Mary," had his countenance irradiated with a heavenly light, and was honored by a vision of the Virgin herself; who appeared to him and to the immense crowd then assembled in the church of Foggia, in the guise of a girl of fourteen or fifteen years of age, with her beautiful face all beaming with heavenly grace and light.' Mr. Palmer may laugh at this miracle, but it will be much more difficult for him to disprove it, in the face of the sworn testimony of the thousands who witnessed it. Be it, however, as it may, the occurrence furnishes not the slightest evidence of idolatry; nay, it expressly excludes all idolatry; for the passage opens with the declaration that St. Liguori was preaching on the intercession and patronage of the Virgin. The meaning of these terms cannot be mistaken; it was apparent to every one of his hearers; and there could have been no danger whatever that any of them would be led to commit idolatry. How would it sound to say, the intercession and patronage of God? Has Mr. Palmer ever read the voluminous writings of St. Liguori on this very subject, which he treats in all its details? If he has, then he must know, that the saint was not guilty of idolatry at this or at any other time. If he has not read them, any farther than a few isolated pages here and there, then he surely has no right to pronounce any opinion on the subject.

Mr. Palmer is greatly scandalized at the devotion of another among our modern saints to the Blessed Virgin. He can not for his life understand, how the seraphic St. Francis di Girolamo should have entertained so tender a reverence for the pure and spotless Mother of his God. Should he think proper to extend his reading in hagiology, he will ascertain that this was not a trait of character peculiar to St. Francis, but that all the most fervent and eminent saints of God, from St. John the Evangelist down to those of our own day, were remarkable for this same tenderly reverent feeling towards the Virgin. Taking this wider view of the subject, he may perhaps be prepared to understand the sentiment ascribed to St. Francis di Girolamo, that "a person can hardly be saved who feels no devotion to the Virgin Mother of God." For how can such a person love and worship the Son, while he treats the Mother with open coolness or contempt? Will Christ receive graciously the homage of one who thus openly spurns the Mother that bore Him, to whom He was "subject" while on earth, and whom He remembered so tenderly while expiring on the cross? No; we heartily subscribe to the opinion of St. Francis di Girolamo; and we concur with Mr. Palmer in believing that the passage in the saint's life, which records this and similar sentiments,

1 Ibid. pp. 18, 19.

'speaks for itself."

He is entirely welcome to all the argument, which

even his ingenuity can extract from such declarations.

In his desperate effort to fasten the charge of idolatry upon the Catholic Church, Mr. Palmer once more takes up the late Pope's encyclical letter, from which he extracts the following glaringly idolatrous passage:

"We will also earnestly beseech with humble prayers from (of?) the prince of the apostles, Peter, and from (of?) his co-apostle, Paul, that you may stand as a wall, that no other foundation may be laid but that which has been laid. Relying on this delightful hope, we trust that the Author and Finisher of our faith, Jesus Christ, will at length console us in all our tribulations." 2

We have retained Mr. Palmer's italics in this extract, as they present a very curious, though a tolerably fair specimen of his method of reasoning. We apprehend, that the phrases italicised are meant for those which contain the idolatrous sentiment; but, for the life of us, we cannot understand how there could be aught of idolatry in the Pontiff's praying to the blessed Peter and Paul, that they might obtain from the " Author and Finisher of our faith, Jesus Christ," the grace to enable the bishops, their successors in the ministry, "to stand as a wall," sharing in their own invincible firmness and constancy in the faith. He is so far from even hinting that divine honors are to be paid to SS. Peter and Paul, that he expressly states the precise contrary, in language as explicit as he could possibly have employed. Does he not refer to the passage from St. Paul: "that no other foundation is to be laid but that which is laid, Christ Jesus?" Does he not look for consolation from Him who is "the Author and Finisher of our faith?" Does he not exult over the "delightful hope," that his brother bishops will continue steadfast in asserting this only foundation of their faith? Verily, our Oxford divine was unfortunate in his selection of an "offensive" passage, in the present instance; his usual acuteness seems to have wholly abandoned him; he exibits a strong propensity to reason by contraries, and to allege passages which not only explain themselves, but prove by the precise reverse of what he intended!

We are almost tired of exposing the transparent sophistry, and the disingenuous special pleading of our accuser; but we must yet refer to one more objected passage, which he places at the close of his fifth letter,* as a sort of climax to his argument on "Romish" idolatry. The very rehearsal of the passage seems to have frozen his soul with horror; he breaks off suddenly, and can not find courage to offer any comments on a scene so awful." Surely now, if ever, he has found out an undeniable specimen of genuine idolatry: men will shudder on reading it; and no ingenuity can defend, or even palliate its atrocity. And yet, what will be your surprise, gentle reader, on discovering that this is no instance of idolatry after all; that it is not so strong even as many other passages which he had alleged with less flourish of trumpets; and that it fully and

66

1 lbid p. 20.

2 Ibid. p. 21.

3 Page 50.

explicitly explains itself! It is taken from the writings of St. Liguori, and contains advices to the priest who attends persons in their last agony. Here is the concluding portion of the passage, with Mr. Palmer's significant and very sensible italics:

"When the sick man is near expiring, the (following) acts should be recited without pausing, and in a loud voice (by the priest): Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. My God, help me; permit me to come and love thee for ever. My Jesus, my love, I love thee. I repent. I wish that I had never offended thee! O Mary, my hope, help me, pray for me to Jesus. My Jesus, for thy passion, save me. I love thee. Mary, my mother, in this hour help me. St. Joseph, help me. Archangel Michael, defend me. Guardian angel, guard me. Saint N. (here let the principal patron of the sick man be named), commend me to Jesus Christ. Saints of God, intercede for me. Jesus, Jesus, Jesus. Jesus and Mary, I give my heart and my soul to you."

If there be any idolatry in all this, we confess we cannot discover wherein it lies. We cannot even see on what ground Mr. Palmer objects to it; for we are under the impression that he is not entirely opposed to a moderate invocation of the saints. The ejaculations given above expressly exclude everything that savors of idolatry: they ask Jesus to save us, and Mary and the saints to pray for us. In the name of all that is reasonable, how can this be tortured into idolatry? We commend the discretion of Mr. Palmer in offering no comments on this passage, and “in leaving his readers to their own reflections." Discretion has been deemed the better portion of valor by every boasting pugilist, from the memorable days of Jack Falstaff down to our own more degenerate times!

In interpreting Catholic prayers to the Virgin and the saints, Mr. Palmer has fallen into many grievous errors. Not only has he shown no regard whatever to the well known and universally promulgated doctrines of the Catholic Church on the subject, but he has paid no attention to the devotional feelings, and made no allowance for the the tender and thrilling emotions, which often give rise to and accompany the recital of those prayers. Of course, we could not have expected of him, as an Englishman and a Protestant, any great warmth of religious temperament, nor any great amount of sympathy with those who feel more deeply on religious subjects than himself: but we had reason to expect that he should, at least, have kept this circumstance steadily in view, while laboring to get at the real meaning of prayers uttered under its influence. But sorely has he disappointed us in this so reasonable a hope. He has interpreted the warm, ardent, and poetic prayer of the enthusiastic Italian, by the same canon which he would have employed to explain that of the cold, phlegmatic, and unimpressible Englishman. Is this fair? Is no allowance to be made for the poetry of religious feeling; for the enthusiasm which fills the soul to overflowing, and gushes forth in speech animated and kindling with its own ardent fervor? Is it fair or reasonable to interpret such a prayer with the same rigor, as if the worshiper had coolly weighed beforehand every word that he used, and been careful to employ