P R E F A CЕ.

I ALWAYS dislike to see a long preface when there is no need of one, and will, therefore, only say, that the following production was written for publication, and for that reason is published.

THE AUTHOR.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1844, by

JOSEPH H. MARTIN.

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Southern District of New-York.

INFLUENCE OF ROMANISM.

THE specific object of the following treatise is to show "the influence, bearing and effects of Romanism, on the civil and religious liberties of our country." In pursuit of this object, it is not considered necessary to indulge in a tone of bitter denunciation against that portion of our American popu. lation which is attached to the Catholic religion. In attempting to decide differences of opinion upon any subject, it is not always the best method to deal too much in fierce invective against the character, motives and practices of that party with whom the dispute is held. Such a course in most cases, tends rather to irritate and inflame the wounds already made, than to soften and subdue them. It is doubtless a better mode of proceeding, simply to take up the general principles upon which a particular creed is built; ex amine them in their various relations; analyze them into their original elements; evolve what is abstruse and complicated connected with them; and in a legitimate way trace out the several consequences which will necessarily flow from a practical adoption of them.

The true secret of all the errors and evils of Romanism lies in the corrupt nature of the human heart. It is a mistaken notion with any unconverted man to suppose, that if he had been placed in a similar situation with the first or succeeding popes, he would have been enabled, by his su perior virtue, to refrain from committing the same enormous usurpations which are charged upon them. Such an assertion may no doubt prove offensive to the high-toned morality of many, who, like the Pharisee, are bold enough to thank God that they are not as other men are, since it implies the possibility of finding in their religious principles a weakness, which their self-love will not allow them to admit. But nothing exhibits a more deplorable want of self-knowledge than too great a self-confidence. It was the indignant reply of Hazael on hearing, from the mouth of the prophet, the prediction of his own degeneracy, What! is thy servant a dog that he should do this great thing ?-but the event showed, that had he possessed a slight degree of self-distrust, its value might have been realized. This view of the case, indeed, does not palliate the past conduct of those who originated, and for ages upheld and perpetuated, the iniquities of Romanism; nor does it afford the abettors of that system, at the present day, the least ground of justification for the course pursued by them. On the contrary, it furnishes a most conclusive argument in favour of vigilance against their insidious efforts; because, human nature being the same in all ages, they may be gradually led to attempt things even in this free country, which they would now be ashamed to avow, and in the end to commit enormities from which an upright heart would shrink with dismay.

It may be still further remarked, that Romanism, as it is styled in the Scriptures, is to be justly regarded as the mystery of iniquity-the most consummate system of error, in all its parts, ever devised by the united cunning of earth and hell, to mislead, debase, and enslave the human mind. There are two things, particularly, which entitle it to be thus considered. The first of these is, that it is totally different from all other systems of error, in the view which it takes of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. The several main heresies, distinct from this, which have

from time to time divided the Christian world, have generally consisted in plainly admitting some of the essential parts of the Christian scheme, and in not admitting the other parts. Such is the fact, especially, with regard to those two which deny, the one the divinity of Christ, and the other the eternity of human punishments;-both of which are such palpable contradictions of the plainest declarations of Scripture, as well as the natural dictates of conscience, as render it impossible for either of them ever to obtain a very great or universal strong-hold upon mankind in general. But, unlike these, Romanism admits all the principal doctrines of Christianity; takes them as the basis of its creed, and apparently rests upon them; while in reality they are so obscured beneath the mass of superadded corruptions, as to be scarcely perceptible even as abstract truths, and of no value at all in their practical influence upon the mind and heart of the deluded worshipper. It is in this that its pre-eminent iniquity consists. It is the devil, clothed as an angel of light. It is truth, crusted over with an accumulation of superstitious absurdities in which the real substance is lost, but whose nominal presence gives an air of authority for believing and practising all the rest.

The second thing alluded to, is its perfect adaptation to the depravity of the human heart. As already intimated, the love of power, which is one of the strongest passions of our corrupt nature, is to be looked upon as the prime source in which Romanism has its origin. The ingenuity of the system, as accommodated to the perverse principles of the heart, is that which deserves our more particular attention. This I shall endeavour to point

out.

The first thing to be examined is the substitution of the infallibility of the pope for the infallibility of God. It is admitted on all sides, that, on account of the variety of conflicting opinions entertained by men, and the innate tendency to error in the human heart, it is necessary that there should be erected some supreme tribunal, to which all questions in religion might be ultimately referred for their final decision. This is so apparent from the natural dictates of reason, that he would be accounted a fool who should deny it. But from past history and the present sentiments of a large class of men, it does not seem to have been equally apparent who should constitute this tribunal, or where it should exist. On the one hand, a claim is put in for Almighty God, as the most proper being to act in such a capacity. His claim is grounded on the fact that he is a being of infinite wisdom, who created man, and is acquainted with his organization, his imperfections and his wants; that it is he who is the author of all religion, both natural and revealed, in regard to which, all questions of doubtful import arise; and is therefore best qualified to pass an infallible judgment upon them; and furthermore, that in view of our divisions and disputes, he has actually given us a perfect and permanent system of truth, by which all differences of opinion may be satisfactorily settled. On the other hand, a similar claim is advanced in behalf of the pope, as the spiritual head of the Church. This claim is grounded on the assumption that it was the intention of Christ, in instituting his Church upon earth, that it should be organized and exist as one single corporate body of men, throughout every part of which there should be an exact uniformity in doctrine and external form; that the supreme government of this vast body was delegated by Christ to St. Peter as his vicegerent upon earth, with full power to decide, according to his sovereign good pleasure, upon all matters affecting its interests, and with the promise that his decisions should be accompanied with infallibility; and that, by virtue of their office, all his successors are invested with equal authority and infallibility. Strange as it may seem, this bold assumption, in opposition to God, is ac

quiesced in and defended by millions of our fellow-men with a pertinacity seldom exhibited by the advocates of any other system. And the question I now wish to discuss is, why is it that they do so? What principle is there in human nature which leads men to prefer the infallibility of the pope, to the infallibility of God?

In proceeding to answer this question, I shall set out with the simple proposition universally admitted, that men always prefer that for which they have the strongest love, and are always ready to practise, defend, praise and celebrate that which is most in harmony with the predominant feeling in their breasts. If a man love money, or fame, or dissipation, or travel, he will pursue any one of these in preference to every thing else. If sin predominate in his heart, he will follow after sin; if holiness, he will follow after holiness. Another axiom which may be stated is, that no two things which are the direct opposites of each other, can ever be of the same character, and consequently, when the character of one set of principles or men has been discovered, the character of the opposite set of principles or men may be inferred from it. Now it appears from experience, that those who are regenerated by the Spirit of God, and are really holy men, assert and maintain, with the utmost tenacity, the supremacy and infallibility of God against all rivals; and that in testimony of these truths, rather than abandon them, millions of men have endured the agonies of martyrdom. And, on the other hand, that the decisions of God's word are in harmony with the feelings of none but holy men, endued with a similar spirit. From whence we are justified, according to the axiom stated, in concluding, that all who maintain the supremacy and infallibility of the pope in opposition to God, are sinners, in their natural, depraved state; and, vice-versa, that all the infallible decisions of the pope are in exact accordance with the corrupt inclinations of the human heart. And that is the true reason why men prefer his infallibility to that of God. They have found by uniform experience, that all his past decisions are of this character, and his very claim of infallibility, which makes it necessary that each succeeding pope confirm all the acts of his predecessors, is a sure guarantee that they will in future continue to be such.

It will be at once perceived, that this is precisely the same principle as that upon which the whole system of heathen idolatry rests, and the very same as that which makes men the worshippers of the devil, and the voluntary slaves of sin. For the only reason why the idolator bows before his wooden or animal god is, that he is a god of his own imagination, possessed of the same corrupt passions with himself, and all whose declarations and commands, as put into his mouth, are conformed to the depraved inclinations of the worshipper's own heart. The only reason why men practise sin is, that they love it. And the only reason why they are the slaves of Satan, led captive at his will, is, that they agree with him in spirit. Blush, then, thou mother of harlots, at this sad exposure of thy nakedness. Beautiful Virgin art thou! daughter of hell, twin sister of the devil, the patron of idolatry, and whose womb is the secret covert and dwelling-place of sin.

The second thing in the system of Romanism worthy of notice, is the doctrine in regard to the merit of good works. The most important question ever presented to the human mind, the standing inquiry of men of all ages, is, how shall man be just with God? In the fruitless attempts to answer this question, we are to look for an explanation of all the false systems of religion the world has ever known. All the altars, real or imaginary, ever erected; all the sacrifices and offerings, whether of human or animal victims, ever made; all the unmeaning ceremonies ever performed, and all the heathenish repetitions of vain prayers ever uttered, originated

in the consciousness of men that they stood in need of some mode of reconciliation with an offended Deity. They may have had no correct or definite ideas of the character of this being, or of the time and manner in which he exerted his power in creating the universe, or of his relation to themselves, or even of their own characters;-but notwithstanding all this ignorance, men felt that there was a being superior to themselves, who took knowledge of their actions; to whom they were amenable; with whom, by some unaccountable means, they were at open war; and that in their present state, it was necessary for them to propitiate his favour. In this deplorable condition, the mass of mankind, for a series of ages, continued. At length, in the fulness of time, new light burst upon the world. The long-promised Messiah, the star of Jacob, the hope of Israel, appeared. God sent his own Son to make a propitiation for the sins of the whole world. He came, clothed in human flesh; entered upon his ministry; achieved his mission as a teacher, then suffered and died as a Saviour. And in his sufferings and death, and by subsequent communications, taught the world explicitly, that his is the only availing sacrifice for sin ever made; the merits of his blood the only acceptable offering; and his cross the only medium of access to the presence and favour of a holy God. This was the doctrine preached by his apostles, and left on record in their writings ;— in the belief of which, millions of his early disciples doubtless died in triumph, and the continued preaching of which, through successive ages, would doubtless have resulted in the salvation of millions more. But, alas, this latter object was not destined to be attained. In one of the very churches nourished by the prince of the apostles, Paul himself, a general defection from the faith early took place. A spirit of domination and grasping ambition there developed itself, and soon grew into a settled, systematic organization, which absorbed within itself all minor heresies and schisms, and then, with characteristic audacity, assumed itself to be the supreme director of all spiritual affairs,―the fountain-head and dispenser of all grace, the only true Church, whose decrees were infallible, whose word was law, and whose anathema was death. This corrupt organization, depicted by the pen of prophecy in so bold an outline as the man of sin, while it professed the true gospel, virtually substituted another in its stead, and proclaimed it as one of its unalterable doctrines, that man could obtain merit by his own good works.

Which of these doctrines is most in accordance with the depravity of the unrenewed heart, the scriptural doctrine of justification by faith in Christ, or the popish doctrine of salvation by good works? I answer, as every Christian's experience, and every sinner's inclinations will answer, the latter. And why? Because a practical belief of the former strikes a deathblow to the natural pride of the heart-the latter does not. In aiming at any object, either of a religious or other nature, men always strive to accomplish it with the least possible difficulty. Now I aver, that the most difficult thing in the world for a man to perform, is to change his own character. For the higher we go, away from the physical, into the spiritual world, the more substantial every thing becomes. It is easier to make a physical alteration than a moral one-to break brittle matter than to effect a change in moral principle. And of moral acts, as just stated, the most difficult of all is that of the sinner in becoming a saint.-For he is compelled to change from one extreme of morals to the other-from a perfectly sinful to a perfectly holy being. When, therefore, in view of a given object, the salvation of the soul,-the question arises before a man's mind, what means he shall employ for its accomplishment, whether he shall make a long pilgrimage, or endure self-torture, or do penance, or