trine on Purgatory. It has also been urged, that the established religion, or Protestantism, does not deny or discourage prayers for the dead, so long as they are independent of a belief in Purgatory and, in this respect, it is stated to agree with the primitive Christian Church. But, my brethren, this distinction is exceedingly fallacious. Religion is a lively, practical profession; it is to be ascertained and judged by its sanctioned practices, and outward demonstration, rather than by the mere opinions of a few. I would at once fairly appeal to the judgment of any Protestant here, whether he has been taught, and has understood, that such is the doctrine of his Church? If, from the services which he has attended, or the catechism which he has learnt, or the discourses which he has heard, he has been led to suppose that praying, in terms however general, for the souls departed, was noways a peculiarity of catholicism, but as much a permitted practice of protestantism? If among his many acquaintances who profess his creed, he has found men who perform such acts of devotion? And if not, nay, if on the contrary, he has always understood that this rite of praying for the dead is essentially a distinctive of the Catholic religion, what matters it that Bishop Bull, and one or two other divines, should have asserted it to be allowed in the English Church? Or how can conformity between the English and the primitive Church be proved from this tacit permission,-if such can be admitted on considering that prayers for the dead were allowed to remain in the first Anglican liturgy, and were formally withdrawn on revision,--when the ancient Church not merely allowed, but enjoined the practice as a duty-you will remember Tertullian's words-not merely opposed not its private exercise, but made it a prominent part of its solemn liturgy ?*

* Dr. Pusey has lately written as follows:-"Since Rome has blended the cruel invention of purgatory wtih the primitive custom of praying for the dead, it is not in communion with her, that any can seek comfort from this rite." An earnest remonstrance to the author of the Pope's Pastoral Letter. (1836, p. 25.) Dr. Pusey's opinion is, 1st. that in the ancient Church, prayers were offered for all the departed, including apostles and martyrs, in the same manner; 2dly, that such prayers had reference, not to the alleviation of pain, but to the augmentation of happiness, or the hastening of

As a practical doctrine in the Catholic Church, it has an influence highly consoling to humanity, and eminently worthy of a religion that came down from heaven to second all the purest feelings of the heart. Nature herself seems to revolt at the idea that the chain of attachment which binds us together perfect joy, not possessed by them till the end of time; 3dly, that the cruel invention of purgatory is modern; 4thly, that the English Church allows prayers for the dead, in that more comprehensive and general form. As to the first, there is no doubt, that in the ancient liturgies, the saints are mentioned in the same prayer as the other departed faithful; from the simple circumstance, that they were so united before the public suffrage of the Church proclaimed them to belong to a happier order. It is also true, that the Church then, as now, prayed for the consummation of their happiness after the resurrection. But it is no less true, that the ancients drew a line of distinction between the state of the two, and that the same as we. St. Epiphanius, quoted in the text, makes the distinction, saying; "We mention both the just and sinners, that for the latter, we may obtain mercy." St. Augustine also writes as follows: "When, therefore, the sacrifice of the altar, or alms, are offered for the dead; in regard to those whose lives were very good, such offices may be deemed acts of thanksgiving; for the imperfect acts of propitiation; and though to the wicked they bring no aid, they may give some comfort to the living." (Enchirid. cap. cx.) Here the three classes of departed souls are mentioned, with the effects of the sacrifice of the mass on each. Dr. Pusey, too, is doubtless well acquainied with the saying of the same father, that "he does injury to a martyr who prays for a martyr." "Injuriam facit martyri, qui orat pro martyre."

With regard to the second and third points, I refer to the texts given in the body of this lecture; St. Augustine uses the term purgatorial punishment (purgatorias pœnas) in the next world. (De Civit. Dei. lib. xxi. c. 16.) The passages which I have quoted are sufficient to prove a state of actual suffering in souls less perfect. There is another important reflection. The fathers speak of their prayers granting immediate relief to those for whom they offered them, and such relief as to take them from one state into another. St. Ambrose expresses this effect of prayer, when he says of Theodosius; "I will not leave him, till by my prayers and lamentations he shall be admitted to God's holy mount." This does not surely look to a distant effect, or to a mere perfection of happiness.

On the fourth, in addition to the remarks preceding this note in the text, I can only say, I wish it were better known that the Church of England considers prayers for the dead lawful and beneficial to them; for a judicial decision has lately annulled a bequest to Catholic chapels, with a condition of saying mass for the testatrix. Ap. 16, 1835. This was in the case of West and Shuttleworth, wherein the Master of the Rolls decided that, as the testatrix could not be benefited by such practices, they were to be held superstitious and not charitable; and declared the legacy null and void. Now, if his Honour had been aware, that the English Church admits prayers to be beneficial to the dead, and approves of them, and if he had judged, that our Eucharist (the oblation spoken of by the fathers) must be admitted by that Church to contain all that its own does at least, he surely would not have based a legal judgment, which, to say the least, savours much of old religious p(judices, upon so hollow a theological basis.—Mylne and Keen, vol. ii. p. 697.

in life, can be rudely snapped in sunder by the hand of death, conquered and deprived of its sting since the victory of the cross. But it is not to the spoil of mortality, cold and disfigured, that she clings with affection. It is but an earthly and almost unchristian grief, which sobs when the grave closes over the bier of a departed loved one; but the soul flies upward to a more spiritual affection, and refuses to surrender the hold which it had upon the love and interest of the spirit that hath fled. Cold and dark as the sepulchral vault, is the belief that sympathy is at an end, when the body is shrouded in decay; and that no further interchange of friendly offices may take place between those who have laid them down to sleep in peace, and us, who for a while strew fading flowers upon their tomb. But sweet is the consolation to the dying man, who conscious of imperfection, believes that even after his own time of merit is expired, there are others to make intercession on his behalf; soothing to the afflicted survivors the thought, that, instead of unavailing tears, they possess more powerful means of actively relieving their friend, and testifying their affectionate regret, by prayer and supplication. In the first moments of grief, this sentiment will often overpower religious prejudice, cast down the unbeliever on his knees, beside the remains of his friend, and snatch from him an unconscious prayer for rest; it is an impulse of nature, which for the moment, aided by the analogies of revealed truth, seizes at once upon this consoling belief. But it is only like the flitting and melancholy light which sometimes plays as a meteor over the corpses of the dead; while the Catholic feeling, cheering, though with solemn dimness, resembles the unfailing lamp which the piety of the ancients is said to have hung before the sepulchres of their dead. It prolongs the tenderest affections beyond the gloom of the grave, and it infuses the inspiring hope, that the assistance which we on earth can afford to our suffering brethren, will be amply repaid when they have reached their place of rest, and make of them friends, who, when we in our turns fail, shall receive us into everlasting mansions.

LECTURE THE TWELFTH.

(SUPPLEMENTARY.)

ON INDULGENCES.

2 COR. ii. 10.

"To whom ye have forgiven any thing, I also. For what I forgive, if I have forgiven any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.”

AMONG the innumerable misrepresentations to which our religion is constantly subjected, there are some which a Catholic clergyman feels a peculiar reluctance in exposing, from the personal feelings which must be connected with their refutation. When our doctrine on the Blessed Eucharist, or the Church, or the saints of God, is attacked, and we rise in its defence, we feel within ourselves, a pride and a spirit resulting from the very cause; there is an inspiring ardour infused by the very theme; we hold in our hands the standard of God himself, and fight his own battle; we gather strength from the altar which is blasphemed, and are reminded of our dignity and power, by the very robe which we wear; or we are refreshed by the consciousness that they whose cause we defend, are our brethren, who look down with sympathy upon our struggle.

But when the petty and insidious warfare begins, which professes to aim at the man and not at the cause, when, from principles of faith, or great matters of practice, the attack is changed into crimination of our ministry, and insinuation against our character; when the Catholic priest stands before his people, to answer the charge of having turned religion into a traffic, and corrupted her doctrines to purchase influence over their conscience and their purse, he must surely recoil from meeting even as a calumny, that, against which his heart

VOL. II.

F

revolts, and find his very feelings, as a member of the society wherein he lives with respect, almost too strong for that office of meekness and charity which duty imposes for the undeceiving of the beguiled, and the maintenance of truth.

These sentiments are spontaneously excited in my breast, by the recollection of the very severe attacks and bitter sarcasms which the topic of this evening's discourse has for ages excited. Indulgences-pardon for sins, past and future, the sale of forgiveness for the grossest crimes, at stipulated sums; these mixed up with invectives against the rapacity of the Church, and the venality of its ministers and agents, have been fruitful themes of ridicule and reproof, of sarcasm and declamation, against us, from the days of Luther, to the irreconcileable hostility of our modern adversaries.

That abuses have existed regarding the practice of Indulgences, no one will deny; and I shall say sufficient regarding them before the close of my lecture: that they were made the ground for the dreadful separation of the sixteenth century, must be deeply regretted; for no such abuses could justify the schism that ensued. But, my brethren, here, as in almost every other instance, the misrepresentation which has been made of our doctrine, chiefly proceeds from misapprehension, from the misunderstanding of our real belief. I shall therefore pursue in its regard, the same method as I have invariably followed; that is, state in the simplest terms the Catholic doctrine, and explain its connexion with other points; and after that, proceed to lay before you its proofs, and meet such few objections as their very exposition does not anticipate. In fact, my discourse this evening will be little more than a rapid sketch of the history of Indulgences.

In treating of Satisfaction, I endeavoured to condense the proofs of our belief, that God reserves some temporal chastisement for sin, after its guilt and eternal punishment have been remitted; and that by the voluntary performance of expiatory works, we may disarm the anger of God, and mitigate the inflictions which his justice had prepared. This doctrine I