B034.C 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 B E flOfi ISS 
 

 /^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 (c 
 
 .^•.^ 
 
^mi^ 
 
THE KEY 
 
 TO 
 
 1 me Christianity: 
 
 BSINQ 
 
 A SERIES OF LETTERS 
 
 ADDRESSED TO 
 
 Rev. J. D. BLACKWELL D D 
 
 BT 
 
 Rev. M. O'KEEFR, 
 
 Paetor of the Catholic Church, Korfolk, Va., 
 PENDING A DISCUSSION OX THE 
 
 "BIBLE AS A DIVINE REVELATION. 
 
 •■I....d»..M,ev..h.o.p.,.«M..„,,^,„„,„,.,.,,,^„„^^^_,^__ 
 
 compel me thereto."— Sr. 
 
 AuaufTun. 
 
 Pf^TLADELPIITA • 
 
 1874. 
 
LOAN STACK 
 
 Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1874, by 
 
 MATTHEW O'KEEFE, NORFOLK, VA., 
 
 in the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C. 
 

 TO 
 
 ft. |nt. ^mn mUn, i- g. 
 
 BISHOP OF RICHMOND. 
 
 THE YOUNG PRELATE, 
 
 WHOSE ZEAL IN THE SERVICE OF GOD, 
 
 WHOSE GENTLE AND AMIABLE CHARACTER, 
 
 WHOSE ADMITTED TALENTS AND ELOQUENCE, 
 
 AND 
 
 WHOSE UNFEIGNED PIETY AND GENUINE HUMILITY, 
 
 HAVE EVER CHALLENGED MY RESPECT AND ADMIRATION, 
 
 THESE PAGES 
 
 ARE AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED, 
 
 BY 
 
 HIS HUMBLE SERVANT AND FRIEND IN CHRIST, 
 
 M. O'K. 
 
 (ifi) 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 The following letters are almost self-explanatory. They embody a 
 discussion which covered a period of nearly four months, in the columns 
 of the Norfolk Virginian, between a highly esteemed clergyman of the 
 Methodist se6l of Protestantism and the author, occasioned by letters 
 addressed by Dr. Blackwell to an assumed Catholic, in the columns of 
 the Richjnojid Christian Advocate, a journal published in the interests 
 of the Methodists, the tenor of which I felt aggrieved by, as the senior 
 priest residing in Norfolk. 
 
 The letters containing the discussion were read with much eagerness 
 by thousands in this sedlion of the country, as they made their appearance 
 in the columns of the Virginian, and it is in deference to the expressed 
 wish of numbers. Catholic and non-Catholic, to whom I may add also 
 the pubhc press, that I have consented to give them a connedled and 
 permanent form. 
 
 I have been the more induced to do this, from the fafl, that of all the 
 discussions that have come under my observation, this is the only one 
 that has from the first, occupied, and at the close, held the same new 
 ground, viz : I entered on the discussion with the consent of my Rev- 
 erend opponent, by occupying Protestant territory, and made it the bat- 
 tle field during the whole period of the confli6l, notwithstanding the 
 ceaseless efforts of my Reverend opponent to allure me therefrom. 
 
 Whilst thus engaged, I despoiled my vanquished foe of the arms 
 wherewith he had hitherto made what seemed to him such a successful 
 war on the Catholic Church, and I demonstrated to the world, as these 
 letters will abundantly testify, that Protestantism has not an inch of su- 
 pernatural ground whereon to maintain itself, and that there is no other 
 resource left to the bona fide believer in the Divinity of Jesus Christ, 
 than the acceptance of the Catholic Church, or, reje(fling Jesus Christ 
 and therefore Christianity, the adoption of Rationalism. This new 
 ground chosen by me at the outset of the discussion, appeared to me, for 
 a long time, to be the shortest and most effedlive mode of arriving at the 
 conclusion, which to the honest and unprejudiced inquirer, is inevitable, 
 viz : that the biblical system cannot bear the test of logical analysis ; 
 hence, when the occasion presented itself, I availed myself of it to prove 
 whether I had conjecflured rightly, and the result has more than con- 
 vinced me of the corredlness of the assumption. 
 
 (V) 
 
VI , INTRODUCTION. 
 
 My Reverend opponent confesses that he had received substantial aid 
 from able auxiliaries, but unavailingly, as the sequel proved. 
 
 The pages to which the reader is introduced will abundantly explain 
 why all the letters of my Reverend opponent are not to be found in this 
 book. It suffices for me to state now, that I have carefully and scru- 
 pulously colledled all the proofs furnished by my Reverend opponent 
 pertaining to the question, which was alone the legitimate subject of de- 
 bate, and had he been able to present more, I should have reserved a place 
 for them, and in the order presented ; but inasmuch as despairing of suc- 
 cess, he filled his letters with extraneous matter, I could not consent to 
 afford space in this work, for the introduction of that, against which I con- 
 stantly protested during the discussion, and which had no bearing on 
 the only legitimate question permissible, viz : the proofs for the inspira- 
 tion of the Bible, on Protestant grounds. 
 
 I also beg leave to append to this collecTtion, some letters written by 
 me early last Fall, in the columns of the Norfolk Virginian, over the 
 nom de plu7ne of "Light," which will, doubtless, convince the hon- 
 est inquirer after truth, that the keeping of the first day of the week, is, 
 on Biblical principles, a pradlical and totally unjustifiable infraction of 
 the most emphatic of all God's commands, " Remember the Sabbath 
 Day, to keep it holy." My reader will charitably overlook any undue 
 warmth of expression which they may detedl, either in the use of terms 
 or in the plainness of language, they will kindly bear in mind that, as 
 my letters followed my Reverend opponent's in the next day's issue of 
 the Virginian, I had not the necessary leisure to calmly seledl expres- 
 sions wherewith to clothe my ideas as a writer would, whose time is 
 entirely at his disposal. 
 
 Should one soul, through divine grace and the reading of this work 
 be brought to the knowledge of the truth, the author is more than re- 
 compensed for what he has done, and the only tribute that he will exacTl 
 is a prayer for himself; for this hope alone, nurtured by the solicitation 
 of friends and strangers, could have induced him to forego the seclusion, 
 which, for twenty-two years, he has advisedly maintained in the routine 
 duties of the Pastorate, and to appear before the world, a target at which 
 the enemies of truth may, with impunity, aim their envenomed shafts. 
 
 In conclusion, although not conscious of any expressions against faith 
 or morals in the following pages, I unreservedly submit myself and them 
 to the judgment of the authorities of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, 
 and especially of him to whoip, in the person of Peter, the Saviour had 
 said, " I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not ;" and whom 
 I, en toto corde, have ever recognized as the Divinely appointed infalli- 
 ble teacher of mankind. 
 
 M. O'K. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 NORFOLK, JULY 10, 187?. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D.D. 
 
 Dear Sir : A friend has placed in my hands several copies 
 of the Christian Advocate^ in which, in a series of letters addressed 
 to "a Catholic," in reply to some questions purporting to 
 be put by him, you profess to enlighten him and " the rest of 
 manlcind," on Rome and her dogmas, and in which you honor 
 my reverend confreres and myself, residing in Norfolk, with a 
 special notice. 
 
 You also propose to "show up" the absurdity of the Catholic 
 doctrine of the " Real Presence," in reply to Father Damon's 
 sermon, as published in the Irish World — how successfully, the 
 sequel will prove. 
 
 As the senior priest resident in Norfolk, I will respectfully call 
 your attention to three or four points in your communications, 
 that seem to be deserving of notice on your part : 
 
 1st. Throughout your letter you address the "unknown 
 friend, " as a Catholic — this I respectfully deny, and call on your 
 "highly esteemed friend" and yourself to prove the assertion, 
 whilst I at the same time aver that your "highly esteemed 
 friend" was well aware that the writer of the questions was not 
 a " Romanist," which fact he either communicated to you or he 
 did not ; if he did so, I cannot reconcile with good faith, the 
 position of addressing as a Catholic, through the public prints, a 
 man whom you know not to be so, unless you felt like borrowing 
 for the occasion a maxim falsely attributed to the Jesuits, viz : the 
 end justifies the means — if, on the other hand, your "highly es- 
 teemed friend " left you in ignorance of the fact, then the infer- 
 
 7 
 
g THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 ence is that he was guilty of a most un-Pythian discourtesy 
 towards a brother sir knight, and justly deserves to be stripped 
 of his spurs. 
 
 2d. I would call your attention to the following extract from 
 your third letter: "Evidently, my friend, Jesus came as a light, 
 a teacher to the world, and when he required his doctrines 
 TO BE WRITTEN FOR ALL AGES," &c. Now do me the favor 
 to say where in the Apostolic writings you made the above dis- 
 covery ? I had always thought that Jesus neither left a line of 
 writing, nor ordered a line to be written. But not being a D.D., 
 and only a simple priest of the Catholic Church, from whom 
 my church has kept the bible, as she did from my ascetic con- 
 frere Martin Luther, my ignorance is excusable. Please extend 
 your charity to a poor benighted priest on this point, furnishing 
 chapter and verse. 
 
 3d. In the same third letter you say : "We do not require our 
 people to ' accept our simple word, * we make every effort to 
 supply them with the Word of God," &c. Now, as you say 
 you fear not the truth, and are, I am sure, in your zeal, "always 
 ready to furnish reasons for the hope that is in you," and, as you 
 enjoy blessings which we benighted Papists do not, living as you 
 do in the full blaze of Gospel light and liberty, which we are 
 alas ! deprived of, do me the favor in your charity, to prove that 
 you possess the " Word of God," and " do not require me to 
 take your simple word for it." You see my church has always 
 taught me that the New Testament, at least, cannot be proved to 
 be the " Word of God," without the aid of an unerring witness, 
 and she arrogantly assumes that that witness is herself 
 
 Now I hereby pledge myself that if you convince me to the 
 contrary, you will have performed — I was about to say — a mir- 
 acle — but your modesty has already made you disclaim that Prot- 
 estantism makes any such claim ; but you will have accomplished 
 what I have never yet seen done, and you will have impressed, 
 not a bogus Catholic " manufactured to order," but a genuine 
 Catholic and a priest to boot, with the conviction that you pos- 
 sess powers of mind I had never before accorded to any man, 
 and you will have laid a foundation for the biblical theory which 
 your predecessors in the Protestant ministry have for 300 years 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 9 
 
 labored to achieve, but in vain. When you will have convinced 
 me of the fact that the New Testament is the '' Word of God " 
 and will " not require me to take your simple word for it," as 
 you say, I will pledge myself to discuss with you, as with one 
 who has the right to quote the Bible as " the Word of God," 
 the doctrine of the real presence, miracles, or any other dogma 
 of the Catholic Church. 
 
 4th. In your third letter I find the following words which 
 require explanation :. " We stand up sabbath after sabbath, and 
 call upon our people to obey the Gospel of Christ, to read His 
 word and try our teaching by the law and testimony of that 
 word." Now whenever I get a chance of reading " the word " 
 like my illustrious brother, Martin Luther (without the ecstacies 
 he experienced, however, when he for the first time, discovered 
 the treasure amongst the dusty tomes in the library) I avail my- 
 self of it, but I have never yet discovered in the " Word of 
 God " that the Sabbath was the first day of the week, but, on 
 the contrary, in every instance the Sabbath, from the beginning 
 to the end, is the day God rested from his work ; beginning on 
 Sunday, He rested on Saturday, which the Scripture calls the 
 Sabbath on that account, and which the Fourth Commandment 
 of God requires you to keep. 
 
 Will you now inform me when you did so ? During my 
 twenty years' residence in Norfolk I have never known any 
 biblical denomination of Christians to have so done, but I have 
 always known them to choose another day. Pray enlighten my 
 ignorance as regards " the Word of God," and let me have some 
 positive precept of God repealing the original command delivered 
 in more emphatic language than any of the other nine, " Remem- 
 ber THE Sabbath Day," &c. Unless you do this, I must con- 
 clude that " your people," as you call them, are after all, taking 
 your simple word, and have never yet tried our (your) teachings 
 by the law and testimony of that (God's) word which I em- 
 phatically declare to be flagrantly violated hj you every week of 
 your life. 
 
 In conclusion, as you have gratuitously invited the controversy, 
 by flippantly referring to me as one of the priests of Norfolk, I 
 now beg leave to propose that you will place yourself under ad- 
 
2Q THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 ditlonal obligations to the Editor of the Christian Advocate and 
 ask him to kindly permit me the use of his columns alternately 
 with yourself in order to discuss the above highly important 
 questions. Or should it suit you better, let us make a joint re- 
 quest of one of our city papers here for that end. You and I 
 are recognized as instructors in Christianity in this city, and it is 
 only fitting that our fellow-citizens should, through the local press, 
 receive many additional rays of Christian light which the con- 
 troversy will, doubtless, elucidate, if conducted under the eyes 
 of our fellow-citizens. 
 
 You say in your first letter, " I fear not the light ; " nor do I ; 
 and for my part I tender you the assurances of the most refined 
 courtesy in my communications. 
 
 Bespectfully, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE, 
 Koman Catholic Pastor of Norfolk. 
 
 NORFOLK, JULY 14, 1873. 
 REV. MATTHEW O'KEEFE. 
 
 Dear Sir : I have read your communication addressed to me 
 through the columns of the Norfolk Virginian^ of the lOth inst. 
 In reply, I have several things to say. 
 
 I am writing a series of articles, the purpose and plan of 
 which were stated in my first letter, published in the Richmond 
 Christian Advocate, You will excuse me if I cannot see that the 
 questions you propound are of so much more moment than those 
 now under discussion, that I must turn aside to answ^er your inquir- 
 ies. Let us see if we can estimate the weight and worth of your 
 questions. You ask first for proof that the gentleman addressed 
 is a Catholic. The friend, who handed me the letter stated 
 that he was not entirely a Catholic, but more of a Catholic 
 than anything else ; and his letter, now in my possession, declares 
 him a believer in those doctrines which distinguish the Catholic 
 from other churches. On the evidence of this letter, a jury 
 would convict him of Romanism. But why this question t 
 The only point of interest to you or to me is, whether the doc- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 21 
 
 tri'nes suggested by this letter and discussed by me are held by 
 the church of Rome. Never mind about the man, look to the 
 points discussed. Again you ask me to prove to you that 
 Jesus required his doctrine to be written, and also that the 
 bible and especially the new testament, is the word of God. If 
 these are not trivial questions, when the points for which proof 
 is demanded are admitted by universal Christendom, both papal 
 and protestant, then I confess my ignorance. We both admit 
 that the new testament was written according to the purpose 
 and promptings of our Lord, and you surely know that God 
 can make known His will in some other way than by direct and 
 written command. Prove to you that the new testament is the 
 word of God ! I have and use, as you know, your own bible, 
 endorsed by the Pope and by the archbishops and bishops of this 
 country, and you would have me turn aside from my discussion 
 and waste time and strength in proving what you and I and all 
 Christendom admit. Can you be serious ? Does not this look 
 like an endeavor to divert attention from the issue. Again, your 
 question about the Sabbath is of the same character, so far as 
 my argument is concerned. I have often seen school boys in 
 debate pass over the main points in an argument and ring the 
 changes on some ill-chosen word or ungrammatical sentence. 
 You know very well that the word Sabbath had nothing what- 
 ever to do with my argument. Had it been written, " We stand 
 up week after week," instead of " Sabbath after Sabbath," the 
 sense would have been the same. Why propound these ques- 
 tions in connection with my arguments ? I presume I know 
 your design ; but if you wish to discuss with me the question of 
 our dependence on the church of Rome, for knowledge on the 
 points you suggest, I will be most happy to do so at the 
 PROPER TIME. For the present please remember, I am writing 
 to another gentleman, and on other subjects. 
 
 As to your remark that I " flippantly " refer to you as one of 
 the priests of Norfolk, I do not know why you say " flippantly." 
 I did not, of course, name you, and in reasoning with one who 
 claims that your Church, equally with the first disciples, has the 
 power to perform miracles, I was simply earnest, and not flip- 
 pant, in referring to the priests of Norfolk, as those who could 
 
22 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 most conveniently remove my incredulity. This is the only 
 reference you can find to yourself, and I am happy to say that 
 in using the phrase " Priests of Norfolk " I had no unkind 
 feeling or ungenerous purpose whatever. It was used simply 
 and solely as part of an argument. 
 
 You say, '' I tender you the assurances of the most refined 
 courtesy in my communications." Let us understand one 
 another. I fear our views of courtesy do not agree. Address- 
 ing me, you write : " You profess to enlighten him and ' the 
 rest of mankind ' on Rome," &c ; and again you say : " You 
 also propose to 'show up' the Catholic doctrine," &c., putting 
 the phrases "rest of mankind " and "show up" in quotation 
 marks. The foundation for all this are these simple sentences. 
 I say to my unknown correspondent : " I will cheerfully no- 
 tice the points to which my attention is directed," and to the 
 editor of the Advocate^ I say, " and will also give a brief review 
 of the discourse of reverend Mr. Damon." Please notice the 
 difference of impression which these sentences would make — 
 the one my own language, the other your representation of what 
 T propose, and a representation so put as to lead, I think, to the 
 supposition that you have my very phrases. The words of the 
 letter are unpretending, simply a promise to " notice" and to " re- 
 view," without even a suggestion whether favorably or unfavorably. 
 Your language representing my position I will not characterize, 
 but say only that Its hectoring and self-sufficient cast would 
 make, a very unfavorable impression on a cultivated mind. Such 
 representations In a letter addressed to a gentleman do not appear 
 to me as courteous. Nor do your remarks about the " bogus 
 Catholic, manufactured to order," and the manifest endeavor to 
 create the Impression that something dark and foul was intended, 
 in addressing the gentleman — unknown to me — as a Catholic. 
 I have stated all I know of him, and every candid mind will see 
 that it Is a matter of no moment whatever in my discussion 
 whether he Is a Catholic or not. As you refer to the maxim, 
 the " end justifies the means," I will remark, In passing, that if 
 the writings of your own high authorities can be relied on, I 
 will, at the proper time, show, that not only Is the charge not 
 false in reference to the Jesuits, but that many others In your 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. J3 
 
 church besides the Jesuits, endorse that maxim. Why that 
 frequent reference to your ignorance and to my great knowledge? 
 Is that intended to be courteous ? You scarcely suppose me so 
 stupid as not to recognize it as irony. Why, that irony ? Am 
 I boasting of my knowledge, or arrogating all wisdom to myself? 
 You find me giving, in a plain, straight-forward way, my views 
 on questions propounded, boasting nothing, promising nothing, 
 but simply expressing my opinions. Is that an impertinence ? 
 Is the expression of one's views freely and fearlessly in this 
 Christian land, an arrogance for which he must be twitted by his 
 brother as a Solomon ; sneered at in irony and biting sarcasm, as 
 professing to be wise above what is written. 
 
 I am willing to believe you intended no offence in all this, but 
 it is difficult to conceive of myself as writing in such a strain 
 without intending marked discourtesy. 
 
 You say, " When you will have convinced me that the bible 
 is the word of God, I will pledge myself to discuss with you as 
 with one who has the right to quote the word of God," &c. If 
 you mean to deny to me the right to use the Scripture as the 
 word of God, I reply that, as a child of God, I am your ecjual 
 in all respects, as to rights, and claim to possess, not as the 
 grant of Pope or church, but as a gift directly from our common 
 Father, the right not only to read His will, writtento Hischildren, 
 but to receive thankfully every perfect gift "coming down from 
 the Father of light." Please remember these are not the Dark 
 Ages, and I am not a papist. If you mean only that I have no 
 right as a logician to use the scripture, as God's word, then the 
 case is altered; but on this point I will join issue with you at 
 the proper time. 
 
 After all this, I will say what hundreds of gentlemen who 
 knoW' me will confirm, that I have not one particle of unkind- 
 ness towards yourself, your church, or any human being. Many 
 have heard me express a deep interest in the Jews. Now, if I 
 should write a series of letters, trying to show, from their own 
 scriptures, that Jesus was the Messiah, and seeking to lead them 
 to the blessings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, would this prove 
 my bitterness and hatred of them? Shortly after my arrival in 
 this city, I heard you in the home of one of my own members, 
 
24 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 say that the water in the holy baptism had cleansed the soul of 
 the deceased before you from all original and actual sins, and 
 that he was safe in the bosom of God. Now, does it show 
 bitterness in one, who believes that he is set for the defence of 
 the truth, to endeavor to teach his fellow-citizens that not water, 
 but the blood of Jesus Christ, cleanseth from all sin ; that the 
 power of the spirit and not the ministrations of man, purijfies 
 and prepares for heaven. Am I therefore, your enemy because 
 I tell you the truth ? 
 
 As to the challenge, I have made none, but was only discuss- 
 ing questions which are legitimately before the world. I, how- 
 ever, accept your proposition and will obtain, if possible, the 
 consent of the editor of the Richmond Christian Advocate^ to 
 publish your articles in his paper, on condition that you secure 
 for me a similar privilege in the Catholic paper which has the 
 largest circulation in this community. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 J. D. BLACKWELL. 
 
 N. B.— If the manner in which I agree to meet your propo- 
 sition does not suit you, I will discuss orally with you, at such 
 time and place, in this city, as we may agree upon, the follow- 
 ing : The right of each one to receive the scriptures as the word 
 of God and interpret them for himself. 2d, The doctrine of 
 auricular confession in connection with penance and priestly ab- 
 solution, as held by the church of Rome. 3d. The doctrine of 
 transubstantiatlon. 4th. The claim of the church of Rome, or 
 of the Roman Catholic church, to be one in doctrine and in 
 spirit with the Apostolic church. J. D. B. 
 
 NORFOLK, JULY 17, 1873. 
 BEV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 Dear Sir • I commence my reply to yours of the 14th, 
 with the grave words of Don Quixote, who, addressing his 
 faithful squire, Sancho Panza, utters the following immortal 
 phrase : " Fortune disposes our affairs better than we ourselves 
 could have desired : look yonder, friend Sancho Panza, where 
 thou mayest discover somewhat more than thirty monstrous 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ^5 
 
 giants, whom I intend to encounter and slay," &c. " What 
 giants ?" said Sancho Panza. " Look sir, those which appear 
 yonder, are not giants but wind-mills," &c. 
 
 The inimitable Cervantes proceeds, then, to describe one of 
 the most amusing pictures ever drawn, and when he presents to 
 our imagination the gallant knight with buckler covered, lance 
 in the rest ; the good steed Rosinante spurred to the charge ; the 
 burying of the lance in the side of the wind-mill ; the hoisting of 
 the redoubtable knight of La Mancha, steed and all, in the sails 
 of the wind-mill, we can hardly decide which to admire the more, 
 the absurdity of the attack and its disastrous results, or the word 
 painting, descriptive of the encounter. 
 
 But we realize, reverend sir, in our day, the dream of Cervan- 
 tes ; our gallant knight hears, too, from his honest brother and sir 
 knight, " he is not a Catholic." Yet our modern Quixote 
 WILL attack, and like his prototype — collapse. The only differ- 
 ence observable between the two pictures consists in the fact that 
 the knight of La Mancha, after his mishap, recognized his mistake, 
 whereas, our modern knight is loath to admit his, and is ready 
 to call together a jury of his countrymen to decide whether the 
 object is a veritable Catholic or not. It is well that he excul- 
 pates his brother knight, admitting that he told him that the 
 writer '' was not altogether a Catholic ;" but in so doing he only 
 criminates himself the more : for thus the question stands — in 
 order to gratify his yearning to attack the Catholic Church, it 
 will give eclat to the attack to dub the interrogator a Catholic 
 (there is method in our madness), although it is well known 
 amongst the friends of the writer that he does not even believe 
 in a divine revelation, and notwithstanding that his " highly 
 esteemed friend," like Sancho Panza, cried out in almost the 
 words of the faithful Squire : " Did not I warn you to have a 
 care of what you did, for that they were nothing but wind-mills ;" 
 it is useless to remonstrate — he declares — with Don Quixote, 
 " it is lawful war (and every ruse is lawful in war,) and doing 
 God good service to remove so wicked a generation from off 
 the face of the earth ;" in other words, to attack them when 
 found or not found. But" here the similitude to La Mancha's 
 knight ceases, and our clerical champion, Proteus-like, assumes 
 
23 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 a new role — the role of Jesuit, according to his own estimate 
 of the Jesuit character. Alas ! my friend, it is too true — from 
 the high pinnacle of D.D. in the Methodist Church, to the adop- 
 tion for his motto : " the end justifies the means, " so truly as 
 cribed to those horrible Jesuits. What a fall ! and yet how truly 
 does the poet say : ^^ facilis descensus Averni.^^ Dr. Blackwell 
 playing Jesuit ! We shall see. The reverend doctor's letter in- 
 forms me that he is now so occupied writing a series of letters to his 
 " manufactured " Catholic, so husy preparing for another tilt at 
 his ecclesiastical wind-mill, that he will not be disturbed by the 
 realities of life, even though " the Greeks be at his own doors;" 
 he must reserve " his strength and time " for Papist attacks through 
 the columns of a Methodist paper, as unconscious of the attack 
 as the wind-mill was of the onslaught of Don Quixote. I tap 
 the reverend doctor on the shoulder and tell him that a papist in 
 Norfolk takes up the gage — that I am ready for the combat ; and 
 what is the reply? I am too busy now ; "at the proper time," 
 repeated three or four times in his letter — which, literally inter- 
 preted, means never. Ah, dear sir, the veil is too transparent 
 not to be seen through — the attempt at so-called Jesuitry bears 
 too evidently the traces of a ''tyro*' not to be easily detected. 
 Again you say with an imperturbable coolness " never mind 
 about the man," &c. Is this, I ask, the language of the man who 
 teaches Christian morality? Who gave you the right to impose 
 on thousands of credulous readers, that the man you were ad- 
 dressing was what you knew him not to be, and what you were 
 told he was not, and to make the matter worse you say : " never 
 mind the man." If this be not the doctrine that "the end jus- 
 tifies the means" illustrated in your person, then I never yet un- 
 derstood it. I regret I am thus obliged to unmask this attempt 
 at what you would innocently denominate a "pious fraud," but 
 which any man not a professor of religion, nay even "a Jesuit," 
 would blush to be guilty of. So much for point ist. 
 
 2d. When I called your attention to your own words : " and 
 when He required His doctrine to be written for all ages," &c., 
 I asked you to inform me where in the apostolic writings you 
 found such a command, requesting chapter and verse? How did 
 you make good that assertion ? How was I answered ? 1 refer 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. "[J 
 
 my readers to your reply to that question and ask whether it be 
 not worthy of any so-called Jesuit ? How much more honest 
 and upright would it have been to admit that you had incautiously 
 used that expression and begged leave to recall it — " humanum 
 est errare^'' "it is human to err." Had I so blundered in my 
 ignorance of the " Word of God " I would manfully accept the 
 mortification and acknowledge my error. 
 
 3d. Before I animadvert on your reply to my third point, I 
 must premise, that I do not desire to occupy a false position in this 
 discussion ; I am not the aggressor. Soon after your advent to 
 this city you published in our city papers announcements of lec- 
 tures to be delivered by you on Romanism. You constituted 
 yourself the Boanerges of Protestantism here, as- against the 
 Roman Church, and in the words of the prophet, we gratefully 
 declare " Misericordia Domini quia non sumus consumpti^^ '*-it 
 is owing to the mercy of God that we were not annihilated." 
 This aggression continued more or less until it was formally re- 
 newed in our recent letters — accident placed me in possession of 
 three of them, wherein my reverend confreres and myself are fre- 
 quently invited by you to amuse you by the performance of 
 miracles (Herod expected the same favor of Christ,) in a style 
 entirely unwarranted by our relations to each other. I used the 
 word " flippantly " in that connection, and I did so advisedly — 
 a stronger word — " insolently" — for example would have been 
 authorized ; and here I will advert to your complaint of biting 
 sarcasm, irony, want of courtesy, &c., whilst in the same breath 
 almost, you bid me " remember that these are not the dark ages, 
 and that you are not a papist." People in glass houses ought 
 not to throw stones." Please let me know whether the man who 
 uses that language in such connection has any right to complain 
 of biting sarcasm, &c. I assure you I don't complain. I'm used 
 to it, as my countrymen are to hanging, and in that consists all 
 the difference between you and myself. 
 
 But let me tell you that a wicked thought flashed across my 
 mind while reading that admonition, and I will confess it even 
 to you, though I assure you I did not consent to it. It was, 
 that surely the ages referred to were dark enough without intro- 
 ducing some one who, naturally or otherwise, would not be able to 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 shed one ray of light on their gloominess. And again, as to 
 your not being a papist, let me assure you that old mother 
 church loses very little in such case, inasmuch as your accession 
 to the " fold " would entail on some poor priest the irksome 
 task of hearing a life-long confession, administering conditional 
 baptism, receiving your profession of faith, pronouncing absolu- 
 tion, &c. Should I be the fortunate (?) one to do so, I promise 
 the absolution without charging a cent ; but please say nothing 
 about it. But to resume, since you have been the aggressor 
 from the beginning, don't blame me, if, in vindication of my re- 
 ligion, I require that you, inasmuch as Othello's occupation's 
 gone — the ecclesiastical wind-mill no longer exists and there be- 
 ing no longer any " Catholic " to address in the columns of the 
 Advocate,, accept my invitation to discuss the foundations of our 
 respective systems of religion through the columns of the 
 Virginian. 
 
 We are agreed as to the existence of a revelation — of its 
 completion in and by the Lord Jesus Christ — but after this comes 
 a divergence. My faith teaches me that the Son of God estab- 
 lished a church on earth for the purpose of teaching mankind ; 
 that He made promises to that church which will ever preserve 
 her from teaching falsehood, and that a Record written some 
 years after her institution by men conversant with the facts of 
 her existence and the promises made her, authentic, genuine and 
 truthful exists corroborative of the above facts. This record is 
 to me, thus far, only a human work — as such, it testifies to the 
 existence of the teacher organized by Jesus Christ ; to the pledges 
 that this teacher can never err in her teachings ; to the command 
 giv^n me by Jesus Christ to hear her under the most awful pen- 
 alties — which command I obey, because it is my God who com- 
 mands ; and when she tells me that I must accept that record 
 (hitherto regarded by me as a human document) as of Divine in- 
 spiration, I cheerfully hear the voice of God speaking through 
 her and joyfully accept the gift ; thus the church instituted by 
 Jesus Christ, years before a word of the Christian dispensation 
 was committed to writing, gives me the *' word of God " and 
 pledges her faith that it is " His." You have now an outline of 
 my faith in the divinity of the New Testament. What I have 
 
THE KEY TO TIIUE CHRISTIANITY. 29 
 
 done with so much facility, you can, I presume, do as easily. 
 Come, reverend sir, let not your modesty interfere! You have 
 no idea of the solicitude with which the forthcoming analysis of 
 your faith is awaited by your fellow-citizens. You have said 
 "I fear not the light," and if ever the time existed that >ou 
 " hide not your light under a bushel," now Is the time. Perhaps 
 you fear to commence (your letter gives every evidence of such 
 a feeling), but hundreds of our veterans residing here will tell 
 you how terribly they felt, (brave men though they were as ever 
 stood in the front of battle) under the first fire. Your indispo- 
 sition to join issue on this question will soon pass away. Aude /;?- 
 cipere^ dare to begin, and very soon like our gallant veterans, if 
 not victor, you will at least have the consolation to know that 
 you made a good fight Bonum certamen certavi^ said St. Paul, 
 " I have fought a good fight." Don't waste your time and 
 strength on the bogus Richmond Catholic and his unconscious 
 co-believers. Heretofore you were like the boys playing soldier, 
 dealing your death blows from the pulpit and through the press 
 on imaginary papists, declaring with the knight of La Mancha, 
 "that it Is lawful war and doing God good service to remove so 
 wicked a generation from the face of the earth." You can re- 
 sume your attacks on the ecclesiastic wind-mill " at the proper 
 time." Remember, you said In your's to me " you believe you 
 were sent for the defence of the truth." Don't be recreant to 
 this duty. Act up to this belief. Gratify your fellow-citizens 
 by entering boldly on " the defence of the truth." But before 
 you begin, let me admonish you to take nothing for granted. 
 Let every link In your chain of reasoning be of such texture and 
 so firmly welded Into Its predecessor, that when you will have 
 concluded your argument " for the defence of the truth," your 
 fellow-citizens with myself will admiringly pronounce It match- 
 less in structure, and proof against the attacks of wilfully-blind 
 unbelievers and thick-headed papists. When this will have been 
 accomplished, we will address ourselves to the Sabbath question 
 and the other questions referred to by you In the N. B. at the 
 end of your letter. 
 
 Respectfully, &c., 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
 I 
 
OQ THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 NORFOLK, JULY 29, 1873. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 Dear Sir : I have just read your communication and hasten 
 to comply with your wishes. 
 
 Allow me, before so doing, to tender you my hearty congrat- 
 ulations on the abandonment of any further attacks on the ec- 
 clesiastical wind-mill, and myself on being the humble instru- 
 ment of recalling so valorous a knight from ideal conquests to a 
 combat with a flesh and blood foeman, equally, to say the least, 
 worthy of his steel. 
 
 You appear surprised that I do not accept your proposition, &c. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, when you tell me "■ that at the proper 
 TIME "you will be most "happy to discuss." &c., and in the 
 same breath you say " foe the present " please remember I 
 am writing to another gentleman (the wind-mill), were I to per- 
 severe in urging my invitation, would I not be pretty much 
 in the same position as poor Pat was when asked what was the na- 
 ture of the gentle hint he got to leave, replied that he was kicked 
 down stairs ? 
 
 You now offer me one of three modes of discussion, viz : the 
 columns of the Christian Advocate ; an oral discussion j or the 
 Virginian, 
 
 I cannot see either the possibility or utility of an oral discus- 
 sion ; for your letters furnish abundantly-convincing proof that 
 your mind, however naturally endowed, has never acquired a 
 disciplined training; hence the impossibility of keeping you con- 
 fined within the limits prescribed by the laws that govern those 
 who have gone through the curriculum of mental discipline, and 
 as to the utility of such a medium (were it possible) I feel that 
 the truth may be elicited, and the public may judge far more 
 calmly of the merits of the discussion through the columns of a 
 newspaper than in any other form. As to the newspaper, I re- 
 peat what I have already said in my last, "accept my invitation 
 to discuss the foundations of our respective systems of religion 
 in the columns of the Virginian." 
 
 As you give me the choice of the first subject to be discussed. 
 I choose the Bible. My reason for so doing, is this : I have an 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 21 
 
 idea that the war-cry of the Bible, and Bible only, without 
 note or comment, cannot be sustained ; hence, before I could 
 consent that you quote it as the "word of God," (although per- 
 fectly willing that you do so as a genuine, truthful narrative of 
 such events as it treats of) you will have to prove your right to 
 do so, as I did, before you attack any doctrine of the Catholic 
 church. 
 
 You will, therefore, proceed to show — 
 
 1st. The divine inspiration of the Bible : or in other words, 
 that it is not a human but divine production. 
 
 2dly. You will please establish your canon of the Scriptures. 
 
 3dly. You will vindicate the right of interpreting what you 
 have already proved to be the word of God, by private judgment. 
 
 These points being satisfactorily demonstrated, I am prepared 
 unequivocally to admit your right to the Scriptures as the '^ word 
 of God," and to sustain any doctrine of the Catholic church 
 which you may feel disposed to assail. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
 NORFOLK, AUGUST 9, 1873. 
 REV. MATTHEW O'KEEFE. 
 ***** * * **** 
 
 Dear Sir : I proceed to show you briefly our method of 
 proving the divine inspiration of the new testament. The 
 apostles and writers of the sacred books easily convinced the 
 candid of the generation In which they lived, that they were 
 truthful and were sent of God to teach. This they did by mir- 
 acles. These may be called the stamp of God to the teachings 
 and writings of those first christian teachers. When Paul, per- 
 forming numerous miracles, proclaimed that the gospel he preached 
 was received, " not from man, nor did I learn it but by the reve- 
 lation of Jesus Christ," Gal. i, I2, the hearer must have been 
 persuaded that God was with him, and that he spake God's truth. 
 Then the doctrine itself confirms this persuasion. It declares 
 of man what his own heart affirms as true, that he is guilty be- 
 
22 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 fore God, &c. It proclaims a heavenly morality, enjoining love 
 to God and man, holiness and perfect purity. Finally, those in- 
 spired teachers, as ail christian ministers of the present day, gave 
 their hearers the demonstration of experience. They taught 
 that burdened sinners coming to Christ by faith, w^ould be par- 
 doned and experience the joys of pardon ; as the cases of the 
 Publican in the Temple, and the vi^oman vv^ashing the feet of 
 Jesus with her tears, the Phillipian jailer, &c. Paul, in Romans, 
 v, I, says: "Therefore being justified by faith, let us have peace 
 with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ." This is the blind 
 man's argument: "Whereas, I was blind, now I see:" whereas, 
 I was burdened, now I have peace and joy of heart. And this 
 the Master teaches, John vii and 17 : "If any man will do the 
 will of Him, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be from 
 God, or whether I speak from myself." Now when the sacred 
 writers penned the Gospels or Epistles, there could be no great 
 difficulty in making known to that generation that they had so 
 done. As they were written to edify the church, the writers 
 would of course deposit each record with some faithful chris- 
 tians, or some one church, as Paul's letters to the Corinthians 
 were sent to the Corinthian church, &c., authenticated as his. 
 Thus the whole new testament was written and authenticated to 
 that generation as the work of inspired men. But of course 
 some part of this record was in one church and some in another 
 — one letter at Rome, one at Ephesus, one at Philippi, &c. 
 When all came to be gathered up, there would be questions as 
 to whether each was of apostolic authority, and therefore of di- 
 vine inspiration. But these questions were settled by human 
 testimony, not infallible witnesses — by such testimony, however, 
 as fully satisfied the christians of that age. Suppose Paul lived in 
 this age, he could convince this generation that he wrote under 
 divine inspiration, and we could gather up the evidence of that 
 fact, and hand it down successfully to after ages, without being 
 an infallible generation. Does it require an infallible nation to 
 hand down to remote ages the fact that George Washington was 
 the first president of the United States. You say in your first 
 letter of July loth: "my church has always taught me, that the 
 new testament, at least cannot be proved to be the word of God, 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 23 
 
 without the aid of an unerring witness." Why so ! The old 
 testament was proved by the Jewish church to be divinely given, 
 and was received by the apostles as God's word ; but surely that 
 church, which acting through its highest judicatory, presided 
 over by its High Priest, condemned Jesus to death, would scarcely 
 be pronounced unerring or infallible ; and yet it handed down 
 successfully the proof of the divinity of the old testament scrip- 
 tures. Human and fallible human testimony has even been 
 deemed sufficient to establish any facts. So far from being de- 
 pendent on the church of Rome for the proof of the inspiration 
 of the new testament, we can show that no such church as the 
 present church of Rome was in existence till several centuries 
 of the christian era had passed away. True, had there been no ' 
 people between us and the apostolic age, the scriptures would 
 not have come down to our times. This is the only sense in 
 which it can be said absolutely that your church or any other 
 organization gave us the word of God, and in this sense, the 
 Greek and Syriac churches place us under as much obligation 
 as the church of Rome. 
 
 Take, now, my mode of establishing the divine inspiration of 
 the new testament — that the writers claimed inspiration, demon- 
 strated by miracles, that God sent them ; that the generation to 
 whom they wrote gathered up the evidence and handed it down 
 — and refute it if you can. 
 
 Take that grand experimental evidence to which we have re- 
 ferred, that believing in the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be 
 saved, and find joy and peace through believing. This is to us 
 the most joyous and satisfactory of any other. Put this evidence 
 to the test, my dear sir, and we will yet see eye to eye. 
 
 In my next I will, with great pleasure, consider the remaining 
 parts of your proposition, namely : the Protestant canon of 
 scripture, and the right of each christian to exercise his private 
 judgment in interpreting the word of God. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 J. D. BLACKWELL. 
 
OA THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 NORFOLK, AUGUST 11, 1873. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 **Parturiunt montes, nascitur ridiculus mus." — 
 
 Horace. 
 
 The mmmtains labor -vvith main and might ; 
 A ridiculous mouse is brought to light. 
 
 Dear Sir: The overwhelming mass of matter with which 
 I was honored in this morning's Virginian^ would have tried a 
 man with less nerve than myself; but let me assure you, that, 
 whilst wading knee-deep through the shapeless bank of mud, 
 which, for twelve days, you were so industriously piling up, I 
 could not refrain from picturing to myself the smile of self-com- 
 placency that passed over your countenance on the consumma- 
 tion of so noble (.?) a work. 
 
 The mode of operation seems to me to be a cross between 
 the Quixotic and so-called Jesuit styles, but I regret that I 
 cannot accord to you the palm of Prince of Sophists ; the 
 veil being too transparent to escape detection — however, I give 
 you all credit for the Intention. 
 
 Your conduct In this instance, can be paralleled only by an 
 incident that occurred in my boyhood days, in a royal college in 
 my native land. 
 
 A youth, otherwise talented, but who had a decided distaste 
 for mathematics, was called at the public examination, to the 
 black-board to solve a question In algebra. His ignorance of 
 equations was as extensive as it could well be ; .yet, counting 
 on the Ignorance of the titled visitors who were looking on 
 very wisely and gravely, the question being presented, he started 
 to fill the board with algebraic signs, which, having accom- 
 plished with a knowing wink to his class-fellows, he subjoined 
 triumphantly Q. E. D. He had already received the approba- 
 tion of the titled visitors, who, deceived by the rapidity of the 
 solution, took it for granted that the present subject was a 
 prodigy. The good, simple professor, whose name Is recorded 
 amongst the best benefactors of the age for his discoveries, was, 
 for the moment, non-plussed ; but having examined for a few 
 minutes the production on the board, calmly remarked : '^ In- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 25 
 
 deed you have not taken the first step towards the solution of 
 the question.'* The disgust on the part of the board of visitors 
 for their own exhibition of ignorance, and for the young man 
 whose brass had completely outwitted them, can be better im- 
 agined than described. 
 
 The counterpart of this incident we enjoyed, reverend sir, 
 in the treat given us this morning in the columns of the Virgi- 
 nian. Three columns and a half of matter are adroitly palmed 
 off on the reading community as proof of the position of the 
 writer ; and elevated, indeed, must be his estimate of their in- 
 telligence, if, like the young man above described, he counts on 
 their being blinded by his miserable sophistry. I shall now pro- 
 ceed to dissect this formidable document. In your last letter to 
 me, dated two weeks ago, reverend sir, you proffered me the 
 choice of a subject to be discussed ; I hastened to meet your 
 wishes, choosing the bible, to be proved by you as a divine, not 
 a human production, etc. In reply, I was (as I anticipated,) 
 after a twelve days' silence, indulged with what? Not an 
 elaborate argument for the question under discussion, but a 
 stale rehash of all kinds of odds and ends, a thousand times 
 already answered, utterly irrelevant to the question at issue, 
 whilst a very small portion of the document was devoted to the 
 proofs of the subject legitimately under discussion. All this 
 was ingeniously introduced for the purpose of diverting public 
 attention from the weakness of the arguments ; but the ruse 
 will not succeed. Like the old professor, I shall now unmask 
 this piece of polemical strategy, and show that you, reverend 
 sir, have not advanced one step in the solution of the question 
 at issue. 
 
 Without adverting for a moment to your irrelevant attack on 
 the outline of the foundation which I gave of my faith, and 
 which, more than ever, convinces me of the absurdity of at- 
 tempting an oral discussion, under the circumstances, I will, 
 forthwith, apply myself to a notice of your attempted vindica- 
 tion of your system of belief, and in so doing, I must confess 
 that I feel ashamed of the slight effort necessary to the refuta- 
 tion of the position. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, before I proceed to analyze, precision is 
 
2Q THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 absolutely necessary — hence, inasmuch as you claim divine in- 
 spiration for the new testament, " independently of church or 
 pope," we had better define what inspiration is : It is generally 
 defined as " a special impulse, direction and presence of the 
 Holy Ghost, controlling the mind of the writer, not permitting 
 him to err, and inducing him to write what God wishes." It is 
 now competent for us to apply this generally-received definition 
 to the system of religion, which claims for the new testament, 
 the above influence of the Holy Ghost ; in other words, that 
 the Holy Ghost, not man, is the author of the new testament. 
 
 The proofs you present for the inspiration are three-fold. 1st. 
 Miracles which are, you say, the stamp of God, Sic. If mira- 
 cles be the test, will you please say how many Luke and Mark 
 performed .? and if you fail to find any, count out from the new tes- 
 tament the gospels of Mark and Luke, respectively, and the 
 Acts of the apostles, written by Luke, and they will leave a 
 wide gap in your new testament. Again, has any of the writers 
 said that God " directed " him to write .? You have repeated 
 that assertion, and I require the proof. Have they declared 
 that THEY wrote one line by the inspiration of the Holy 
 Ghost ? I say, emphatically, no ! and defy proof to the con- 
 trary. And where did you learn that they were inspired to write? 
 I deny the possibility of proving that the apostles were 
 inspired. I warned you in my former letter to "take nothing 
 for granted." The apostles I admit, were preserved from erring 
 by the constant presence of the Holy Ghost ; but immunity from 
 error in teaching by word of mouth, which the Catholic church 
 claims, is not inspiration to write. Surely the foundation of a 
 religion should be better grounded than on such hap-hazard guess- 
 ing as this. Proof 2d. You say: "The doctrine itself confirms 
 the persuasion," &c. Who questions the divinity of the doc- 
 trine .? It was taught by Christ, and preached by His apostles, 
 years before a line of the new testament was written. The 
 record of the doctrines written by contemporary historians is true 
 too, but because true, is it therefore inspired? Is every truth a 
 divine inspiration.? So much for proof No. 2. 3d. You say: 
 "finally, those inspired (?) teachers, as all christian ministers," kc. 
 
 I confess that this proof completely transcends my intellect. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 27 
 
 Are the christian ministers of this day inspired? You will have 
 to give me some small change for this proof, or some of your in- 
 spiration, before I can comprehend the force of that argument. 
 
 And this is the sum of the proofs you furnish for the founda- 
 tion of your faith ! You have invited me to discuss the grounds 
 of our respective faiths — your's is now '•''sub lite.'^ I will not 
 shrink from mine when the time comes — but not a word from 
 
 ME UNTIL YOU HAVE FULFILLED THE CONDITIONS OF THE PROF- 
 FER MADE BY YOURSELF. How much more advisable would it 
 have been for you to be prepared with the necessary proofs, (if 
 available) rather than to be guilty of the miserable fallacy called 
 by logicians, ignorantia elenchl^ calling off the attention of your 
 readers from the question at issue, to a question which was not 
 under discussion? Of (bourse, I was too old a bird to be drawn 
 ofF by your decoy-duck, and I trust that your readers will, like 
 the college-visitors, see the deception and take a note accordingly. 
 
 Come, reverend sir, let me admonish you that my treatment of 
 you in every instance, where you take up matter extraneous to 
 the subject, will be similar to that of this morning. Believe me, 
 you have more to do than you can well stagger under at present, 
 without raising outside issues, which I will, in every instance, ig- 
 nore. I repeat that your cause requires all your efforts, and, too, 
 all the external aid you can acquire. 
 
 The proofs already adduced, I have scattered to the winds. 
 You can now understand what I meant by the word "human," 
 as distinguished from a "divine" production. Matthew, Mark, 
 Luke, John and the others remain undisputed authors of their re- 
 spective works, and unless you can furnish proofs that the Holy 
 Ghost participated signally in their writings, the conclusion is in- 
 evitable that the pillars of your system have no foundation 
 whereon to rest, and the new testament remains to you a human 
 production. Remember that you have to confine yourself to the 
 proofs of the inspiration of the new testament. Don't hesitate 
 to invite your friends to the rescue — your battle is theirs. Ap- 
 peal to them in the words of Job : *''' Miser emini ?nel^ miseremini 
 mei^ saltcjn vos amici mei^ quia manus [Sacerdotls Romani) tetlgit 
 mey "Have pity on me, have pity on me, at least you, my 
 
 friends, for the hand," &c., &c. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
23 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 NORFOLK, AUGUST 26, 1872. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 *' Ah me ! what perils do environ 
 The man that meddles wtth cold iron ! 
 What plaguing mischiefs and mishaps 
 Do dog him still with afterclaps ! 
 For tho' dame Fortune seems to smile. 
 And leer upon him for a while, 
 She'll after show him in the nick 
 Of all his glories, a dog trick." 
 
 — Hudibras, Canto Bd. 
 
 Dear Sir : Ah me ! twelve days more of exhausting and 
 exhaustive toil, and with what results ! * * * * 
 
 Surely, reverend sir, you must be again ready for another trip, 
 and richly do you deserve it, if the people appreciate your efforts 
 to blind them with your mud, as highly as you do yourself. 
 And so the Bishop, as much enamored of his productions as you 
 are of yours, asked the stripling " what are they worth when 
 written ?" The modesty of the application to yourself, can be 
 equalled only by its peculiar fitness. Should the material that 
 composed the Bishop's sermons, (the time being equal — two 
 weeks nearly, for each bank of mud) be equal in quality and 
 quantity to your lucubrations, I assure you, much would not be 
 lost, did it take him and you two years to complete one. 
 
 As usual, pitching your dirt at old mother church, her Popes, 
 councils, Szc. She has survived treatment worse far than this, 
 for nearly nineteen centuries, and I venture to say she will get 
 over this too. But is it possible, reverend sir, that the people 
 are not aware of the hollowness of the game you are seeking to 
 play ? They clearly perceive that all that fetid matter, you are 
 raking up, and seeking to blind them with, is a dodge, but by no 
 means a clever one, to call their attention off the real question 
 at issue. They are perfectly well aware that you undertook to 
 prove that the bible was an inspired work, and instead of devot- 
 ing yourself to your task, you are disgusting them by the intro- 
 duction of matter that has no more bearing on the subject at 
 issue, than if you were to introduce a dissertation on philology. 
 Like myself, they expect when a man has work to do, he will 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 29 
 
 do It, and not be trifling with their good nature and time by 
 mjake-believes. 
 
 In reply to my strictures on your proofs of the divine inspira- 
 tion of the new testament, I should prefer not to be obliged to 
 unmask a piece of unfair dealing, unworthy a fair or honest con- 
 troversialist. In your letter of this morning, you state that your 
 first argument for inspiration was from the theory of the Romish 
 church, &c. Now, reverend sir, this is not so. You approached 
 your subject in your letter of the 9th, inst., thus : "I proceed to 
 show you briefly our method of proving the divine inspiration of 
 the new testament," and forthwith, you proceed to offer miracles 
 as your first proofs and when I asked you to apply miracles, 
 which you called the " stamp of God " to the Gospels of Mark 
 and Luke, and the Acts of the Apostles, putting the question 
 how many miracles they performed ? and suggesting, that if you 
 could prove none performed by them, to count them out of the 
 bible, you replied by an apparent concession of your inability 
 to prove any miracles performed by these writers, although you 
 decline to withdraw their writings from the bible — hence the 
 utter failure of miracles, your " stamp of God," and your first ^ not 
 second^ proof of inspiration is extinct. Your second proof, com- 
 mencing thus : " Then the doctrine itself confirms this persua- 
 sion, &c.," was so summarily dismissed by me, that you did not 
 even advert to it in your reply to my refutation of it. Hence 
 two or three proofs are abandoned. 
 
 Your explanation of your third proof, which was too * deep for 
 me before, may have cleared up the ambiguity of the phraseology, 
 but it certainly is too much for me yet ; for I cannot compre- 
 hend how such a jumble could, by any rational being, be pro- 
 posed as a proof of the inspiration of any book that may happen 
 to treat of it ; or how any man in good faith, could offer 
 such a proof, is beyond my comprehension. Listen, dear reader, 
 to the specimens of logical reasoning : The scriptures tell us 
 how we may be born again ; how become new creatures, and 
 they say, " beUeve in the Lord Jesus Christ," &c., ergo, the 
 scriptures are inspired. Now, reverend sir, you have furnished 
 us in the reasons alleged, a compendium of what the scriptures 
 propose and faithfully too, I am authorized to declare your in- 
 
QQ THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 spiration^ because you declare God^s truths in writing also ; hence, a 
 pari, I conclude that every sermon, every religious work con- 
 taining God's truth, is, therefore^ v^^ritten by the Holy Ghost, 
 the hand of the writer being only the instrument. How does 
 that parity of reasoning work ? You have heard of the axiom 
 in logic ? ^od probat nimis^ probat nihil : " What proves too 
 much, proves nothing." You conclude this proof (?) thus : 
 " No serious man would delay a moment on the question of in- 
 spiration, if he was assured of the truth of the writing. This 
 you grant to me when you say, I can receive the scriptures as 
 truthful." Can you, reverend sir, be serious in that language ? 
 Is the writer who writes what is true^ therefore^ inspired by the 
 Holy Ghost ? Is every written human production, (because 
 truthful) the joint work of the Holy Ghost and the author ? and you 
 seek to foist such an admission on me, saying, this I grant, &c. 
 God forbid that I could ever be so demented, or that my intel- 
 lect should ever become so clouded as to admit that because a 
 human production is truthful^ it becomes the joint property of 
 the Holy Ghost and the author. Your ideas of inspiration are 
 certainly of a very lucid character. 
 
 Let me once again throw some light on the subject ; but before 
 I proceed to do so, I cannot forbear commenting on the bad faith 
 that you, reverend sir, have exhibited, ab initio^ in the discussion. 
 
 Your letter of the 9th began with the proofs for the inspiration 
 of the new testament with the words : " I proceed," &c. This 
 you entered upon in apparent good faith ; you presented three 
 proofs (numbered by me l, 2, and 3 in my reply); the first I dis- 
 posed of in short order, viz : the miracles. Your 2d proof com- 
 menced with the words: "Then the doctrine," &:c., (and 1 
 marked it No. 2 in my reply); you, however, finding it im- 
 possible to meet my refutation of it, utterly abandoned it to its 
 fate, but that the public may not notice the back-down, you pur- 
 posely change the numbering, falsify the order of your proofs, 
 and instead of the miracle — proof No. i — you substitute another 
 which did not appear amongst your proofs — thereby making the 
 1st proof the second, to cover the absence of what was really the 
 2d proof, viz : the one proposed from the doctrine. This was a 
 ruse unworthy a man whose self-respect and character were 
 dear to him; and behold another specimen ! In this connection 
 
^ THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. gj^ 
 
 I asked, once again, for the proof of the assertion that God directed 
 the bible to be zvritten ; for the text proving that proposition would 
 be invaluable just now; but alas! the oracle is again silent ! An 
 apparent honesty manifests itself in the proofs by miracles, for 
 the purpose of concealing your utter discomfiture in the failure of 
 your proof; but not a word^ when there is nothing gained but mor- 
 tification, in making the latter admission of error. In what Ian- 
 gunge should conduct of this kind be characterized? 
 
 Now, reverend sir, these be your proofs presented for the in- 
 spiration of the scriptures ! Two of them proved dead failures ; 
 the <hird I have to-day strangled and I hardly think you will 
 touch its decaying carcass for the purpose of galvanizing a little 
 life into it. 
 
 Behold, then, your utter failure to maintain one decent proof 
 for the inspiration of the scriptures? This is precisely what I 
 foretold. But in to-day's letter I read the following: "As to my 
 views on inspiration the public, of course, will understand that I 
 do not propose to offer such proofs on the subject as I would present 
 to a class of students or to a set of skeptics." The public^ of 
 course understand no such thing. They understand this morning 
 that you have in your two last letters made an abortive attempt 
 to prove the inspiration of the scriptures — they understand that 
 in a three and a half column letter ostensibly to be devoted to 
 the proofs of inspiration — one-fifth of that letter was occupied 
 with the most puerile attempts to sustain your platform, while 
 four-fifths of the same letter were devoted to subjects a thousand 
 miles away from the issue; and that too^for the purpose of throw- 
 ing dust and mud in their eyes, that they might not see the utter 
 vvorthlessness of your proofs ; but this dodge I have shown up in 
 my last. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, the public must have "these proofs that you 
 would present to a class of students or to a set of skeptics;" 
 that is, if they exist. I deny their existence — you assert it. / 
 demand for mysef and the public their forthcoming. Those you 
 have brought forward have vanished ; bring up your reserves. 
 Let us have them at once; don't let the cause perish by default; 
 but if you do not, I now warn you that I shall characterize your 
 failure to do so in truthful, but not very complimentary terms. 
 My demand for these proofs must he met. The public and myself 
 
22 THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. , 
 
 want the reserves called out at once. Having slain and buried the 
 proofs already presented by you to the public, I shall, whilst 
 awaiting the reserves, beg leave "to carry the war into Africa" 
 by presenting to my readers the true position of the litigants in 
 reference to the question of inspiration of the Scriptures, and to 
 this explanation I would respectfully call their attention. 
 
 From the definition already given of inspiration, it follows that 
 every inspired writing has two representatives or authors — the one 
 visible — the other viz : the Holy Ghost, invisible. Now, as God 
 requires faith, according to St. Paul to the Hebrews, ii c. 6 v. : 
 " For without faith, it is impossible to please God," and as the 
 object of our faith must be the revelation made by God, it 
 follows that a just God cannot threaten with the Divine dis- 
 pleasure, him, who cannot conscientiously convince himself that 
 God has made a revelation. Now God can make a revelation 
 in one of two ways : First. By word of mouth, as He did to 
 Adam, as His Divine Son did, during His life on earth ; or, 
 secondly. By command to write. 
 
 Those who truly fear the displeasure of God, conveyed within 
 the above text, will feel it incumbent on them to use earnestly 
 the intelligence given them by God to ascertain with absolute cer- 
 tainty^ whether in the Christian dispensation, God has adopted 
 one or both of the above media of communicating with man. 
 
 Should he believe the words of the apostle, his conduct is 
 criminal and deserving the reprobation of God, should he fail to 
 avail himself of every means of knowing the revealed will of 
 God ; less than this the conscientious christian who dreads God's 
 displeasure cannot do; whilst alas! how many millions of so- 
 called christians are there, who never for a moment question the 
 foundations of their faith ! whose faith is pinned to the sleeve of 
 reverend doctor Holdforth, and who will not hear any arguments 
 that would be calculated to shake their faith in the reverend doc- 
 tor, not in God; with such persons it is hard to have patience — 
 they can furnish no grounds for the faith or hope that is in them, 
 and yet you must not disturb the calm complacency that inebriates 
 their souls, notwithstanding the words of God : "He that be- 
 iieveth not will be condemned," are heard by them — they do not 
 apply to them — they believe — what? falsehood, very probably. 
 But God requires belief in truth^ not in falsehood. A false faith 
 
THE KEY TO THUE CIIKISTIANITY. 33 
 
 Is no faith, and I maintain that the man or woman, who has not 
 examined with scrupulous diligence into the foundation of his 
 faith, and who Is not prepared to declare before the throne of 
 God, that after the most mature deliberation, he unequivocally 
 has arrived at the conclusion, that the foundation of his faith Is 
 Immovable — I say that such man or woman may expect to have 
 applied to him or her, the words of Jesus Christ, "He that be- 
 lieveth not shall be condemned." It Is then the will of God that 
 man should believe; but what? God's revelation. Where Is 
 this to be found ? The biblical platform assures him that the 
 bible, the whole bible, without note or comment. Independent of 
 Pope or church, contains the whole revelation of God. Now, I 
 fearlessly proclaim the platform false and without foundation, and 
 I shall prove to a demonstration this, my declaration, and I con- 
 jure those who read these lines to ponder them carefully, and with 
 their immortal souls In their keeping, should I prove to be right 
 in my discussion of the question, to seek some other haven of 
 safety-— for a false faith Is no faith, and " cannot please God." 
 
 Let us then approach this question with a sincere desire to learn} 
 the truth^ and If our present faith has no foundation, or Is false,, 
 or contradictory, reject it unhesitatingly. 
 
 We will now open the book known as the bible — it has ever 
 been recognized as furnishing many acts, and sayings of Jesus 
 Christ, whom we believe to be God. Its several parts were writ- 
 ten by men conversant, more or less, with these acts and sayings, 
 and the laws of criticism having tested the credibility of these 
 writings, pronounce them genuine, authentic, and truthful. But 
 we are looking for the revelation of Jesus Christ to man. In this 
 book ; to be sure, we have a i^^ fragments containing the words 
 of Jesus Christ therein, and attested to by these authors — we have 
 the beautiful sermon on the mount, &c., but all else contained 
 therein are the Ideas of the writers committed to writing. What 
 we have secured contains but the slightest atom of what Jesus 
 Christ revealed ; for one of these writers (the beloved disciple) 
 says that he did not think that all the books In the world would 
 contain all that Jesus said and did — hence the absurdity contained 
 in the biblical platform, that the bible contains the whole revelation 
 of God — a pocket bible capacious enough to contain what all the 
 
 3 
 
34 THE KEY TO TRUE CHEISTIATn'ITT. 
 
 books in the world could not contain ? It is therefore conclusive 
 that St. John, or the "platform" is in egregious error. 
 
 Hence, we must look to some other source in order to acquire 
 possession of the whole teachings of Jesus Christ, and the Master 
 himself indicates the same, when (Matthew 28, c. 20v.) he com- 
 mands the apostles to go and teach all nations, all the tbhjgs He 
 commanded them. He committed to them all the tj'uths^ all 
 things whatsoever I have heard of my Father, I have made known 
 to you (John 15 c. 15 v.) by word of mouth, and he ordered 
 them to go and teach in the same manner as he taught them, by 
 word of mouth — there was no command to write^ and the proof of 
 this is, that the majority of them did not write. The apostles 
 obeyed this summons of their Master, and went forth teaching all 
 the truths wherein they were instructed by Him ; and this they 
 continued during their lives — five of them only leaving a few 
 manuscripts written, for the most part, for special occasions. 
 But as we are looking for the revelation of Jesus Christ at the 
 distance of nearly nineteen centuries from the period of their 
 teachings, and as we have seen the absurdity of looking for the 
 whole revelation from a few letters, and as the whole revelation 
 was confided to the apostles, and as, moreover, it is an incontest- 
 ible fact that the volume of letters was not therefore the original 
 source of revelation, inasmuch as it had no existence as a whole^ 
 for three score years, whilst millions, meantime, believed during 
 that period all the truths that the apostles taught — therefore, they 
 believed and "pleased God" by their faith, without ever having 
 seen the bible — consequently, the bible, as we possess it, was 
 never intended by God to be the sole medium of His revelation 
 to man ; so far from this, the Son of God altogether ignored any 
 such means of conveying His revelation to mankind, and this 
 reasoning, based on facts, is sustained by the word of St. Paul, 
 whereby he places writing as secondary to the mode adopted bv 
 Jesus Christ, and practiced by the apostles during their lives. 
 In his second epistle to the Thessalonians he says : " Therefore, 
 brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions you have learned, 
 whether by word or by our epistles." Here we have a direct 
 refutation of the system, which enunciates that the bible contains 
 the whole word of God ; for the apostle clearly indicates that the 
 word of God is conveyed by two modes — by word of mouth and 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 35 
 
 by writing — giving the preference to the first mode, conformably 
 with the practice of the apostles during their lives. The same 
 apostle confirms this declaration when writing to Timothy (2d 
 Ep., 11. c. 2v.) : " And the things thou hast heard from me by 
 many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall 
 be fit to teach others also." Can any blindness equal that, 
 which, in the face of this latter text, declares that the doctrines 
 of Christianity were confined to the medium of writing, when 
 the apostle commands his disciple to go and teach by word of 
 mouthy to faithful men who were to teach by word of mouth 
 others, the doctrine of Jesus Christ ? For how many gospels 
 or epistles did Timothy write .? As long as these texts exist, 
 they directly and formally falsify the biblical platform ; and in 
 further proof of this, I will now show that its advocates do not 
 believe it themselves. Where, let me ask, can the followers of 
 that system justify the practice of baptizing children, of using 
 blood, of substituting Sunday for the Sabbath, &c ? There is no 
 warrant in scripture for any one of these, and the denial of 
 divine tradition by word of mouth, in theory^ is emphatically con- 
 tradicted by daily practice — a course grossly inconsistent before 
 God and man. Therefore the apostolic teaching and the prac- 
 tice of Its own advocates, abundantly disprove the claim that 
 the bible only contains the whole word of God. 
 
 Therefore we collect from the Apostles John and Paul, who 
 are credible witnesses, that the book called the bible, neither 
 does nor can give us the whole revelation of Jesus Christ ; and 
 that, whilst we possess a portion of that revelation in the sayings 
 of Jesus Christ, recorded by them and others, we cannot pos- 
 sibly possess the whole in luriting. We have, however, in our 
 search, secured Christ's sayings, and a special message to the 
 bishops of Asia Minor. But the exponents of the biblical 
 theory may now ask : Why, if the Apostles faithfully recorded 
 the sayings of Jesus Christ, and we can safely trust them in 
 recording and transmitting them to us by writing, and since they 
 are promised the divine assistance in teaching — why may we 
 not receive all they have written as coming from God, Inasmuch 
 as their miracles prove, they can teach nothing but the truth ? I 
 answer, that we are looking for the whole revelation of Jesus 
 Christ, and God could never say, " He that believeth not shall 
 
Qg THE KEY TO TRUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 be condemned," unless He furnish us a witness and an inter- 
 preter to His revelation, competeiit a?id unerring; the justice of 
 God demands this. The apostles, had they all written, and 
 declared that the Holy Spirit ordered them to write, would have 
 been competent witnesses, and their writings would have been 
 the joint effort of the Holy Ghost and themselves, as their 
 preaching was — "the Holy Ghost speaking through us." The 
 Apostles were not ordered to write, nor did they all write, nor 
 did those who wrote indicate that they wrote under divine in- 
 fluence ; and it is absurd to conceive that God will pronounce as 
 condemned the man who cannot in conscience, make an act of 
 faith in what, at most, could be no more than a bad guess^ against 
 which are arrayed the above formidable facts, all contradictory 
 of the guess. 
 
 Again, the apostles failing to testify that their writings were 
 the joint production of the Holy Ghost and themselves, unless 
 we are willing to risk the displeasure of God and the condemna- 
 tion of our souls on a guess^ it necessariiy follows that we should 
 look elsewhere for a witness, competent to testify to the fact 
 that the apostolic writings are a revelation, or rather a portion 
 of a revelation, for the whole revelation they cannot possibly be. 
 Let us try to secure for ourselves the writings of the apostles as 
 forming a portion of God's revelation on the above " platform ;" 
 for the flag bearing the inscription : " The bible and bible only 
 contains the whole revelation of God," has been badly per- 
 forated by two shots fired at it by St. Paul, one by St. John, 
 and, worse than all, by the practices referred to above by its 
 own advocates, all of which have carried away a large share of 
 the bunting ; yet there is some left to fight for ; but inasmuch 
 as the apostles and its own friends have not spared the flag, I, 
 too, will take a shot or two at it, and we will judge of the effect. 
 I will try my hand at two or three of the gospels, which are pre- 
 sumed to be inspired by the Holy Ghost. St. Mark (vi. c. 8v.) 
 tells us that Jesus Christ commanded the apostles to carry a staffs 
 and St. Matthew and St. Luke were inspired by the same Holy 
 Ghost to write respectively (x c. lOv. and Ix c. 3V.) that Jesus 
 Christ commanded them not to carry one. It is bad enough for 
 these writers to be contradicting each other directly^ withou" 
 dragging in the Holy Ghost, and saddling Him with the author- 
 
THE KEY TO TllUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 37 
 
 ship of this flat contradiction. Will the advocates of the bible, 
 without note or comment, independently of church or Pope, 
 relieve the Spirit of Truth from the terrible imputation of having 
 flatly contradicted Himself? or, rather than, that He should be 
 convicted of this terrible charge, which amounts to blasphemy, 
 is it not better to exculpate Him from having anything to do 
 with these three gospels, and let the writers of them bear all the 
 consequences of their contradictions. This would be the lesser, 
 far, of two evils. So that shot carries away three large shreds of 
 the bunting. One shot more, and I shall have done. I read in 
 Matthew and Luke, (King James' Bible), that Christ gave to 
 the world a prayer, which has ever since been known as the 
 " Lord's Prayer," and which is recited from childhood by Chris- 
 tians. Here again is trouble. How, I ask, can we, bearing in 
 mind the terrible threats denounced by St. John, (for the present 
 we will presume, he was inspired, dato non concesso) against those 
 who dare to add to, or take from sacred scripture, reconcile it 
 with our conscience, to believe that the same Holy Ghost who 
 made that threat through St. John, could have inspired St. 
 Matthew to complete the prayer with the words, " for thine is 
 the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever, &c.. Amen ;" 
 whilst he inspired St. Luke to write that Jesus Christ did not 
 utter one word of this ? We have to deal here with a fact — it is, 
 whether Christ ever uttered these words. If he did, did the 
 Holy Ghost inspire St. Luke to reject them ? if he did not, did 
 the Holy Ghost inspire St. Matthew to insert them ? 
 
 Now rather than be guilty of the blasphemy of attributing to 
 the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, the contradiction in a ques- 
 tion of fact, I would hold the writers responsible, and declare 
 that such men could not be inspired. This shot has a telling 
 effect on the bunting. To resume our investigation, the apostles 
 having failed to come to the rescue by declaring themselves 
 inspired to write, it behooves us in order to sustain the flag, and 
 thereby escape the condemnation of Jesus Christ, to invoke, in 
 aid of the flag and its inscription, all the testimony which nature 
 and reason have placed at our disposal, and should these fail us, 
 then let the rag go^ and seek some other means, whereby the 
 whole revelation of God can be, with unerring certainty^ assured 
 to man. 
 
QO THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 For this purpose we will call to our aid all the resources that 
 philosophy has at her disposal in the shape of evidence. The 
 motives of certainty, or the sources of evidence, are of a seven- 
 fold character. Whatever man knows, he has obtained through 
 one or other of these sources of evidence, and he knows nothing 
 that he has not acquired through one or other of them. They 
 are the only resources of evidence left us to attain certainty as to 
 the inspiration of the apostolic writings. These sources of cer- 
 tainty, or motives of credibility, as they are written by philoso- 
 phers are classified in the three orders to which they belong, 
 viz. : In the metaphysical order we have two of these motives, 
 viz. : the sensus intimus^ or conscience, and ' evidence. In the 
 physical order there is but one motive of certitude, viz. : the 
 testimony of the five senses of man. Thirdly. In the moral 
 order there are four motives, viz. : the consent of men ; the 
 testimony of men ; memory, and analogy. It is now our duty to 
 inquire carefully, and see if one or other of these sources of cer- 
 titude will not infallibly lead us to the inspiration of the apostolic 
 writino^s. And first, what can the sensus intlmus or conscience 
 avail us in our search ? It is defined as the faculty of the mind, 
 whereby it is cognizant of its own internal perceptions, but as 
 what we are seeking for is something altogether external to the 
 mind, this species of evidence avails us nothing. The same is 
 literally true of the third moral motive of certitude, viz. : 
 memory ; for what conscience is to the present modifications of 
 the mind, memory is to the past. The second metaphysical 
 species of certitude, is what philosophers call evidence or pure 
 reason — this motive of certainty is altogether occupied with 
 necessary and self-evident truth, that requires no demonstra- 
 tion, viz. : twice two make four — the whole is greater than its 
 part, &c. It is evident that this motive of certitude can have 
 no bearing whatsoever on the question of inspiration. We now 
 pass to the testimony of the senses, and as we can neither feel, 
 see, taste, smell or hear the spirit of God in the apostolic writ- 
 ings, (although there are not wanting deluded fanatics, who pre- 
 tend to taste the spirit of God therein), we will not tarry a 
 moment here. The first of the moral motives of certitude, is the 
 consent of men. This motive consists in a common judgment 
 of mankind in general truths, viz. : the existence of a Supreme 
 
THE KEY TO TllUE CIIKISTIANITY. 39 
 
 Being, his providence, a future life, Szc. ; but as the common 
 sense of mankind has never yet been exercised on the question 
 of inspiration, we cannot appeal to it. The testimony of men is 
 the next motive of certitude. Of this, we will have something 
 more to say than of the others ; for it may be asserted that the 
 testimony of men is available as a proof of the inspiration of the 
 bible, inasmuch as over three hundred millions of christians 
 believe it. But I ask, is the testimony of men the motive 
 whereon it is believed ? N'o I For five-sixths of them believe 
 on the testimony of God^ Himself^ speaking through His Church, 
 which He calls through His Apostle " the pillar and ground of 
 truth," not on the testimony of men ; whilst the small remnant of 
 christians left, cannot claim this source of certitude, because 
 they stand alone, and do not, therefore, derive their certitude 
 from the testimony of God or of men. I have already referred 
 to memory. Finally, nor is analogy of any service in the ques- 
 tion at issue — for there does not exist any term of similitude 
 from which we could conclude in this case ; for although the 
 Koran and the Kedas make the same claim, yet their claim is 
 rejected by us, hence the inspiration of the bible cannot derive ^ 
 any aid from this motive of certitude. 
 
 Now, there is not one particle of knowledge possessed by man 
 on earth, in the natural order that does not reach him through 
 one or other of these seven channels of certitude above referred 
 to. It is admitted by all philosophers worthy'of the name that, in- 
 vested with the required conditions which are specified in refer- 
 ence to every one of these channels, they render the possessors 
 of such information infallibly certain of the knowledg'fe conveyed 
 through them. I use the word " infallibly" purposely, for every 
 philosopher will bear me testimony in this statement ; and here, 
 reverend sir, I respectfully request your permission to make a 
 slight digression in this connection ; it is for the purpose of ani' 
 madverting on either the gross ignorance, stupidity or malice, (or 
 perhaps all three combined in many cases), of those who, a few 
 years ago, when the definition of papal infallibility was defined, 
 inveighed against it with an affectation of holy horror, whilst the 
 same persons do not hesitate any day, to enter a court of justice 
 and swear to their own infallibility, that is, to the impossibility 
 of their being mistaken in regard to any statement or fact to 
 
40 
 
 THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 which they swear ; and their sworn infallibility on millions of 
 questions, is daily recognized by judges, juries and lawyers in all 
 such cases, but when the Church of God in solemn conclave 
 proclaims, that the prayer of Jesus Christ for Peter to His 
 Heavenly Father was heard : " I have prayed for Thee^ Peter, 
 that thy faith should not fail," and that Peter and his legitimate 
 successors cannot teach false doctrines by virtue of that prayer ; 
 behold ! Rome is charged with blasphemy, and that which the 
 most ignorant man claims for himself in a court of justice, and 
 which is conceded to him, is denied to the successor of Peter, to 
 whom the above words were addressed by the Son of God. To 
 resume : 
 
 Having exhausted every available source of evidence known 
 to man in seeking to apply it to the question at issue, and 
 without the slightest approach to success, I now ask, is it possi- 
 ble to prove the divine inspiration of the bible, as any portion of 
 the Word of God, (except the words spoken by Christ), by any 
 of the many sources of evidence known to man in the natural 
 order ? I answer. No ; most emphatically. 
 
 Now, it is claimed by the writers of the gospel, that they are 
 recording, in part at least, a supernatural system of doctrine and 
 morals (which is unquestionably the truth), and whilst the writers 
 quote the words of Jesus Christ, we receive, in the natural order, 
 supernatural truths ; "but here we must stop, for whatever the 
 apostolic writers v/rote beside the recorded sayings of Jesus 
 Christ, must not be taken for granted, to be in the supernatural 
 order, unless they themselves aver it ; but they have not done so ; 
 hence the necessity of a supernatural witness to testify to the 
 supernatural character of the writing in question — hence the 
 secret of the failure of all the motives of certitude above re- 
 ferred to, because of their incompetency to testify. A natural 
 witness is essentially incompetent to testify to the supernatural. 
 Aristotle's second rule of syllogisms settles this, viz : " Latins 
 hunc quam promissae conclusio non vult ,•" that is, the conclusion 
 can never transcend the premises. The premises being in the 
 natural order, the conclusion cannot be supernatural ; but the 
 advocates of the system referred to have cut the ground from 
 under their feet, by allowing no witness but the bible-^hence 
 the impossibility, on such conditions, of proving the bible any 
 
rilE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 41 
 
 portion of divine revelation — hence the impossibility of making 
 an act of faith in the divine authorship of the bible on such a 
 basis — hence the impossibility of " pleasing God" under that 
 flag — hence the imminent danger of the terrible threat of Jesus 
 Christ : " He that believeth not, shall be condemned," — hence 
 the necessity of leaving Adatthew and his fellow-writers, the 
 undisputed authors of their respective works — hence the proofless 
 assertion that the Holy Ghost participated in that work — hence 
 the evidently suicidal character of the system that blindly expels 
 from its precincts a supernatural witness which alone is compe- 
 tent to testify to its supernatural origin — hence its untruthful- 
 ness by contradicting flatly the apostle, by assuming for the bible 
 the monopoly of the whole revelation^ whilst, in fact, it cannot 
 advance one step towards proving one word of it^ a divine revela- 
 tion, (the words recorded as spoken by Christ, and the above 
 
 referred to message, excepted). 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
 NORFOLK, SEPT. 3d, 1873. 
 EEV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 "For Iludibras, who thought he'd won 
 The field as certain as a gun, 
 And having routed the whole troop, 
 With victory was cock-a-hoop ; 
 Thinking he'd done enough to purchase 
 Thanksgiving day among the churches, 
 "Wherein his mettle and brave worth 
 Might be explained by holder-forth, 
 And register' d by fame eternal. 
 In deathless pages of diurnal ; 
 Found in few moments to his cost. 
 He did but count without his host; 
 And that a turn-stile is more certain 
 
 Dear Sir : Before I proceed to give my attention to the con- 
 tents of your letter of this morning, I feel it due to myself and 
 friends to apologize to my readers, for the use of an expression to 
 be found in my last, commencing with the word "Really," &c., 
 on the eleventh line, and terminating with the sentence on the 
 
42 
 
 THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 thirteenth. One or two devoted friends have called my attention 
 to the expression, and I hereby recall it as far as I can do so, 
 ofFeiing as my apology, the exuberance of Celtic hilarity provoked 
 by the occasion, which unreflectingly clothed the Idea, suddenly 
 presented to my imagination. In the above not very refined form. 
 Hujnayium est err are — it is human to err, and as I have never 
 been ashamed to acknowledge my fault, I hesitate not to make 
 the amende to my readers, and to my friends, especially, who flat- 
 ter me with the assurance that such sins against propriety as the 
 above are altogether alien to my nature and education. 
 
 Allow me to congratulate you, reverend sir, on your approxi- 
 mation to the stripling in the anecdote of your letter of the 22d. 
 Only eight days, and the result, over three columns ! Would 
 that I could congratulate you on your success In maintaining your 
 position ! Failure is now a foregone conclusion, hut you mean to 
 die game. 
 
 I do not object to your choice of death, but I am determined 
 that the readers of the Virginian shall witness it, and for this pur- 
 pose it will be necessary to place before the public, once more, 
 the true issue. 
 
 You invited me to choose a subject to be discussed by us, 
 through the columns of the Virginian. I chose, at your Invitation, 
 the bible. I classified the subject under discussion thus: You 
 were to prove the new testament to be a divinely Inspired volume, 
 in the ist place. 2d. You were to prove your canon of the 
 scriptures. 3d. You were to justify the right of private judgment 
 as its Interpreter. These three points having been satisfactorily 
 proved, you then had the choice of any tenet of the Catholic 
 church, which you might assail and which I must defend. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, you undertook, according to your proposi- 
 tion, to prove in your first letter, after this arrangement, the ist 
 point In debate, viz: the inspiration of the new testament. Five- 
 sixths of that letter were devoted to abuse of the Catholic church, 
 a subject not at all under discussion, whilst, with an eye to busi- 
 ness, you slipped in at the fag end of this long letter, what you 
 called your proofs for the inspiration of the new testament. These 
 were numbered by me i, 2 and 3. The ist was derived from 
 miracles. In the 2d you contended that the docrine confirmed the 
 persuasion. The 3d proof I could not, at the time, understand. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CIIKISTIANITY. ^g 
 
 In attacking your first proof, viz : miracles, I asked you for 
 the rniracles performed by Mark and Luke, and failing to produce 
 them I insisted on the removal of their gospels and of the acts of 
 the apostles, from your canon. You would not hear of it — 
 thereby abandoning your first proof, viz : miracles. I then com- 
 batted your 2d proof; that I succeeded in destroying it, your 
 silence as regards It is conclusive. The 3d argument, incompre- 
 hensible to me hitherto, you explained in your letter of the 22d 
 inst. This, too, I attacked successfully, as your abandonment of 
 it in to-day's letter abundantly proves. These three proofs hav- 
 ing been disposed of and having proved themselves utter failures, 
 I observed that in your despair, you dropped an expression in your 
 letter of the 22d inst. to this effect: *'As to my views of Inspira- 
 tion, the public will, of course, understand that I do not propose 
 to offer such proofs on the subject, as I would present to a class 
 of students or to a set of skeptics." Now, reverend sir, they 
 say that a drowning man will grasp at a straw, but I fear that you 
 will let the glorious flag (or rather what's left of it) that defied 
 •popery for 300 years, trail in the dust, rather than, by the slight- 
 est effort, which your words Intimate you to be capable of, bear 
 to the battle-front the precious bunting. What ! brave self-con- 
 stituted standard bearer ! will you basely betray the sacred Interests 
 which you, of yourself, voluntarily assumed ? Did you not In your 
 
 letter of declare yourself about to bring forth your proofs? 
 
 and did you not bring them forth ? and when they were demolished 
 did you not assert that you possessed others? What will the 
 Protestant world say to this conduct. Their self-chosen cham- 
 pion to abandon their cause, to run away In the midst of battle 
 and basely betray the cause that he professed to be so dear to him. 
 He declares he has reserves — rhe styles himself a christian gentle- 
 man — and therefore to be believed; but he Is, too, an officer In 
 the christian army — the army of the bible — and In the heat of 
 battle, with reserves at his disposal, (so he says, and being a 
 christian gentleman we must take his word for Itj he shamefully 
 abandons the battle-field to the foe. Can any treachery equal 
 this? Bazalne, at Metz, declared that until provisions had nearly 
 given out, he did not surrender the city. Behold a worse than 
 Bazalne here ! He has, he asserts, the necessary munitions of 
 war sufficient to pluck victory from the grasp of the enemy^ 
 
44 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 and yet he is about to surrender ! Friends of the cause ! behold 
 your brave champion! 
 
 There is no alternative left, reverend sir, but to stigmatize 
 
 such conduct as either the basest treachery or , I wall not 
 
 say what at present. I offer you another chance of redeeming 
 yourself. You will have necessarily to choose either horn of the 
 dilemma. This is a sad plight. Like your prototype the cuttle- 
 fish, you black-well the waters in your ignominious retreat, but 
 whilst you may be successful in blinding a i^w^ the dodge will 
 not succeed. 
 
 When the impartial reader of this discussion opens the Virginian 
 of to-day, to read, as he naturally expects, a powerful and ex- 
 haustive vindication of the inspiration of the bible (the reserves 
 being at hand !) and a thorough refutation of the argument I ad- 
 duced to show the impossibility of proving inspiration from any of 
 the sources of certitude known to man (seeing that the assumption 
 that the apostles declared themselves inspired to write is wholly 
 gratuitous) with what, may I ask, is he entertained? Instead of 
 bringing up these reserves or seeking to break the force of my 
 arguments drawn from the motives of certitude, you tell the 
 public that Sir William Hamilton calls the source of certitude, 
 which I translated from the Latin (having studied niy philosophy 
 in that language), conscience, (the Latin term is conscientia^ self- 
 consciousness, which may be a more appropriate term — but how 
 can that affect the argument? the motive of certitude is unmis- 
 takable under either appelation. Again, you find fault with my 
 classification of the moral motives of certitude. Now, reverend 
 sir, the author whom I studied and whom I follow as philosopher 
 and theologian was as much above any Methodist theologian or 
 philosopher that ever lived since the mushroom origin of the sect, 
 that the best of them is not worthy to tie the latchet of his shoe. 
 But what has all this to do with the merits of my argument ? You 
 left it untouched, and there it remains, a lasting barrier against the 
 possibility of proving inspiration on your principles. 
 
 Never was there a better illustration of the Nero-fiddling- 
 whilst-Rome-was-burning policy, than you afford to-day. You 
 fill over three columns with all kind of irrelevant matter, whilst 
 not one proof exists on paper to-day in favor of inspiration, but 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ^r 
 
 three columns of cuttle-fish tactics are exhausted to cover one of 
 the most ignominious and damaging retreats ever witnessed. 
 
 For shame ! how can any christian gentleman degrade him- 
 self by such unworthy makeshifts ? Dare to be honest ! We are 
 all anxiously awaiting the proofs of inspiration. It is too late to 
 dodge now — had you not undertaken to do so, you might have 
 backed out under some clever pretence, or the manly admission 
 that you were deceived in supposing that you possessed proofs, 
 whereas you know now you have none. Unless this be done, 
 the effect is damaging to yourself and cause, for the cause that 
 would require such a course, cannot he the cause of truth. 
 
 By the bye, I beg leave to return my acknowledgments rever- 
 end sir, for your kind proffer of a treatise on philosophy, and 
 that I may not be outdone in generosity, may I beg your accep- 
 tance of a grammar of the English language — but I fear it is 
 ^^ most too late^' to use your own grammatical (?) phrase. 
 
 I now proceed to pay my respects to what you call your ca- 
 non ; but before so doing, I will beg leave to recall for the bene- 
 fit of my readers an incident of my youth, which perhaps, more 
 than any other cause, induced me to cast my lot in this Western 
 hemisphere. I recount this anecdote for the purpose of afford- 
 ing to my readers a just appreciation of the question now about 
 to be discussed. 
 
 One morning in harvest time, the Protestant clergyman resi- 
 ding in my father's parish called at our house, accompanied by a 
 bailiff; he summoned my father to visit his (my father's) lands, 
 where his crops of wheat, oats, barley, hay, &c., were all stacked. 
 My father obeying the summons, with this stripling forming 
 his rear guard, had the pleasure to hear instructions given by the 
 reverend gentleman to his attendent to bring his vehicles next day, 
 and carry off every tenth stack of wheat, oats, barley, hay, &c., 
 to be found on my father's lands, and in the spirit of christian 
 self-denial, he, in every instance, chose the largest. My rea- 
 ders will ask, why this ? I asked my heart-sick father the same 
 question and receive for an answer : My boy, the laws of the 
 land authorize the Protestant preacher to take a tithe or tenth 
 part of the annual produce of our lands, and although there is 
 no equivalent offered or received (for I should as soon call for 
 the spiritual services of the hangman as for his, under any cir- 
 
^Q THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 cumstances), yet the laws of England, authorize him to appro- 
 priate my hard earnings, and his conscience is nothing loath. 
 
 Had this reverend gentleman, whilst superintending the trans- 
 fer of my father's toil to his farm-yard and granary in the rear of 
 his stately mansion, next day, in the exercise of his legalized act 
 of robbery and comparing the quality of the grain, &c., now in 
 his wagons with that yet in my father's possession, said to my 
 father; Our grain is perfectly alike in quality^ in what terms 
 would you, reverend sir, characterize such a remark? The 
 application I shall now make. You assure me that our bibles 
 are identical as to quality, but that as to quantity, I possess some- 
 what more, and you then proceed to justify your rejection of what 
 you deem useless, or even noxious, and follow up this rejection by 
 the inevitable onslaught on Popery, asserting what you may believe 
 to be true, but what I know to be false ; for example, pronoun- 
 cing the Council of Laodicea to be a General Council, and re- 
 peating the assertion^ and then seeking to place in antagonism in 
 their teachings. Pope Gregory the Great, and Pius IX. the former 
 of whom, gave Christianity to England, whilst the* latter is, with 
 similar success, restoring her — once merry and happy England — 
 rich in faith and works — to that faith which the church of Rome, 
 under the great Gregory, gave her. 
 
 But as neither the Catholic church nor her doctrines are on 
 trial in this stage of the discussion, I must not say more on this 
 subject. One word only as regards St. Gregory the Great 
 — in his commentary on the 20th chapter of Job. I have taken 
 the pains to ascertain and find that he is referring to the Books 
 of the Maccabees as not being in the Jewish Canon. What 
 becomes now of infallibility versus infallibility? 
 
 You have more than once, reverend sir, with an affectation of 
 simplicity and self-complacency, truly refreshing, told your 
 readers that our bibles, at least the new testaments, were similar. 
 Now before I discuss the secret of this amicable agreement on 
 the bible, I find it necessary to remind you that there is a little 
 hitch here which clogs the whole machinery and leaves it per- 
 fectly worthless. I will explain. The canon of the scriptures 
 means the catalogue or list ofithe inspired writings, but as you 
 have not yet presented a single proof that one word of the new 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 47- 
 
 testament (the exceptions referred to admitted) is the joint pro- 
 duction of the Holy Ghost and the respective writers thereof, I 
 ask, does it not strike you as supremely ridiculous to think of 
 piling up your ore before you know positively that there is a 
 grain of gold in your pile? Is it not worth while to secure your 
 hare before you set about cooking him ? 
 
 Yet, notwithstanding the apparent anomaly of the situation, 
 and because the two branches of the question are so singularly 
 interlaced, I will consent to discuss the question, or rather this 
 phrase of it, viz.: the canon, at once. 
 
 For this purpose, I will recall once more the motto on the 
 poor riddled flag, to remind you of your rule of faith. "The 
 bible and bible only, independently of church or pope^ contains the 
 whole word of God." I will now present a ^c\v undeniable facts 
 from history for the elucidation of my investigation. As you 
 are the acknowledged champion of the above motto, you will 
 not deny that the Protestant churches of this country get the 
 bible as you have it to-day, from t;he established church of 
 England. That church seceded from the Catholic church in 
 the i6th century, in the days of that paragon of purity and self- 
 denial, Henry the VHI. of blessed memory (the Redeemer in 
 accordance with a promise made to His church that He would 
 be always with her to the end of the world), in reward of king 
 Hal's holiness of life, having chosen him as his worthiest agent 
 to be found, to deliver the church of her impurities; which Hal 
 proceeded to do with a vim and energy to be equalled only by 
 the industry he displayed in getting rid of his wives, which holy 
 mission descended to his well-begotten and immaculate daughter 
 — the mantle of Elias falling gracefully and naturally on Eliseus 
 — for which they are now enjoying their reward ! In her 
 secession, she^^arried with her the bible, which she received 
 together with the gospel, from Rome ; St. Augustine having been 
 sent as his representative by Pope St. Gregory, (the same Gregory 
 whose bible was not different in any respect from that of Pius the 
 IX. of to-day), to convert to the faith the pagan Britons, whose 
 noble appearance had attracted his attention, as, passing one day 
 through the streets of Rome, he saw some British youths for sale 
 in the market ; he asked of what nation they were ? and being 
 
48 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 told that they were Angles, replied : " Non Angli sed Ajigeli forent 
 si essent Chrhtiani — they would not be Angles, but Angels, were 
 they Christians — and as soon as he could he sent out the above 
 named prelate (Augustine) and his companions to evangelize the 
 pagan Britons; which mission Augustine accomplished, bringing 
 with him the joyful tidings of salvation, which, with the Roman 
 bible, he, under God, conferred on his British converts. How 
 does this public and notorious fact of history accord, with that 
 plank in your platform "independently of Pope or church." 
 Why never was a more absurd assertion ever before hazarded 
 than this; for the conversion of England and the possession of 
 her bible (and yours therefore) are solely a?id exclusively the result 
 of the immediate and direct action of a Pope (Gregory) and of a 
 church (the Roman). How does that shot tell on the last shred 
 left of the bunting ? This is a question of fact ^ and I challenge 
 fearlessly its denial. It is, then, unquestionable that the Church 
 of England to-day and the Protestants of America owe whatever 
 Christianity and whatever apostolic records they possess to the 
 charity and zeal of Pope St. Gregory and to the church of Rome. 
 But I will anticipate an objection, viz. : that the bible might have 
 been obtained from other churches at one time or other. I an- 
 swer, I am now only dealing with a fact, which I have established,^ 
 and I assert that if ever there were a people indebted to an in- 
 dividual or institution for a valuable favor or gift, it is the English 
 people, who should hold in veneration, ever,^ the names of Gregory 
 and Augustine, who laid the foundation of Christianity in their 
 island, and placed in their hands that volume (call it what you will) 
 which they appear to prize so highly. Nor should the above 
 names be less dear to American christians, who are equally under 
 obligations to the same as the English are. But, alas ! where is 
 the testimony of gratitude exhibited by either ? George Washington 
 won by his sword the liberties of the American States — his mem- 
 ory is held sacred in the hearts of a free people. Gregory and 
 Augustine, whose zeal urged them to bestow on a race of pagans 
 the true liberty of the gospel, are ignored; and what is worse, 
 by far, their memories even insulted in the presence of their 
 spouse, the church of Christ (the Roman church), and by none 
 more than you, reverend sir, whose talents and eloquence are 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 49 
 
 never better displayed than when your tongue and pen are occu- 
 pied in vilHfying and "bearing false witness against her who has 
 begotten you in Jesus Christ," and to whom, as I have shown 
 to-day, you owe whatsoever of Christianity you possess. St. Cyp- 
 rian says, "He cannot have God for his P'ather who has not the 
 church for his Mother," and your mother in the flesh has no 
 stronger claim upon your obedience and filial love than the spiritual 
 mother, whom you cannot find terms sufficiently harsh to abuse. 
 She, however, like her Divine Spouse pendant from the Cross, 
 ceases not to pray for her ungrateful children: "Father forgive 
 them ; they know not what they do." If in the future, you re- 
 fuse, in your pride, to recognize your spiritual mother, let me 
 conjure you, reverend sir, to cease your abuse of her. She has 
 had millions of ungrateful children for the past eighteen centuries, 
 who devoted themselves to the same occupation — they have 
 passed away to receive from her Spouse, Jesus Christ, their re- 
 ward. But I have been unconsciously carried away by my sym- 
 pathy for my beloved mother church — how little do thy enemies 
 know thy beauties, my mother ! " But if ever / forget thee, O* 
 Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten ! Let my tongue- 
 cleave to my jaws if I do not remember thee." But to resume. 
 The bible, as now used by the Protestants of this land, was, 
 therefore, in fact, the property of the Roman church, which her 
 missionaries brought with them from Rome to Britain, to confirm 
 their teachings by its testimonies, and which was legally appro- 
 priated, with all the property of the church, in the beginning of 
 her apostacy, by the monster on the throne and his sacrilegious rob- 
 ber minions, so that they and their descendants could, with equal 
 truth and equally charming naivete say to the Catholics of to-day, 
 as you have already said, reverend sir, "Behold! how much alike 
 our bibles are!" as the clerical robber, in the anecdote above, 
 could have said to my father: "How much cz^r grain and hav 
 resemble." 
 
 But you will say: "Whilst we have to admit that Rome gave 
 us the present Canon, yet might we not have obtained it from 
 any of the other churches at that time?" I answer that that 
 would be impossible, unless from such churches as had already 
 adopted the Roman Canon ; and to prove I am correct in my 
 
60 
 
 THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 reply, I shall concisely give the history of the Roman Canon from 
 the time of its definition by the Council of Trent to its birth, and 
 declare myself prepared with the necessary documents to main- 
 tain my statements. 
 
 The council of Trent declared as canonical or inspired, the 
 present Roman bible. That decree is perfectly identical with 
 the canon of Pope Eugenius IV., A.D. 1439. The canon of 
 Eugenius IV., which was taken from that of Pope Gelasius, in 
 his decree, A.D. 494, was the same canon precisely as that of 
 Pope Innocent L, in his epistle to Exuperius, and also that of 
 St. Augu^ine, A.D. 490 (Letter 2d, De Doctrina Christiana)^ 
 and of the Third Plenary Council of Carthage, celebrated A.D. 
 397, and of the council of Hippo, A.D. 393. It is evident that 
 the canon of the church of Rome in the fourth century 
 was identical with that of the council of Trent in the sixteenth; 
 and it is, besides, evident that the church of Africa had the same 
 canon that we have to-day, and that she received it, with her 
 faith, from Rome, in the beginning of the second or at the close 
 of the first century. This is testified to by Pope Innocent I., 
 epistle 25th, to Bishop Decentius, by Tertullian, and by St. 
 Augustine, who repeatedly testifies to the fact. From all this, 
 it is conclusive that the present canon was that of the Roman 
 church at the close of the first century ; and this is put beyond 
 peradventure by the first epistle of Pope St. Clement, the 
 third successor of St. Peter, and whose name St. Paul says, is 
 written in the Book of Life, who, writing to the Corinthians, 
 makes mention of, and quotes from, almost all the writers of the 
 old and new testaments, including Wisdom, Judith, Ecclesiasticus 
 and the Maccabees. Pope St. Clement makes no mention of the 
 Gospel of St. John, nor of Revelations — hence the learned con- 
 clude that the epistle of Clement was written before the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem and the Temple, and the fact is testified to 
 that St. John had not written the Revelations until after the fall 
 of Jerusalem. The conclusion is therefore inevitable, that the 
 self-same canon, book for book^ which the Catholic church uses 
 to-day, is precisely that which her Pope St. Clement, the friend 
 and companion of the apostles, testifies to, excepting Revelations 
 (because it was not yet written), and which only in the lapse of 
 
THE KEY TO THUE CHRISTIANITY. g^ 
 
 time had been received by the different churches, until all the 
 churches of the world received it and now acknowledge it — but 
 which no particular church had received whole and entire until she 
 dropped intb hne, adopting the Roman canon. 
 
 I have, reverend sir, with that shot I fired at that remnant of 
 the inscription, " Independent of church or pope," carried it away, 
 proving its utter falsehood by the fact that you get your bible from 
 church and pope^ and moreover, that it was an impossibility that 
 you could get it otherwise; for every particular church that ever 
 existed adopted the canon of the Roman Church, from the days 
 of Pope St. Clement. 
 
 But I read in your King James' edition, that this bible has been 
 translated out of the ^^ original tongue s^'* and diligently revised 
 and corrected. High sounding phrases and calculated to give as- 
 surance to the simple and unwary ! Surely we are not, then, un- 
 der obligations to the Roman Catholic church ! I admit that 
 much diligence has been evinced by Protestant biblical scholars 
 in seeking to obtain for themselves, and communicate to others, 
 knowledge of the bible in a philological point of view; but could 
 ''the straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel" process be bet- 
 ter illustrated than in their efforts ? Instead of seeking to elevate 
 the human character of the work which they fear to venture on, 
 and which, whenever tried, they have abandoned in despair, they 
 are content to exhaust their energies, groping like moles in the dark 
 recesses of, to say the least, equivocal abysses, without the faint- 
 est hope of being ever able to consummate their work, for the 
 simple reason that they have improvidently cast from them the 
 key that can alone unlock the treasures of God*s riches and prove them 
 to be the gift of the Holy Ghost to man^ viz. : that church, the pillar 
 and ground of truth which fesus Christ commands us to hear. 
 
 But what is meant by the original tongues? Where are the 
 original scriptures ? St. Jerome, the greatest biblical giant that 
 ever lived, and who lived in the infancy of the church, could not 
 .say in what language St. Matthew wrote his Gospel, nor whether 
 St. Paul wrote to the Hebrews in Greek or Hebrew. So much 
 for any hope from the original documents ! The oldest Hebrew 
 manuscript now in existence dates back only to the eleventh 
 century, and during the immense period intervening, must have 
 
g2 THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 gone through i,ooo transcriptions, subject to all the changes in- 
 separable from the ignorance, prejudices, carelessness and dis- 
 honesty of that multitude of copyists. Surely such a resource as 
 this whereon to build one's hope of securing the word of God 
 (that is, when we have proved it so) is pitiable and absurd. 
 
 And now as to the Greek originals ; there is not one of them in 
 existence. The oldest of the copies which have survived the 
 ravages of time, is in the Vatican Library in Rome. It is want- 
 ing in portions of Genesis and the Psalms, and the new testa- 
 ment thereof lacks several of St. Paul's Epistles. The next in 
 antiquity begins with the sixth verse of the twenty-fifth chapter 
 of St. Matthew, (giving only three full chapters thereof), and 
 lacks some of St. John's Gospel. The third, called the 
 " Codex Rescriptus Ephraimi," is deficient in many parts of the 
 new testament. The fourth, called Codex Cantabrigiencis, 
 wants also several parts of the new testament. The fifth and 
 sixth contain only the Epistles of St. Paul. The seventh, eighth 
 and ninth are also wanting in integrity. The eighth contains 
 only the four gospels. 
 
 These are the sources whence you seek to emancipate yourself 
 from the thraldom of Rome ! this the result of the boast of in- 
 dependence of church or Pope ! Now these are not only indi- 
 vidually defective as to parts, but they are in many places in 
 marked opposition to each other. Six out of the nine manuscripts 
 belong to the Catholic church ; besides it is impossihle to get a 
 copy of the new testament out of them all. What now becomes 
 of the bible and bible only .? Now, reverend sir, I have stated 
 only facts in all this. And from the time you have professed to 
 derive your bible from the "original tongues," how have you 
 swum without corks } Not to refer to any contradictions re- 
 ferred to in my last letter, hear what a sound and staunch sup- 
 porter of Protestantism in our day says of the same production 
 revised, &c., from the original tongues ! Mr. D'Israeli, in his 
 " Curiosities of Literature," says of English bibles, that no book 
 ever yet swarmed with such " innumerable errors." Again he 
 says: '* One bible swarmed with six thousand faults." "In 
 other bibles we may find errors so abundant as to reduce the 
 text to nonsense or blasphemy, and make the scriptures con- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ro 
 
 temptible." Hear also what the bishops and clergy of England 
 said of their own King Jamea' Bible. " Our translation takes 
 from the text and adds to the text ; it obscures and changes the 
 meaning of the Holy Ghost ; it is a translation that is absurd 
 and senseless^ perverting the meaning of the Holy Ghost." I 
 hope you were never before aware of all this. How much 
 better had it been, had you devoted the time, labor and talents 
 that God has placed at your disposal, to an investigation of the 
 foundation oi your own faith ^ rather than employ the same in the 
 abuse of that mother who has begotten you in Jesus Christ ; 
 who has given you all the Christianity you possess, and to 
 whom you are indebted (from whatever point of view you regard 
 it) for the apostolic writings — not the word of God — for until you 
 come to the bosom of your mother, and recognize her whom St. 
 Paul calls " the pillar and ground of truth," you never can as a 
 rational heing know that you have the word of God. But to 
 resume. 
 
 What is now left of the flag? Where now is your indepen- 
 dence of church and pope ? Could any claim be more worth- 
 less than yours ? But you will say, we rejected the Apocrypha 
 of the Old Testament. Tou rejected what 8t. Clement received! 
 You rejected them on what grounds ? Such grounds as you 
 furnished in your last, in reference to the Maccabees ? Were I 
 disposed to deviate from the line of argument laid down, viz. : 
 The non-introduction of any irrelevant matter (for the Catholic 
 rule of faith is not on its trial but your's is) I would riddle to 
 shreds the frivolous objections offered especially against the Mac- 
 cabees, and furnish stronger objections than you have done. 
 
 The best reason you can furnish for your refusal to admit 
 them, is that given by the Irish Protestant schoolmaster, when 
 asked by the boy why they (Protestants) had only two sacraments^ 
 answered, because the Papists have seven. Never was illustra- 
 tion more appropriate than this. Now, reverend sir, before I 
 close this letter, let us review the situation. You opened this 
 controversy by attempting to prove that the bible, as you pos- 
 sess it, was and is, a Divine Revelation — this you proposed to do 
 under a flag bearing the inscription, " the bible and bible only, 
 without note or comment, independent of church or pope .^ contains 
 
g^ lilt Jv±;i TU TKUE UHKISTIANITY. 
 
 the whole revelation from God to man," and with what degree 
 of success ? You have not yet proved one word of it (the excep- 
 tions already named admitted) to be other than the productions 
 of the pen of Matthew, Mark, &c., respectively. You have 
 not furnished the shadow of a proof of any interference of the 
 Holy Ghost in the acts of the writers. You undertook to estab- 
 lish a canon ! of what ? not of inspired writings — for not a word 
 of the writers has been proved inspired. On the contrary, the 
 flag under whose folds you went into battle has now came out 
 with the naked stafF and a meaningless shred, on which the cu- 
 rious may be able to decipher the words, "without note or com- 
 ment," which, if they have any meaning at all, now signify that 
 certain writers, eight in number, wrote after the departure of 
 Jesus Christ from the earth, certain papers which the Roman 
 church, in those very days, collected together. In connection 
 with the volume of the Old Law, and which she has ever since 
 carefully preserved for reasons highly appreciative to herself, and 
 which, together with much other valuable property, her declared 
 enemies have appropriated without note or comment^ like the 
 Episcopal preacher used to do my father's crops, but which, in 
 their hands, are comparatively useless, inasmuch as they peremp- 
 torily have flung away the key to the lock which holds these 
 treasures, viz. : The only unerring witness that Is competent to 
 testify to their supernatural origin and that can interpret the will 
 of God contained in them. 
 
 In a word, you have had In your possession a catalogue or col- 
 lection of writings which were compiled together by the Roman 
 Church, which have ever been as a whole^ in her possession 
 exclusively^ which have been carried with the Gospel wherever 
 preached by her missionaries — to which she alone possesses a 
 right claim by prescription — to which she attributes a divine 
 origin, which she alone can prove to exist, and which her enemies 
 have no moral right to lay claim to, and which, when in the 
 hands of her enemies, no matter how well-disposed otherwise, is 
 a non-descript being, neither human nor divine — a ship without rud- 
 der or compass, a law without a judge or interpreter, a teacher 
 that never yet uttered a syllable of instruction, and an oracle 
 whose lips have never yet opened, but who, (if what the wor- 
 shippers at her shrine say be true) not only when consulted, speaks 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 55 
 
 ambiguously, but delivers herself of innumerable contradictions ; 
 witness the countless sects that profess to derive their inspira- 
 tion, mutually contradictory of each other, from her lips, whilst 
 in fact, her lips are a sealed hook unless to her, who is both her 
 witness and interpreter. 
 
 Respectfully, &c., 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
 SCENE. — On the banks of the Elizabeth, at the " City by the 
 Sea." — Dramatis per some — Jack and George, amateur fishermen. 
 
 Jack. — Say, George, got tired of this 'ere fishin' for "inspira- 
 tions," as the old fellow called them ? For my part, I ain't goin* 
 to stand this any longer. 
 
 George. — Guess, Jack, if we go on at this rate we'll never 
 catch a "canon," that's what he calls a string of this 'ere fish. 
 
 Jack. — Wonder how the old fellow himself succeeded as a 
 fisherman of "inspirations?" Did he ever catch a "canon?" 
 
 George. — Guess he caught a Tartar lately : he came in con- 
 tact with a Catholic Priest about this 'ere thing, and they say the 
 Priest is " fetching him up " with a round turn. 
 
 Jack. — I have noticed that all through life some people are 
 not satisfied with getting along quietly, but are all the time, like 
 the Irishman at Donnybrook Fair, asking some gintleman or 
 other to oblige him by treading on the tail of his coat. 
 
 George. — Such gents as these are spoilin' for a fight, till some 
 one at last gets even with them. But I'm tired. I believe that 
 man imagined these 'ere fish. I don't believe they exist anyhow. 
 
 Jack. — You're mistaken about that, George, the good book 
 says there was an old fisherman named Peter, out of whose boat 
 the Master fished, and that the Lord gave him and his descend- 
 ants the patent-right to catch the canon, and that that family 
 alone know how to catch, dress, and prepare for the table, this 
 'ere fish, in short order: for the Lord showed them himself how 
 to fix it, and they have been using this 'ere inspiration, for bait, 
 ever since, and the shoals of all kinds of fish that they catch with 
 this 'ere bait is wonderful. It is a family secret — there's no one 
 but the Lord and themselves in it. 
 
56 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 George. — Jack, why didn't you tell me this before ? I don'l 
 believe that man knew what he was talking about. Anyhow, 
 they say that the Priest, who is one of old Peter's household, is 
 ROW showing him a thing or two about this 'ere fishing for " in- 
 spiration." I'm fagged out ; let's haul in our lines. 
 
 Jack. — " Barkis is willin' : " here goes; my bait is just as I 
 threw it out — not a nibble. 
 
 George. — Jack ! come here ! my hook has got somethin' — 
 guess by the weight I have got a whole " canon.*' Let's haul 
 in carefully. 
 
 Jack. — George, what's that 'ere spar got to do with your 
 *' canon ? " it's comin' in with the rest. 
 
 George. — Look here ! I've got an old rag tagged on to my 
 hook and that spar is tagged on to the rag. Let's get it ashore 
 anyhow. Look here ! there's something printed on it. '^'^ With- 
 out note or comment'* Now I've got it — that's all's left of the 
 flag under which the Preacher fought the Priest. My ! what a 
 riddling ! don't saucy boys get dirty jackets ? 
 
 Jack. — George ! If I had known this 'ere thing long ago, I 
 shouldn't to-day be losing my time and patience, fishing for 
 "inspirations" with that bait. If we want to succeed, George, 
 there's only one way to do it. Let's see what the representative 
 of old Peter has got to say about it. " Live and learn " is my 
 motto hereafter. What's to be done with this " relic of old 
 decency ? " We have no further use for it. Inspiration under 
 Peter's teaching or rationalism hereafter for me. 
 
 George. — Farewell ! old reHc ! Jack and I are going for bait 
 to Peter's man. Exeunt George and Jack. 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 67 
 
 NORFOLK, SEPTEMBER 9, 1872. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 How dost til', I say, adventure thus 
 
 T' oppose thy lumber against us ? 
 
 Could thine impertinence find out 
 
 No work to employ itself about. 
 
 Where then secure from wooden blow, 
 
 Thy busy vanity might show ? 
 
 Was no dispute afoot between 
 
 The Caterwauling brethern? 
 
 No subtle question raised among 
 
 Those out-o' -their wits, and those i' the wrong? 
 
 — Uudihras, Canto 2d. 
 
 Dear Sir : Your letter has just come to hand. I hasten to 
 reply. Its first sentence Is couched in the following terms : 
 " As your letters are chiefly replies, not to the articles of mine 
 they immediately follow, but to the preceding ones, &c." In 
 the language of the outraged lawyer: "I deny the allegation and 
 defy the alligator" to the proof. Take for instance my last let- 
 ter : Is not the greater part of one column devoted to an expo- 
 sure of the inconsecutiveness of your last? Have I not therein 
 expressed my own disappointm.ent, and that of the public at your 
 utter failure, in that letter, to meet our wishes and comply with 
 the terms of a compact which you advisedly and deliberately 
 made with me in the presence of more than thirty thousand peo- 
 ple ? And yet you, in the face of these facts, make the above 
 assertion! Sure the cause must be "/« extremis^* that requires 
 such "dodging" as this. 
 
 And the public are, to-day, treated to a disquisition on the In- 
 spiration of the scriptures, impregnably fortified by the "reserves" 
 that were so long coming up ! Ah ! reverend sir, you were pre- 
 paring a surprise for your friends and the public! You have 
 been marshaling the reserves for the final blow, all this time, 
 and now surely they are forthcoming ! Alas ! -we are once more 
 doomed to disappointment. We are treated this morning to a 
 lengthy article on the right of private judgment to interpret and 
 discuss, ad infinitum^ the writings of Matthew, Mark, Paul, 
 Luke, and their fellow-writers, as you possess the right to in- 
 terpret Livy, Xenophon or any other writer. You might have 
 
53 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 saved yourself all that trouble. Your right was conceded before 
 you began. But when you claim the right to interpret the above 
 writings as a joint result of the spirit of God and the writers, 
 this is something else. It will be first necessary to prove the 
 participation of the Holy Spirit in the works of these writers be- 
 fore you constitute yourself the mirror through which the Divine 
 mind manifests itself. You have undertaken in your usually 
 logical (?) way, to cook your hare before you caught him. 
 
 But I ask, in the name of reason and common sense, has your 
 respect for the intelligence of this- community been reduced to so 
 low" an ebb, are you so utterly regardless of what you owe them 
 as to be induced to believe that you can thus persistently evade 
 the question after this fashion ? For my part, as an honest man, 
 rather than be guilty of such tactics, I should honestly throw 
 down my arms, acknowledge manfully my defeat, and be the 
 first to congratulate my opponent on his success. 
 
 However, to keep my readers posted constantly on the current 
 phase of this discussion, it is necessary once more to summarize. 
 
 On the 28th July, you wrote me to this effect : "You may 
 select the first subject of debate — as soon as you choose the 
 medium through which we will address the public, you shall 
 have my reply." So far honest and straightforward. Next day's 
 Virginian brought you the following, consequent on the above 
 invitation : 
 
 "As you give me the choice of the first subject to be discussed, 
 1 choose the bible. My reason for so doing is this : I have an 
 idea that the war-cry of the bible and bible only, without note 
 or comment, cannot be sustained ; hence before I could consent 
 that you quote it as the word of God, (although perfectly willing 
 that you do so as a genuine, truthful narrative of such events as 
 it treats of) you will have to prove your right to do so, as I did, 
 before you attack any doctrine of the Catholic church. You 
 will therefore, proceed to show: ist. The divine inspiration of 
 the bible, in other words, that it is not a human, but divine pro- 
 duction. 2d. You will please establish your canon of the scrip- 
 tures. 3d. You will vindicate the right to interpret, ivhat you 
 have already proved to he the word of God^ by private judgment. 
 These points being satisfactorily demonstrated^ I am prepared unequivo- 
 cally to admit your right to the scriptures as "the word of God,'* 
 
KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 69 
 
 and to sustain ?.ny doctrine of the Catholic church, which you 
 may feel disposed to assail." 
 
 This programme of points for debate was implicitly accepted 
 
 by you, as your letter of the plainly indicates. A letter 
 
 bearing that date, ostensibly written in proof of the inspiration of 
 the Scriptures from your point of view, but which was filled with 
 vituperation against your bete noir — the Catholic church, con- 
 tained, at its fag-end, an attempt to prove the inspiration from a 
 three-fold point of view. These proofs were successively dis- 
 posed of in my subsequent letter, and no attempt has since been 
 made to resurrect them. These were the only proofs ever brought. 
 A statement made by you in a subsequent letter contained the 
 following: "The public will, of course, understand that I do 
 not propose to offer such proofs on the subject as I would pre- 
 sent to a class of students or a set of skeptics." 
 
 Must I alas ! once more find it necessary to remind you of 
 the terms of your contract with me and the public ? Have you 
 yet advanced one step towards the fulfilment of them ? Where 
 are the proofs for the inspiration of the Scriptures ? I must pre- 
 sume still that you spoke truthfully when you wrote the above 
 sentence. Have you read my last letter on this point ? What 
 can be thought of one who deliberately ignores a public compact 
 he makes in presence of thirty thousand people and more ? and 
 what savors of the deepest treachery towards his cause — his own 
 word being pledged for the existence of these proofs and their 
 availability, he, in the midst of the conflict, and with a most dis- 
 astrous defeat staring him in the face, and inevitably too, refuses 
 doggedly to bring forth those reserves that, perhaps, would turn 
 the tide of fortune ? Never in the history of polemics was a 
 combatant so impaled ! and after all that was written on this sub- 
 ject in my last — enough to galvanize into life the last breath of 
 a sensitive dying man — we are favored to-day — not with the 
 proofs for inspiration — but with an exhausting (not exhaustive) 
 argument on the right to interpret the apostolic writers as each 
 one pleases. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, think you that I could be induced to fol- 
 low you in this irregular proceeding ? You know me better now 
 than to make me particeps criminis of a procedure so utterly illog- 
 ical. I admonished you long since that I neither would reply 
 
QQ THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 to any irrelevant matter, nor sanction Its introduction In the dis- 
 cussion, and this course I have invariably observed. But you 
 mistake, very much, the character of the public, if you think 
 that this awkward attempt to hoodwink them will avail you any- 
 thing in the exercise of your cuttle-fish tactics. They under- 
 stand that the first Instalment of your contract consisted in prov- 
 ing that the Holy Ghost was the author, in part, of the apos- 
 •tolic writings, and they understand, too, that the first effort you 
 made to do so proved such a failure that you never tried it again, 
 although they read your declaration that you hold proofs in reserve 
 for a " class of students or a set of skeptics.'* Imagine us, rev- 
 erend sir, either one or the other, or both, and, for my part, I 
 will pledge myself to hear with docility and respect the words of 
 wisdom at the feet of our new Gamaliel. 
 
 We expect, reverend sir, that as an honest man, you will keep 
 to the terms of your contract, and that as a truthful man, you 
 will keep your word pledged in the presence of the "twin cities," 
 and the numerous other readers of the Virginian. Were I In 
 your place, the sun should not set to-morrow before either my 
 candid acknowledgment of defeat, or the proofs for inspiration (if 
 they exist), should be before the eyes of the people. Never in 
 my life have I been more earnest and sincere than in this state- 
 ment. What a mockery ! Does your cause require this course 
 of conduct ? If so, then let the cause go, that would demand at 
 your hands a sacrifice of your manhood ; if not, then redeem the 
 cause from the imputation that now naturally rests on it, by ac- 
 knowledging your inability to advance one step. Reverend sir, let 
 me appeal to you to forbear this course of proceeding. The far- 
 ther you go on in this track the more you are losing caste amongst 
 men. 
 
 Throw down your arms, acknowledge the futility of your 
 eff'orts to sustain a system that I predicted never could be main- 
 tained. Other heads far more gifted than yours have abandoned 
 the effort in despair, and you will not be disgraced by yielding 
 honorably to the necessities of the case. I speak the simple 
 truth when I say it grieves me to be obliged to write publicly thus tcf 
 one whose friends speak in high terms of his qualities of head and 
 heart. But I must expose what I feel and know to be anything 
 but fair dealing. There is one feature of your letter of the 3d 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. Q^ 
 
 ich I overlooked, but which I deem worthy of advert- 
 ence, inasmuch as it bears on the inspiration of the scriptures, 
 the only legitimate question under discussion^ viz. : You find fault 
 with my reasoning or logic when I say, "There was no command 
 to write, and the proof of this is that the majority of them did 
 not write." Now, reverend sir, I repeat the expression and pro- 
 ceed to prove it : The command to write (if such exist, and 
 which must be proved by testimony), was written as a general 
 order or as one confined to some of the apostles in particular. 
 If a general command, then the majority disobeyed it, for they 
 did not write ; are you prepared for this conclusion, viz. : that the 
 majority of the apostles disobeyed the command of God ? If the 
 command was limited to some of the apostles distinct from the 
 body, that can only be known by testimony, viz. : either by the 
 words of Christ giving the command, or by the declaration of 
 the apostles themselves ; and as the burden of proof rests on you, 
 and as you have declared that Christ directed the apostles to write, 
 adduce your proofs. Otherwise my proposition remains intact, 
 viz. : There was no command to write, and the proof of this is 
 that the majority did not write. 
 
 Meanwhile, whilst awaiting the reinforcements with all the 
 equanimity at my disposal, I shall take a new departure, and 
 accepting for the present the (to me) new Shibboleth, viz. : the 
 bible and bible only, without note or comment, independent of 
 Pope or church, contains all things essential to salvation, or more 
 concisely, according to your great champion, Chillingworth, "the 
 bible is the religion of protestants." I join issue with you, and 
 now deliberately and in full possession of my mental faculties de- 
 clare that if either proposition (yours or Chillingworth's) be true, 
 a greater imposition than the system whereby Christianity was 
 propagated never existed ; whilst on the other hand, if the Re- 
 deemer adopted for the propagation of Christianity a system that 
 absolutely excludes from its precincts all contact with the bible, 
 "the rehgion of protestants," then the latter system Is an impo- 
 sition practically ignored by Jesus Christ. The latter division 
 of this disjunctive proposition I shall now proceed to demonstrate. 
 
 For the purpose of aiding more effectually the investigation I 
 will respectfully Invite you to accompany me down the stairs of 
 time, to take a peep into the dim vista of the past. In order to 
 
Q2 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY 
 
 be well provided for the journey, it is necessary to take with us 
 a good supply of " independence of church and pope" sandwiched 
 by Chillingworth's " Bible, the Religion of Protestants," and a good 
 biblical lantern and matches, to light us down the steps repre- 
 sented by the "dark ages," with a keen and ever vivid sense of 
 appreciation of what " our religion, the bible," has done for Chris- 
 tianity since Christ directed it to be written. Jllons ! Messieurs! 
 Let me precede, for I happen to be acquainted all the way. I 
 have a talisman, the sign of the cross, which is calculated, even 
 as we pass through the "dark ages," to do us service. Be care- 
 ful how you tread the first step, for it is not yet completed. 
 Now we have touched the eighteenth step and so' on for several 
 others — we are approaching the steps of the dar|£ ages — have the 
 matches and lantern in readiness ! At last, we have descended 
 to the fifteenth from the top safely. We will now rest awhile 
 here, and in the city of Rome (A. D. 313) we witness the trium- 
 phal entry of the youthful Emperor Constantlne with his victorious 
 army, preceded by the labarum "/« hoc s'lgno vinces,'^ 
 
 In his imperial edict he grants freedom of worship to the 
 christians. Immediately after his arrival he pays his respects to 
 St. Melchiades, the then Pope, of whom St. Augustine afterwards 
 wrote : An excellent man ! true son of peace ! true father of the 
 christian people! Since peace is now restored and Christianity 
 now recognized by that mammoth power that rules the destiny 
 of the world. We will look round and seek to collect some in- 
 formation regarding the condition of Christianity for the past 
 (nearly) 300 years. For this purpose we will obtain a reliable 
 and intelligent christian guide, whose ancestry in the blood and in 
 the faith gloriously spilt their blood in the amphitheatre, to the 
 cry of " Christiani ad leones.'* " Christians to the lions." We 
 invite our guide to conduct us to the catacombs where the bones 
 of millions of martyrs and confessors have been accumulating for 
 nearly three centuries. We enter the amphitheatre whereof the 
 soil for inches deep is ensanguined by their blood. Our guide, 
 in the exuberance of his joy, tells us that an edict of the Emperor 
 transforms the pagan temples into christian churches, so that no 
 longer hunted into the deep recesses of caverns, the light of God's 
 sun is about to shed its first beams upon altars erected to the 
 glory of the Maker of all things, in the new sanctuaries. Natu- 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE UHRISTIANITT gg 
 
 rally you extol in eloquent tones the superhuman faith attested to 
 by the piles of martyr bones, you sympathize with the thousands 
 of maimed and scarred confessors of the christian faith whom you 
 meet everywhere and who carry on their persons the marks of 
 their sufferings for the christian name. You hear from the lips 
 of thousands, of the agonies endured by their own parents, brothers, 
 sisters, friends, in the last persecution, and they point out with a 
 natural sadness, but, nevertheless, with an eye lustrous with 
 supernatural triumph, to the bones of those dear ones who joy- 
 fully poured out blood and life for that persecuted religion, almost 
 without cessation, since the days of the martyrdom of Peter and 
 Paul. They will also point with pride and reverence to where 
 the glorious apostles rest, where the martyred successors of Peter, 
 in the chair of Rome," sleep their last sleep," and countless other 
 objects of interest which fill the christian heart with a heavenly 
 joy and pride, and gratitude to God, who gave the grace of per- 
 severance to eleven millions of witnesses to his name and doc- 
 trines. 
 
 You will, also, whilst offering your felicitations to the survivors 
 of the tragedy of nearly 300 years duration, instructed as you 
 have been, naturally descant on the power and blessings of the 
 gospel illustrated in the suff'erings of its children, all over the 
 empire, for so many generations, and being naturally anxious to 
 secure a copy of that new testament which furnished, through 
 its pages, to 'the martyr and confessor, so much instruction, 
 strength, hope and consolation, you ask where you could pur- 
 chase a bible as a relic of these glorious days. Probably you 
 could secure one whose pages or cover is spattered with the blood 
 of one or other of these glorious martyrs ; what a treasure. 
 What a cherished memento of this glorious epoch ! But in reply 
 to your request, what do you hear ? We have never seen or heard 
 anything whereof you ask. JVe have never seen a bible. What ? 
 Was it not the bible that gave force and character to the grand 
 struggles and imparted victory to Christianity at length ? They 
 repeat their answer. TVe know not tuhat you refer to ; it never had 
 existence for us. You remonstrate against such an assertion as 
 this, and tell your informant in the words of the immortal Chil- 
 lingworth, "the bible is the religion of protestants." They 
 assure you that that may be so, but that neither they nor the 
 
 I 
 
g4 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 eleven millions of their martyred co-believers ever saw one ; that 
 such a book neither had nor has existence^ and that the only way in 
 which they received that faith which sustained them in over- 
 coming all the ingenuity of diabolical malice, was throuo-h the 
 voice of their pastors, who invariably instructed them by word of 
 mouthy as they were themselves instructed ; that, now and then, 
 in some places, certain letters, or points thereof, purporting to 
 to have been written by some of the apostles or their companions, 
 and containing some excellent christian counsel, would be read 
 to them by their pastors, but that so many spurious writings were 
 in circulation, no one could feel assured of their genuineness or 
 authenticity j that the rule of teaching was oral^ that they derived 
 their faith (that faith that was always dearer to them than their 
 lives) from the living voice of their pastors exclusively. You look 
 with amazement on your informants, you are shocked at the 
 glaring contradiction between your life-long views and their 
 statements, you cannot reconcile them. What ! millions to have 
 given their lives for the faith of Christ (and this for nearly ten 
 generations) who never saw a bible ! You question others, and 
 what you have already heard is only confirmed the more. 
 
 You again remonstrate that " the bible is the religion of protest- 
 ants;'^ they politely assure you that they do not at all seek to 
 contradict your statement ; but they assure you also, that their 
 ancestors, for 300 years nearly, were christians of the first water, 
 and prodigally poured out blood and life for their faith without 
 any aid from any such source. They declare that their pastors 
 had always taught them that Jesus Christ, their Redeemer, sent 
 His apostles, after having instructed them Himself in all things, 
 to teach, by word of mouth, others, whom they chose for that 
 same office of teaching, who, with them, would transmit all these 
 truths^ by word of mouthy to their successors, and that these paral- 
 lel lines of teachers and taught have been transmitted perpetually 
 for ten generations with the promise of Jesus Christ, that this 
 arrangement of His, will, under His superintendence continue 
 practically to do its work to the end of the world ; that there has 
 existed no other than this for 300 years, and that what you tell 
 them of the bible being the religion of protestants may be very 
 well, but that they never heard of one or the other, and that your 
 notions on such matters are all "Greek" to them; that for their 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 65 
 
 part, they know of no teacher but the teacher created by Jesus 
 Christ, His church, whose visible head is to-day Melchiades, the 
 thirty-second successor of St. Peter, who has just barely escaped 
 martyrdom through the victory of Constantine, and who can to- 
 day be found in the Vatican, having been installed there by the 
 Empress Fausta, who cheerfully gave up her palace to the high 
 priest of the Roman Empire and of the christian world. Facts 
 are stubborn things, and there is now no remedy and no escape 
 from the conviction that the golden era of Christianity, during 
 which eleven, millions of christians were baptized a second time 
 in their blood, was utterly devoid of a single copy of the bible ! 
 What a loss ! what benighted ignorance ! what an oversight in 
 the Redeemer ! surely these glorious martyrs and confessors de- 
 served to have, at least, a nice little pocket edition to carry about 
 with them, and yet our Lord deprived them of this comfort. He 
 left them in utter ignorance of the existence of "the bible, the 
 religion of pro es.ants," while they were, for 300 years, pouring 
 out their life-blood for His name and the truth of His teachings. 
 It is incomprehensible how the Redeemer could have done so (on 
 biblical principles), yet the fact is undeniable, that He entrusted 
 the teaching of mankind to a number of men who, without a hible^ 
 transmitted His doctrine to scores of millions, who proved the 
 excellency of their faith by the sacrifice of their lives (" by their 
 fruits you shall know them.") This is a lesson, reverend sir, 
 that we will take home with us. It will excite in our minds a 
 grave suspicion that " the ways of God are not your ways" in 
 this very important matter, at least. 
 
 But there is another question of importance that we will have 
 to see after, whilst here. The last letter I wrote you, took away 
 all legitimate right and title to the new testament. It is un- 
 equivocally the property of the Church of Rome, where we now 
 are, and as we desire to be independent of church or pope, we 
 must, whilst in the Empire, collect together all the available 
 material that can be found in this year (313) so that when we 
 return home, we may, as biblical students, separate out of the 
 number, what is spurious from what is genuine, what is inspired 
 from what is not so. In this way we will secure to ourselves a 
 true copy of God's word for future generations, and thus instead 
 of sponging on church and pope as we have been doing for 300 
 
66 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 years, we will have our own bible from the hands of those chris- 
 tians scattered over the broad extent of the Roman Empire, 
 through which we must travel to collect all the material available 
 to us. (A. D. 313.) 
 
 As this tour of ours is of course one of imagination only, it is 
 only necessary to state that ecclesiastical writers of the four first 
 centuries mention seventy-one Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Reve- 
 lations which have perished. During our sojourn, however, in 
 the Roman Empire we have, at greafcost and with much fatigue 
 and journeying secured for ourselves the following, which are to- 
 day extant, and from which we can select our canon independently 
 of church or pope. 
 
 There are nine Gospels now in existence, viz. : 
 
 Two of Matthew. 
 
 One of St. James, the Less, Bishop of Jerusalem. 
 
 Two of the Infancy of Jesus Christ, attributed to St. Thomas. 
 
 One of St. John. 
 
 One of St. Mark. 
 
 One of St. Luke. 
 
 One of Nicodemus. 
 
 There are in existence to-day three works, entitled Acts of the 
 Apostles : 
 
 Qjie by St. Luke. 
 
 Two by Paul and Thecla. 
 
 Of Epistles there are the following now extant : 
 Fifteen of St. Paul, the Epistle to the Laodiceans thrown out 
 by the Catholic church, for reasons satisfactory to her, and 
 whom protestantism has servilely followed in this particular, with- 
 out knowing why, although the apostle expressly mentions the 
 same epistle in his Epistle to the Colossians, and commands it to 
 be read by them. This epistle is in existence to-day, and there 
 is high protestant authority for its genuineness, yet it is excluded 
 from the canon. Can this be explained ? 
 
 Two Epistles of Peter. 
 Three " of John. 
 One " of Jude. 
 Two " of Clement to the Corinthians. 
 
 (This is the Clement whose name, St. Paul says, is written In 
 the Book of Life. Why his two epistles should be rejected, 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. Q'j 
 
 whilst the gospels of Mark and Luke should be received, ought 
 to be carefully ascertained.) 
 
 One Epistle of St. Barnabas, an apostle, whose epistle is not 
 in the canon, whilst the writings of Mark and Luke, no apostles, 
 are to be found there. This, too, deserves attention. 
 
 Six Epistles of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Tral- 
 lians, Romans, Philadelphians and Smyrnaens. 
 
 One Epistle of Polycarp.* 
 One " of Polycarp to the Phillippians. 
 One Book of Hermas called the Visions. 
 Two Books of Hermas called the Commands. 
 Three " " " Simihtudes. 
 
 Finally, the Revelations of St. John. 
 
 Behold the existing material wherewith to provide a canon ! 
 all these are now at hand to furnish the " Lex scripta " of biblical 
 christians "independently of church or pope." No borrowed 
 material after, this, especially from an institution that apostatized 
 from the truth centuries ago ! 
 
 Let us take a glance at the nine gospels left us. As Mark 
 and Luke were not apostles, I should prefer giving precedence to 
 the Gospel of James, who wrote the Proto-evangelion (which is 
 within a few inches of the hand that pens these lines), it was 
 regarded as genuine, and was pubhcly read as canonical in the 
 Eastern churches. In your investigation, you will consider that 
 James was the kinsman of our Lord, hence his gospel ought surely 
 take precedence of those of A4ark and Luke. Again the gospel of 
 Nicodemus, let me say a word or two in his behalf. He was a 
 good man, beloved by our Lord, and the gospel was believed to 
 have been written by him. After you have convinced yourself 
 of its genuineness, give it a place in your canon. Don't over- 
 look the Gospels of the Infancy, attributed to St. Thomas. 
 Why it looks, after all, as if all the apostles had written, and 
 perhaps, too, by the command of Jesus Christ, to be found in 
 that immense list ; perhaps the order could be found in the 
 rejected Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans, which he commanded 
 the Colossians to read, (4 c. i6v). Being thus provided with the 
 material necessary to make "a new departure," independently of 
 church or pope, it remains for us to retrace our steps, and return- 
 ing by the same route, we will halt by the way, and resting our- 
 
68 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 selves for a while, lay down our material for a new bible, stop on 
 the fifteenth step of the stairs and prospect awhile. 
 
 It is a week or two before the discovery of the art of printing. 
 Surely we can now, without difficulty, furnish ourselves with the 
 Word of God, and boldly proclaim our faith in the bible as the 
 religion of protestants ; but, alas ! there is reason to fear a diffi- 
 culty here, too. In England we will be accommodated, if it be 
 possible. You ask for a book-store ; they tell you they know 
 of no such establishment. You say you want to furnish your- 
 self with a bible ; they tell you that a bible would cost a king's 
 ransom. How is that ? They inform you that those vi^ho tran- 
 scribed the bible did so on parchment ; that the early manuscripts 
 of the scriptures were all written in uncial or capital letters, each 
 separated from the other, and somewhat similar to what we see 
 now on a sign-board ; that in order, therefore, to form a just esti- 
 mate of the value of a bible, the parchment, the quality thereof, 
 and the skill of the writer must be considered ; that you will 
 have, in a word, to purchase the fruits of nearly a lifetime of an 
 amanuensis whose services are, on account of his skill and learn- 
 ing, perhaps placed at a higher rate than those of any other man, 
 and hence you must calculate the enormous cost. Your funds 
 will not authorize such a luxury as this, and you, good bible man, 
 must do without your greatest treasure. This is enough to enrage 
 a saint. Where can you get a bible, if only to get a look at one? 
 Go to yonder monastery and perhaps they will accommodate you 
 with a look at the curiosity. But will they sell me one ? Yes, 
 perhaps, if you can afford to purchase it. There are monks in 
 every monastery whose lives are constantly occupied in transcrib- 
 ing the Word of God. You ask the superioj-, are not the people 
 supplied with the Word of God ? He replies, yes, through the 
 teachings of their legitimate pastors, precisely as Jesus Christ 
 taught, as he sent the apostles to teach, as the martyr-christians 
 were taught, in accordance with the arrangement established by 
 the Redeemer Himself. " Faith," as the apostle says, " comes 
 by hearing," and no change whatsoever has taken place in this 
 plan of Jesus Christ for nearly fifteen centuries. But has it not 
 entered into the plans of Jesus Christ that every christian could 
 have his own bible ? // is physically impossible that it could he so^ 
 for not all the transcribers on earth could furnish a bible to onu 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY gg 
 
 christian in every half milHon ; but then there is another impos- 
 sibility, viz. : that not one in a half million could afford to buy 
 one. Some powerful and wealthy nobleman may have the means 
 to permit himself to indulge in such a luxury, but only such, and 
 how few are these ? You are paralyzed by this shock. What ? 
 has God betrayed the interests of Christianity so that scarcely one 
 man in 500,000 could possess His Word in this fifteenth century? 
 It was bad enough when we tarried in Rome in the days of Con- 
 stantine, when there was not in existence on this earth a bible, 
 for there was no opportunity to collect the fragments of the 
 written Word, although it must be confessed that the best chris- 
 tians that ever lived did without its aid, but now, at the interval 
 of 1200 years, that it is practically impossible for one man in a 
 half million to have the Word of God, " is a hard saying, and 
 who can hear it ?'* Nearly 1500 years from the dawn of Chris- 
 tianity, and not one man in 500,000 to have it in his power to 
 supply himself with a copy of God's Word ! What has God 
 been thinking of? Hold ! my erring friends ; don't blaspheme ! 
 God's ways are certainly not your ways. Ask these good people 
 has God abandoned his interest in Christianity ? Have all chris- 
 tians ceased to exist ? No, is the reply ; the world is full of 
 them to-day (15th century). The same answer was given by 
 Tertullian in his Apologia; notwithstanding the terrible persecu- 
 tions, the court, the camp, every rank of life has its quota of 
 christians full of faith, and all this without having had the luxury 
 of a bible. The great Columbus, whose genius gave, in this 
 very age, a continent to the world, was as good a christian as 
 you or I, and probably he never read a word from a bible. 
 
 There is here an antagonism of the most decided and formida- 
 ble character between God's arrangements for the propagation of 
 Christianity and your theory. Jesus Christ converted the pagan 
 world to Christianity, and preserved it so converted for fifteen 
 centuries by a plan adopted by Himself, and which is in direct 
 opposition to your speculations. Had He adopted your plan He 
 would have inspired some man created a century before His 
 coming on earth in the flesh, with the idea of printing, so that 
 when He did come. His Word, which He would have written 
 Himself, or ordered to have written (neither of which he did), 
 would be forthwith transmitted to mankind, or he would have 
 
70 THE KEY TO TPtUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 deferred his coming to the sixteenth century of our era, so that 
 the art of printing might become the great lever for christianizing 
 mankind. 
 
 Now^ He has done neither of these. He has made his own 
 arrangements, which differ ^^ toto ccelo'* from yours, and unless 
 you can show that since the discovery of the art of printing, He 
 has altered the course that he adopted and maintained for the 
 christianizing of the world, it Is inevitably conclusive that your 
 theory, to-day, is as much opposed to the workings of the Re- 
 deemer's plans from the beginning, as pole Is opposed to pole. 
 Hence it is necessarily concluded that, although " the bible be 
 the religion of protestants," from the above array of terrible*facts, 
 covering a period of eighteen and a half centuries, it is not the 
 religion of Jesus Christy for He has utterly ignored it from the begin- 
 ning. Moreover, point me out the nation that has ever been 
 evangelized on the bible theory, although untold millions have 
 been expended in developing the fruitless project. " By their 
 fruits you shall know them." Can any theory, therefore, be 
 more fallacious than this ? One that is in direct opposition to 
 the Divine arrangements for the propagation of the gospel. In the 
 beginning, development and permanence of the tradition of the 
 gospel of Jesus Christ to the world. 
 
 Having returned from our tour, let me ask, reverend sir, what 
 course you propose ? A new departure is absolutely necessary ; 
 either the one organized by Jesus Christ Himself, and which, in 
 virtue of His promises. He has guided and superintended from 
 the day He sent His apostles with the commission to teach all 
 nations, or the cutting out of a new track j the old one, viz., the 
 present bible, being the exclusive property of the Catholic Church 
 (as I proved in my last), and which, as honorable men, you ought 
 not retain without her sanction. Besides, you know, It re- 
 mains in your hands a mere human production, every attempt to 
 prove it divinely inspired having failed thus far. You brought 
 with you from the visit we made, in addition to the astounding 
 facts so contradictory and destructive of our cherished hobby that 
 God gave the bible, cut and dry, to man, to evangelize the world, 
 you brought, I say, with you, the material from which you are 
 at liberty to frame a bible of your own. Be independent of Rome 
 in fact; persevere in your new-fangled theory of evangelizing the 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 71 
 
 world, in opposition to the settled and permanent plan of Jesus Christ 
 for now nearly eighteen and a half centuries. Commence, then, at 
 once, start for yourselves, independent of church, pope, or God 
 Himself. His mode of doing things did not suit you. When 
 the glorious reformation took root on the earth, the Redeemer 
 should have availed Himself of its power, combined with the 
 great lever of printing, and indicated His desire to keep pace with 
 the march of progress. How terrible are such ideas as these, but 
 yet (pardon them, O Lord ! they know not what they do) are 
 they not the immediate effects of the terrible treachery and rebel- 
 lion against God's plans of eighteen and a half centuries' standing 
 for the salvation of mankind \ 
 
 Go to work, then, in your independent course! You have 
 with you the material. Select all genuine and authentic works from 
 the spurious, and after you have done all this, be prepared to 
 bring forth these reserved proofs for inspiration, which you say 
 you possess, and after you have proved the inspiration of your 
 new canon, start your new gospel in opposition to the plan 
 adopted by Jesus Christ, which course your ancestors, 300 years 
 ago, should have pursued^ collating, as I have suggested you to do, 
 all the available writings of the apostolic age, when they threw 
 off their allegiance to the supreme pontiff; or foreseeing, by 
 God's grace, the Insuperable obstacles to your success (seeing 
 that you were not able to prove one word of the biblical writings, 
 with which you are familiar, to be inspired), acknowledge the 
 sole teacher of Christianity, created by the Redeemer Himself to 
 evangelize the world^ which mission she has been occupied with 
 for eighteen and a half centuries, and then you will hearken to 
 her voice declaring, as the only supernatural witness available, 
 that the apostolic writings are inspired by the spirit of God. Thus 
 only can you know the fact. 
 
 I cannot close this letter without adverting to a sentence or 
 two in yours of this morning. You say that "the discussion of 
 the catholic rule was entirely legitimate." I reply that there is 
 no discussion of any interpretation legitimate until you prove that 
 you have scripture to Interpret. Again you say, " I granted my 
 opponent the right to select the first question, but not the right 
 to direct how." I answer that not only did you grant me the 
 
IJ2 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 selection of the subject, but yo\x formally accepted my division of 
 it into three parts, and you took up my divisions of the subject 
 successively, and in the order laid down by me, and as I was 
 aware, at first, of the absurdity of cooking my hare before I 
 caught him, I advisedly placed the question of inspiration yzrj/, to 
 be followed naturally by the quantity of inspired writings, or the 
 canon, and finally the right to interpret by private judgment, the 
 whole body of inspiration. In three letters you took up this 
 division, but your failure to catch your hare, involves the impos- 
 sibility of cooking him. I cannot, therefore, interpret the above 
 language in any other way than as a reckless and desperate effort 
 to escape the toils in which you are inextricably entangled. 
 
 The public and myself, reverend sir, are looking for a masterly 
 article in your next appearance in the Virginian^ on the inspira- 
 tion of the scriptures — the only subject legitimately under discus- 
 sion — without digressions or the introduction of irrelevant matter. 
 Give the poor old church a rest for once, and bestow your atten- 
 tion exclusively on your own legitimate business. Should she 
 happen to be wrong, will that make you right ? Cuttle-fish tac- 
 tics will avail you no further. The proofs for inspiration are 
 earnestly and patiently looked for. By their introduction alone 
 can you redeem your word^ pledged for the proofs, and defend 
 your course from the impending verdict about being pronounced 
 by a patient public, viz., that your system of religion has not a 
 shred of divine or human testimony to uphold it. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 M. O^KEEFE. 
 
 BROAD RUN, FAUQUIER CO., VA., SEPT. nth, 1873. 
 REV. MATTHEW O'KEEFE. 
 
 Dear Sir : In contrast stands the protestant theory. We 
 hold, too,^ that the witness which testifies to inspiration must be 
 in a supernatural state ; but we can point to that witness and 
 prove it to be in an inspired or supernatural state, and we can 
 show that that witness has the power to convince the church 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ^3 
 
 that God sent it to testify of His truth. All know that the apos- 
 tles were inspired men. Many others, called prophets, in the 
 first century, were inspired, and spake under the influence of the 
 Holy Ghost, as the four daughters of Philip and Agabus (Acts 
 21 c. 9— lov). Paul, speaking of the church officers, says, "First 
 apostles, second prophets," &c. The seven deacons were men 
 "full of the Holy Ghost." The seventy sent out by Christ had 
 powers through the Spirit to perform all manner of miracles. Of 
 the church at Jerusalem it is said : " They were all filled with 
 the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues." Of 
 the church at Antioch it is declared the disciples were filled with 
 joy and with the Holy Ghost. The gift of tongues, and of pro- 
 phecy, and of miracles, and of discerning of spirits were found in 
 all the churches, and abounded especially in Corinth. A prophet 
 is one who speaks as the mouth-piece of God ; not he alone who 
 predicts the future, but he who speaks from God His word. 
 Thus with the prophet at the heathen temples ; he spake the 
 oracles of his deity. Scripture prophets are those who receive 
 their teaching directly from God, and speak it at God's command. 
 It may be good news, a command, or promise, or threat, or a 
 prediction. Now there were many of these in the new testa- 
 ment church, and Jesus says that the least of them was greater 
 than John the Baptist, while none of the old testament prophets 
 were greater than John. Luke 7 c. 28v. The learned Michaelis 
 thus renders this passage. The apostles rank first of all the offi- 
 cers of the church. They were inspired. Christ promised them 
 that the Holy Ghost should " lead them into all the truth," that 
 He would bring to their remembrance all things which he had 
 spoken unto them, &c. Peter and Paul both declared that the 
 old testament scriptures were given of the Holy Ghost, divinely 
 inspired, and yet Peter ranked the letters of Paul with those scrip- 
 tures, saying, "As our beloved brother Paul hath written unto 
 you, as also in all his epistles, &c., which the unlearned and un- 
 stable wrest, as also the other scriptures, to their own perdition." 
 Here he tells us that to pervert these letters leads to perdition, and 
 by the use of the phrase ^^ other scriptures^' declares these letters 
 of Paul to be a part of scripture. Peter could discern spirits and 
 saw that Ananias lied, and that the cripple had faith to be healed. 
 Pai:l declared that he was not a whit behind the chiefest of the 
 
74 
 
 THE KEY TO THUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 apostles, and that he received his gospel not from man, but from 
 the Lord, that he received from the Lord the account of the 
 eucharist, which he vi^rote to the Corinthians. These apostles 
 of our Lord, having the power to kill and to make alive, to whom 
 it was promised that in emergencies they need not premeditate, 
 that the Holy Ghost would give them what they should say ; 
 "for it is not you, but the Holy Ghost which speaketh in you." 
 These manifestly inspired men, in that age of inspiration, wrote 
 the new testament. The only exceptions are Luke and Mark ; 
 and Luke was Paul's chosen companion, and Mark was the asso- 
 ciate of St. Peter, i Peter 5 c. 13V. When prophets abounded 
 in the church, and multitudes possessed the power of miracles 
 and very many of the disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost^ 
 we have no difficulty in understanding what kind of men Peter 
 and Paul would select to be with them in their work, and to write 
 for the edification of all ages. They were men filled with the 
 Holy Ghost, and Paul and Peter, inspired men, were able to 
 know whether the Holy Ghost inspired the writings of their com- 
 rades. Then among the "prophets and teachers" in the church 
 at Antioch, to whom the Holy Ghost said, "Separate me Barna- 
 bas and Saul," &c. Acts 13 c. i-2v. Among these was Lucius 
 of Cyrene, supposed to be the same called Luke, the physician 
 who wrote the gospel and the acts. In the preface to his gos- 
 pel, Luke says : " Having had perfect understanding of all 
 things from above." Not "ap archas" (from the beginning), 
 but "anothen" (from above). As James uses it, "Every good 
 gift Cometh from above," and John 19 c. iiv : "Except it were 
 given xhQtfrom above^ "anothen." Besides, Peter and Paul had 
 the power of imparting the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost 
 by the laying on of hands. Paul said he had upon him " the 
 care of all the churches," and uses language which shows that 
 he claimed full power to order and arrange the worship and decide 
 questions of morals ; as when in Cor. 7 c. 1 7 V., he says, "And 
 so ordain I in all churches." Now can any man believe that 
 these apostles and St. John, with such responsibilities and such 
 full powers and such wisdom, and living after the writings of 
 Luke and Mark were received in the church, would have allowed 
 them to be received as of God, if they had not been given by the 
 Holy Ghost ? None but an inveterate caviller. Paul says 
 
THE KEY TO TRVE OHRISTIANITY. r X 
 
 i O 
 
 (2 Cor. 2 c. i6v), "But we have the mind of Christ," and (r 
 Thes. 2 c. 13V), " When ye received the Word of God, which 
 ye heard from us, ye. received it not as the word of men, but as 
 it is in the truth^ the tvord of God.'' Again (i Thes. 4 c. 8v.), 
 " He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who 
 hath also given unto us his " Holy Spirit," and in i Cor. 14 c. 
 37V. he asserts that the prophet or the spiritual man must "ac- 
 knowledge that the things that I write unto you are the com- 
 mandments of the Lord." Now we have men, to whom Christ 
 promised a full inspiration, men whom all admit to be inspired, 
 who wrote almost all^ and who superintended all the waiting of 
 the new testament scriptures. These men were inspired or in a 
 supernatural state, and therefore prepared to testify to this inspira- 
 tion, this supernatural fact ; they were at hand, and not eighteen 
 hundred years away, as your present church, and therefore com- 
 petent to testify to a fact that happened to themselves, and finally 
 they had the power to convince the world that God spoke through 
 
 them. 
 
 BespectfuUy, 
 
 J. D. BLACKWELL. 
 
 NORFOLK, SEPT. 24th, 1873. 
 REV. J. D. BLACKWELL, D. D. 
 
 I who was once as great as Caesar, 
 
 Am now reduced to Nebuchadnezzar ; 
 
 And from as famed a conqueror 
 
 As ever took degree in war, 
 
 Or did his exercise in battle, 
 
 By you turned out to grass with cattle. 
 
 — HUDIBRAS. 
 
 Dear Sir : Yours has just come to hand. I was beginning 
 to fear that you were about to let the case go by default, and 
 hoard up for students and skeptics the reserved texts that were so 
 long coming : but I rejoice to find it otherwise. I regret, how- 
 ever, to find you in such bad humor. One would naturally sur- 
 mise that bracing air and other genial surroundings would be 
 calculated to impart anything else than the spirit of bitterness 
 
76 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 that pervades the whole communication ; but the fates often play 
 us tricks, notwithstanding our best efforts to the contrary. How 
 applicable, in this case is the old adage: "Man proposes, but 
 God disposes !" But to be serious. The long expected proofs 
 for the inspiration of the scripture have come at last ! There is 
 nothing like perseverance, reverend sir, and the world has to 
 thank me for the formidable (?) document that would ever be, 
 otherwise, buried in the recesses of the brain of students or skep- 
 tics, and you have to thank my indefatigable efforts for saving 
 your reputation for truth. All the other (3) proofs offered, long 
 since being found utterly worthless, we are now indulged with 
 the students' and skeptics' reserves, to which I now beg leave to 
 pay my respects. 
 
 After prefacing somewhat, you attempt to sustain Luke as an 
 inspired writer ; (you remember one former failure in reference 
 to the same writer, viz. : on the ground of miracles), for this pur- 
 pose you adduce Luke himself as saying: "having had perfect 
 understanding, he. ^ from ahove.^^ Now, reverend sir, let me pre- 
 sent you with your own text (verses 2 and 3) "even as they deli- 
 vered them to us, which (who) were eye witnesses and 
 ministers of the Word; it seems good to me also, having had 
 perfect understanding of all things from the very first^ to write." 
 &c. You attempt, in contradiction of your own text^ to find in the 
 Greek word "anothen" what would, if true, suit your purpose 
 admirably, but unfortunately your own text contradicts you, the 
 Lexicon bears out your own text, and St. Luke himself says, in 
 express words^ that he got his information, directly^ from those 
 who were eye-witnesses from the beginning, and not from on high. 
 What a cause, that would seek to sustain itself by so glaring a 
 contradiction ! Luke was informed by eye-witnesses and not 
 from on high ; he says so himself, and therefore his testimony, 
 that what he writes is of human and not of divine origin, settles 
 the question so far as' you are concerned. Again, you say, it is 
 supposed, that Lucius, of Cyrene, was Luke, the EvangeHst. 
 Well, if Luke, the Evangelist, declares that he wrote from infor- 
 mation derived from eye-witnesses, it matters not who Lucius, 
 of Cyrene, was. Will you be kind enough to find, amongst the 
 writings of Peter and Paul, whom you look to, to sustain the in- 
 spiration of Luke and Mark, a correction or rather a contradic- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. nj 
 
 tion of this assertion of Luke who so emphatically declares that 
 he got his information from a human source ? This unfortunate 
 allusion to Mark and Luke only serves to make " confusion 
 worse confounded." 
 
 Not only did they not perform miracles to prove their inspira- 
 tion, but one of them declares : " He told the tale as it was told 
 him, by eye-witnesses, without any other aid, and Luke is a truth- 
 ful witness. This is even a more disastrous attempt than the 
 one to prove his Gospel by his miracles, which were no where. 
 Again, you quote from St. Paul to the Thessalonians (4 c. 8 v.) 
 " When we received the word of God, which ye heard from us^ 
 ye received it, &c." How can this' text avail you ? Why in- 
 troduce it? Does he not say that they received the Word of 
 God from him, by word of mouth and not by writing ? Need I 
 remind you that the commission given by Our Lord to his Apos- 
 tles does not imply that they were inspired to write but to preach 
 the Gospel, as is evident from the fact that whilst all fulfilled their 
 mission by preaching, very few left any writings. Again, you quote, 
 I Corinthians (14 c. 37 v.) that the prophet or spiritual man, 
 "Must acknowledge that the things / write unto you, are the 
 commandments of the Lord." I ask, could not the Apostle 
 convey to the Corinthians the commandments of God zuithout being 
 inspired to do so ? Can you prove that Jesus commanded him to write 
 these ? He was in possession of these commandments before he 
 wrote, and merely made use of the medium of writing to convey 
 them to the Corinthians. Is inspiration to write, necessary for this ? 
 Suppose you wrote, for a child under your charge, the ten com- 
 mandments, does it follow that you are inspired in so doing? Alas! 
 for the cause that cannot furnish better argument than this ! Again, 
 you refer to the text "Separate me, Saul and Barnabas," &c., 
 and as the Apostolic writings refer in almost unmeasured terms 
 to the gifts of Barnabas, as an Apostle, you will please say why 
 his Epistle now extant, and which has certainly been regarded as 
 canonical by numbers of the early Christians, is not received by 
 you, whereas -you receive the Gospel of Luke who declares him- 
 self indebted to human eye witnesses for what he wrote ? 
 
 Nor is the quotation from St. Peter's Epistle calculated to fur- 
 nish you with the slightest consolation. As we are engaged in 
 an investigation wherein we must take nothing for granted, it 
 
•J'g THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 will be necessary to have recourse to the Greek text In order to 
 obtain the literal and critical translation and meaning of the 
 words. The words of the Greek text on which you rely are 
 "^j kaitas loipas graphas^'^YiiQTdWy^ " as well as the other writings;" 
 and the Greek text does not indicate that the word '*- graph as^^ 
 has any emphatic or peculiar meaning, inasmuch as it begins with 
 a small gamma, and is therefore a generic term, signifying any 
 kind of writing. 
 
 Your translation of the text is, therefore, an unwarrantable 
 one, similar to that of the Greek word referred to in the text of 
 St. Luke, gotten up to serve a purpose, is borrowed like every- 
 thing else, from the church's translation, although you profess to 
 take nothing from church or pope. 
 
 I appeal to any Greek scholar if my translations of the Greek 
 text be not literal and critically true ; but I may now be asked 
 what can be the meaning of the passage ; the answer is simple 
 and easy. St. Peter guards those to whom he writes against the 
 abuses of the unlearned and depraved, who pervert all written in- 
 structions from himself, Paul, or any other writer, apostolic or 
 otherwise, as for example, the apostles' creed, in which you pro- 
 fess to believe ; how many thousand times has this platform of 
 Christianity been rent and torn to pieces by the wicked and igno- 
 rant ! and yet you will not, although it may be one of the writings 
 referred to in the text, admit it as inspired ? By the bye, if the 
 apostles were inspired to write, why, may I ask, is not the apos- 
 tles' creed, their joint production, regarded as of divine inspira- 
 tion rather than the gospels of Mark and Luke — no apostles ? 
 
 Remember, reverend sir, that we must plant ourselves on the 
 merits of the text critically considered, without any help from 
 tradition, pope, council, church, or any other source whatever, 
 and I defy the world to extract from that text, on your platform^ 
 any more than I have taken from it. Behold, once more the 
 success of your long-awaited proofs ! look at them now, and esti- 
 mate their true value. There does not remain the vestige of a 
 single one to prove for your inspiration. And this is the sum 
 total of all your writing and of my indefatigable efforts to bring 
 you to the proof for over two months ! I notice an effort in to- 
 day's letter to deny the identity of the catholic church of to-day 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 17Q 
 
 with the church in the beginning of Christianity ; there is nothing 
 that will not be resorted to, to serve your purpose. But as I intend 
 to introduce the catholic church to-day as the church instituted 
 by Jesus Christ over eighteen hundred years ago, I will offset your 
 blind and silly nonsense with the authority of one, who, although 
 never a friend of the catholic church, yet never permits his pre- 
 judices to interfere with facts that are as clear as the noonday 
 sun. 
 
 Lord Macauley, in his review of Ranke's History of the Popes, 
 speaks thus of the " Roman Catholic Church," (he gives her 
 this title). " No other institution is left standing which carries 
 the mind back to the time when the smoke of sacrifice rose from 
 the Pantheon." Again. " The proudest royal houses are but 
 of yesterday when compared with the time of the supreme pon- 
 tiffs." " The papacy remains not in decay, but full of life and 
 vigor." " She was great and respected before the Saxons had 
 set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when 
 Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were 
 still worshipped in the temple of Mecca." " The Republic of 
 Venice came next in antiquity. But the Republic of Venice was 
 modern when compared with the papacy," &c. And in the face 
 of all this, and the consent of mankind, we are this morning 
 treated to a specimen of nonsensical babbling that can merit only 
 the contempt of any rational ma-n. 
 
 I have demonstrated, through your agency, in this discussion, 
 the utter impossibility of discovering an inch of ground whereon 
 the biblical system might find for itself a basis (this from the 
 acknowledgment of your inability to advance one step towards 
 proving the apostolic writings to be a Divine revelation); I have 
 
 also clearly shown in my letter of that that which you 
 
 call your canon is in your hands, only a catalogue of apos- 
 tolic writings, the result of the labors of the men whose name 
 they bear, and your failure to prove any co-operation on the 
 part of the Holy Ghost being now confessed) is no more your 
 canon than the coat you wear is mine; inasmuch as the particu- 
 lar Roman church, from the very days of the apostles, took 
 charge of these documents as a precious deposit, and has Irad 
 them in her keeping for eighteen centuries. She has, to be sure. 
 
OA THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 during that period, freely and generously bestowed them, with 
 her teachings, on the nations which she has converted to the 
 faith of Jesus Christ, and given them, by virtue of her Inerrancy, 
 a character which they could never otherwise possess (for the result 
 of the present discussion abundantly demonstrates this); but she 
 is unwilling that the nation that has received the blessings of 
 Christianity at her hands should. In rejecting her authority, make 
 use of that catalogue which she has taught that nation to be the 
 JVord of God^ and which, without her authority, can never be 
 ascertained or proved ; hence the failure to prove them inspired 
 being now admitted, they dwindle down necessarily to the'status 
 of merely human records in such hands, and self-respect and 
 delicacy would prompt the immediate rejection of them, such as 
 they are, coming from a source against which you daily declare 
 a fierce and unrelenting war; for my part, were I In your place, 
 I would feel that all her gifts should be returned forthwith ; any- 
 how, in any other hands than hers, they are like Dead Sea fruit, 
 beautiful to look upon, but they turn to ashes on the lips. Hav- 
 ing in my last demonstrated that an antagonism of the most direct 
 character exists between the scheme organized by the Redeemer 
 for the christianizing of the world (and which like the grain of 
 mustard-seed, has been wonderfully developing for the past 
 eighteen centuries all over the earth), and the system represented 
 by you ; having also shown the impossibility of the existence of 
 your system during the first fifteen centuries of that period, it 
 now only remains for me to collect my proofs and present them 
 to the world, which I shall do as briefly as possible. 
 
 According to your system, detached sayings of Jesus Christ 
 (and very few at that), and a message sent by Him, through St. 
 John, to each of the seven bishops of Asia Minor — but which, 
 being of a personal character, is of no practical utility to any one 
 else — constitute the sum total of the christian revelation. An 
 appropriation of the apostoHc writings, the owner not consenting 
 thereto, and an abortive attempt for three centuries, with the 
 above material, to revolutionize and set aside the system planned 
 by Jesus Christ and maintained by Him for eighteen and a half 
 centuries ; behold ! from what has been demonstrated through 
 the medium of this discussion, the true status of the biblical sys- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 81 
 
 tern ! In a word, what you call your bible and canon is in reality 
 but a collection of records, letters, &c., written by men who 
 lived in the apostolic age, which had been collected and preserved 
 in the form you now possess them, but which have been pur- 
 loined from the unwilling proprietor, and which, without any 
 authority from God, but in direct opposition to His arrangements 
 of eighteen and a half centuries' duration, you make use of, 
 through the medium of the wealth of this world, extracted from 
 the pockets of the unwary and ignorant, to thwart the arrange- 
 ments of the Son of God for the salvation of mankind. " He 
 that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with 
 me scattereth/' This is strong but truthful language, and the 
 issue of this discussion proves its correctness in every particular. 
 I am not, reverend sir, hazarding any suggestion ; I am merely 
 summing up legitimate consequences. 
 
 But the honest inquirer after truth may with perfect propriety, 
 now say to me, " Take care ! It is true that you have succeeded 
 fully in showing that the bible cannot be proved to be a Divine 
 revelation on protestant principles ; that, therefore, the question 
 of canon and the right of private interpretation is not to be a 
 moment entertained, since the failure of the attempt to prove the 
 inspiration j but do you not tread on dangerous ground ? Are 
 not numbers likely, by your arguments, to lose the faith (such as 
 it is) that they have in Christianity ? Are you not engaged in a 
 work that gives comfort to the infidel and rationalist ? I answer, 
 God forbid that I should, by my writings, cause one soul to be 
 perverted from Christianity to infidelity ! I have spent twenty- 
 two years in the service of God — twenty-one in this city^de- 
 voting myself and the poor abilities, in the measure given me, to 
 His service exclusively ; and that I should, at this period of my 
 life, become the agent of withdrawing from God a single soul, is 
 as abhorrent to my nature as it is contradictory of a life spent in 
 His service. 
 
 But if I see my friends enter what I know to be a mock- 
 auction establishment ; when I know they will be invited to pay 
 honest money for valueless wares ; think you that it would be a 
 proof of true friendship to allow them thus to squander their 
 means on what I was convinced was not a genuine article ? The 
 
 application is easy and clear to the readers of the letters that cover 
 
 6 
 
32 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 the pages of this discussion. Or assuming the role of a Samson 
 (si licet parva componere magnis — if it be allowable to compare 
 small things with great), do I seek to enjoy the luxury of destroying 
 myself and friends in pulling down the columns of the temple to 
 be revenged on my enemies ? But I glory in being the humble 
 instrument in God's hands of shedding light in the Cimmerian 
 darkness that obscures a system that never borrowed onQ of 
 Heaven's rays to Illuminate it. I rejoice in the occasion that is 
 offered me to present to the well-disposed the opportunity of 
 using their reason and good sense in seeing for themselves the 
 baseless fabric, beneath which they have heretofore so confidingly, 
 because ignorantly, loved to dwell. The result of this discussion 
 should serve as a warning to them to find some safe harbor 
 wherein to seek shelter from the ruin and shipwreck that sur- 
 rounds them ; for their ship has been proved to be utterly unsea- 
 worthy. No, reverend sir, I am no caviller. I am as the true 
 physician who will save life, even if the effort to do so cause 
 the most exquisite pain to the patient. 
 
 I know that to cast off from the moorings of a lifetime, where 
 we have revelled in genial society, in laughing and rippling waters, 
 without a shadow of consciousness of danger heretofore. Is a task 
 hard to accomplish and " a saying hard to hear ;" but God's 
 grace is all sufficient, if we only obey the call. " If to-day you 
 hear His voice, do not allow your hearts to be hardened against 
 it," says the royal prophet. But you ask, what would you have 
 us do ? Abandon what of Christianity is reasonably ours and be- 
 come rationalists ? Surrender even the few consoling words of 
 the Redeemer to be found in the apostolic records ? No ! Em- 
 phatically No ! Christianity has flourished for over eighteen 
 centuries under a form that was given it by its Divine Founder 
 at its commencement. It has preserved its identity ever since — 
 a corporate body ; like the human body, it has from its birth, or 
 rather from the hands of its creator, Jesus Christ, gone on de- 
 veloping for eighteen centuries under an appellation bestowed 
 upon it by its Founder, " My Church." What ! do you mean 
 the Roman Catholic Church ? If so, I shall never join her. 
 Then you have no hope of remaining a christian. Your own 
 system has been proved to be an absolute failure, unable to stand 
 the test of reason ; and there Is no other system of Christianity 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. gg 
 
 left but this. Do you prefer becoming rationalist ? Perhaps so. 
 In making such a choice you are only following in the footsteps 
 of millions of your own way of thinking, viz. : On biblical 
 principles, men of matured minds who detected the hollowness 
 of your system long before you, but who, being poisoned from 
 their infancy by the slanders constantly uttered against the church, 
 never thought of examining into the truth or falsehood of these 
 imputations, and therefore remain practically rationalists. Our 
 country is to-day filled with such men. Were you, reverend sir, 
 at the foot of the cross, on Calvary, during the crucifixion, would 
 you have cried out with the crowd, " crucify Him, crucify Him ;" 
 or would you tender your sympathies to the afilicted and heart- 
 broken mother and her friends ? Undoubtedly, I would the lat- 
 ter, you now say. Were you the friend of Saul, would you 
 accompany him to Damascus, breathing with him fire and sword 
 against the followers of Christ ? You answer No ! unhesitatingly, 
 now. But you would hear Him address Himself to Paul, thus : 
 "Saul ! Saul ! whypersecutest thou Me ? — I am Jesus, whom thou 
 persecutest." Over eighteen centuries have rolled by, reverend 
 sir, since these remarkable words were uttered by Christ, and He 
 could to-day^ with equal reason and force, pronounce the same 
 words in your ear as he did in the ear of Saul then. He declared 
 Himself persecuted by Saul then.^ in the person of His children, 
 and with how much better reason can He declare Himself perse- 
 cuted to-day in the person of His spouse, for whom, the same St. 
 Paul says : " He died that He might preserve her holy and un- 
 spotted." ^^ Mutato nomine fabula de te narratur^^ says the poet: 
 *' Change the name and the case is your own." 
 
 Your own system of Christianity being proved groundless, there 
 is no other resource now left you than to look conscientiously at 
 your position. Can it be possible that the words of Jesus Christ, 
 addressed to Paul, are applicable to you ? There is, to-day, no 
 Christianity left you but what the catholic church represents, and 
 therefore if you are not prepared to abandon Christianity in toto, 
 you had better see if you are not impersonating Paul in his cru- 
 sade against Christ's spouse, in the nineteenth century. But you 
 say, how can I do otherwise than persecute her ? Saul said the 
 same, and was in as good faith as you are ; hut was he not wrong 
 
34 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 in SO doing? Did he not think he was doing a service to God 
 whilst persecuting her ? And were I in your place, believing as 
 you do (that is, presuming on your good faith), I should far ex- 
 ceed you in viHfication of her ; but, like Saul, I thank God who 
 has, by the gift of faith, opened my eyes and given me to behold 
 nothing but loveliness in the spouse of Jesus Christ. " Thou 
 art beautiful, my beloved one, and there is no stain in Thee," 
 says the spouse in the Canticles. 
 
 I shall now proceed to develop the foundation of the only form 
 of Christianity that will bear the test of close scrutiny ; the bibli- 
 cal system having proved itself a perfect failure, as was already 
 demonstrated. Let us see whether the Catholic system will 
 stand the test of criticism ; and in instituting this test, I wish it 
 to be distinctly understood that I ask for no more than what I 
 cheerfully accorded you, viz. : The apostolic records as human 
 testimonies of the facts related in them. With the aid of these 
 human testimonies I shall develop a system, an organization, 
 perfect in itself; the exclusive work of Him whom vou and 1 
 recognize to be the Maker of all things. We agree in saying 
 with the crowd who beheld His miracles, " He hath done all 
 things well," &c., and when, in the creation. He made all things, 
 He pronounced the Divine approbation on His own work. The 
 latter cost Him merely His "fiat." The former, the work of 
 the Redeemer, cost Him His life. " Christ died for His church," 
 says St. Paul. How much more important, therefore, this last 
 work of His ! The machinery, and the creations regulated by 
 that machinery — all the work of this Divine Architect — once set 
 in motion by Him, have been operating with precision and per- 
 fection now nearly six thousand years ; and man has only to look 
 on with admiration and awe during his passage on this earth, at 
 these wonderful works of God. But come and behold the last 
 of His works here ! Four thousand years after the creation. He 
 visited this earth in human flesh, to remove the penalties which 
 the abuse of the free will of man entailed upon himself, and to 
 restore to him his lost inheritance. The records left by His 
 chosen companions inform us, that, in addition to having paid 
 the ransom for man to the Divine Justice, He laid the founda- 
 tion of a society to exist on the earth to the end of time, organ- 
 ized by Himself, and under a title which He Himself gave to it. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. g^ 
 
 And mark the contrast here ! Whilst we utterly fail to find one 
 word in the same records that would lead us to conclude their 
 Divine origin, we, on the other hand, learn from them that the 
 Creator, four thousand years after the period of the general crea- 
 tion, is Himself directly about to lay on this earth, the foundation 
 of an Institution which is to last to the end of time. 
 
 Naturally we expect a grand work, and It would be blasphemy 
 to prophesy failure. Open the pages of the historian Matthew, 
 and read i6 c. 15 v. "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I 
 will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 against it." We are now over eighteen centuries removed from 
 this promise, and must necessarily find It realized, because it is 
 the promise of Him who Is "the Way, t-he truth and the Life." 
 It is as Impossible to close our eyes against the realization of the 
 promise, as to close them against the fact of creation ; and the 
 same historian (18 c. 17V.) records of Christ, "And If he will 
 not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and pub- 
 lican." These words Indicate His church as Hh^ as clearly as 
 were He to refer to His sun. His moon, His earth, &c. There- 
 fore an institution exists on this' earth, created eighteen centuries 
 ago by the Great Creator of all things, and perfect like all His 
 other creations ; In fact, could we suppose degrees In perfection, 
 this is transcendently above all others, because It cost Him a life 
 of thirty-three years to complete it, and then the sacrifice of His 
 life. "Christ died for His church," says St. Paul. Who is 
 there that believes in a God that loves to contemplate His works, 
 that believes in the redemption of man by God, and the facts 
 recorded by the historian Matthew of the creation, hy God In the 
 flesh, of an Institution on this earth, that is not anxious to behold 
 it, to admire its organization, and since It does exist through the 
 agency of the most beautiful of His Divine Attributes — His 
 Mercy to man — who, I ask, is not prepared, on beholding this 
 realization, to glorify God for this last creation of His — the fruit 
 of His mercy to man ? Although it Is Impossible to prove that 
 Christ directed a bible to be written^ behold the fact of the creation 
 of a teacher by God on this earth, whom He commands all to hear I 
 Now there is no commandment of the decalogue more bindlno; 
 than this command of the same God "/^ hear his church^'' under 
 a threat of the severest penalties. That a Divinely-instituted 
 
gg THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 teacher has been created by the Redeemer — God, whose teach- 
 ings are obligatory on all on this earth to be received with respect, 
 is a fact beyond question, recorded by the historian Matthew, 
 the companion of God Himself, and whose testimony cannot be 
 gainsayed. 
 
 Having secured the existence of this Heavenly Teacher, it 
 now behooves us to know somewhat of her organization — or 
 component parts. The same reliable historian, Matthew, (28 c. 
 20 v.), furnishes us with the key to the organization of this Divi- 
 nely-created Teacher. He records that Christ, as He was about 
 to ascend into Heaven, addressing his friends, the Apostles, in 
 the following remarkable words : " All power is given me in 
 Heaven and on earth. Go ye, therefore, teach all nations," &c. 
 Here we have the embodiment of the component parts of this 
 Divinely organized Teacher. The Apostles were ordered to 
 teach — this order constituted them the magisterial portion of the 
 church — and all nations were commanded to hear these teachers 
 (for the command to teach, given the Apostles implied necessarily 
 the correlative obligation on the part of " all nations " to hear 
 these teachers — besides Christ's direct command to " hear the 
 church " places this inference beyond peradventure) under pain 
 of being ranked as outcasts. The command of Jesus Christ to 
 the magisterial portion of His church was peremptory and final, 
 involving a subjection to the Divine malediction, did they refuse 
 to obey whilst the command of Jesus Christ to all nations to 
 "hear" His teachers was equally peremptory and He Himself 
 characterized the refusal to hear, in language cbmminatory of 
 the severest chastisements. " He that will not hear the church 
 let him be to thee as the heathen and publican." There are 
 therefore, in this organization created by Jesus Christ, two dis- 
 tinct elements running in parallel lines to the end of the world, 
 viz. : the teachers and the taught ; these constitute the church 
 which the Creator of all things and the Redeemer of men insti- 
 tuted, and left after Him on earth. We have now secured 
 through the writer, Matthew, His church (the church of the 
 Living God, as St. Paul calls it) constituted of the elements 
 already named. We shall next proceed to inquire whether all 
 the teachers were placed by the Redeemer — God on an equal 
 footing in this His creation. We ask did He constitute His 
 
Il THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. gfj 
 
 Church SO that each teacher was independent of the other, and 
 subject to no head but Himself? I reply, that the same historian, 
 Matthew, throws the fullest light on this question. Instead of 
 telling the world, as an ambitious or interested man might have 
 done, that he was himself the special favorite of the Redeemer, 
 he sets himself, and all personal motives aside, and declares that 
 the Redeemer selected one of His apostles, and changed his 
 name from Simon to Cephas, to signify the virtue and power 
 with which He was about to endow him, designating him Cephas 
 or Peter, which in all the languages of that day signified a rock. 
 We naturally ask why Christ changed the man's name and gave 
 him so singular a one ? The answer is a simple one : because 
 He had already marked him out for a peculiar mission which his 
 name would always indicate, and that it was His purpose to found 
 this, His creation, on him, at the same time asserting that the 
 powers of hell would be impotent against this creation of His, 
 not by reason of any native strength possessed by this apostle, 
 but by virtue of the Divine decrees for which the word of God is 
 pledged. 
 
 I am perfectly well aware of the desperate but ever abortive 
 efforts made by those who seek to preserve the name of chris- 
 tians, and yet set aside, by all kinds of sophistry, this arrange- 
 ment made by God in assigning to this apostle so prominent a 
 position in the economy of His church, hence in order to set 
 aside all doubts on this matter, I refer you, reverend sir, to one 
 of these beautiful figures of the Redeemer recorded by the histo- 
 rian John, 21 c. i6v. — Christ addressing this apostle in presence 
 of all the others, says, " ' Simon, son of John, lovest thou me more 
 than these?' He saith to Him, 'Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I 
 love thee.' He saith to him, 'Feed my lambs.' He saith to 
 him again, ' Simon, Son of John, lovest thou me ?' He saith to 
 Him, 'Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee.' He saith to 
 him, 'Feed my lambs.' He saith to him the third time, 'Simon, 
 son of John, lovest thou me?' He saith to him, 'Feed my 
 sheep.'" 
 
 I ask, is it possible to find on earth a clearer indication of what 
 Jesus intended for Peter, than this ? He assimilates this church 
 of His to a sheepfold, the constituent parts whereof are a shep- 
 herd, sheep and lambs. Where are the sheep and lambs referred 
 
gg THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. • 
 
 to in the above passage ? Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep. 
 They arc mine. His, emphatically. And " the good shepherd 
 giveth his life for his sheep.*' " I am the good shepherd, I know 
 my sheep and my sheep know me." And what does this good 
 shepherd now propose to do ? Nothing less than to entrust to 
 one of His apostles the charge and care of H'ls whole flock. His 
 lambs. His sheep. His flock ! And this he has actually done 
 in the command contained in the above quotation. And to 
 whose care does He entrust them ? To that apostle whom He 
 styled a rock, upon whom He promised to build His church, to 
 whom He gave exclusively the keys of the kingdom of heaven. 
 Can any prerogative be more suggestive than this ? He entrusted 
 to him the charge of His whole flock. Now, as we have already 
 learned the constituent parts of this creation of the God-man, 
 viz. : the teachers and the taught, here we have the perfection of 
 that organization established by Christ on earth, viz. : His church 
 to be presided over by one of His apostles ; His sheepfold to be 
 under the guidance of a shepherd appointed by Himself to the 
 charge of the sheep and lambs, viz., of His whole flock. Could 
 the meaning of the Redeemer, when He declared He was about 
 to build His church upon Peter, be better illustrated than by this 
 figure of his sheepfold and its newly and divinely-appointed shep- 
 herd ? We have advanced one step further, and have now 
 arrived at the knowledge of the existence of the perfect organiza- 
 tion completed by the mind of Him who made all things. 
 
 Do you, reverend sir, find fault with this arrangement ? It is 
 not mine — it was effected over eighteen centuries ago by Him 
 " by whom all things were made." Why not turn your critical 
 eye towards the heavens ? You will, doubtless, have equally 
 good reason to find fault with the works of the great Creator 
 there ? Our own earth, too, should claim a moderate share 
 of your sagacious attention. There are parts of her circum- 
 ference wherefrom the inhabitants cannot catch a glance of 
 the sun for months ; there are other parts where his influence is 
 almost intolerable all the year round. Then the seasons should 
 also claim a share of your reformatory attention. Let Him (the 
 Creator) understand that sometimes the seasons are the reverse 
 of what they should be ; that when warmth is desirable. He sub- 
 stitutes cold, and when the interests of agriculture are likely to 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. gg 
 
 be subserved by humidity, a season of extreme drought is, by 
 His arrangement, substituted. I have not heard you utter any 
 complaints relative .to these grievances, but they vi^ould be as 
 valid and reasonable against the management of the physical 
 world, as your abuse against this last best work of His^ which 
 His infinite mercy towards you and all compelled Him to create, 
 is reasonable. He loved this work of His so much that " He 
 died for it," viz. : His church, as the apostle St. Paul testifies, 
 and you, reverend sir, and those who think with you, the expect- 
 ant beneficiaries of this creation of God, are never happy unless 
 when you are traducing and " speaking all manner of evil things" 
 against her^ not reflecting that her spouse will be her avenger. 
 
 We have now secured, with the aid of truthful historians, the 
 knowledge of the perfect organization of this new creation — a 
 visible body composed of two elements — the teachers and the 
 taught — presided over, by Divine appointment.^ by a visible head, 
 viz., Peter, upon whom the church rests, upheld not by his own 
 strength, but sustained by the Omnipotent power of God; for 
 mark the word of God after constituting him the rock of the 
 church : " And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !" 
 The omnipotence of God is hereby pledged for the fulfilment of 
 the end of this creation — a mission to teach the world all the 
 truths Jesus Christ was commissioned by His Father to teach, 
 without any possibility of admixture of error, under the guidance 
 of this visible head ; or to revert to the beautiful figure of Jesus 
 Christ, we have the whole sheepfold placed by Him, the great 
 Shepherd, In charge of one man, who. In visible form, will always 
 represent Himself, who Is no longer to abide In visible form on 
 the earth. This, I repeat. Is the arrangement of God, not ours. 
 We are equally justified in attacking any other creation of His 
 as we are In attacking this. 
 
 Having proceeded thus far, let us now turn our attention to 
 the consideration of the permanence of this creation. The his- 
 torian Matthew will furnish us the needful Information by record- 
 ing the words of the commission : Go, teach all nations, to the 
 end of the world. Now there Is not a nation that then existed, 
 or did exist since, that exists now, or will exist to the end of the 
 world that is not comprised In this commission. 
 
 They are all to be taught, and by this teaching body. But 
 
9Q THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 these individual men will not hav^e their lives protracted so as to 
 continue teaching on earth to the end of the world ? Certainly 
 not ; but the moral body created by Jesus Christ, and called by 
 Him " My Church," was created by Him to last to the end of* 
 the world ; it is, like all human bodies, subject to the laws of in- 
 crease and loss, yet preserving its moral identity from the hour 
 of its creation by Jesus Christ to the hour when — its mission 
 being fulfilled — it, like all other creations of God, closes its ex- 
 istence, and Jesus Christ indicates in the most unmistakable hn-^ 
 guage when it will cease to work, viz. : when all nations are, 
 through its agency, taught, or at the close of the world. But no 
 change in its fundamental parts can take place — the teachers, the 
 taught and the supreme pastor — the original constitutive elements 
 of its formation by its grand architect must ever abide — remove 
 any one of them and you have a monstrosity ; take away the 
 teachers, and the gospel cannot reach the nations ; take away the 
 taught, and the magisterial office is a farce — none to be taught ; 
 take away the shepherd appointed by Christ over the whole or- 
 ganization, and you have an acephalous institution — a lusus natura 
 as hideous as a human body without the s^e corresponding 
 necessary appendage. They are all three absolutely essential to 
 the existence of the whole, in the nature of things. They have 
 been chosen and combined together by the design of Him who 
 created all things, and with as much plausibility, and with^as lit- 
 tle absurdity, might you seek to pluck the sun from our solar 
 system as to seek to rob this moral body, the work of the Great 
 Creator also, of its head, or any one of its essential elements. 
 It must last, thus constituted, to the end of the world ; and they 
 who, after a period of eighteen hundred years existence of this 
 grand creation in the midst of men, will seek to question her evi- 
 dence (whilst, anomaly of anomalies ! every breath they draw 
 may be regarded as a protest against her authority), are as inex- 
 cusable as the man who, whilst the noonday's sun is pouring his 
 beams upon his head, persists in denying the existence of the sun. 
 Where Peter is, there is the church. The language of St. Am- 
 brose, ringing through the vaults of the centuries, " ubi Petrus, 
 ibi Ecclesia," is no less true to-day than was the word of Jesus 
 Christ to Peter in person: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock 
 I will build my church,'* and after eighteen centuries' existence, 
 
THE KEY TO TllUE CHRISTIANITY. 9]_ 
 
 behold, to-day, this last creation of God, perfect as when it was 
 organized by Him, at its birth, the teachers scattered over the 
 nations, " Go, teach all nations," teaching all things whatso- 
 ever Christ commanded them — the taught, hearing with docility 
 " all the things," knowing that, in hearing the teachers, they hear 
 Jesus Christ, and in despising them they despise Him, whilst be- 
 hold re-enacted at the close of the nineteenth century what was 
 enacted in the person of Peter in the first — his 259th successor 
 virtually a prisoner to-day — Peter again in chains — whilst Caesar 
 and the world rejoice, for this is their hour — the hour of dark- 
 ness. Can the identity of this institution at the close of the 
 nineteenth century be misapprehended ? Impossible, unless by 
 the mind that wilfully rejects the light. 
 
 But whilst this organization preserves its outward lineaments 
 during this immense space of time, yet there are millions of well- 
 disposed persons who firmly believe that the work of God has 
 long since failed in its mission — that the church prevaricated — 
 taught error, became anti-Christ, &c. Overlooking the compli- 
 ment paid to her Divine spouse in making such charges as these, 
 did you ever, I ask, observe any of the other creations of God 
 deviate from its course and end ? Have they not always responded 
 to the laws of their Creator ? And may it not be safely pre- 
 sumed, too, that this Creation of God, like all others, will respond 
 to the^ designs of its Creator ? That God is its sole architect is 
 undeniable. He declares His intention to lay its foundation in a 
 certain and definite form ; He declares it, afterwards, laid, and as 
 the Creator, He commands all men to submit to the directions of 
 that teacher. But we may, perhaps, be deceived in this teacher 
 and her teachings ? This is impossible. Hear what He says of 
 this teacher : He that heareth you, heareth me. Again, will you 
 believe Him if He promise that this teacher cannot err ? Or reject- 
 ing His promises, do you prefer to be guided by the blind instincts 
 of antipathy and hatred with which, during life, you have pam- 
 pered your soul against the work of God ; you, who cannot fur- 
 nish one presentable proof in favor of the religious views that you 
 have heretofore held ? Hear, now, the words of your Redeemer, 
 God, and let them in warning tones, sink deeply into your soul. 
 "And behold! I am with you all days even to the end of the 
 world." These words were addressed to the apostles and their 
 
92 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 successors, who were to continue teaching all things Jesus Christ 
 commanded them, to the end of the world. The end of the 
 world has not yet arrived. The commission to teach holds good 
 till then. He who gave this order to teach prefaced it by words 
 declaratory of His own omnipotence: "All power is given me 
 in heaven and on earth." Go, ye, therefore^ teach, &c., that is, 
 because I as God-man possess all power — you have nothing to 
 fear: "/ shall always be with you." 1 pledge my sacred word 
 that I shall abide permanently with you to the last hour of this earth's 
 existence. Go ye^ therefore^ &c. No monarch ever issued such 
 a command as this — it presupposes the empire of the world and 
 even declares it in express language, " All power is given me." 
 The promise couched is in the language of an undisputed master, 
 and it is kept by Him as a God. 
 
 Now one of two things is true : the promise here made was either 
 kept or broken ; li kept, then He is with this teacher, created by 
 Himself, teaching either truth or falsehood ; if she continue to 
 teach the truth, the fulfilment of the promise is realized ; Christ 
 is with her teaching truth. But if she fell from her high voca- 
 tion — if the motives of Christ in her creation have failed, the 
 first work of omnipotence that ever failed (forbid, O God ! the 
 blasphemy), then Christ, to keep His word, must be with her 
 teaching falsehood for over a thousand years ! How does that 
 inevitable conclusion (your conclusion) suit ? The God of Truth, 
 truth essentially, forsooth, superintending the dissemination of 
 errors for an indefinable period ! He kept His promise, and His 
 church has been immersed in idolatry, &c., and Divine truth has 
 actually changed places with the spirit of darkness, and is super- 
 vising the teaching of idolatry for, perhaps, fifteen centuries. 
 Can any blasphemy surpass this ? I once heard a wretched man " 
 in his anger, taking off his hat, curse his Maker and the Heavens. 
 He cursed, but as soon as his wrath subsided, the poor wretch 
 regretted, in the bitterness of his soul, his blasphemy. But what 
 is to be thought of those who, with deliberation, live their whole 
 lives declaring that God failed in the last of His works, and, as 
 St. Paul says, " He died for His church, that she might be holy 
 and unspotted" — therefore spilt His blood in vain ? Behold the 
 direct consequence of Christ having kept His word, in combina- 
 tion with your principles ; but should we for one moment assume 
 
THE KEY TO THUE CHRISTIANITY. gg 
 
 the alternative, viz. : that He broke it, then He vi^as not God, 
 and Christianity is the grossest imposition that has ever been 
 palmed ofF on the credulity of man. Which horn of the dilemma^ 
 reverend sir, will you choose ? Your principles impale you, of 
 necessity, on either. 
 
 Nor is the foundation of the teaching church dependent on 
 this promise alone. Speaking of the church, Jesus Christ says 
 that " The gates of hell shall not prevail against her." Did He, 
 as Creator, make any such promise for any of His other crea- 
 tions ? And yet, although this sacred pledge was given by God 
 Himself, how many are they who seek to persuade themselves 
 and teach others that this is one of the meaningless nothings ut- 
 tered by Jesus Christ : they forget His words : " The heavens 
 and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass." He, of 
 course, broke the promise, too. Oh ! the blasphemy underlying 
 a religion that professes to adore a God who possessed neither the 
 power nor self-respect to keep His promises ! 
 
 Again, the Holy Ghost, whom Jesus Christ calls the " Spirit of 
 Truth," is promised to be with this teaching body, not during their 
 life-time alone, hut forever. "I will send you the Spirit of Truth, 
 who will teach you all truth ^ and He will abide with you for ever. ^^ 
 The same argument which I made use of when referring to the 
 perpetual superintendence of the Son of God over His church, 
 is, verbatim et literatim.^ applicable to the Holy Ghost, viz. : If 
 that church ever did teach error, then the Holy Ghost Is super- 
 vising the work, that is. He Is now, and has been for several cen- 
 turies, substituting Himself for the spirit of darkness. Imperson- 
 ating him ''who was a liar from the beginning." Are you, rever- 
 end sir, prepared for the inevitable conclusion? This blasphemy? 
 But it is the necessary consequence of your own cherished bib- 
 lical principles, or if the Holy Ghost be not found thus occupied, 
 then necessarily once more, Christ, who made that promise of 
 the permanent abiding of the Holy Ghost, for the purpose of 
 teaching. His church all truth .^ and for ever .^ is either wanting In 
 the truth or In the power to make good His promise, hence He 
 cannot be God, being deprived of the necessary attributes of Truth 
 and Omnipotence — hence His religion is false, being founded on 
 a false basis — hence Christianity is an imposition, and the most 
 self-stultifying that ever found place on this earth. The system of 
 
94 TIIE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Christianity you represent, reverend sir, being based on the failure 
 of the church of Christ, in teaching the truth, must assume the 
 responsibihty, before mankind^ of all the terrible but necessary con- 
 sequences referred to, but, before God^ what can I say of the 
 repeated blasphemies ? 
 
 Again, reconcile the language of St. Paul, speaking of the 
 church of Christ, which he called the Church of the Living 
 God, the pillar and the ground of the truth, ist Ep. Timothy, 3 
 c. 15 v., with the blasphemy that declares the utter failure of the 
 last, best, most dearly cherished, of all the creations of God ! 
 To comment on this further would be to throw a veil over its 
 turpitude. Again, St. Paul, writing to the Ephesians, says: 
 " Christ loved the church, and delivered himself up for it," etc., 
 that it should be a glorious churchy not having spot or wrinkle^ hut it 
 should be holy and awj-/)^//^^/ (Ephesians 5 c, 25, 26, 27 v.) For 
 the first time since God became a Creator He has failed in His 
 work — perhaps His omnipotence was exhausted. O God ! into 
 what contradictions, absurdities and impieties will not error lead 
 men. It is thus they value Thy labors, toils, life and death. O 
 Lord ! surely, when pendent from the cross Thou didst pray for 
 Thy enemies. Thou didst pray for these very people, who by an 
 unheard-of refinement of deicide, pretend to worship Thee, the 
 breaker of so many sacred pledges ! 
 
 Your religion, reverend sir, is emphatically and literally built 
 on these broken promises, and sooner than that I should assume 
 for a moment so impious a position, I would infinitely prefer to 
 reject all notion of a revelation, and declare myself a rationalist. 
 Which of the two is preferable and more consistent, to deny rev- 
 elation or to adore an untruthful God \ Horrible ! yet this is 
 the ultimate but inevitable result of your principles. Principles, 
 did I say ? my previous letters have demonstrated that you pos- 
 sess nbt one principle whereon to rest an act of faith, and yet 
 your tongue and pen are ceaseless in their abuse of this " glori- 
 ous and unspotted " creation of God ! Please hereafter to do 
 your crucified Redeemer the justice to believe Him truthful^ — 
 grant him, at least, what you would to any of your fellow-men 
 for whom you entertain the slightest respect. Allow His prom- 
 ises to His church to stand, and let Him enjoy the reputation 
 (whatever may be your private opinion to the contrary) of having 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIA.NITY. g^ 
 
 kept His sacred word to this' the cherished of all His crea- 
 tions. Surely, if it be true that practice makes perfect, kindly 
 fccord to Him the result of four thousand years' observation of 
 the workings of His other creations, and by the end of so long 
 an experience, accord to Him perfection in this work also, espe- 
 cially as His sacred word is so often pledged for its indefectibility, 
 and being under His and the Holy Spirit's guardianship, trust 
 Him that it can never teach error. In a word, there is falsehood 
 somewhere. If the church created by Jesus Christ on this earth 
 has ever taught one particle of error, count me out as a believer 
 in revelation, but if the promises of Jesus Christ were not bro- 
 ken — then may God have mercy on the traducers of His holy name I 
 
 The S^^n of God has, then, laid on this earth the foundation 
 of a definite organization for the purpose of teaching mankind all 
 the truth His heavenly Father commanded, to the end of time. 
 His sacred word is repeatedly pledged that this institution can 
 never teach aught but truth. The introduction of error is there- 
 fore an impossibility. We are ^//, in every age, and everywhere, 
 commanded to hear her teachers. "He that believeth not shall 
 be condemned." There is no resource now left us, since the 
 biblical sjfstem has been proved a " mockery, a delusion, and 
 a snare." 
 
 And now, reverend sir, let me show you how, without reason- 
 ing in a circle, I arrive at the conclusion that the apostolic 
 writings are of divine origin. Observe that in quoting Matthew, 
 etc., in this letter, I merely used their testimony as that of truth- 
 ful historians. They, as such, furnished me with the knowledge 
 of a creation of God — a teaching church — established by Him- 
 self, perpetually supervised by Him and the Holy Spirit as long 
 as time will last, pledged by His sacred word never to teach 
 error — that sacred word is the basis of my faith ; the breaking of 
 that sacred word is the basis of yours. "If the testimony of man 
 is to be received, how much more the testimony of God." Now 
 this perfect work of God — this unerring teacher — assures me that 
 the spirit of God participated in the writings of those witnesses, 
 Matthew, Mark, etc., and as God's word is pledged that she can- 
 not err in her teaching, I must unequivocally accept this her decla- 
 ration. Where is the vicious circle here ? That assertion is made 
 either in ignorance of the nature of a vicious circle or in bad 
 
9g THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 faith. We reason in a vicious circle, when we use two doubtful 
 propositions to prove each other ; but here there is nothing of 
 the kind ; our premises are admitted by our opponents, viz. : tHI 
 truthful testimony of the historians, Matthew, etc., and with the 
 aid of their testimony we arrive infallibly at the conclusion, that 
 the foundations of a new creation were laid by God Himself, in 
 their day, viz. : a teaching church, which is nothing more than 
 his mouth-piece, his voice — and having secured, with absolute 
 certainty^ the knowledge of this divine teacher from the histori- 
 ans, I learn from this supernatural teacher that the historians 
 were efficiently aided by the Holy Ghost in their work. Had I 
 assumed the inspiration of the scriptures, and thence proved the 
 church, etc., I would be justly charged with reasoning in a circle. 
 Evidently I have done nothing of the kind. Hence the absurdity 
 of the charge. 
 
 And now, reverend sir, it is high time this trifling with my pa- 
 tience and time and that of the public should cease. At the end 
 of over two months you bring forward to-day proofs for the in- 
 spiration of the scriptures which vanish like flax before the fire. 
 
 Your time was thrown away in the discussion of subjects 
 that right order and the laws of debate summarily ignore, but 
 it seems that an end was to be subserved, viz. : dust was to 
 be thrown in the eyes of the illiterate and prejudiced, and I en- 
 tertain no sympathy for a cause that would impose on its sup- 
 porters such a task as this. I therefore declare this discussion 
 closed, from the utter inability on your part to comply' with the 
 terms of the arrangement made with me. 
 
 I, however, hereby hold myself obliged to renew it, on condi- 
 tion that you produce tangible proofs for the inspiration of the 
 scriptures. The public recognize the utter failure to do so hith- 
 erto ; but should you, in the future, find proofs that will cover 
 the inspiration of the new testament, then I hold myself under 
 obligation to resume the discussion. 
 
 BespectfuUj, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. QJ 
 
 DEFENDERS OF THE FAITH.— FATHER O'KEEFE 
 IN REPLY TO A PROTESTANT LAYMAN. 
 
 NORFOLK, SEPTExMBER 30, 1873. 
 
 Editor Norfolk Journal: My attention was called to- 
 day to a communication signed " A Protestant Layman," and 
 addressed to you, wherein I read the following : " I was so 
 much gratified by the communication of your correspondent ' A' 
 in your paper of the 28th instant, in which he gave a striking 
 expose of some of Mr. O'Keefe's inconsistencies in his contro- 
 versy with Dr. Blackwell," &c. 
 
 Mr. editor, I have examined with some care the letter of " A," 
 and must confess that I can find therein "the some inconsisten- 
 cies" referred to, only in the corrected text, and in the explana- 
 tion of the words, " Lo ! I am with you alway, even to the end 
 of the world ;" which, if they be inconsistencies, are his own as 
 well as mine. This failure on my part may be owing to want of 
 clearness of perception, or after all, possibly, to the great gratifi- 
 cation which the writer felt and which very naturally exaggerated 
 the "some inconsistencies." If "A Protestant Layman" was 
 so much gratified, &c., I can assure him I was equally so in 
 securing so able an advocate in defending his or my "incon- 
 sistencies." 
 
 Towards the close of his communication your correspondent 
 uses the following language : " I could have wished that your 
 correspondent had passed over this point and confined himself to 
 exposing the glaring instance of the '• petitto principii^ furnished us 
 by Mr. O'K., which he does so successfully." 
 
 Now, I beg leave to request "A Protestant Layman" to put 
 aside his prejudices and impartially discuss with me this "glaring 
 instance of petitio principii'* or vicious circle with which I am 
 charged. 
 
 What is a vicious circle ? Dr. Watts in his " Treatise on 
 Logic," defines it thus : A vicious circle is " when two proposi- 
 tions, equally uncertain, are used to prove each other." Now, 
 what was my mode of reasoning that evinced this glaring instance 
 of petitio principii? It was this : A reliable historian, Matthew, 
 records the establishment by God Himself, of an institution over 
 which He (God) pledges His perpetual superintendence to the 
 
 7 
 
gg THE KEY TO TRUE CHEISTIANITY. 
 
 end of the world, with the assurance that she (His church) can 
 never teach error, because "the gates of hell cannot prevail 
 against her." Now, the catholic and protestant believe the his- 
 torian, Matthew, to be truthful, and the catholic, moreover, be- 
 lieves that the recorded words of Christ mean an unerring church. 
 To him, there can be now no doubt that an infallible teacher 
 exists, which he is commanded to hear. By virtue of this autho- 
 rity invested in her by Christ, she teaches that the apostolic 
 writings are the joint product of the Holy Ghost and their re- 
 spective writers. Thus do we prove that the apostolic writings 
 are inspired. 
 
 Dr. Watts' definition of a vicious circle has no place here, /or 
 I do not assume two propositions equally uncertain^ but I take for my 
 premises the testimony of the historian Matthew, accepted as in- 
 disputable by the protestant and myself, whose testimony places 
 me in possession of an infallibly-teaching church, as a fact vouched 
 for hy God Himself; assuming now as a principle that, of which 
 there can be no doubt, viz. : the infallible teacher, I hear the 
 voice of the teacher, divinely created, informing me that certain 
 writings, known now-a-days as the bible, are of divine origin. 
 
 "A Protestant Layman" will see that I have not used the 
 bible to prove the infallible church ; for I have used only two 
 expressions of the Redeemer, recorded by a historian, Matthew, 
 regarded as reliable and veracious by "A Protestant Layman" 
 equally with myself. 
 
 In a word, there is not the shadow of a vicious circle, accord- 
 ing to the definition of Dr. Watts, to be discovered in my rea- 
 soning, seeing that, of the two propositions, one is regarded as 
 certain by " A Protestant Layman," as well as by myself, viz. : 
 the truthfulness of the historian Matthew : whereas it is necessary 
 to the definition of a vicious circle that both propositions should be equally 
 uncertain. 
 
 Call my reasoning faulty, or what else you please, but be silent 
 evermore as regards the charge of vicious circle or "petitio prin- 
 cipii," where catholics are concerned, for our reasoning lacks the 
 •essential qualities of a vicious circle, viz. : two propositions equally 
 uncertain. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 99 
 
 NORFOLK, OCTOBER 8th, 1873. 
 REV. MATTHEW O'KEEFE. 
 
 Dear Sir: The first point I consider is your criticism of 
 some scriptures presented in my last. In the first column of 
 yours of September 24th you object to the meaning of the Greek 
 word " anothen,'* and say, " Your own text contradicts you, and 
 the lexicon bears out your own text." I have just consulted 
 three lexicons — two of classic and one of new testament Greek — 
 and all give " above" and " from above" as the first meaning of 
 that Greek word. Also, if you will take the pains to refer to 
 your own Douay bible, or to our English version either, you will 
 find at John 3 c. 31 v., and 19 c. 11 v., and at James i c. 17 v. 
 and 3 c. 15 and 17 v. — in these five places — that both bibles 
 render that word by the phrase "from above." Again, if you» 
 will carefuUly read the first three verses of Luke's gospel you will 
 see nothing whatever contradicting the supposition that St. Luke 
 gained his " perfect understanding of all things from above," or 
 from the spirit of truth. He states that many having written 
 "those things which are most surely believed among us, even as 
 they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eye- 
 witnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, 
 having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, 
 to write," &c. Instead of " from the very first," I render it 
 " from above." In so doing I am sustained by some eminent 
 scholars, and also by the leading or primary meaning of the 
 Greek word ; while the fact, if admitted, that Luke gained his 
 information from " eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," 
 does not preclude the necessity of the aid of the Holy Spirit to 
 teach him what and how to write. Without the aid of the Holy 
 Ghost he might have written as Barnabas did, of which more 
 hereafter. John and Peter were eye-witnesses, and yet they 
 needed the Spirit to guide them in writing scripture. 
 
 But I do not insist upon that interpretation of the word — it is 
 not at all necessary. I am willing to admit that you and the trans- 
 lators of our bibles are correct here ; but I have not the slightest 
 difficulty in believing that gospels written during that age of in- 
 spiration by the companions of Peter and Paul — who taught that 
 
•iQQ THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 all scripture was divinely inspired ; that "holy men of God spake 
 inspired by the Holy Ghost " — that gospels written by the chosen 
 companions of such men, and received as a portion of the sacred 
 scriptures, while these chiefest apostles, Peter, John and Paul, 
 yet presided over the churches — I have no difficulty in believing 
 that such gospels are inspired by the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 J. D. BLACKWELL. 
 
 NORFOLK, Oct. 14th, 1873. 
 PROPRIETORS OF THE VIR£IINIAN : 
 
 Gentlemen : — I address you this letter rather than Rev. Dr. 
 Blackwell, inasmuch as, having perused his letter, I see nothing 
 therein to induce me to change my determination, as the sequel 
 *will prove. 
 
 I adopted, in my last letter, the resolution to abandon the dis- 
 cussion, conditionally^ for a two-fold motive : 1st. In order to call 
 public attention to the continued flagrant violation of the laws of 
 discussion by my reverend opponent ; and, 2d. With the hope 
 that the reverend gentleman would bestir himself to furnish the 
 quota of the work voluntarily assumed by him in the beginning 
 of the discussion, but towards which he has not contributed yet 
 one iota, as the letter of to-day too abundantly evinces. 
 
 I was not a little amused by the sang froid displayed by my 
 reverend antagonist in his card, wherein he asserts that it is ne- 
 cessary for him to reply to my letters, etc. Were I not certain 
 that the gentleman was keenly alive to the anomaly of his 
 situation, I would be disposed to admire his childlike simplicity ; 
 but knowing from experience his determtnation to hold on with 
 death-like tenacity to his cuttle-fish tactics, and to " brazen it 
 out " to the end, I feel it my duty to put the public once more 
 on their guard against his subtleties and so-called Jesuit prac- 
 tices ; and for this purpose I will summarize the discussion as 
 concisely as possible. The reverend gentleman's morbid hatred 
 for the catholic church, not finding a safety-valve sufficiently ca- 
 pacious here, he availed himself, a few months since, of a com- 
 munication containing some questions proposed anonymously, to 
 open a correspondence with a methodist paper, published in Rich- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 201 
 
 mond, through letters addressed by him to a catholic, manufac- 
 tured for the occasion ; and although assured that the writer was 
 no catholic, such was his mania for ventilating his hatred of Ro- 
 manism, that his conscience readily compromised with the impo- 
 sition to be practiced upon thousands, perhaps (the more the bet- 
 ter), of readers J and in these letters, with an ungentlemanly 
 public appeal to the catholic priests residing in Norfolk, he 
 invites them to go out in the highways to amuse him and others 
 (Herod-like) by the performance of miracles, and this without the 
 slightest acquaintance with any one of us. This conduct an intel- 
 ligent public will, with me, stigmatize as a most unwarrantable 
 liberty with strangers. 
 
 As soon as my attention was directed to two or three of these 
 productions, I called the gentleman to an account for it ; and to 
 furnish him an opportunity to ventilate his furore against the church 
 and at the same time indulge his ^^ cacoethes scr'ihendi^'' I proposed 
 that we discuss the merits of our relative systems of belief, and 
 thus give the gentleman a flesh and blood catholic antagonist to 
 grapple with. The gentleman endeavored stoutly to maintain 
 that his correspondent was a catholic, and went so far as to de- 
 clare that a jury would convict him as such. Now I desire to 
 be distinctly understood, when I assure the public that a more 
 unwarrantable assertion never emanated from the pen or lips of 
 any man, and not only do I assert the fact, but I declare that the 
 intimate friends of the writer are ready to testify that the gentle- 
 man openly exults in his declaration of infidelity, that is, in a 
 denial of all revelation — a position wherein I would be found 
 to-day, were I not a catholic, and so said the great St. Augustine: 
 " I would not believe the gospel, had not the authority of the 
 catholic church moved me thereto." Who ever saw the man 
 who was a catholic and at the same time denied revelation ? The 
 supposition is an absurdity. But the assertion served a purpose, 
 the end justified the means ; in this particular he could afford to 
 be more Jesuitical that the Jesuits themselves. The only re- 
 source now left the gentleman, in self-vindication, is to publish that 
 communication, and let the public occupy the place of jury in 
 the case. I repeat, that neither that communication nor the 
 writer's clearly-defined opinions, unhesitatingly expressed amongst 
 his friends, could warrant any such assertion. 
 
2Q2 THE KEY TO TKUE CHEISTIANITY. 
 
 Notwithstanding the acknowledged caution of his friend and 
 my exposure of the pious fraud, at the time of his arraignment 
 by me, the statement was persevered in, and I now feel in the po- 
 sition to maintain that the catholic was manufactured "out of the 
 whole cloth," and I leave the reverend gentleman to lie contented, 
 if so disposed, on the bed of thorns which he has made for him- 
 self. I am thus explicit, in order to show to the public how 
 consistently with this specimen of moral " Colfaxing " a christian 
 gentleman can comport himself during a discussion of months' 
 continuance. My proposition to discuss was accepted, and I was 
 proffered the choice of subject, which I chose, viz.: ist. The 
 inspiration of the bible. 2d. The canon. 3d. The right of 
 private judgment to interpret it when proved to be of divine 
 origin. The gentleman accepted my offer by the appearance 
 of a letter over his signature. But before I proceed fur- 
 ther, it is my duty to explain to the public once more that 
 the cardinal rules of discussion^ whether of an oral or writ- 
 ten character, demand the most scrupulous adherence to the 
 question under discussion, a-nd forbid the slightest violation 
 thereof by the introduction of any matter extraneous to the 
 question at issue. This rule was never disputed, but never, 
 to my knowledge, was it so openly and shamefully violated as 
 during the discussion, by my reverend opponent. He accepted 
 unhesitatingly the question to be discussed, and the choice of 
 which was by himself proffered to me ; we were therefore to 
 confine ourselves to the inspiration of the bible from his stand- 
 point, and after this had been satisfactorily maintained by the 
 reverend gentleman, he was to proceed with the proofs of the 
 two other points. But when his first letter put in an appearance, 
 what do we behold ? He began that letter in open violation of 
 all the laws of discussion, by attacking the rule of faith of the 
 catholic church, which was an intolerable breach of the law, for 
 the catholic church should not have been mentioned even in that 
 letter ; she was not on her trial ; her day was to come ; but the 
 inspiration of the bible was to be proved, and that letter was to 
 have been devoted exclusively to that subject. Anyhow a corner 
 was appropriated to proofs of the inspiration of the scriptures — and 
 such proofs ! Well indeed ought the reverend gentleman be silent 
 evermore as regards them, and leave them in the mass of ruins 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 103 
 
 with which I overwhelmed them. Before the gentleman com- 
 menced to pen that letter, his eyes were opened to the appalling 
 situation in which he had involved himself. It was either the 
 honest admission that he was unequal to the task assigned him, 
 or the adoption of the cuttle-fish tactics, which might, after all, 
 carry him through the discussion with the prejudiced and ignorant, 
 at least. A drowning man will grasp at a straw, and why not, 
 with a certain amount of brass, succeed as well as he did in es- 
 caping the manufactured-catholic difficulty ? 
 
 A series of letters from the pen of the reverend gentleman fol- 
 lowed this one, all of the same character, all occupied with mat- 
 ter that had as much bearing on the question under discussion as 
 a dissertation on the steam engine would have, there and then. 
 In fact, I was never before able to realize such dogged persistency 
 in a want of candor and sincerity as characterized my reverend 
 opponent's conduct during the discussion. Let the high-toned 
 reader take up my letters, and see what manner of man I had to 
 deal with — a constant soliciting, imploring, entreating, conjuring, 
 scolding, worrying, to induce my opponent to abandon his unwor- 
 thy course, and betake himself, as a man^ to the work he had 
 voluntarily assumed, but unavailingly. Letter followed letter, 
 filled with irrelevant matter, but not one word for the subject 
 of debate, which alone was legitimate. After the first proofs 
 were disposed of, he stated that he held other proofs in reserve 
 which were for students and skeptics. If ever there were need of 
 proofs for the benefit of the latter class, it was just then, for his shuf- 
 fling course from the beginning had so helped to engender skepti- 
 cism, that overwhelming proofs were, indeed, needful to counter- 
 act it. But when, after ceaseless expostulations, which almost ex- 
 haifsted my patience, I worried out of him some further attempts 
 to bolster up his system, these so-called irrefragible proofs, so well 
 calculated to fortify and illumine students, and remove the doubts 
 of skeptics, appeared ; what was their value ? My present letter 
 disposes of the question, and I assert that the man is easily ac- 
 commodated who could, with a safe conscience, make an act of 
 faith in the inspiration of the new testament on such a basis. 
 But, in fact, did any one believe in the existence of the reserved 
 proofs so well ca.culated to put the quietus on skeptics ? Not I 
 surely ; not the public, for they had concluded long ago, that if 
 
204 TH^ KE"^ TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 they were there, so much teasing would not be necessary to bring 
 them forth, and last of all, the gentleman's conscience and his self- 
 consciousness both bore testimony to his entire unconsciousness of 
 their existence, and he has to thank one of the many friends 
 who have so efficiently aided him in this discussion, for his kind 
 offices in delivering him from a sad plight, by furnishing even 
 the sorry pretexts offered to maintain the inspiration of the scrip- 
 tures. Any comment on the above would only serve to dim 
 their naturally resplendent brightness. 
 
 Another assertion made by the reverend gentleman in a very 
 early stage of the discussion, was that "God directed" His word 
 to be written. Scarcely a letter of mine appeared after this as- 
 sertion, wherein I did not harass him, to death almost, for the 
 proof of the assertion, but as usual, ineffectually, yet he lacked 
 the candor to admit his errors, and the assertion remains, to his 
 honor, neither proved nor admitted to be false. Sic imus ad astra ! 
 But the most sublime of all the gentleman's attempts at sophis- 
 try, is the ingenuity, constant and persevering, with which he 
 endeavors to mislead the public mind from the true issue. / 
 must he answered forsooth. The gentleman knew in his heart of 
 hearts that he had only one answer to give^ and that was to furnish 
 adequate proofs for the inspiration of the scriptures, and one letter 
 would have sufficed for that answer, or in case of failure, in the 
 hands of an honest and candid controversialist, the issue would have 
 been abandoned ; whereas, the success of that effort would have 
 authorized the gentleman to choose for himself, for discussion, 
 some teaching of the catholic church, wherein he was to be 
 plaintiff and I defendant. 
 
 Well, indeed, might the fournars correspondent, " A," who, 
 although a protestant of some kind, whilst he paid him the com- 
 pliment to say, substantially, that his effort to prove the inspira- 
 tion of the scriptures was an entire failure, aver, that he could 
 not understand the question at issue, so well were the waters 
 blacked by an illimitable effusion of the cuttle-fish tactics, although 
 had the writer adverted to the terms of the discussion drawn up 
 by me and adopted by my reverend opponent, he could not for a 
 moment plead ignorance ; anyhow, " A's" threat '' to go for 
 him" was thrown away, for he could not do better in furnishing 
 proofs. Well, too, might the reverend gentleman imploringly 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. ]^Q5 
 
 look in the face of " A/' and cry out ^^ et tu Brute^^ in the words 
 of Julius Caesar. On the whole, a more persistent attempt to 
 hoodwink a community into the belief that he was engaged in 
 legitimate work for months, was never before attempted in the 
 annals of controversy, whilst the reverend gentleman when re- 
 tiring to rest on his laurels will have the consolation to feel that 
 the world now sees, through his instrumentality, that protestant- 
 ism cannot lay claim to the possession of one syllable of Divine 
 revelation, as long as it preserves its present status. This I fore- 
 told the reverend gentleman at first, and whilst I entertain only 
 charity for the man, I cannot forbear expressing other than extreme 
 disgust for the tactics that he adopted ah initio ; and rather than 
 be obliged to lend myself to any such degrading course of policy 
 on account of the religion I professed,! would discard the religion 
 as unworthy of my manhood, because I would feel my manhood 
 insulted and polluted by contact with it. 
 
 I now proceed to give my attention to the effort made by the 
 reverend gentleman to sustain the only text of scripture he has 
 brought forward in three months, to make good his engagement. 
 1st. The text from St. Luke's gospel advanced to prove his in- 
 spiration, and which I demolished so effectually from St. Luke's 
 own words, is admitted by the reverend gentleman as incapable 
 of "holding water," in these words: "I am willing to admit 
 that you and the translators of our bibles are correct here." 
 Therefore St. Luke remains uninspired. Alas ! for the poor bib- 
 lical theory ! 2d. As regards ist Corinthians, 14th chapter and 
 37th verse : The gentleman almost gives up the proof, but I will 
 conclude the destruction of the effort by St. Paul's words. In 
 the same epistle, 7th chapter, 40th verse, the apostle says of him- 
 self: "And, I think ^ I also have the spirit of God." What more 
 can be required ? Here the apostle himself plainly implies a 
 doubt as to whether he has the spirit of God. "//^/wi," but I 
 may be mistaken ; he would not dare to make an act of faith in 
 his own inspiration, but our reverend friend, with so many oppor- 
 tunities of knowing better than the apostle^ has no doubt of his inspira- 
 tion. The compliment paid the apostle, like other compliments, 
 he must swallow at the expense of his veracity ! So much for 
 the effort to bolster up the second proof — there will be no resur- 
 
2Qg THE KEY TO TEL'E CH EISTMKITY. 
 
 rection for it. And now let me devote a little time to the text 
 of Peter, whereby it is sought to canonize St. Paul's epistles. 
 
 That the interpretation, or rather critical translation of these 
 words may be placed beyond question, I refer my readers to St. 
 PauPs second epistle to Timothy, 3 c. 16 v., where he says: 
 " All scripture, divinely inspired," or more literally and hiore 
 critically, " Every writing, divinely inspired." Now, either 
 this expression is tautological, or the first words, " every writing," 
 are taken generically, and the words " divinely inspired" are 
 one of the species of that genus. That there is no tautology in 
 the expression, and that the distinction between writing *' divinely 
 inspired," and what was not so, was clearly intended by the 
 apostle, is evident from the preceding verse, where he says to 
 Timothy, " And because from thy infancy thou hast known the 
 SACRED scriptures," or "writings." Here the apostle draws the 
 distinction in fact^ and calls the writings with which Timothy 
 was conversant sacred^ as distinct from those that were not so, 
 and in the following verse confirms the distinction by declaring 
 "every writing" as the genus, with its differentia "divinely in- 
 spired." Let us now apply the distinction to the text of St. 
 Peter. He says nothing of the writings referred to by him as 
 being "inspired," in the first place; and secondly, if there were 
 not writings of St. Paul not divinely inspired^ why, may I ask, is 
 not the epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans (now extant, and of 
 which he wrote to the Colossians requiring them to read it) in- 
 corporated amongst the inspired epistles of St. Paul, on the 
 strength of this text of Peter ? and if the Holy Ghost inspired all 
 of St. Paul's epistles (that is, interpreting the words of Peter^s 
 text as " the other writings," to signify inspired writings), inas- 
 much as St. Paul declares all scriptures divinely inspired to be 
 profitable, &c. Why, I ask, did the Holy Ghost allow the 
 epistle to the Corinthians, written by the same Paul, and referred 
 to by him in the present ist Corinthians, i c. 5 v., if inspired^ to 
 be lost ? Had the Holy Spirit so little regard for his own pro- 
 ductions ? What proves too much proves nothing. Either 
 Peter did not mean by the term "the other writings," inspired 
 writings, or biblical christians are guilty of the crime of casting 
 out from the inspired writings the epistle to the Laodiceans, 
 written by St. Paul, according to his own testimony, and the 
 
THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 207 
 
 Holy Spirit slighted his own works when he allowed the first of 
 the three epistles written by Paul to the Corinthians to be lost. 
 Which horn of the dilemma is the less irksome to be impaled 
 on ? 
 
 Let us see the practical utility of the text, even admitting for 
 the sake of argument all the force that can be given it. How 
 many epistles of St. Paul were written when Peter wrote his id 
 epistle ? St. Paul is known to have written sixteen at least, viz. : 
 the fourteen now amongst the apostolic writings, one to the Lao- 
 diceans recorded by himself and enjoined by him to be read by 
 the Colossians, and one to the Corinthians, prior to either of 
 these on the record, and referred to by himself in the ist epistle 
 to the Corinthians, 5th chapter. There were, therefore, sixteen, 
 at least, written by St. Paul, but how many before Peter wrote 
 his 2d epistle? Certainly not all; for St. Paul (2d epistle Timo- 
 thy) wrote that epistle immediately before his death, for he says 
 therein, ''''the time of my dissolution is at hand.^^ It is then morally 
 certain that St. Peter meant by the word "all" only these epistles 
 that had been written previously to his 2d epistle, and as it is 
 conclusive that not all Paul's epistles had been written then, who 
 will dare to say how many Peter had known of. In this we 
 must not rely on guessing, because it is a question of faith, and 
 faith necessarily excludes, or should exclude all doubt. Besides, 
 the language of Peter is extremely indefinite, and as he does not 
 name any one, what are we to do? The expression "all" may 
 mean eight, ten, or twelve, and to be accurate, it may mean only 
 three, and on this number alone could we rely with any degree 
 of safety. But then we are equally at a loss to know which 
 three he could refer to; perhaps amongst that number, and very 
 probably, that one to the Corinthians that has been lost, because 
 it was written at a very early date, and probably, too, that to the 
 Laodiceans, which was written, necessarily, before that to the 
 Colossians, and neither of which is on the record, and on this 
 supposition, who will dare to select from the remainder, the one 
 that is inspired? Who will dare to make an act of faith on the 
 inspiration of that particular one ? Which is it ? Or if there 
 happen to be two or three, which of them ? Certainly not the 
 one to the Hebrews, which was not received as canonical until 
 the beginning of the fifth century, and which Dr. Martin Lather, 
 
108 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 in the exercise of his infallibility, never recognized as canonical. 
 This is what is gained practically by seizing on the words of St. 
 Peter to prove the inspiration of St. Paul's epistles, granting them 
 all that we can reasonably grant in order to secure somethings 
 with certainty^ we may conclude that one epistle is inspired, but 
 who will dare to- lay his finger on it and say with St. Paul, "I 
 know and am certain" and prepared to make an act of faith on 
 the inspiration of this particular epistle, with infallible certainty ? 
 And this is the sum total of three months' toil to prove the in- 
 spiration of the scriptures, viz : the impossibility of placing our 
 finger on one syllable that is inspired^ with any degree of moral 
 certainty ! 
 
 In the beginning of to-day's letter the gentleman uses the fol- 
 lowing language rather equivocally : " For many weeks somebody 
 saw that your cause and yourself were suffering in this contro- 
 versy." The key to these words is, I believe, to be found in 
 the following, towards the end of to-day's letter. " Thus you 
 state your argument. I say pw, but this letter does not read like 
 yours," &c. The insinuation contained in these two quotations 
 is palpable. I feel it necessary, in reply, to assert my manhood, 
 and in the most emphatic and formal manner, declare that the 
 human being does not live who furnished me the slightest aid, 
 mentally or mechanically, to write or compose one syllable of any 
 one of the letters addressed by me to the reverend gentleman. The 
 letters were composed by me, written by my own hand (every 
 syllable), with all their faults and merits. I therefore beg leave 
 to indignantly repel the imputation. Can the reverend gentleman 
 truthfully make that declaration his own? I defv him to do so. 
 
 A remark made by Dr. Blackwell in his second last letter, I 
 feel bound. In justice to myself, to notice. He would have me 
 say that the apostolic writings were only human documents until 
 the church had, by placing her seal on them, declared them in- 
 spired. It Is my duty to say, that no language of mine could be 
 honestly Interpreted thus. In my letter of July 7th I proceeded 
 to give an outline of my faith, and in so doing I merely pre- 
 scinded or abstracted from the acknowledged Divine character 
 of the work, which was always my belief, because the authority 
 of the church moved me thereto, as it did the great Augustine, 
 and In the exposition of the ana)v<?is of mv faith, accepting the 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. JQg 
 
 writings as human works, I concluded their Divine origin from 
 the authority of the church (and the result of this discussion 
 forces the conviction on us that, only thus^ can any one be sure 
 of their inspiration). There is no scholar who does not recog- 
 nize and practice the logical process of abstraction or precision, 
 which the reverend gentleman adopted, like myself, by availing 
 himself of the genuineness, authenticity and veracity of those 
 works as human productions^ and thence seeking to prove their 
 Divine character from their own testimony — in the doing of which 
 he has failed so completely and disastrously •, and the result pre- 
 dicted by me in the beginning of the discussion is now patent to 
 the world and verified to the letter, viz. : The reverend gentle- 
 tleman cannot to-day make an act of faith, rationally^ in the in- 
 spiration of a single syllable of the apostolic writings, except in 
 the messages sent by God through St. John to the bishops of the 
 seven churches ; and, as declared in my terms of debate, he is 
 ever debarred from quoting the apostolic writings as inspired 
 works as long as he adheres to the biblical platform ; and as an 
 inevitable result, the foundation being unable to furnish the slight- 
 est evidence of a supernatural character, the superstructure — that 
 is, the religion founded on such a basis — is necessarily equally 
 destitute of the same. ^^ Nemo dat quod non habet'' is a logical 
 maxim literally applicable here. 
 
 The readers of the Virginian not acquainted with the rules con- 
 trolling polemics may have been surprised that I should have 
 permitted my reverend opponent to write with impunity, and as 
 he thought proper, in reference to so many supposed abuses and 
 errors of the catholic church. This I was obliged to do, by my 
 scrupulous respect for the universally admitted laws of discussion. 
 On the other hand, my reverend opponent recognizing, almost 
 at the beginning, the unenviable situation in which his principles 
 involved him, determined to fling off all the restraints which 
 govern controversialists, and commenced the discussion by a 
 fierce onslaught on the catholic church, which he has invariably 
 maintained ever since, to the exclusion of the matter alone legiti- 
 mate, two instances alone excepted, so that every letter of his, 
 from first to last, the above exceptions admitted, would have 
 been thrown out as irrelevant, and ignored by all competent 
 judges of controversy. 
 
220 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Had I allowed myself to be drawn in defence of my church 
 (although ever so much disposed to tear off the hideous mask 
 with which the reverend gentleman sought, by misrepresentation, 
 to soil the fair face of Christ's beloved spouse, who is, as St. 
 Paul says, " without spot or wrinkle,") to refute these calumnies, 
 I would be guilty of a two-fold violation of the laws of polemics, 
 viz. : the direct introduction of irrelevant matter foreign to the 
 question at issue, and the sanctioning of such introduction on the 
 part of my reverend opponent ; hence I deemed it better that 
 Christ's spouse should suffer a little from the almost impotent 
 rage of her enemy than that I should swerve for a moment 
 from the recognized laws of discussion. Of one thing, however, 
 my readers may rest assured, that should ever the occasion for 
 directly defending the doctrines of the catholic church present 
 itself, the pen that so effectively demolished the foundation of 
 the fabric whereon the biblical system rests, and so faithfully ex- 
 posed the utter destitution of any claim to a supernatural religion, 
 will be equally prompt in vindicating as effectively the beloved 
 spouse of Jesus Christ and her unerring teachings. 
 
 Before I take a final leave of the public, I would request to be 
 allowed to say a word in defence of Dr. Blackwell, viz. : What 
 he had committed himself to accomplish has never yet been 
 effected by any protestant controversialist. Perhaps the reverend 
 gentleman was not aware of that. For three hundred years all 
 such controversialists have sustained themselves by the cuttle- 
 fish tactics so well and industriously employed by the reverend 
 doctor, so that the gentleman cannot conscientiously claim a 
 patent right for the discovery ; but, on the whole, he has done as 
 well as any one else could have done whose conscience and want 
 of self-respect would not interfere with the adoption of such a 
 course. 
 
 It is true I found it necessary to call things by their proper 
 names; but if, during this discussion, I have unnecessarily wounded 
 the sensibihties of the reverend gentleman by any uncalled-for 
 expression, I regret doing so from my heart, and now declare 
 that I entertain for him to-day no other feelings than those of 
 unfeigned charity and good-will. 
 
 Respectfully, yours, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. JJ"!^ 
 
 NORFOLK, OCT. 31, 1873. 
 PROPRIETORS VIRGINIAN. 
 
 Gentlemen : When I took up your paper this morning and 
 glanced at the formidable document addressed to my humble self, 
 I felt assured that the reverend gentleman had made an expiring 
 effort to maintain the only remnant left (St. Peter's second epis- 
 tle In favor of the inspiration of St. Paul's epistles) of the proofs 
 presented by him to uphold the Inspiration of the new testament. 
 But after having waded through the seven columns I failed utterly 
 to find one word for the Inspiration of St. Paul — the only text left 
 for which a stand might have been made ; but, alas ! that, too, 
 had been abandoned In despair. 
 
 In this letter we are treated, ^^ usque ad nauseam^'' to prayers to 
 the Virgin, genuflections, with the thousand and one stereotyped 
 slanders that constantly characterize all mediocre effusions of 
 tongue and pen on the part of " our evangelical brethren." An 
 intelligent public will not fail to comprehend now the almost 
 frantic efforts I constantly made during the discussion to confine 
 my reverend opponent to the only point legitimately under discus- 
 sion, viz., the proofs for the inspiration of the bible, from the 
 protestant standpoint; and when despairing of success I declined 
 to address him directly hereafter, I had hoped that his utter failure 
 to comply with the terms of the compact, to which the attention 
 of the public would be naturally directed by this flank movement, 
 would. If possible, stimulate him to make one more effort to 
 maintain the biblical system of which he had constituted himself, 
 gratuitously, the champion ; but, alas ! all my efforts have been 
 in vain. Not one word to-day in defence of his position, vyhilst 
 he takes his cong^. 
 
 I now fearlessly declare that a more disastrous defeat never 
 before marked the pages of controversy than this one. A con- 
 tract — " signed, sealed and delivered" — had been entered Into by 
 the reverend gentleman and myself. In the presence of thousands, 
 whereby he was solemnly pledged to furnish adequate proofs of 
 the inspiration of the scriptures on protestant principles. This^ 
 and this alone^ was his legitimate task. To-day he retires from the 
 discussion without having advanced one step in proving one syl- 
 lable inspired. This is an undeniable truth, and well may his co- 
 
2-|^2 ' THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 believers feel mortified that he should have been the cause of 
 making such an expose before the world of the utter groundless- 
 ness of their system of belief. 
 
 How can the reverend gentleman henceforth stand in a pulpit, 
 and, opening that book, call it, or any portion of it, with truth^ 
 the " Word of God ?'* How could he, after this, present as 
 proofs of the inspiration of apostolic writings those texts upon 
 which he relied to convince students and skeptics, and which 
 he so long sacredly withheld from the profane gaze of the mul- 
 titude and myself, when to-day's letter does not contain one word 
 to rescue their disjecta membra from the mangling they received 
 at my hands in my last letters ? Alas ! for the biblical system I 
 Not one word of its tattered fragments worth striking one blow 
 for in to-day's letter. That production is a formal abandonment 
 of the effort to uphold the biblical system as a divine arrange- 
 ment. In a word, nearly four months of toil and collecting ma- 
 terial from all directions, have ended in emphatically convincing 
 the biblical world that their religion is truly and really a " base- 
 less fabric," without a word from the Holy Spirit to maintain its 
 claims. Regarding the bogus catholic I have nothing to retract. 
 I have a copy of that letter In my possession, and once more 
 reiterate that there is not a word therein that, with the informa- 
 tion already possessed by the reverend gentleman, would warrant 
 his having addressed him as a Catholic. The gentleman asks : 
 " Would he disgrace your church by membership ? Suppose he 
 is an infidel, you have had popes who were Infidels. Pope John 
 was deposed by a general council on the charge of infidelity. 
 My bible, which is my rule of faith, does not allow me to falsify." 
 I reply, as regards the writer of this anonymous letter : " No 
 matter how great the sinner, he is ever welcome to the bosom of 
 the church. It was for this she was instituted by her divine 
 Founder ; but faith is absolutely necessary as a preliminary to 
 membership." As regards the statement that Pope John was 
 deposed by a general council of the church, I have only to say 
 that although the gentleman's bible does not permit him to falsify, 
 he has done so by again calling a general council that which was 
 never before called so. How does that suit ? How true is it 
 that "a little learning is a dangerous thing!" Mais revenons a nos 
 mouions. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHEISTIANITY. -^-^^ 
 
 In the gentleman's second last letter he introduces the vicious 
 circle once more. This is very natural. My success in destroy- 
 ing every vestige of a supernatural origin for the religion vi^hich 
 he represents has been so palpable and evident, despite every 
 effort of his to maintain it, that in his despair he, ex toto corde, 
 makes an expiring effort to avenge himself by seeking to under- 
 mine the only foundation existing of a supernatural religion. But 
 I sincerely hope that it was not the mind that presided ov^r the 
 philosophical department of the reverend gentleman's letters that 
 furnished the attempt at reasoning found towards the close of 
 that letter ; if so, let me assure him that whatever respect I had 
 heretofore entertained for him as a philosopher has vanished. 
 He says : " In your argument you start with these writers as 
 mere truthful historians. I could not swear to the exact words of 
 any statement I heard five years ago." Mere truthful ! Gram- 
 matically and logically we have a bonne houche. But as the gen- 
 tleman's utter contempt for the rules of grammar did not permit 
 him to accept the proffer of a grammar on a former occasion, I 
 feel under no other obllg'ation than to call attention merely to the 
 " error, whilst I feel it my duty to notice specially his wallowing 
 in the mire whilst seeking to destroy one of the chief motives of 
 certitude. Merely truthful historians, forsooth ! What more 
 than truthful could you have them ? Were they inspired, could 
 they be more than truthful ? What more is required in order to 
 secure certitude ? If Matthew be truthful, can God himself 
 make him more so ? Is one truth intrinsically greater or less 
 than another ? Will the gentleman recall one of his early letters 
 to me, wherein, driven to the wall for proofs for inspiration of 
 the scriptures, he asserted that inspiration was of no further use 
 than to secure truth ? and did he not enter on this discussion 
 with the genuineness, authenticity and truthfulness of the apos- 
 tolic writings as a basis ? What will not the gentleman ignore 
 when it suits his purpose ? But let me use the argumentum ad 
 hominem on the gentleman. So St. Matthew could not remem- 
 ber sixty-six words spoken to himself and a ftw others because 
 the gentleman would not swear to what he had heard five years 
 ago. But I will condemn the gentleman from his own lips, by 
 calling his attention to his own words in the same letter. I 
 asked him if it were necessary that he be inspired in order to 
 
 8 
 
114 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 write out for a child, from memory, the ten commandments ? 
 He replied, '*■ Oh, no." Now over thirty years have elapsed 
 since the gentleman first learned these commandments, and he 
 declares that he can write them from memory. The command- 
 ments contain three hundred and sixty-eight words, and after 
 thirty years or more he can write them, while St. Matthew 
 could not retain, according to the gentleman, for twenty years, 
 sixty-six words spoken to him by Jesus Christ himself, the said 
 words containing his commission to teach the world, and which 
 were more indelibly impressed on his memory than any other 
 words ever spoken by his Master ; whilst during these twenty 
 years they must have been recalled fifty times to the once that 
 the commandments were by the reverend gentleman, for they 
 were his credentials to preach the gospel. Alas ! of what shifts 
 and contradictions is not error capable, when to subserve its ends 
 it will rob the apostles of their veracity — when it will assert 
 what robs philosophy of one of its most precious gems, viz., the 
 infallible certitude that the whole world concedes to historical 
 witnesses, coeval and cotemporary with the facts asserted, and 
 surrounded with all the conditions required to insure certitude — 
 for such was the testimony furnished by Matthew ! And it may 
 be asked why this desperate attempt to destroy the very founda- 
 tion of philosophy. Why expose himself to thus contradict him- 
 self.? and why seek to undermine the veracity of the apostles, 
 thus destroying the very basis on which this discussion rested .? 
 The answer is obvious. The biblical system stands before the 
 world to-day a manifest fraud, from its inability to cover its na- 
 kedness with a single patch of Divine inspiration ; or rather, the 
 crow is stripped of his borrowed plumage, and the advocates of 
 this system, in their mortification and impotent rage, seek to 
 engulph in destruction the sole source left, whereby the inspira- 
 tion of the sacred records can be proved. The failure to prove 
 St. Matthew inspired was sufficiently mortifying, but the effort 
 to destroy his veracity, admitted by the world, out-Herods Herod. 
 The motive for this self-contradictory, unphilosophical, calum- 
 nious, un-christian attack on the veracity of the apostle Matthew, 
 for the purpose of dragging the catholic church into the mire — 
 in which I leave the gentleman wallowing — is only too palpable. 
 Having dissipated conclusively the delusion which, doubtless, 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. H5 
 
 pervaded the minds of many who heretofore have been indus- 
 triously impregnated with a sublime contempt for catholics and 
 their belief, without for a moment suspecting that they could not 
 themselves produce an iota of evidence in favor of the supernatu- 
 ral character of their own religion, inasmuch as this discussion 
 has proved that the biblical system has suffered a total shipwreck, 
 and been cast on the beach without the possibility of discovering 
 a single supernatural nail to unite together its shattered and 
 storm-spent timbers ; in a word, having exposed during the dis- 
 cussion the inherent vacuity of the system, and especially its 
 utter inability to make good the slightest claim to a supernatural 
 origin, bereft as it has been proven to be of the possession of one 
 syllable of Divine revelation, I will now proceed to expose some 
 of the practical absurdities of the same system which destroy the 
 foundation of the supposed work of God Himself (which it is far 
 from being, as we have seen) and which will extort from all ra- 
 tional men the conviction that the God of reason and truth could 
 have no part in it. I must be concise. I ask was Jesus Christ a 
 legislator? He says Himself, "I am not come to destroy but 
 to fulfill the law." (Matthew, 5 c. 17 v. 7 p.) 
 
 This being so, it behooved Him to adopt the precautions of all 
 legislators, to see that His laws were always interpreted according 
 to His own mind, so that the spirit of His law could not be at 
 any time tortured to signify otherwise than as He intended. His 
 law was the perfection of the Divine positive law promulgated by 
 God Himself at the creation, and as such should never be with- 
 out a witness, interpreter and judge, to testify to its divine exist- 
 ence and origin, to instruct according to the will of the legislator, 
 and to decide without possibility of erring, all difficulties that 
 might arise in its administration. But the system referred to is 
 utterly bereft of each of these attributes absolutely essential to 
 all legislation. The code, in the first place, claims to come from 
 God ; this controversy has definitely destroyed any such claim. 
 He neither wrote it, nor did He order a line of it to be written, 
 nor did they who wrote, say they wrote by his dictation — there- 
 fore the system under examination has no witness to testify to 
 the divine origin of the assumed code of laws left by Jesus Christ 
 as a legislator. And even admitting it as His, we are inextrica- 
 bly surrounded by difficulties insuperable. Where are the inter- 
 
-j-ig THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 preter and judge ? No legislator ever yet was so besotted as to 
 make a law and not appoint a judge to decide what was his will 
 regarding all points requiring interpretation and decision. To do 
 otherwise would be to ignore the most practical part of legisla- 
 tion : it would be to play Hamlet without Hamlet. Imagine for 
 a moment the Legislature of Virginia placing the "code" in the 
 hands of the people without establishing a judiciary to interpret 
 and decide authoritatively the law ! Can any chaos be conceived 
 similar to this ? When would one of the thousand cases that 
 yearly come up for adjudication in her courts be settled "accord- 
 ing to law," if left to the decision of the litigants themselves ? 
 And yet this is what is forced on our observation in the system 
 that claims the right of private judgment to interpret authorita- 
 tively the law of Jesus Christ. 
 
 I can well imagine the smile that would light up the counte- 
 nance of the biblical lawyer or judge who would be soHcited to 
 advocate the introduction of this perfect system of legislation attri- 
 buted to the Omniscient God in place of the imperfect code of 
 Virginia now existing in our commonwealth. No judge, no lav/- 
 yer, no court of justice hereafter ! The biblical system which 
 has for the past three hundred years proved its perfect practica- 
 bility (?) in deciding so many questions of controversy, which 
 has been so eminently successful in convincing pagans, and which 
 has, at length, so happily demonstrated the realization of the 
 prayer of Jesus Christ to His Father for the unity of his children, 
 viz., "that they may be one as Thou and I are one ;" and this 
 system is now to be substituted for that " code" which has for 
 so long a period ruled the destinies of the commonwealth. I 
 can well portray the indignation, the horror and contempt that 
 would pervade the mind of every citizen as soon as such a pro- 
 position was submitted. Nothing but chaos and confusion would 
 be anticipated, and yet the system proposed as a substitute pur- 
 ports to be an emanation from God. A book assuming to con- 
 tain a Divine code of laws is placed in the hands of christians. 
 It has no authorized exponent ; no judiciary to declare authorita- 
 tively the Divine will presumed to be contained therein. Each 
 individual is the rightful exponent of the laws. Was ever legis- 
 tor before so short-sighted as this one ? And is not the chaos 
 just now portrayed in the case of the commonwealth of Virginia 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. Il'l 
 
 substituting the Divine arrangement for the present one, more 
 than realized under the present biblical system. Is there a doc- 
 trine of Christianity that is not torn to shreds ? Is there a blas- 
 phemy that ever could be forged in the infernal regions that does 
 not find protection under the wings of the system ? Who can 
 point out one truth of Christianity that is not denied by some of 
 its strongest advocates ? I do not wonder that moderate and re- 
 flecting men prefer to hold aloof from a recognition of the Chris- 
 tianity that is incorporated in such a system. Can any impiety 
 equal this when reasoned out to its legitimate consequences ? and 
 yet it is the immediate result of a legislation which ignores the 
 existence of a judiciary to pronounce authoritatively the will of 
 the legislator. In a word, no absurdity can be conceived equal 
 to that under discussion, and I must confess that were such a 
 system proposed for my adoption, so far from deeming the legis- 
 lator, in such premises. Omniscient, I should be disposed to regard 
 Him as considerably beneath the calibre of any semi-civilized 
 ruler, who should for the first time, try his raw hand at legislating. 
 Neither Omniscience nor common sense could identify itself 
 with such a procedure. 
 
 Again, the reverend gentleman says in to-day's letter, " the 
 position of protestants is that the bible contains all things essen- 
 tial to salvation." Let us, adopting this platform fresh from the 
 pen of the gentleman, investigate it in its practical workings in a 
 most important feature. 
 
 If there be any doctrine common to protestantism (and I^elieve 
 it is the only one on which its representatives are of '' one mind"), 
 it is the observance of the Sunday, and I aver that if "the father 
 of lies" ever grinned with a malicious smile of self-satisfaction it 
 is over this gross inconsistency of biblical christians. 
 
 The biblical christian despising the authority of that church 
 which alone can save him from the wrath of God for his gross 
 violation of His command, and from the ridicule of unbelievers 
 for his inexcusable inconsistency, exposes himself by the above 
 "position" irretrievably to both one and the other, by the con- 
 scious violation of the most positive of God's commandments^ viz. : 
 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Now, if the posi- 
 tion of protestants be " that the bible contains all things essential 
 to salvation," where, let me ask them in sober earnestness will 
 
Jig THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 they find one word in the bible that will justify their weekly vio- 
 lation of the most emphatic of God's commands ? Is not that Sab- 
 bath the last day of the week ? Has not the Israelite, from time 
 immemorial, kept that day, and does he not now keep it ? and 
 is he not consistent in obeying God's command as contained in 
 the old testament, and does not the biblical christian profess to 
 worship the same God and obey His commands, and yet does he 
 not keep another day than that kept by the Israelite? What 
 authorizes this divergence ? Has Jesus Christ in the apostolic 
 records changed the law ? I reply, most emphatically, No^ and 
 I defy any man living to show me in the new testament^ the first word 
 that would indicate any such change. On the contrary, everything 
 recorded in the new testament, is in favor of the Sabbath (Satur- 
 day). But I nearly exhausted this subject in a series of letters 
 which I inserted in the columns of the Virginian under the " nom 
 de plume" of " Light," last year, in reply to some fanatics who 
 seek to change the joyful christian Sunday into, a long-faced 
 puritan Sabbath. When I entered on the discussion with Dr. 
 Blackwell I declared publicly that his system of religion left him 
 without a shred of rational testimony to vindicate its supernatural 
 character, and has not the result fully, thoroughly and literally 
 realized my vaticinations ? The letter of this morning has for- 
 ever settled the utter impossibility of maintaining that a syllable 
 exists of the new testament wherein the biblical christian can 
 make a rational act of faith in favor of its inspiration. 
 
 I now, in a similar manner, publicly declare that all who think 
 with the reverend gentleman (on the biblical platform), are living 
 in open and flagrant violation of God's positive precept and in 
 flat contradiction of their own professed belief in the all-sufli- 
 ciency of the bible, by daring to alter God's command, substi- 
 tuting another day of the week for the one ordained by Him, 
 which crime admits of no palliation ; which can admit of no jus- 
 tification, and which God visited with the most terrible chastise- 
 ments in former days. The command " Remember the Sabbath 
 day," is more positive than any of the others ; it remains on the 
 record without change or modification anywhere to be found in 
 the apostolic writings. Christ said, " If thou wilt enter into life 
 keep the commandments," and who will dare say that if the 
 young man had arbitrarily kept Sunday instead of Saturday he 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. -t-in 
 
 would not have been rebuked by Christ ? No : there is not a 
 hint of the abrogation of the day or its substitution by another, 
 to be found anywhere in the apostolic record. Hence the inevi- 
 table subjection of all such believers to the wrath of God for 
 every weekly violation of this clear, emphatic, and most positive 
 order from the Divinity Himself. The threat is not mine — it is 
 that of God Himself, clearly denounced in His own word. Let 
 the reverend gentleman reconcile the terrible denunciations of 
 God for the violation of His commands with the practice of the 
 religion he professes, and if he can compromise the matter with 
 God, in the open violation of whose law he spends his life (on 
 bible principles, freshly repeated by him to-day), and relieve him- 
 self from the charge of gross inconsistency — direct contradiction 
 hetweeii prificiples and practice^ before God and mankind^ I shall not 
 complain. For my part, I should renounce Christianity, rather 
 than spend my days in the gross and constant violation of the 
 most positive and most emphatic command of that Being, whom 
 I pretend to adore and obey. In this anomaly we realize an- 
 other of these glaring contradictions that render the system that 
 authorizes it, in the eyes of all thinking men, "a rnockery, a 
 delusion and a snare.'* 
 
 Thus has the discussion just closed irrefutably proved that the 
 religion represented by the reverend gentleman is human in its 
 origin, because of its failure to establish for itself a supernatural 
 character; insulting to the Deity, because built on God's broken 
 promises, and because it represents Him as the most stupid of 
 even all human legislators ; contradictory of its own principles, 
 inasmuch as it professes to obey, whilst it exults in the inexcusa- 
 ble violation of one of God's most positive precepts ; and finally, 
 unauthorized by God, for it rebelliously seeks to compass the 
 destruction of the church of Jesus Christ, />«/ /'« vain; for, despite 
 the coalition with the powers of darkness, the promise of Christ 
 will ever abide, viz. : the gates of hell will never prevail against 
 
 her. 
 
 Respectfully, yours, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
120 THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 [Norfolk Virginian, August 22, 1872.] 
 
 SUNDAY EXCURSIONS. 
 
 Ahgust 23, 1872.' 
 
 Mr. Editor : — Where are we drifting ? Is the Sabbath to be- 
 come with us, as it is in some of the semi-infidel communities of 
 Europe and South America, simply a day of worldly pleasure and 
 recreation ^ Is no voice to be raised from either the press or the 
 pulpit ? Is no effort to be made among either moral or religious 
 people against the encroachments of the dread evil of the dese- 
 cration of God's peculiar day .? 
 
 In looking over our daily papers, we see excursions advertised, 
 offering inducements to spend that day far from the sanctuary, 
 and surrounded by circumstances only calculated to promote utter 
 forgetfulness of moral obligation and christian duty. 
 
 A few weeks ago I noticed that somebody highly commended 
 the Vue de I'Eau company for publicly stating that Sabbath ex- 
 cursion boats would not be allowed to land at their wharf, and 
 he congratulated the community that there was one company of 
 business men who had the fear of God before their eyes, so far, 
 at least, as not, for the sake of gain, to be parties to this shame- 
 ful mode of ensnaring the young and thoughtless, and breaking 
 down the moral safeguards that ought to surround every commu- 
 nity. 
 
 But, alas for consistency and moral courage ! A special Sun- 
 day afternoon excursion was. advertised to that very place on last 
 Sabbath. I have not heard whether the boat was permitted to 
 land its passengers. Have you .? If it was not, of course all 
 here said that applies to that particular case is recalled. 
 
 But, sir, in serious earnestness, why is it that the press, which 
 ought to conserve the morals and well-being of a city, commends 
 these things, and urges people to patronize them ? Are we all 
 unbelievers ? Do we think that God is asleep while we violate 
 His day and trample upon His commands ? 
 
 I can hardly think that the paltry sum made by printing the 
 advertisement is the inducement. It must be that God is just, 
 anJ holy, and true to His threatening^ as well as His promises. 
 
 Again, cannot the pulpit do a great deal in checking this evil .? 
 It seems to be just about at the beginning of its course as a cus- 
 
THE KEY TO TllUE CKKISTIANITY. I 01 
 
 torn among us. Now is the time, before its constant repetition 
 shall familiarize us with it, to set ourselves to prevent the evil. 
 
 Let us hope that those who have the eyes and the ears of the 
 people, will use the mighty influence thus placed within their 
 reach, to form and maintain a proper standard of moral conduct 
 on this point. If we do, we may expect the blessing that " brings 
 no sorrow with it." If not, we may look for the displeasure of 
 Him who will not always clear the guilty. 
 
 SABBATH. 
 
 TWO QUESTIONS FOR "SABBATH" TO ANSWER. 
 
 OLD POINT COMFOKT, August 26, 1872. 
 EDITOR NORFOLK VIRGINIAN : 
 
 Sir : — I was much edified by the display of zeal on the part 
 of your correspondent, " Sabbath," in your Saturday's issue ; but 
 before I can acquiesce fully in his views, I would respectfully ask 
 him to reply to one or two questions, which he can, no doubt, 
 readily answer, being " well up " in all questions pertaining to 
 God's law, as contained in the "good book." 
 
 1st. Am I right in supposing that the Sabbath referred to in 
 the fourth commandment was the last day of the week, and our 
 Saturday ? 
 
 2d. If so, and if I am to take the bible for my rule of faith, 
 please let me know where I can find therein, under the old or 
 new dispensation, any subsequent command from God, setting 
 aside the original positive precept of " keeping holy " the last 
 day of the week, to the exclusion of every other day .? • 
 
 Unless these questions be satisfactorily answered, and a posi- 
 tive injunction from God be found in " His word " repealing the 
 original command for keeping Saturday, in clear and distinct lan- 
 guage, I for one must feel that the Jew alone is consistent in 
 keeping the Saturday, which, with my present knowledge of the 
 matter, is the last day of the week, and not the first. 
 
 A clear and precise answer to the above, will afford much 
 
 LIGHT. 
 
122 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 OLD POINT COMFORT, Septkmrkr 2, 1872. 
 
 "SABTJATH" ANSWERED.— " 'Sabbath's' Sabbath no Sabbath."— "General Ma- 
 hone, Presidents McOready and Grice, and Millions Vindicated." — "•" Light's' 
 Coup do Grace." 
 
 EDITOR VIRGINIAN: 
 
 Sir : — Having waited, with commendable patience, but inef- 
 fectually, for a full week, for a reply from "Sabbath," to my two 
 simole questions, viz. : ist. Is not the Sabbath of the fourth 
 Commandment, Saturday .? and 2d. What biblical authority exists 
 for the change to Sunday ? I now, despairing of receiving the 
 information sought for at the hands of " Sabbath," feel author- 
 ized to throw a little light on the above questions, and at the 
 same time to give " Sabbath " a parting salute. 
 
 I have carefully investigated the question of the change of day, 
 and fail to find in sacred scripture the shadow even of an author- 
 ization of the change — not a word from the Supreme Being, who 
 alone, directly, or through His authorized organs, possessed the 
 right to change His own positive command, " Remember the 
 Sabbath day, to keep it holy," — Exodus, 20 c. If then the bible 
 only is to be my guide in the revelations and teachings of God, 
 the inevitable conclusion is, that the man who accepts the bible 
 for his teacher and guide, and finds therein God's command, is 
 guilty of a most flagrant violation of a most positive precept, 
 should he, on any Sabbath (Saturday) of his life occupy himself 
 otherwise than in worshiping God and sanctifying His day (Sat- 
 urday), and not all the special-pleading or hair-splitting of a Phil- 
 adelphia lawyer, can justify his course to the contrary, any more 
 than he could seek to justify a causeless infraction of any one of 
 the remaining nine ; unless, indeed, the same voice that imposes 
 the obligation cancels it by a subsequent ordinance, declaring, in 
 express terms, the former law abrogated ; and I fearlessly assert 
 that nowhere in the sacred scriptures, can any such repealing law 
 be found. If, therefore, God has left man no other teacher than 
 His sacred word, there is no one living, who accepts the sa- 
 cred scriptures as the sole guide of man in the "ways of God," 
 who is not guilty of a gross violation of the command of God, 
 for daring, without His subsequent order, to tamper with unholy 
 hands, His precept, and substitute another day for the Sabbath 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ;[23 
 
 (ever kept holy by the Jew), and this is the secret of " Sabbath's " 
 silence to my questions. 
 
 I aver that there is not a shadow of excuse for the palpa- 
 ble violation of the fourth command of God, and with what 
 show of reason can the bible christian, with impunity, and with 
 the example of the Jew ever before his eyes, preserving the ori- 
 ginal command, zuhen and how God required its observance, vio- 
 late a law which was never repealed ? This is a difficulty which 
 the best biblical scholars have, with the most persistent and des- 
 perate efforts, failed most notably to solve, holding the bible 
 alone to be their rule of faith. The grounds for the change, fur- 
 nished by them from the new testament, are so baseless that it 
 amounts to a waste of time, and a mere sophistry, to recapitulate 
 them. God has spoken in no doubtful language, and unless he 
 explicitly revokes his command (which His Son did not, having 
 come, not to annul, but to perfect the law), I maintain that those 
 who are amenable to that law will be inevitably punished for its 
 violation, and God cannot be reconciled to the violator by being 
 told that any other day will suit as well. These thoughts have 
 been elicited by the production of " Sabbath," and I trust they 
 will afford to " Sabbath," and all whom it may concern, food 
 for reflection. 
 
 And now a few words for " Sabbath's " private ear. Your 
 love for God's word is such that you have dramatized one of the 
 Redeemer's parables, in which, with native modesty, you have 
 chosen for your own part a prominent role. I refer to the parable 
 of the two men who ascended the temple to pray. One of these, 
 not content with vaunting his good works, must needs, in his 
 arrogance, condemn the rest of mankind, without exception — not 
 even was the poor publican, who was crying to God for mercy, 
 overlooked. 
 
 You, Mr. ^' Sabbath," like your prototype in the gospel, are 
 not content with violating the command of God every Sab- 
 bath of your life, but you must needs call down the reprobation 
 of the community upon the rest of mankind, because their mode 
 of violating the law does not correspond with yours, and with 
 your views. 
 
 You, first of all, attack, in your arrogance, the semi-infidel 
 nations of Europe, and then, in your self-sufficiency, the whole 
 
224 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 of South America. Should there be any doubt of the people re^ 
 ferred to by you in the phrase, " semi-infidel communities of Eu- 
 rope, you elucidate all ambiguity, by the reference to South 
 America. The people of that region are all Roman catholics, 
 and it is your " Cheshire-cheese" to hold them up when occasion 
 ofF&rs. But whilst for them there is justification in not keeping 
 the " Saturday " holy, inasmuch as their church, which they be- 
 h'eve God Himself commands them to hear, and which He tells 
 them can never err, for the gates of hell can never prevail 
 against her, and because she is to them, as the apostle calls 
 her, " the pillar and the ground of the truth," requires that 
 the first day of the week be kept holy ; whilst I say the Roman 
 catholic can justify his keeping the first, and not the last day of 
 the week, and is consistent in hearing the voice of his church, 
 you, Mr. "Sabbath," can ofFer no palliation of your conduct, in- 
 asmuch as you recognize no teacher but your bible, and in this 
 particular your bible condemns you every week of your life. 
 
 To proceed ; having gratified your spleen on the semi-infidel 
 nations of Europe, and the whole of South America, you look 
 round for " game " nearer home. The presidents of the Atlan- 
 tic, Mississippi and Ohio railroad, of the Old Dominion Com- 
 pany of the Vue de I'Eau hotel, fall under the ban of your evan- 
 gelical zeal, nor will your charity permit you to spare the 
 conductors of the daily press of this city. You say, "I can 
 hardly think that the paltry sum, etc., etc." You entertained a 
 slight doubt, etc., and you gave them charitably the benefit of it (!), 
 and last of all, the Sabbath-breaking crowd on that steamer ! they 
 were not spared, and that poor publican " Light," was in that 
 crowd ! how perfectly realized was the parable ! What arro- 
 gance and self-assumption can equal this, and what consistency, 
 at the same time ? The man whose charity forces him to con- 
 demn millions of his fellow men, is respectfully asked the reason 
 for such condemnation, when lo ! he is silent, and there is reason 
 to fear that the intrusion of "Light " has dimmed his brightness, 
 and prevented him from again playing the role of the " christian 
 gentleman " prefigured by Christ in the parable. 
 
 Thanking you, Mr. Editor, for the space afforded in your col- 
 umns in vindication of myself with millions of others, including 
 railroads, steamships, and hotel presidents, and their employees, 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHEISTIANITY". -^- 
 
 I conclude with the immortal words of our eloquent chief magis- 
 trate, " Let us have — 
 
 LIGHT." 
 
 NORFOLK, SEPT. 14, 1872. 
 
 Sabbath's Sabbath.— " Christian " answers "Light,"— The grounds on which the first 
 day is observed.— An injunction to "Light." — "Open your New Testament and 
 follow me with a mind dispossessed of all bias and prejudice." — Scriptural quota, 
 tions. — The right and the fact of the change from the Jewish sabbath to the Chris- 
 tian Sunday.—" Examine them in a prayerful spirit." 
 
 Mr. Editor : The importance of the question at issue between 
 " Light " and "Sabbath *' is such that no one who is enlisted un- 
 der the banners of the Divine Redeemer can remain neutral 
 or indifferent to it. This must plead my excuse for assuming 
 the defence of a divine institution, which is at once preceptive of 
 man's highest and most essential duty on earth, and forms, so to 
 speak, the grandest and most sublime profession of faith that 
 Christianity makes in God, the Saviour and Redeemer. The 
 standard or rule of faith by which christian doctrine is to be 
 judged and estimated is the body of revealed truth contained 
 within the pages of sacred writ, and the christian church does 
 not propose for belief other than the doctrines therein contained 
 and which were once delivered unto the saints, for to do so even 
 for a moment or by way of hypothesis would be to assume that 
 Christ had neglected His mission as teacher, and had given to 
 His followers an insufficient and inadequate rule of faith and 
 morals. 
 
 Hence, when " Light " in his reply to " Sabbath," after assur- 
 ing us that he had made a special study of the question, declares 
 that no authority exists for the observance of Sunday as a day to 
 be consecrated to the exclusive service of God, he gives conclu- 
 sive evidence either of most culpable ignorance, or of wilful 
 misrepresentation of the scriptural testimonies, and places himself 
 thereby in, to say the least, a most doubtful position as regards 
 his faith in the entire christian economy. History informs us'of 
 a like denial once made during the Reign of Terror, when the 
 reign of reason was substituted for that of Deity ; then, in or- 
 der to blot out from the memory of man all trace of his depend- 
 
126 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIA.NITY. 
 
 ence on his Maker, bloodstained and sacrilegious men directed 
 their first and chief efforts to the extinction of Sunday's observ- 
 ance, hoping that the introduction of a new nomenclature for the 
 days of the week, months and years would cause the very name 
 of Sunday, or Lord's Day, to cease to be remembered. 
 
 Alas ! that in our own day, in the very face of the divine 
 gospel of Jesus, men should be found who trample under their 
 feet all that is most holy and sacred, and are so blinded in their 
 ungodliness as to set at bold defiance the positive injunction of 
 the Most High, which was declared and delivered to mankind 
 amid the thunders and lightnings of Mount Sinai. 
 
 If this growing spirit of impiety and desecration be not resisted; 
 if this torrent be not stemmed, which is surely and rapidly rush- 
 ing on to the ocean of infidelity, society will have reason to fear 
 a return of the chaotic confusion in faith and morals that reigned 
 over the world in the ages of darkness and superstition, and which 
 would have continued to reign had not men, bold and fearless, 
 and with hearts sincere in their love for truth, been raised up by 
 Almighty God to bring order out of chaos and to dispel darkness 
 from the eyes of men by holding up to them the bright torch of 
 the gospel of truth. 
 
 I would fain dwell longer on the fatal and pernicious conse- 
 quences that the desecration of the Lord's Day would necessarily 
 entail upon society, but the space I already occupy in your col- 
 umns, Mr. Editor, and the fear of trespassing too far on your 
 valuable time, warn me to give my immediate attention to the 
 ungrounded assertion that "Light" makes so emphatically and 
 with such aff'ected accuracy and precision, when he declares that 
 no authority exists for the observance of Sunday as of a day divinely 
 established for the exclusive service of Almighty God. That 
 the subject may be presented in the clearest possible light, I will 
 consider under the heads of Right and Fact the main arguments 
 that establish the change from the Jewish Sabbath, or Saturday, 
 to the Christian Sunday. 
 
 J. The question of Right. All biblical scholars agree in ad- 
 mitting that the divine precept, " Remember the Sabbath day, to 
 keep it holy," is partly a ceremonial precept of the Mosaic law, 
 and partly a moral precept of the law of nature. Inasmuch as it 
 points out one particular day in preference to another, for divine 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 127 
 
 worship, prescribes the manner in which this worship is to be 
 rendered, and declares the penalties incurred by the violators of 
 it, it is a ceremonial precept, and therefore, like all the other 
 ceremonial precepts of the Mosaic dispensation, which were 
 neither based on the nature of things, nor absolutely required by 
 the essential relations existing between man and his Creator, it 
 was liable to change, and it was foretold that there was to be a 
 cessation of it, and therefore it was to be expected. Hence, it 
 was in this respect a precept of mere relative utility — made and 
 established by God for a particular people, the Jews, living in one 
 small corner of the world, or at least not so generally dispersed 
 over the face of the earth as to render its observance impossible, 
 since all the males were required to appear three times a year at 
 Jerusalem and worship together. Now such a state of things 
 was never designed to continue always ; since, when the Mes- 
 siah should come, there would be a gathering of all the people 
 unto Him from the rising to the going down of the sun. Now, 
 to such a dispensation, the ceremonial part of the precept in 
 question could never suit, and therefore could not be intended to 
 be continued ; the people of all nations could never be convened 
 in one country, and worship in one place, and sacrifice at one 
 altar. 
 
 There are reasons why this precept, in so far as it was cere- 
 monial, should cease, for like all the other precepts of the cere- 
 monial laws of the Jews and the whole Israelitic people, it was 
 typical of the spiritual Israel redeemed by Christ, and of the 
 works, duties, and services that were to be required of them, 
 under the new law of the gospel. Now when the Antetype of 
 all this came, the types must cease ; when Christ, the body, the 
 sum and the substance, appeared, these shadows must flee away, 
 as darkness vanishes at the approach of the king of day. These 
 reasons, establishing the right, or, in other words, the possibility 
 and propriety of a change being made from the Jewish Sabbath 
 to the Christian Sunday, should seem, it appears to me, amply 
 sufficient to convince any unprejudiced mind that when the time 
 determined by Christ, "the end of the law," had arrived, an 
 abrogation of that part of the precept relating to the time and 
 manner of its observance must have necessarily been made, since 
 it was no longer suited to the state of things under the new dis- 
 
][28 '^HE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 pensation, and belonged to a time of types and figures .that had 
 entirely passed away. 
 
 The moral part, or that part which was expressive of God's 
 eternal law, and preceptive of the moral and natural duty of man 
 to render worship to his Creator, could not be abrogated or sub- 
 jected to any change, since it is based on the eternal and immu- 
 table nature of God Himself, and on the essential relations that 
 exist between the Creator and the creature ; hence in its moral 
 part this precept was of absolute necessity and utility, made and 
 established by Almighty God, not for one people only, but for 
 every people ; not to continue for a time only, but to continue 
 during all time, until the religion it commands us to practice here 
 on earth towards God, shall be perfected by our complete union 
 with the object of our worship, after the shadow of this world 
 shall have passed away. This, then, was the only part of the 
 fourth precept that passed over to the christian church ; it was, 
 indeed, the only part that existed at the moment the old dispensa- 
 tion gave place to the new, since by the mere fact of the estab- 
 lishment of Christ's Church, which was to realize what had been 
 prefigured by the old covenant, all the shadows, and figures and 
 ceremonial laws that were typical of the "good things" that had 
 now come, passed completely out of existence, leaving thereby 
 the new Israel to enjoy the true liberty of the children of God. 
 Hence we look in vain, from the beginning of Matthew to the 
 end of the book of Revelations, for the slightest allusion or hint 
 to the Jewish Sabbath, as the day on which the followers of 
 Christ were to assemble for the purpose of rendering to Almighty 
 God the worship that the moral part of the fourth precept com- 
 manded, whilst on the other hand, it appears plainly, from several 
 passages, that the apostles and disciples assembled together with 
 the first christians, on the first day of the week, or the Lord's 
 day, for the purpose of divine worship. 
 
 I will now proceed to consider the arguments of fact which I 
 promised to adduce under the second head, and I doubt not but 
 that they will be sufficient to carry full conviction to the mind 
 of " Light," if he will open his new testament and follow me, 
 with a mind dispossessed of all bias and prejudice. It will be 
 well to advert to that law of evidence, that the testimony for a 
 fact is always best and strongest, according as the character of the 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. -j^Og 
 
 witnesses is above suspicion. Now the witnesses whom we adduce 
 are the apostles of Christ, men inspired by the Holy Ghost, who 
 wrote and taught and preached agreeably to the commandments 
 of the Lord. (Matt. 28 c. 20 v ; i Cor. 14 c. 37 v.) Their 
 practice, therefore, and example, carry with them the force and 
 obligation of a precept. When, therefore, we discover that they 
 were not only silent concerning the Sabbath of the Jews, but that 
 they speak of a day other than that on which, according to the 
 Jewish law, worship was to be rendered to Almighty God, we 
 must conclude that this other day was substituted, either by the 
 Lord Jesus Himself, or by his apostles. In virtue of the authority 
 divinely conferred on them for that purpose. It Is not necessary 
 that we should find In the scriptures of the new testament writ- 
 ten precept, as "Remember the Sunday (or Lord's day) to keep 
 it holy." The existence of such a precept is as plainly declared 
 to us by the example of the apostles, as If It had been transmitted 
 to us written or engraved by their own hands on tablets of stone. 
 This silence of the apostles in regard to the Jewish Sabbath can 
 only be explained by assuming that the day was abrogated by 
 the establishment of Christianity ; whilst, on the other hand, the 
 assembling of the christians on the first day of the week to break 
 bread and to hear the preaching of the word can only be ex- 
 plained by the fact that they were Instructed by the apostles to 
 believe that this was the day appointed by Christ Himself for 
 divine worship, or by those who had been divinely authorized to 
 do so. 
 
 It is, then, on these grounds that we observe the first day of 
 the week as a day set apart by Christ, or by the apostles In con- 
 formity with the instructions they received from Christ, as a day 
 that Is to be exclusively devoted to the service of the Lord, and 
 as commemorative, at the same time, of the grand mysteries and 
 events in the life of Christ that transpired on this day, and which 
 form the groundwork and foundation of the whole christian reli- 
 gion. 
 
 In the Acts of the Apostles, 11 c. I v., it is said: "When 
 the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one 
 accord in one place," and this day was honored with the effusion 
 of the spirit and by preaching the gospel to men of all nations. 
 It was on the first day of the week that the disciples at Troas 
 
;J3Q THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 met together to break bread, when Paul preached to them. (Acts 
 20 c. 7 V.) Now, though he had been there seven days before, 
 yet it does not appear that he and they assembled on the Sabbath 
 of the Jews, but only on the first, and that for religious worship; 
 he to break bread to celebrate the supper of the Lord, and they 
 to hear him preach. 
 
 The apostle Paul gave orders to the church at Corinth to 
 make a collection for the poor on the first day of the week, 
 when they met together (i Cor. i6 c. i, 2 v.), which shows that 
 it was usual to meet on that day ; nay, it implies an order to 
 meet on that day. 
 
 John speaks of the Lord's Day, as a name well known — so 
 called because Christ rose from the dead on that day, in com- 
 memoration of which it was kept, and in which his gospel was 
 preached and ordinances administered ; for it was now more than 
 sixty years from the resurrection of Christ to John's being in 
 exile in the island of Patmos, where he wrote his revelations. 
 
 Thus have I endeavored to sum up the principal arguments 
 that establish the right and the fact of the change from the Jew- 
 ish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. I submit them to the con- 
 sideration of " Light," with a well-grounded confidence that, if 
 he examine them in a prayerful spirit and with an humble reli- 
 ance on the divine Author and Source of all light and understand- 
 ing, the false and delusive light of proud reason will give place 
 to the mild and enlightening rays of the divine gospel of truth. 
 
 CHRISTIAN. 
 
 OLD POINT COMFORT, SEPT. 18, 1872. 
 
 Sabbath's Sabbath— " Light's" reply to "Christian"— "Christian" critically castl- 
 gated— A New Formula of Faith for "Christian," "Sabbath," & Co. 
 
 Editor Norfolk Virginian: In self-vindication I must 
 again trespass on your columns. 
 
 Your correspondent " Christian" is very much exercised be- 
 cause of my assertion of the untenableness of the " biblical" 
 position as regards the change from Saturday to Sunday, and I 
 am sure the community will thank me for giving " Christian" an 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 1 Qi 
 
 opportunity of donning his armor and making so graceful a fight 
 in the "good cause." 
 
 " Christian's" style and rhetoric evince a highly cultivated in- 
 tellect and imagination, which almost induces me to forgive him 
 the discourteous allegations of " most culpable ignorance or of 
 wilful misrepresentation," relative to myself. Enough for my- 
 self — now for my cause. 
 
 Before I proceed to reply to " Christian," I wish that my po- 
 sition be distinctly understood. 
 
 In rebuking the fanaticism of " Sabbath," I submitted that no 
 christian taking the bible for his sole rule of faith can justify the 
 ever-recurring violation of God's command : " Remember the 
 Sabbath day to keep it holy," Exodus, 20 c. This is my posi- 
 tion, and the attempted vindication of the substitution on the 
 part of " Christian" has ended, as I then averred, in a display of 
 "sophistry and loss of time." 
 
 " Christian" treats us to a very plausible dissertation on the 
 distinction made by biblical scholars between the natural and 
 ceremonial phases of the law of God, but cui bono ! What will 
 it avail me before the judgment seat of God to appeal to biblical 
 scholars for what the most ordinary intellect can at once perceive 
 to be the law laid diovjn for all^ without reservation of t'lme^ place 
 or person^ which law stands, as I shall abundantly show, uncan- 
 celled, unrevoked, to this day ? 
 
 Where, let me ask, has God made any such distinction as 
 this ? I defy " Christian" to place his finger on it in the sacred 
 record. The distinction is evidently gotten up to cover a weak 
 point, and herein lies the sophistry. He again refers to the im- 
 possibility of keeping the command, because of the wide-spread 
 character of the christian dispensation as contrasted with the 
 limited sphere wherein Judaism moved. As facts supplant all 
 arguments, I beg leave to present the following: ist. The Jew 
 has, no matter where sojourning^ for the past four thousand years 
 kept the fourth command ; and 2d. It is equally a fact that the 
 christian has been keeping the first day of the week for nearly nine- 
 teen centuries, and in the face of these two facts what becomes 
 of the impossibility of keeping the Sabbath referred to by " Chris- 
 tian." Another fact is that "Christian's" clear head is some- 
 what " mixed" on this portion of his theme. " Jliquando dormi- 
 
232 '^^^ ^^^ "^^ TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 tat bonus Homerus,'* and well it may be, for he has assumed a 
 Herculean task, impossible to be achieved. 
 
 Having disposed of the captious distinction drawn by " Chris- 
 tian," and of his absurd impossibility of keeping the Sabbath day 
 by christians, I now hasten to what " Christian" calls his argu- 
 ment of " Fact.'' With your permission, Mr. Editor, I will 
 address myself to " Christian." 
 
 You, at length, and apparently unwillingly, approach what 
 you call the " Facts," which are to be found in the new testa- 
 ment, as favoring your position, viz: ist. The Resurrection; 
 and 2dly. Pentecost. As to the first, how the fact of the resur- 
 rection can authorize the violation of a positive precept of God, 
 is all " Greek" to me. Besides, might I not with better reason, 
 suggest that the Sabbath be left as it was, because all christians 
 believe that their redemption was effected on Friday evening, 
 when Jesus cried out, "It is finished," that is, the redemption 
 which cost Him a life of thirty-three years of earthly misery, and 
 by which man was restored to the favor of God, and to the title 
 of a heavenly inheritance, was completed on Friday evening — • 
 the same evening of the week that God concluded the creation. 
 Which was the greater work, and which brought greater bless- 
 ings to man ? And if God, after the creation rested, and because 
 He rested, gave a positive precept to man to do likewise on the 
 Sabbath (which precept He never repealed), why not christian 
 man, after the example of his Redeemer, resting in the tomb, 
 and in accordance with the command of God, return his thanks 
 on the Lord's Sabbath for the twofold benefit of creation and 
 redemption, effected on the same evening of the week ? Is there 
 not a fitness in this suggestion, sustained as it is, by God's order, 
 far above the gratuitous choice of another day against His express 
 will ? 
 
 Again, Pentecost is advanced as a reason why Sunday should 
 be kept ; this reason on the lips of a Roman catholic, is a forci- 
 ble one, because he believed that it was on that day the Holy 
 Trinity perfected the work of the Redeemer by endowing his 
 church with infallibility — the Holy Ghost having been sent, he 
 says, to teach her ail truth to the end of time; but that the bible 
 christian could claim the right to tamper with God's precept for 
 such a reason as the above, is to me an absurdity, seeing that 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY 
 
 133 
 
 nothing practical accrued to his system of Christianity by the com- 
 ing of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 Again, we are told that St. John was " inspired on the Lord's 
 day" (Revelations), which was Sunday, forsooth ! Where, in 
 the whole range of sacred scripture, let me ask, is the Lord's day 
 made to signify Sunday ? I can present scores of places in the 
 old testament, and some in the new, wherein the Lord's day 
 means either the Sabbath, the day of God's wrath, or the final 
 day, but nowhere is the Sunday so called — a baseless assumption, 
 therefore, is the much-vaunted text from Revelations. 
 
 Once more, the apostles met on Easter Sunday, and therefore 
 the Sabbath was abrogated ! The poor coward followers of 
 their Master were found by Him now restored to life, huddled 
 together in a room "for fear of the Jews." They were there 
 for the reason just given, hidden away, but as far as we know 
 no prayer was said, but Christ, on that occasion, as I perceive, 
 conferred on them a wonderful power, viz. : that of forgiving sins, 
 which millions of christians believe, but the bible christian will 
 not have it so. Again, they happened to be together eight days 
 after, and Christ appeared for the purpose of confounding the 
 incredulity of Thomas, but not a single act of homage to God 
 is reported on that occasion either. For the life of me, I cannot 
 comprehend how any sane man could furnish such pretexts for 
 violating God's command. "Christian" lays great stress on the 
 discovery that the apostles themselves kept Sunday, (Acts 20 c, 
 7 V.) Now the text expressly says that they came together for 
 the celebration of the Lord's Supper, but does that forbid their 
 doing so on any other day, especially when I refer " Christian " 
 to the text, Acts 11 c, 46 v., in which it is expressly stated that 
 they did so every day ; the words are : " They continued daily 
 with one accord in the temple, breaking bread from house to 
 house. How does that suit Mr. " Christian?" What he claims 
 for Sunday exclusively, I show him to be a daily practice 
 from the word of God. He is equally unfortunate in call- 
 ing St. Paul to the rescue (i Cor. 16 c, i and 2 v.) St. 
 Paul tells the Corinthians, as he did the Galatians, that he 
 desires to contribute to the wants of the brethren at Jeru- 
 salem, and he names the first day of the week that each one 
 would set aside of his means a portion, in order that the work 
 
•tOA THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 of charity be speedily and simultaneously done. But in the name 
 of common sense, what, let me ask, has this act of philanthropy 
 to do with changing the Sabbath day ? Where was the slightest 
 act of religion ordered or hinted on this occasion ? Not a word 
 about the assembling of the people, not even for the purpose of 
 massing together the alms asked for. And even were it so, how 
 could it conflict with the holiness of the Sabbath any more than 
 the daily visits to the temple, above referred to ? Be these 
 thy promised proofs, Christian ? Partr^iunt monies^ nascltur ridl- 
 culus mus ! 
 
 And now that I have summarily disposed of the so-called 
 proofs from the new testament, in favor of the change, and 
 which Christian ushered in with such a flourish of trumpets, ap- 
 pealing to the practice of the apostles, which, like the Irishman's 
 flea, wasn't there when wanted, I will present a text from St. 
 Paul, which* will prove too much for Mr. "Christian." "Let 
 no man judge you in respect of a holiday, or of the new moon, 
 or of the Sabbath days (CoUossians, i6 c, 2 v.) No Sabbaths ! 
 No holidays hereafter ! How does that suit Messrs. " Sabbath" 
 and " Christian " & Co. ? 
 
 Mr. "Christian," you have unwarrantably charged me with 
 either "most culpable ignorance, or gross misrepresentation." 
 (I may take my choice). So far from retorting, I admit that you 
 have done all that was possible for a " bad case." The bible, as 
 you now see, does not refer to an act of worship of God on Sun- 
 day, except one^ and the apostle tells us that that one was done 
 daily^ thus leaving the Sabbath untouched. 
 
 To conclude; the inference is unavoidable, viz.: the position 
 of the bible christian is utterly untenable. On his own prin- 
 ciples, he violates without warrant or shadow of excuse, the ex- 
 press command of God every week, and the sooner he adopts 
 other principles as regards the Sabbath observance, the better for 
 his consistency as man and for his salvation as a creature, amenable 
 to the laws of his Creator. There are only two courses left 
 him, Judaism, with its observance of the Sabbath, or the Romish 
 church, which he, in fact, adopts as his guide in the observance 
 of the Sunday, and that, too, in direct contradiction of his bibli- 
 cal principles. 
 
 Before I conclude, I beg leave to present to Christian, and his 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ^35 
 
 co-religionists, an act of faith which I merely put in form — the 
 substance was always theirs. I would urgently recommend its 
 recitation morning and evening for adults ; that it be well com- 
 mitted to memory by children, and adopted in all biblical Sunday 
 schools, so that the children may not err from the "faith of their 
 fathers, and I would especially commend that all preachers of the 
 " word," and all young men's christian associations of the land, 
 would give it prominence in their " rooms " and elsewhere. 
 
 It will be to biblical christians far more truthful, far more con- 
 cise, and will meet with far more general acceptance than the 
 Apostles', Nicene, Athanasian creeds, or any other formality of 
 faith, viz. : " I firmly belfeve, O God, that the bible contains 
 thy whole revelation to man. I accept unhesitatingly its teach- 
 ings ; it alone is to me my guide to eternal life; yet. Lord, I 
 must make at least one exception to this my rule of faith, viz. : 
 contrary to thy express order (fourth precept, decalogue), my 
 ancestors, following the practice of the Romish church, instead 
 of shaking ofF this corruption with others, have entailed on me 
 the necessity of following in their footsteps ; and although I 
 know. Lord, that death was the punishment affixed to the viola- 
 tion of the Sabbath (figure of eternal death to me and all vio- 
 lators for the same offense) yet rather than submit to the teach- 
 ing of that church, or return to the observance of the Jewish 
 Sabbath, I accept all the mortification that the anomaly of my 
 position entails before men, and the terrible chastisements as- 
 signed by thy law to the conscious violation of thy command : 
 Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." Let us have 
 
 LIGHT. 
 
 [Norfolk Virghkian, October bth, 1872.] 
 
 NORFOLK, Va., Oct. 4, 1872. 
 
 "Sabbath's" Sabbath,— The Controversy G-rowing Interesting,— "Another Richmond 
 in the Field."— Truth and Light Wanted,— Where is the Impetuous and Fiery 
 Christian? — His Silence Damaging to his Cause. 
 
 Mr. Editor : — That the dispassionate (though, possibly, 
 sophistical) argumentation of "Light" has completely (to em- 
 ploy a familiar, though expressive phrase,) " used up " the 
 more impetuous and fiery "Christian," is a fact which cannot 
 
136 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 fail to be patent to all minds free from prejudice, and even to 
 some hitherto accustomed to " Christian's" mode of thinking — 
 in which category your correspondent takes rank, having been 
 reared under Anglican influences. From its inception, the con- 
 troversy between " Light " and " Christian " has been watched 
 with great interest and concern, and some of us have awaited 
 with anxious solicitude for the reply which we have expected 
 "Christian" to make to the last article from the pen of "Light." 
 Why has it not put in an appearance ? Are we to lose the case 
 by default ? It causes regret to see that apparently the "affected 
 accuracy and precision " of " Light " (to quote from our cham- 
 pion, " Christian,") have at last availed him something, since 
 they have had the effect of silencing his opponent. This will 
 naturally cause some to " desire further light." Has the " false 
 and delusive light of proud reason" yielded to honest conviction 
 in " Christian's " case ? If he tacitly acknowledges himself 
 helplessly vanquished, and his case is left championless, some of 
 us will have cause to waver and vaccilate in our faith, and un- 
 questionably must this be the case with one still in search of 
 
 TRUTH. 
 
 [Norfolk ViROiifiAN, October 6th, 1872.] 
 
 NORFOLK, Va., Oct. 4, 1872. 
 
 "Sabbath's" Sabbath.— Another Champion of "Sabbath."— A *' Lover of Peace " on 
 the Stage.— The "Unholy" Work of Liight.—" Light " an InfiJel. 
 
 EDITOR VIRGINIAN : 
 
 Dear Sir : — Truly it Is much to be regretted that in this 
 christian community men are found who do not hesitate to hurl, 
 and through your most respectable and extensively-read paper, 
 their venomous darts against the very word of God itself. Such 
 was the evident object of some articles by " Light," lately pub- 
 lished in your columns. 
 
 This writer seems to have enlisted himself in a crusade for the 
 propagation of his infidel views, so taking your readers by a sur- 
 prise. Of course, we all know that the word of God, as found 
 in the holy bible, to be not only the very basis and foundation 
 of religion, but even of society itself. What, then, could have 
 
THE KEY TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY, 
 
 137 
 
 better suited the purpose of " Light," than to shake men's faith 
 and confidence in that true and safe guide which a bountiful God 
 has so lovingly placed within the reach of all ?. Far, indeed, 
 had he progressed in his work if he lessened in the heart of one 
 God-fearing man that respect and obedience which the sacred 
 word demands. Much might he have boasted of his share of 
 that work of ruin and destruction which the propagation of his 
 doctrines would entail, not only on religion, but also on society. 
 
 How wicked, how unholy, then, to seek to unbridle the pas- 
 sions of passionate men; to subject the weak but just to the 
 strong but cruel. This the laws of society prevent, this reli- 
 gion prevents, and the disparaging in any way of God's holy 
 word is nothing more than a direct attack on the very basis and 
 foundation of one and the other. 
 
 Let "Light" reflect if he saw those consequences on the 
 views he so defiantly proposed for public consideration. If in 
 the face of such consequences he wrote his articles, then there 
 is evidence sufficie]*t that the teachings of " Light " differ very 
 materially from the doctrines of that Light, " who is the way, 
 
 the truth, and the life.' 
 
 A LOVER OF PEACE. 
 
 [Norfolk Viroinian, October 8th, 1872.] 
 
 OLD POINT COMFORT, OCTOBER 7, 1872. 
 
 "Sabbath's" Sabbath— "Light Pays His Respects to Madame " Lover of Peace"— 
 The Case taking a New Turn— Bold Declarations— Detending, not Subverting— 
 "There's Nobody Hurt," &o. 
 
 Editor Virginian : Do me the favor to assure the whining 
 old lady who signs herself " Lover of Peace," that she has no 
 reason to be alarmed ; that I am an old physician of over twenty 
 years' practice (homoeopathic or allopathic, I will not say) ; 
 that my experience and success as such ought to be a guarantee 
 that I will not use the scalpel for destruction, but rather to save 
 the life of my patients ; that so far from seeking to subvert the 
 bible, I was only defending the bible against a practice which I 
 have, to a demonstration, shown to be in direct hostility to its 
 teachings as regards the substitution of Sunday for the Sabbath 
 enjoined by God j that the practice is utterly indefensible on the 
 
2^38 '^^^ ^^^ TO TKUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 biblical platform — a mere servile Imitation of the catholic church, 
 without the shadow of excuse for the now conscious violation of 
 God's ordinance, and that it is accident alone, occasioned by the 
 ravings of " Sabbath," that has called my attention to the biblical 
 system and its strange anomalies ; that at first glance, before 
 making a careful diagnosis of the system, I discovered a hideous 
 excrescence on the corpus of my patient, which I carefully re- 
 moved and gave gratuitously the result of the operation to the 
 public; that, alas ! whilst thus occupied I made a discovery, viz: 
 That the excrescence which I exposed was itself seated on an 
 enormous polypus, which, if I have time, I will undertake to 
 remove, and will respectfully invite the public to be present and 
 witness the operation. 
 
 Putting aside professional terms, I invite Madame " Lover of 
 Peace" and her friends to a formal declaration which I now make, 
 and which I will make good (as I did the declaration that no one 
 could, on biblical principles, justify the substitution of Sunday 
 for the Sabbath), viz : That it is impossible for any christian 
 accepting the bible as his sole rule of faith, to prove it, to any 
 rational being, to be the word of God^ or a Divine revelation, and 
 therefore that no christian can rationally, on such principles, 
 make an act of faith in the scriptures. I have no doubt that the 
 declaration will produce a holy horror — a turning up of many 
 pious eyes — shocked feelings — weeping, and gnashing of teeth, 
 &c. But who can, on such hypothesis, consent for a moment 
 to be a member of a body that possesses a mere galvanized ex- 
 istence, and not even the first principles of healthy vitality ? I 
 am perfectly serious, Madame " Lover of Peace" and friends. I 
 have discovered an immense polypus — the patient will perish 
 unless it be removed. I am ready with scalpel in hand — expe- 
 rienced and cool. If invited to take the case in hand, I pledge 
 myself that the work will be skilfully executed, and the ''modus 
 operandi" plainly explained to the public. Respects to the old 
 lady, and assure her, in the words of the "late lamented" — 
 
 " there's nobody hurt." 
 
 LIGHT. 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 izd 
 
 [Norfolk Virginian, October 16th, 1873.] 
 
 NORFOLK, Va., OCTOBER 15, 1872. 
 
 "Sabbath," "Light," "Christian," "A Lover of Peace," and "Truth," Partially 
 
 Reviewed. 
 
 Mr. Editor : I do not know whether you are a professor 
 of experimental religion or not, but one thing I do know, that 
 while your paper is a secular or political journal, it has afforded 
 me very great pleasure to see the moral and religious teachings 
 of yourself, and those also of your city editor ; they have been 
 very nearly unexceptional. But I notice at the head of " Light's" 
 reply to "Christian," the words, "Christian Castigated," which 
 I suppose you wrote, for surely " Light," with all of his arrogant 
 vanity, did not presume to put that heading to his letter himself. 
 If you did it 1 must suppose that you read " Christian's" letter 
 rather casually, as " Christian" got no " castigation" at the hands 
 of " Light ;" and "Light" failed to notice one of the most im- 
 portant arguments of " Christian." Of course it was commend- 
 able for his cause for him to do so. 
 
 Now allow me to say a word to you about your city .editor. He 
 is ever ready to advocate the cause of religion, and all benevolent 
 and christian institutions receive his unqualified support. More- 
 over he is kind-hearted to the dead, for nearly all of the deaths 
 he comments upon he sends the deceased right home to heaven 
 in a full blaze of glory. Nevertheless, I have something against 
 him. Occasionally he kicks over his buckets of milk. Such I 
 conceive he has done when he advocated the cause of the Sunday 
 excursion to Richmond, which originated "Light's" controversy. 
 I wish I could review in full the letters of your correspondents 
 "Sabbath," "Light," "Christian," " A Lover of Peace," and 
 "Truth." But as it would requirfe at least four columns, I 
 could not request so much space in your paper for that purpose. 
 
 Now to the point (and I promise to be as brief as the case will 
 possibly admit). A steamer advertised to make an excursion 
 trip from this place on the Sabbath day to Richmond. A cor- 
 respondent of yours, evidently a christian, signing the name 
 " Sabbath," wrote you a mild, respectful letter (which you pub- 
 lished), protesting against the Sabbath day being desecrated in 
 that way, and asked if the press would not condemn it, saying it 
 
140 
 
 THE KEY TO TKUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 could not be for the small sum of such an advertisement that it 
 would advocate It. Now, sir, I go no further than your office 
 for a judge, but ask you if the above statements are not substan- 
 tially correct, especially as to spirit, the mildness, the courteous- 
 ness, and respectfulness of " Sabbath's" letter ? It very soon 
 appeared that another correspondent found you, who wrote you 
 upon the same subject, an old gentleman of Old Point, who 
 probably " neither fears God nor regards man," who signs him- 
 self to his productions " Light." This old man (for he says In 
 his last letter that he Is an old "physician," and consequently an 
 old man, and at least In some respects it is true) took exception 
 to the letter of " Sabbath," and endeavored to prove from scrip- 
 ture that "Sabbath's" Sabbath was no Sabbath, but another day. 
 He does not quote scripture because he believes the scriptures, 
 but as a Sabbath-breaker to justify himself, just as the serpent 
 by his subtle artfulness beguiled Eve. He persuaded her to 
 believe that she should not surely die If she partook of the for- 
 bidden fruit. Oh no ! God was too good ! to carry out that 
 penalty! But oh! the suffering of the race in consequence of 
 her disobedience to God's command ! " Light" defends the 
 bible in the same way that King Herod wanted to defend the 
 young child. He wanted to worship the young child, but only 
 for the purpose of slaying him. Our hero defends the bible for 
 the purpose of destroying Christianity ; he quotes the scriptures 
 and defends the bible just as Satan did to our Saviour when he 
 tempted him to fall down and worship him. 
 
 Now, Mr. Editor, " Light" tells you that in South America 
 Saturday, the correct day, is kept for the Sabbath, and In no 
 other Christian countrv. When a witness goes before a court 
 of justice to testify in a case, he Is sworn not only to "tell the 
 truth, but the whole truth," and If he fails "to tell the whole 
 truih" he virtually perjures himself, and if It be known It Invali- 
 dates his whole testimony. Why did not " Light" tell the whole 
 truth about the countries of South America ; why did he not 
 tell you that all days are alike In most of those countries, so far as 
 business Is concerned. He knew there Is no day there recognized 
 and enforced by law as the Sabbath ; he knew that although 
 those Catholic people go to their churches on Sabbath, and go 
 through more ceremony than on other days, that then they return 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 241 
 
 home and resume their work and business as a general thing. 
 Here it is different. We have a day recognized and enforced 
 by law as the Sabbath, and all good citizens respect it, whether 
 they are christians or not. " Light," in his reply to " Christian," 
 was exceedingly careful not to say one word about the ceremo- 
 nial law that " Christian" showed was changed, or done away, 
 after the advent of our Saviour. He knew that any admission 
 of a change in the Abrahamic, Mosaic, or ceremonial law, would 
 put him to silence in his boastful position ; his theory of no 
 change since the coming of our Saviour would prove too much 
 for his cause. Now if there was ever a ceremonial law given by 
 God, through Moses, and Christ has not come and done away 
 and changed that law, it is still binding, and if that law is still 
 binding, the usages of that day, with all the customs that were 
 not sinful then, would not be sinful now, and be admissible, if 
 not expedient. Let us look at a few cases. The patriarch 
 Jacob was a " man after God's own heart," yet he had four wives; 
 the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel were all Jacob's children, 
 but they had four mothers, all living with Jacob at the same 
 time, and it was no sin to him, for he followed " the Lord with 
 a perfect heart." Look at the case of Solomon, he had seven 
 hundred wives and three hundred concubines, but he was 
 not condemned for that, neither did he lose God's favor 
 for that. But not being satisfied, he loved strange women 
 (heathen women), and they turned his heart from God, and 
 then he lost God's favor. Now if there had been no change 
 in the ceremonial law neither need there be in the customs of 
 that day. Imagine a man in our day with a thousand wives, he 
 buys them a fashionable dress pattern ; now, even if he had Solo- 
 mon's revenue, how long would it take him to become a bank- 
 rupt ? If those past customs now prevailed, even if it was not 
 the grossest immorality and sin (which it would be), and our old 
 friend " Light" should have happened to have strayed into the 
 diiEculty of having a thousand wives hanging around him, I think 
 he would wish there had been a christian dispensation to have 
 that custom done away, and it is more likely he would try the 
 virtue of about nine hundred and ninety-nine divorces, besides a 
 dispensation to do away with all of the ceremonies of the law 
 of Moses, and all of the customs prevalent at that day was for the 
 
j^9 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIA.NITY. 
 
 best. No matter how poor the sinner is, now he needs neither 
 birds or beasts to bring to the altar as a sacrifice; but he may 
 come just as he is, all the sacrifice required is a penitential, broken 
 and contrite heart. Well, if the christian dispensation has 
 changed, or done away the Jewish law, so may it change the 
 Jewish Sabbath. All the commands of God to the patriarchs in 
 their day, and to Moses, for the offering of beasts and birds upon 
 the altar of sacrifice, were right and binding. It will be remem- 
 bered that everything offered was to be without blemish, because 
 it was typical of the coming Saviour, who, without spot or blem- 
 ish, offered Himself upon the cross a sacrifice for the sins of the 
 whole world. Therefore now whoever attempts to worship in 
 imitation of those past ceremonies, by the offering of beasts and 
 birds, or the burning of incense and bowing to images, are idol- 
 ators, as much so as the heathen who never heard of the true 
 God, and daily bow down to gods made by his own hands. 
 " Light" says Saturday is the Sabbath of the bible instead of Sun- 
 day. Now the narrative says that in six days God -made the 
 world. "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished and all 
 the hosts of them. And on the seventh day God ended His 
 work which He had made, and rested on the seventh day from all 
 His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh 
 day and it was sanctified.'* Now it is supposed that about four 
 thousand years had passed to the time of the advent. Will 
 "Light" pretend that he can prove from the bible or any other 
 source, that Saturday, our present seventh day, is the identical 
 successive seventh of the first seventh on which God rested from 
 all His labors ? Will he pretend that he can show from the 
 bible that the present Jewish Sabbath is positively and unmistak- 
 ably the true successive of the seventh on which God rested ; 
 that through all time past it has never been interrupted or 
 changed ? It may be, or it may not be, but if it be he cannot 
 prove It from the bible. Unless he can positively show beyond 
 a shadow of doubt that the present Jewish Sabbath is the identi- 
 cal seventh of the first seventh day after creation (even if he 
 were to admit that the change by the christian world from the 
 Jewish Sabbath to the present christian Sabbath were unavoid- 
 able or wrong), his whole argument to prove that Christianity is 
 keeping the wrong day, is not worth a straw. A long time had 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. -tAQ 
 
 elapsed from the creation of time to the giving of ceremonial 
 law by Moses. Also was it a long time from the giving of the 
 law by Moses to the advent of our Saviour into the world. Who 
 knows but through these long periods of time the first seventh 
 day had never been interrupted or changed. We know that the 
 christian Sabbath has remained the same from its first institution; 
 we know that God has blessed the christian Sabbath ; we know 
 that God has sent the Holy Ghost down with power upon His 
 people while worshiping Him upon the christian Sabbath dav ; 
 we know that the little stone that was cut out of the mountain 
 has been rolling on, and is still rolling on, and until every isle of 
 the sea shall find rest under its shadow, and the praise of the Re- 
 deemer of man shall be heard from every hill top and every val- 
 ley on every side of this globe on the christian Sabbath, and God 
 will sanctify the christian Sabbath ; and if all the devils in per- 
 dition were to form in solid column, and were to be reinforced 
 by all enemies of Christianity in the world, and were to make one 
 concentrated attack upon Christianity, the little stone would con- 
 tinue to roll on. Your correspondent "Light's" defence of the 
 bible is worthless. If the bible had to depend upon his defence 
 it would not stand twenty-four hours. Mr. Editor, " Light" 
 tells you in his last communication that he is defending, not 
 writing to destroy the bible. " Light's" vanity and self-approba- 
 tion is without a parallel. He has persuaded himself (nobody 
 else) to a demonstration that he has succeeded in proving that the 
 Sabbath is no Sabbath. Not that he, like the devout Jew, has 
 any more regard for Saturday as the Sabbath than he has for 
 " Sabbath," for he regards neither as a holy day, and while he 
 defends the bible, it is alone for the purpose of trying to strike a 
 death-blow at Christianity, by which, if he could succeed, it 
 would be easy to prove the bible a cunningly devised fable. And 
 now, having thrown off^ his mask, that is evidently what he pur- 
 poses to do ; one must suppose, from the exalted estimate that 
 your correspondent places upon his own abilities, that he expects 
 to put the talents of his forerunners, Hume, Hobbs, Gibbon, and 
 the great Voltaire, in the shade, who labored in the same cause. 
 For with their great talents they failed to overthrow Christianity. 
 '*• Light's" self-conceit has persuaded him by a little flippant let- 
 ter writing, that he has discovered a mighty lever by which hq 
 
144 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 intends to overthrow the noble s*-ructure of Christianity that has 
 Stood the storms of more than eighteen hundred winters. 
 
 Look, Mr. Editor, at " Light's" unparalleled vanity. After 
 making certain assertions in his last letter, he says, " I have no 
 doubt that the declaration will produce a holy horror, a turning 
 up of many pious eyes, shocking feelings, weeping and gnashing 
 of teeth," &c. What consummate vanity ! Hold, old fiend ! 
 Hold ! Please don't be frightened at the enormous shocks of 
 your own earthquake ! for nobody else will. Please take notice 
 that the whole ground you propose to occupy has been fought 
 over before. Your propositions are nothing ' new under the 
 sun." Hands and voices, perhaps nearly equal to yours, have 
 done their worst, but to-day Christianity stands erect ! is stronger 
 to-day than it ever has been since the day that Herod sought to 
 slay the " young child." With all that you have said, or can say, 
 you will hurt no christian, real or nominal. No one will be 
 frightened by the mighty thunder that you have uttered. No one 
 will be horrified by those mutterings. No pious eyes will be 
 turned towards you with fright. No one's teeth will gnash with 
 fright at your thunder ! The world will stand as long probably 
 as if you had not have thundered ! And If you do not destroy 
 yourself by the shock of your earthquake, nobody will be hurt. 
 
 Now, Mr. Editor, it is really amusing when " Light" tells you 
 it was "accident alone, occasioned by the ravings of 'Sabbath,'" 
 &c., to read his truly "ravings" at his "Madame, A Lover of 
 Peace." She has completely thrown him off his balance, caus- 
 ing him to forget to be courteous and affable to her effeminacy. 
 But the "old lady" has laid It on him so sharp that he "raves" 
 like a madman with the hydrophobia, and he commences his 
 attack on her by calling her ugly names, something unusual for 
 those of his school to do. Mr. Editor, I do not know whether 
 your correspondent, " A Lover of Peace," is an " old lady" or 
 not, but I suppose so. " Light" says so. And It Is said that 
 nothing makes a rickety, gouty old doctor so mad as to be se- 
 verely lashed by an " old lady." So, in the absence of other 
 evidence, Instinct would tell him she was an "old lady;" for 
 these old doctors are an Instinctive set. The "old lady" has 
 lashed him so severely that In revenge he has looked around, and 
 supposes he has made a mighty " discovery," by which, after 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. -^^^ 
 
 operating upon the " old lady," he proposes to use his mighty- 
 lever, he has discovered, to destroy Christianity at one mighty 
 stroke ; and with that destruction the bible falls also. 
 
 Mr. Editor, I don't think the " old lady, a lover of peace," is 
 very timid, but permit me to say to her, that she has so enraged 
 "Light," that he is now in a humor, not only to take out her 
 tumor, but also her heart with it. " Old lady," )ou have no- 
 thing to fear from the doctor's old rusty knife, although he says 
 he has been using it for twenty years. I doubt whether he has 
 succeeded in persuading a single patient to disbelieve Christianity. 
 I do not place the great estimate upon his abilities that he does 
 himself. No, "old lady." There is no harm in him. His 
 dirty old scalpe has neither point nor edge. But doubtless he 
 thinks himself a perfect Samson. And that he now holds the 
 main pillars of the temple in his hands ; and that he is now only 
 waiting a favorable opportunity to bow himself, and level the 
 mighty temple of Christianity with the ground, and bury all of its 
 devotees in the ruins thereof. But that does not alter the truth 
 of God's revealed will to man by His holy word. No, my dear, 
 old, rickety, gouty " homoeopathy," for you are not " allopathy." 
 You need not have taken such pains to warn Christianity to get 
 out of your way. Hume failed, Hobbs failed. Gibbon failed, 
 Voltaire failed. And the lesser "light" will fail. 
 
 Now, Mr. Editor, if you please, a few words in reference to 
 "Truth." It requires no stretch of the imagination to see that 
 "Truth" has assumed a partial mask, as did "Light." He does not 
 wish to come out as a bold ally of " Light," nevertheless he has 
 shown by his writing that he is in full accord with him ; for he calls 
 the effusion of "Light " dispassionate, and the writing of "Chris- 
 tian " impetuous and fiery. He has a strange idea of the defini- 
 tion of the word impetuosity. He says it is a fact which cannot 
 fail to be patent to all minds free from prejudice, and even to 
 some hitherto accustomed to Christian's mode of thinking, in 
 which category your correspondent takes rank, etc. His words, 
 "even to some hitherto," clearly shows that he thinks all chris- 
 tians " prejudiced." His word " hitherto " shows that he has 
 lost the effect of his religious training, though he might have been 
 only a nominal christian. It was worth more to him by culti- 
 vating it, and seeking for the whole '^truth " as it is in Christ, 
 
 10 
 
146 
 
 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 by humble prayer and faith, and calling upon the God of his 
 sainted mother (perhaps now in heaven), who took him by her 
 side and taught him to say: "Our Father, who art in heaven," 
 than the riches of a thousand worlds like this. May the Lord 
 help him to return to the pious teachings of the God of his father 
 and mother. For the very worst wish that I find in my heart to 
 make against "Truth" and old friend "Light," is that they may 
 find the true light that outshines the brightness of the. noonday 
 sun on a cloudless day. That " truth " that all of the opposing 
 elements of Christianity cannot shake loose from its solid foun- 
 dations, because it is founded upon a solid rock. And when the 
 angel Gabriel shall sound the last loud trump, and the countless 
 hosts of the buried dead shall burst through the green sward that 
 covers their graves, and spring forth into life, and old ocean, with 
 one mighty wave shall roll her unnumbered millions to the shore ! 
 and the crucified, risen, ascended Saviour shall return to earth the 
 " second time," not as a redeemer, nor as an intercessor, but as a 
 judge ! I pray God, Mr. Editor, that you, with all your corre- 
 spondents, "Sabbath," "Light," "A Lover of Peace," "Truth," 
 and the writer (my heart expands, and I add all of Adam's race 
 for whom there is yet hope), may be found in that glorious com- 
 pany that John said no man could number, that had washed their 
 robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. 
 
 It is certain that no christian, real or nominal, thinks, as 
 "Truth" professes to think, that "Light" has been "dispassion- 
 ate," or that " Christian " has been " impetuous and fiery." 
 " Christian's " statements were plain, calm, and courteously 
 spoken facts, enforced by scriptural* truths, quoted from scrip- 
 ture, and enforced by mild but decisive arguments, conclusive to 
 all minds not " prejudiced " against Christianity. " Truth " says 
 he is one still in search of truth. If that is really so, he has adopted 
 a poor method of finding it, by writing sophistical and semi, or 
 at least quarto letters, and charging " Christian " with a method 
 of writing of which he was not guilty. If " Truth " really wishes 
 to find the "truth," let him take his bible. There he will find 
 that it says the way is so plain, that a wayfaring man, though a 
 fool, need not err therein. He will find the " truth," if he ap- 
 proaches the Lord as did the poor publican, when he smote upon 
 his breast, and said, " God be merciful to a sinner." If he thus 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHKISTIANITY. 
 
 147 
 
 approaches God, in the name of the Redeemer of man, he will 
 be sure to find the "truth." And when the impression is made 
 upon his heart, "peace be still !" or "go in peace and sin no 
 more," or "thy sins are forgiven," there will be such a glorious 
 "light" spring up into his heart, upon the very foundations of 
 "truth," that it will cause him to exclaim, "behold, the half was not 
 told me." And when that true "light" springs up into his soul, 
 probably the first thought that will come into his mind will cause 
 him to say. Oh ! my mother ! oh ! my father ! I feel I am going 
 to meet you in the better land, " where the wicked cease from 
 troubling, and the weary are forever at rest." 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 S. L. B. 
 
 [Norfolk VinaiNiAN, October 20th, 1872.] 
 
 A LAST WORD FROM LIGHT IN VINDICATION 
 OF HIMSELF AND HIS POSITION. 
 
 OLD POINT COMFORT, October 19, 1872. 
 
 Editor Virginian : — Surely courtesy does not require that a 
 correspondent should be obliged to defend himself against the 
 wild, aimless attacks of every scribbler who feels authorized to 
 deliver himself of senseless abuse, and then with impunity to re- 
 tire from the arena. I found it necessary to rebuke " Sabbath ;" 
 he disappeared, then a writer of culture (" Christian ") who cer- 
 tainly wielded an energetic pen, and with whom I had hoped to 
 break more than one lance, graced your columns with an article 
 fraught with erudition and style, and evincing a refined notion of 
 the amenities of life. In my reply I treated him with that con- 
 sideration which his production deserved. Finding, however, my 
 arguments too much for him, he, " deeming prudence the better 
 part of valor," gracefully left me in possession of the field. 
 
 A third writer ("A Lover of Peace,") I barely noticed with a 
 few jocular remarks, simply because there was no effort at argu- 
 ment, nothing tangible whereon I might remark in connection 
 with the question at issue. I never again expect to hear a whine 
 from the " old lady." 
 
;[48 THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY, 
 
 But in sober earnestness, I ask, am I expected to notice the pro- 
 duction that graced (?) your pages of the 17th instant? A Re- 
 viewer, forsooth ! shades of Sidney Smith, Macauly, etc., etc., 
 what a misnomer ! What between laughing and sympathy for 
 the writer, I have been all day in a strange mood. Has the 
 poor man no friends who will kindly see to it that he will not 
 again expose himself? Had I his address I would seek to atone 
 for the defects of his early education by furnishing him with a 
 dictionary and English grammar ; but alas ! I fear that it is too 
 late, and that he will never master the primary rudiments of his 
 own language. Nor does his undisciplined mind evince the 
 slightest logical acumen ; some minds are naturally consecutive, 
 but our friend can honestly stand guiltless of the charge, as is 
 witnessed in some of his sentences, wherein he buries his head in 
 a bank of mud, and you lose sight of him until he starts the 
 next sentence. On the whole, I must confess that, while I 
 have been reading newspapers with some degree of attention for 
 over thirty years, a more senseless, aimless, unlettered produc- 
 tion has never met my eyes. 
 
 However, before I take leave of this writer, I will note a 
 remark made by him in reference to the Sabbath. He asks, 
 " Will he (Light) pretend that he can show from the bible that 
 the present Jewish Sabbath is positively, etc., the true suc- 
 cession of the seventh day on which God rested ? It may be, 
 or it may not be, but if it be, he cannot prove it from the bible." 
 In reply I would hazard the assertion that the Son of God, who 
 calls Himself (Matt. 12c., 8 v.) the Lord of the Sabbath, knew 
 as much of the matter as our very erudite friend ; as He was 
 omniscient, did He not know that for four thousand years the 
 people of God were keeping the wrong day ? And if they were, 
 would he not have corrected the error ? Whereas, on the other 
 hand. His evangelists, in their simplicity, never harbored a sus- 
 picion for a moment that they were keeping the wrong day. 
 The Sabbath (Saturday) is referred to in more than seventy in- 
 stances in the new testament, by Christ, His apostles and evan- 
 gelists. He taught, as St. Luke inform us (4 c, 31 v.) on the 
 Sabbath day, and no other ; the words of the text are : " He 
 came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught there 
 on the Sabbath days." He promised eternal life to the young 
 
THE KEY TO TEUE CHRISTIANITY. ^49 
 
 man (who had asked him what he should do to attain it) if he 
 would keep the commandments, including, of course, the Sab- 
 bath day, without any change or modification, and it is worthy 
 of observation, that the fourth command was given with an em- 
 phasis peculiarly its own ; for God says. Remember the Sabbath, 
 etc. The day, therefore, that Christ recognized and endorsed 
 as the Sabbath day, the day he confirmed in the new testament 
 when He promulgated anew the commandments, the day He 
 chose whereon to teach His doctrines (St. Luke), in preference 
 to all others, and to substitute which by another, there is not a 
 word said in the new law, is the day, the only day, to be kept by 
 those who profess to follow the bible for their guide. This is 
 conclusive and final. 
 
 I wish it, however, to be understood that I am not infidel 
 enough to seek to destroy or diminish in the least the practice 
 of keeping Sunday — better that day than none — but I maintain 
 that the system of Christianity that holds that the bible is the 
 only and original source of christian faith, is lamentably inade- 
 quate to furnish the believer with grounds for the change of day, 
 whilst it furnishes the unbeliever with ample material to charge 
 its followers with the grossest inconsistency ; because their prac- 
 tice is in direct violation of the fundamental principles of their 
 religion, and is, in fact, a constant rebellion against what they 
 profess to call the law of God. But this is not all. I fearlessly 
 assert that this is only one of the many contradictions derivable 
 from the system. I maintain that the whole system is funda- 
 mentally wrong ; that it has no basis ; that the christian who 
 adheres to it is surrounded with difficulties insuperable. Meanwhile 
 I commend S. L. B. to the kind attentions and good offices of 
 his friends. 
 
 I had proposed, as I promised, to expose the utter inconsecu- 
 tiveness of the system to which my attention had been calkd, 
 and if my antagonists will unite with me in soliciting you, Mr. 
 Editor, to withdraw your veto to further writing on the subject, 
 I will engage to prove to a demonstration, that the system under 
 discussion has not wherewith to maintain itself; that the bible 
 cannot be proved an inspired work — a supernatural witness being 
 required therefor, which is not admissible in the system — that 
 its canon we can never be assured of, inasmuch as out of twelve 
 
-icQ THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 gospels in use in the fifth century, the Roman catholic church 
 rejected eight ; out of six Acts of the Apostles she rejected five, 
 leaving us only one ; out of four Revelations she rejected three ; in 
 a word, she set aside no less than forty scriptures then in use ; that 
 inasmuch as the system proposes to us a code of laws without 
 interpreter or judge, thereby evincing the fact, that if this system 
 be the one presented for our acceptance by a divine Legislator, 
 He displayed in this respect none of the wisdom with which He 
 has endowed even the semi-civilized legislators of the earth, to 
 whom he has given the foresight to see that disorder and chaos 
 would reign when every subject or citizen had the right to decide 
 and interpret definitively the genuine sense of the law ; to appoint 
 judges who, learned in the law, interpret its true meaning. On 
 the other hand, the divine Legislator, in such premises, has ut- 
 terly failed to foresee the lamentable consequences that necessa- 
 rily follow from a system of legislation not only incomplete, but in 
 its immediate results productive of discord, wrangling, uncharita- 
 bleness, etc., in proportion as men seriously and heartily adhere 
 to it ; whilst, on the other hand, to men who, conversant with 
 its workings, who regard it with clear intellects, it begets only 
 indifFerentism to all revealed religion, and consequent rationalism, 
 and this deplorable condition of things is fast pervading our land. 
 Another fact, which is well worthy our notice, is that Chris- 
 tianity had existed nearly fifteen hundred years, during which 
 time it was morally impossible for one christian in ten thousand 
 to exercise an act of faith through the scriptures ; for from the 
 dawn of Christianity to the year 397, there was no bible, as we 
 possess it to-day, the catholic church having, in the council of 
 Carthage, separated what she considered the spurious from the 
 genuine and inspired scriptures, rejecting the greater part ; there- 
 fore, for four hundred years nearly, no christian could make an act 
 of faith in the scriptures. From that period to the discovery of 
 the art of printing, it was nearly equally impossible to do so ; for 
 when we consider the extreme difficulty of procuring a copy of the 
 scriptures, occasioned by the mode of writing, which was called 
 "uncial," and which consisted of detached letters, like our capi- 
 tals on a sign-board — the long period thus necessary to copy a 
 whole bible, and the consequent high price thereof, let me ask, do 
 I exaggerate when I suggest that not one man in a hundred thou- 
 
THE KEY TO TRUE CHRISTIANITY. ^^l 
 
 sand could possibly have a copy of the scriptures, and consequently 
 not one man in that number could make an act of faith in the scrip- 
 tures ? Let me ask, can such a system have ever been intended 
 by God as a means of salvation, which for a period of fifteen 
 hundred years was practically a "sealed book" to mankind? If 
 this fact be not of itself sufficient to alarm those who, in good 
 faith have hitherto accepted this system, I know not what is ca- 
 pable of so doing. It is then conclusive that inasmuch as Chris- 
 tianity flourished for fifteen hundred years without this system, 
 God never intended it to christianize the world, apart from the 
 considerations already proposed. 
 
 Having convinced myself of the utter inadequacy of the biblical 
 system to bring me one step in advance, so that I could make an 
 act of faith in a divine revelation, I naturally looked for some 
 other system of Christianity that could satisfy my rational longing 
 for the supernatural rather than resort to rationalism, into which 
 mankind in our day are hastily rushing. The only system left 
 me is that of the Roman catholic church. It alone affords me 
 an escape. It presents me with a supernatural witness to prove 
 the scriptures inspired — otherwise unprovable. It, claiming a 
 divine origin, and a perpetual supervision of the Holy Spirit, can 
 alone present me unerringly a true canon, and as interpreter, 
 judge and witness of God's law to man, declares and defines, in 
 virtue of its infaUibility — an absolute necessity in every system 
 of revealed religion — the law of the divine Legislator. 
 
 LIGHT. 
 

 APPENDIX 
 
REVIEW AND REFUTATION OF A SERMON, ETC. 
 
 FBSACHED BY 
 
 Rev. O. S. BARTEN, D. D. 
 
 Pastor of Christ Church, Norfolk, Va. 
 
 "I hear that some one Is devising some folly regarding the holy and ever-virgin 
 Mary, and dares to vomit forth some Injurious fancy against her ! Whence this wicked 
 temper? Whence this great audacity?. Does not her very name bear witness against, 
 and convince thee, thou contentious man? Who was there ever, or what age has pre- 
 sumed to utter the name of Mary the holy, and when interrogated, has not instantly 
 added in reply, "the Virgin?" For in these titles are shown forth the distinctive 
 marks of virtue. And to holy Mary is added the epithet, "the Virgin," and this shall 
 never be altered. For she, the holy, ever remained spotless. Does not nature itself in- 
 struct thee? Oh! the unheard of madness ! Oh, sad novelty ! How dare they attack 
 the spotless Virgin 7 She was found worthy to be the dwelling-place of the Son ; she 
 who was, for this very end, chosen from out the thousands of Israel to be the vessel, 
 and the alone memorable dwelling-place of the (divine) birth." 
 
 St. Epiphanius, A. D. 385. 
 
 NORFOLK, FEAST OF THE PURIFICATION OF B. V. MARY, 1874. 
 REV. 0. S. BARTEN, D. D., Rector of Christ Church, Norfolk, Va. 
 
 Reverend Sir : I beg leave to call your attention to the 
 subjoined copy of notes, taken from the original, verhatijn^ llter^ 
 atim^ et punctuatim^ which was handed me by a friend, having 
 been addressed to him by yourself, and which I now propose to 
 make the subject of some remarks. 
 
 • ''CHRIST CHURCH RECTORY, NORFOLK, VA., JAN. 5, 1874. 
 
 ''The leading points of the sermon you alluded to were, ist. 
 An examination of the passage of Luke, i c. 28 v., the much- 
 quoted passage in favor of adoration., &c., which brought out the 
 fact that — even accepting their own translation (the Vulgate), 
 not a word can be found that implies or teaches equality with the 
 Son. She was not a fountain of grace to others as was the Son. 
 Moreover, it was shown that expressions, the very same, or as 
 similar as can well be conceived were applied to many others in 
 scripture — that in fact not a word is said in that passage which 
 
A ADOKATION OF THE B. V. MAR'X. 
 
 was in any way peculiar as to her nature and had not been said 
 before or to others. 
 
 " Moreover, her consternation at the angel's message was 
 dwelt upon as another proof that she herself did not accept the 
 visit or anything connected with it as an act of adoration. 2d. 
 The historical account of the gospel was dwelt upon as a proof 
 of her miraculous conception by and through the overshadowing 
 of the Holy Ghost — which the angel in the most reverend man- 
 ner spoke of as a great mystery — the point here is, if the Virgin 
 had been without sin, &c., then the miracle should be dated back 
 to her and her birth, and where would the human nature of 
 Christ come from ? 
 
 "3d. Mary's submission — her obedience — her humari Vi2.y oi 
 doing — the Saviour's treatment of her — the turning-point of their 
 relationship at Cana — at the message that she and His brethren 
 are without — the scene upon the cross not my but thy (John's) 
 mother and to Mary, not mother, but woman behold thy son ! — 
 from which it appears that Mary felt and was satisfied with the 
 transfer of natural relationship to the fullest apprehension of the 
 tenderness and sacredness of the eternal tie which binds together 
 the church and the Lord. Lastly the historical point that the 
 apostles in the epistles and early fathers are all silent as to the 
 Romish doctrine with respect to her — not to be supposed natural 
 from the importance which Romanists attach to it. 
 
 "Also the fact that the prayer now used by the Romanists — 
 Ave Maria was not used in the church before the 13th century — 
 the latter clause, pray for me, not until the 15th and later. And 
 that while it took 15 centuries to develop the doctrine, it was not 
 promulgated till the 19th — moreover that at this time thousands 
 (over 20 or 30,000) in the last year are absolutely turning away 
 from her altars because they will and cannot accept the new 
 dogma. 
 
 " In haste, yours, 
 
 «0. S. BARTEN." 
 
 Never have I, in the course of my life, discovered in so small 
 a compass, such a combination of reckless assertion, unpardon- 
 able ignorance of facts, theology and ecclesiastical history than 
 is to be found embodied in the above summary ; and " si hoc in 
 viridi^ quid in arido? — if so much be found in the green wood, 
 wnat may we not expect in the dry ?" that is, if the synopsis of 
 the sermon betray such a lamentable exhibition of uncharitable- 
 ness, misstatement and ignorance, what must be concluded of 
 the sermon itself? You undertake to prove, by various argu- 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. g 
 
 ments, that Romanists have no justification for their adoration of the 
 Virgin, Let me ask have you carefully ascertained whether they 
 adore her^ in fact? If they adore her, they are, necessarily, idol- 
 aters^ because to adore a creature Is pure Idolatry. Then, Inas- 
 much, as I unworthily represent the catholic community of this 
 city, I am the arch-Idolater of Norfolk ! Oh, God ! have I lived 
 in this city nearly twenty-two years, devoting myself ceaselessly 
 towards furthering Thy interests (as I vainly imagined), in the 
 instruction of the old and young, teaching them that they must 
 adore one, true, living and eternal God, and no more^ as our 
 catechism teaches, and at this era in my life to be told that I 
 represent an idolatrous church — that my people are adorers of 
 a mere creature — that the gentle sisters of charity, who, in one 
 of our Institutions here are devoting themselves, night and day, 
 to alleviate the sufferings of poor humanity, and In the other, are 
 " spending themselves and being spent" in protecting many of the 
 helpless orphans of our city, are idolaters? That the grant of 
 St. Vincent's Hospital, one of the chief ornaments as well as 
 most useful institutions of our city, was made by an idolatrous 
 lady and her idolatrous brother, who,' raised a member of the 
 church of England, fell into the idolatry of his sister, and died 
 an idolater, having previously bequeathed his large estate to the 
 propagation of the catholic faith — in other words, to the further- 
 ance of idolatrous interests ? 
 
 Am I to be told that the present archbishop of Baltimore, erst 
 an episcopal minister, and of course then a simon-pure christian, 
 fell, like the apostate Julian, Into base Idolatry, and is now, like 
 his prototype, devoting his energies to the propagation of an Idol- 
 atrous worship? Am I to be told that the present archbishop of 
 Westminster, Dr. Manning, once one of the brightest ornaments 
 of the church of England, has similarly abandoned that pure (?) 
 institution, to adore idols ? that Dr. Newman, one of the most 
 gifted men of the age, with hundreds of his episcopalian confreres, 
 formerly ministers of that church, are fallen from their high estate, 
 and now grovelling in the mire of idolatry ? Am I to be told that 
 two hundred and fifty million Roman catholics, and from seventy 
 to eighty million, that compose the Greek church, are all sunk in 
 base idolatry, in conjunction with the other eastern sects that, 
 with the foregoing, have always held on the same question views 
 
g ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 perfectly identical ; whilst a mere sixth part of so-called chris- 
 tians, the remnant of Christianity, composed of a conglomera- 
 tion of all kinds of odds and ends, the debris of protestantism, fast 
 dissolving into shapeless fragments, the greater part of which does 
 not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, or in a divine revela- 
 tion ; ex gratia^ Prince Bismarck, the Premier of Germany, who 
 recently informed a correspondent of the New York World that 
 he recognized no God but the state, and would compel the empire to 
 adopt his own views ; and in this particular, he will not experience 
 much difficulty, inasmuch as the protestantism of Germany to-day 
 is not very far removed from that desired point. And this, forsooth, 
 is the element that Christianity has to rely upon for recuperation 
 and restoration to that pure condition which it enjoyed in the 
 primitive ages — an element that cannot unite in making an act of 
 faith in the divinity of the Founder of Christianity, or in the exis- 
 tence of a supernatural revelation. Surely the age of miracles 
 must be restored to us, in order to enable this compound to recall 
 all idolatrous christians, Romanists, Greeks, etc., etc., to that 
 enviable (!) Christianity, which they exult in with such good 
 reason. 
 
 Have you, reverend sir, weighed well the import of the above 
 words, " adoration, equality with the Son, act of adoration,'* etc., 
 etc. ? Could you possibly have offered a greater insult to a chris- 
 tian than to charge him with idolatry ? And yet this is unequiv- 
 ocally true, if your own handwriting is to be credited. In the 
 wantonness of spiritual pride, you, on that Sunday, in the pres- 
 ence of a large number of our fellow citizens, thanked God that 
 you were not as the rest of — so-called christians, idolaters. You 
 had your publican realized in the person of the poor benighted 
 papists who, in an obscure corner of the city, in their house of — 
 pardon me, I was about to write — God ; no, but in their temple 
 of idolatry, striking their breasts and, unconscious of the horrid 
 reality of their situation, asking God (!) in their infatuation, to 
 have mercy on them sinners. Arrogance equal to this is incon- 
 ceivable. Did the congregation who listened to this calumny on 
 so many of their fellow citizens, believe you ? If so, from my 
 heart I pity their credulity, and the situation in such case would 
 warrant the conclusion that wealth and position are not insepa- 
 rable from unpardonable ignorance, but if they believed you not, 
 
ADORATION OF THE B, Y. MARY. n 
 
 » 
 
 then how, I ask, can they, hereafter, trust utterances from such 
 a source ? But I now pronounce, in the most formal manner, 
 the subject-matter of that sermon a foul libel on myself and my 
 faithful catholic children — a gross and unmerited insult to each 
 and every one of us — a specimen of uncharitableness as unwar- 
 ranted as vindictive, and an expose of ignorance that should raise 
 the blood to the cheek of any half-educated boor. I denounce 
 the above, every position, every sentence, word and letter there- 
 of, and publicly proclaim that a more wanton and unprovoked 
 insult never before emanated from the most irresponsible source 
 to a considerable portion of any community. 
 
 It is equally untrue as it is insulting, and I shall now proceed 
 to establish this proposition. 
 
 Alas, that in this enlightened age, and in a city where catho- 
 licity has had a foothold for nearly a century, numbering in its 
 fold some of the most prominent and influential of its citizens, it 
 should be found necessary to repel this gratuitous insult, by 
 proving the charge a false one, and that neither my spiritual chil- 
 dren nor myself can be truthfully charged with the crime most 
 odious to Christianity, viz. : idolatry. 
 
 Were I not a christian clergyman I should adopt another mode 
 of refuting this slander. 
 
 Is it true, then, that Romanists, as you call us, adore the 
 blessed Virgin Mary ? The answer to this question can be found 
 in the defined teachings of the church, or from the lips of the 
 catholic child, who will tell you from his catechism, that supreme 
 and absolute homage belongs to God alone, whilst a relative or 
 inferior homage is allowable to be conferred on creatures. But 
 before the reply be fully developed, it is better to be explicit re- 
 garding the terms, idolatry and adoration. The word idolatry, 
 etymologically considered, is derived from two Greek words, 
 which signify the supreme homage to an idol ; whilst the word 
 adoration, from its Latin root, means literally " the hand to the 
 mouth," indicative of homage. Whatever may have been hith- 
 erto the received acceptation of these words, it is now beyond dis- 
 pute that they are to-day synonymous, should the word adora- 
 tion be applied to any other being than God, and involves the 
 crime conveyed by the word idolatry, and this is evidently your 
 idea of the word, for you labor hard to establish the fact that 
 
g ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 Mary is but a creature — a work of supererogation on your part, 
 for the being does not live who ever regarded her otherwise. 
 Now I shall proceed to the discussion of the question, as to 
 whether catholics a^iore the Blessed Virgin. I reply with all the 
 energy of my nature, that the imputation is a foul calumny, and 
 I hurl back the slander in the teeth of the libeller ! But as as- 
 sertion merely would be of no avail here, inasmuch as I have to 
 deal with those who love to see with bandages voluntarily en- 
 veloping their mental vision (pardon the Hibernicism), I propose 
 to develop the teachings of the church on this question. 
 
 I have been a catholic from my infancy, and have devoted the 
 best part of my life to the instruction of others in her teachings ; 
 hence I deem myself, to say the least, as correct an exponent of her 
 doctrines as any one who never for a moment obeyed her voice. 
 Well do I remember the question in the catechism, viz. : Does 
 this commandment (first) forbid all veneration of saints and 
 angels ? and its answer: No, provided we honor them with an 
 inferior or relative honor, etc. 
 
 To render to God the supreme homage which belongs to Him 
 alone^ is the first lesson which the catholic church inculcates on 
 the tender minds of her children ; hence she takes special care to 
 distinguish between the absolute and inalienable honor and hom- 
 age due to the Deity and the honor accorded to creatnres ; thus 
 distinguishing in the genus honor two species : Latria, which be- 
 longs to God alone, and is absolute, whilst the second species, 
 which is rendered to creatures in the natural or supernatural 
 order is called Dulia, or inferior and relative honor. This 
 distinction is so well delineated that it is impossible to con- 
 found one with the other; for to God alone belongs Latria, or 
 supreme homage, which chiefly finds expression in sacrifice, 
 which can be offered to Him alone, and which has been offered 
 to Him alone by all true believers from the creation of the worW 
 — in the old law, through the medium of types and figures, and 
 in the new dispensation by the sacrifice of the cross ever abiding 
 amongst us in its continuation by the arrangement of Jesus Christ 
 Himself, who is "a Priest forever according to the order of Mel- 
 chisidech," viz., by off'ering the " clean oblation," alone accept- 
 able to God, viz.. Himself, under the forms of bread and wine, 
 and this " forever," through the medium of the priests of the 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. ft 
 
 new law, who were commanded to " do this in remembrance of 
 Him." This is Latria, in its highest and supreme expression, and 
 this, reverend sir, you never yet offered to God, but, dog-in-the- 
 manger-like, you will not ofFer it yourself nor allow it to be 
 ofiered, if you can help it. This is the realization of all the 
 sacrificial figures, "offered from the rising of the sun to the going 
 down thereof;" and in every place "there is sacrifice and a clean 
 oblation," verifying literally the grand prophecy of Malachy. 
 This is Latria in all its plenitude, the absence of which, in pro- 
 testantism, exhibits it as the only profession of religion on earth 
 which does not offer to God supreme honor or sacrifice, whilst 
 yet it recognizes His supreme Majesty. For from the com- 
 mencement of the world to this day, protestantism stands isolated 
 as a system of religion presenting the anomaly of the worship of 
 God without sacrifice. To resume, the second species of honor, 
 called Dulia, is confined to created beings, but always referable 
 to God, according to the psalmist, " Laudate Dominum in Sanctis 
 ejus'' — "Praise ye the Lord in His saints;" for all the honor con- 
 ferred on the saints redounds to the honor of God, and it is to be 
 referred to Him — the Holy Ghost commanding it in the above 
 express terms. Moreover, what are the saints of God but His 
 creatures who are now^ by His bounty, enjoying the beatific 
 vision, because he chooses to confer on them His gifts, and in 
 praising, honoring and venerating them we but co-operate with 
 God in His acts, and but imitate His example, who commands it 
 as above in the royal psalmist. He also commands us to honor 
 our parents, and, indirectly, all superiors ; and, in fact, is not 
 every creature of God worthy of honor, because it is the creation 
 of God? Is not the grain of sand, one of the least of God's crea- 
 tions, deserving of our respect because it is His handiwork pro- 
 duced from nothing — a standing miracle of His omnipotence ? 
 For who shall seek to emulate God even in this ? His own, 
 even his inanimate works serve to magnify His glory, and why 
 not the rational being, in contemplating respectfully the creations 
 of God, tender to Him the homage of rational praise ? and if 
 rational to do so in the natural order, how much more so in His 
 higher works, viz., the works of the supernatural order, wherein 
 God's magnificence is more conspicuously mirrored, inasmuch as 
 in rewarding His saints He is but crowning His own gifts ? 
 
J^Q ADORATION OF THK B. V. MARY. 
 
 If then the lower creations of God challenge our respect, because 
 they are His works, why not, a fortiori^ bestow our respect, honor 
 and veneration on the grandest of His works, in which act He 
 Himself forestalls us ? Is the astronomer or star-gazer who 
 poetically portrays the music of the spheres, and by his word- 
 painting carries our imagination captive whilst beguiling us to 
 accompany him, in spirit, in the midst of the systems of suns and 
 their revolving planets, to receive the homage and applause of 
 mankind, whilst he has not a word of praise for the Author of 
 these works, whilst the intelligent and supernatural works of God, 
 immeasurably above these inanimate creations, and which God 
 Himself ceases not to honor and glorify, must not be honored 
 nor venerated, although such honor and veneration is intended to 
 redound to the glory of God, by those who offer it ? 
 
 Now the catholic church in honoring with the relative or 
 second species of honor called Dulia, the saints of God, is but 
 honoring God in His gifts, whilst she, at the same time, compre- 
 hends in this species of honor every creature of God, from the 
 grain of sand to the most exalted of the supernatural creations. 
 But the distance observed by her between this honor and Latria 
 is simply infinite^ as infinite as the distance between the Creator 
 and His creatures. Adoration, or Latria, is the exclusive tribute 
 of homage to God, whilst all creatures, because they are God^s 
 works^ receive, according to her teaching, what she calls Dulia, 
 viz. : a relative honor referable to God, who is thus honored in 
 His works. The line of demarcation is therefore discernible 
 between the two, beyond all possibility of error, except to those 
 who will not see, because the fond dream of imputing idolatry to 
 these papists, from our pulpits, is so refreshing a theme to descant 
 on, and one hates so to have his eyes opened to the destruction 
 of so pleasant a vision, by the knowledge of the truth. I give 
 Thee thanks, O God, that I am not as the rest of — christians, 
 an idolater. 
 
 To resume, the conferring of Latria, or supreme homage, on 
 any created being, howsoever elevated by the bounty of God, 
 would be idolatry, and, a fortiori^ a similar honor or homage to 
 any image or picture, even of God Himself. No doubt, reverend 
 sir, you indulged your hearers with the frequent repetition of the 
 term " Mariolatry" in that sermon j if so, and you imputed La- 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 11 
 
 tria or supreme homage by catholics to Mary (for such Is the im- 
 port of the word, and such certainly the import of your language 
 as quoted above), you have perpetrated on us as gross and insult- 
 ing a misrepresentation as was ever unjustifiably fastened on a 
 human being. 
 
 The distinction made by us was made first by God Himself 
 when He ordered us to honor our father and mother, and in 
 countless other places of holy writ He enjoins us to honor crea- 
 tures ; and the failure to make that simple distinction involves 
 you in a labyrinth from the mazes of which you can see only 
 idolatry and Mariolatry. 
 
 But, you will ask, do not catholics render to A4ary an honor 
 above all other creatures ? Unquestionably we do, but yet we 
 honor her only as a creature. Does it follow because the soul 
 of the Southern soldier was fired with enthusiasm by the contem- 
 plation of the meteoric splendor of Jackson's genius, he followed 
 less confidently the orders of the mighty chieftain whose eagle 
 glance developed almost intuitively, combmations that embraced 
 the weakness and strength of armies, positions, localities and 
 countless circumstances that are more or less concomitant with, 
 or consequent upon warfare ? By no means ; nor does it follow 
 because we may be enraptured with the zeal and superhuman 
 energy manifested by the apostles after they had begun to preach 
 the gospel, or followed them in their self-sacrificing spirit even 
 to the shedding of their blood — it follows not by any means that 
 we have ceased to admire, to venerate, and love with an all- 
 absorbing tenderness her who, at the voice of the angel indicating 
 the will of the Deity, voluntarily placed her life and all, at the 
 service of the Divinity that man might have a Redeemer, and 
 whose life ever after, for thirty-three years, was one of self- 
 sacrifice and terrible suspense, predicted in the warnings of the 
 aged Simeon, " that a sword should pierce her soul." 
 
 Mary's sacrifice for man is one that should beget in the chris- 
 tian soul a feeling of indebtedness to her that should never cease, 
 for not all the sacrifices and trials of all the chosen servants of 
 God can compare with the all-important rdle she represented in 
 the work of redemption. 
 
 Catholics, in honoring the least of God's creatures in the natu- 
 ral order, to the noblest in the supernatural, are, therefore, but 
 
j|^2 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 acting as rational beings — for every creature of God, even the 
 least, challenges the admiration of the reflecting rational man, 
 and as we advance in the scale of creatures our admiration and 
 respect for God and the works of God are enhanced proportion- 
 ately to their excellence, until our faith conducts us into the abode 
 of God Himself, so that, by the light of revelation, we are lost 
 in admiration of God's honored creatures there, and overwhelmed 
 by the anticipation of the majesty of God Himself, whose power, 
 grandeur and magnificence are so admirably mirrored in these His 
 most favored and honored creatures. And who are these creatures 
 upon whom God loves to bestow thus His bounties ? They are 
 His angels and saints ; they are those of whom St. Paul says that 
 " eye hath never seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man been 
 able to conceive" the happiness that they enjoy. And who is 
 the Being whom all the denizens of heaven adore, invested with 
 a body and soul like ours, but resplendent with the effulgence of 
 the Deity ? This is the Man-God — the second Person of the 
 Holy Trinity ; our Redeemer ; our Adorable Benefactor — whose 
 praises the saints before the throne cease not to sing, because 
 they owe all their happiness to His infinite love. The Incarnate 
 God is "their God and their All." But whence that flesh 
 through which the Divinity manifests Himself, filling Heaven 
 itself with the magnificence of Deified Humanity ? It was given 
 him for the salvation of these saints by that Queen of Saints who 
 is, forever, the connecting-link between the Divinity and them. 
 It is " the flesh of her flesh and the bone of her bone" that con- 
 stitutes the glorified body of the saints' Redeemer. And if the 
 treasure of eternal happiness which they now exult in, challenges 
 the ceaseless gratitude of their being towards the God-man, can 
 it be possible that their purified nature could for a moment per- 
 mit them to ignore the debt of gratitude they owe her who gave 
 Him that glorified body — who was as truly His mother as any 
 parent could possibly be, and who of all beings that ever lived 
 could, without idolatry, adore the child of her womb ? Think 
 you that that Son who left us all a positive command to honor 
 our parents, could Himself be to us an example of disrespect to- 
 wards His parent, as His and her enemies would have us believe? 
 Think you that the Father and Holy Ghost who sought her 
 co-operation when putting into execution the grand scheme of 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. ^3 
 
 man's redemption and who behold the Divine Son clothed in 
 glorified humanity, fail to recognize in her the relation she bears 
 to the Holy Trinity — infinitely distant from the Triune God as 
 a creature ; but nearest of all creatures through the tie of consan- 
 guinity to the Divine Son ? Can it be possible that St. Eliza- 
 beth, the Mother of the Baptist, forgets, in the court of heaven, 
 the vi^ord she uttered under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, as 
 recorded by St. Luke ? " Whence is this to me that the mother 
 of my Lord cometh to me ?" Has the Holy Spirit also forgotten 
 the same expression which He then placed on the lips of Eliza- 
 beth ? If so, if it can be said without blasphemy, " quantum 
 mutatus ah illo /" Has she, by any act of hers, forfeited the high 
 esteem of the Holy Ghost, and with which, too. He filled the 
 heart of Elizabeth ? Or rather, is it not utterly repugnant to 
 reason not to conclude that inasmuch is the Father and Holy 
 Ghost co-operated in so effectual a manner in creating this won- 
 derful vessel of election that was to be so potent an instrument 
 in man's salvation, worthy in every respect to fill the high office 
 for which she was created ; is it not, I say, utterly repugnant to 
 reason not to conclude, that inasmuch as they created her with 
 all the perfection and excellence of soul and body of which a 
 human being is capable (less than this would have been unworthy 
 the dignity of the Divine Son), to render her a habitation worthy 
 of Him whom the heavens cannot contain, that the Divinity in 
 crowning His own gifts in the happiness of the saints, crowns in 
 an especial manner, this, the most beautiful of his creations, in a 
 manner worthy of God Himself — to honor the human nature of 
 the Divine Son, in honoring, conformably to her dignity, His 
 mother ? 
 
 In a word, what shall I say of the angels of God — one of 
 whose number was chosen to be the messenger of the grand 
 tidings to mankind, and who was commissioned by the Godhead 
 to address her as " full of grace" — who, on the night of the babe's 
 birth, sang "glory to God in the highest," &c., and who could 
 not possibly ignore the important r6le assumed by the being that, 
 that night, gave salvation to the earth ? How can they who love 
 their fellow-adorers of the Divinity with all the ardor of their 
 exalted nature, overlook her that so potently aided in filling 
 heaven with the multitude of saints that are hourly taking 
 
14 ADORATION OF THE B. V.MARY. 
 
 their place in the celestial choirs ? But what tongue can begin 
 to portray the all-absorbing, ever-augmenting, soul-filling grati- 
 tude that ever inflames the saints of God toward her that gave 
 to the world her Son who redeemed them, and who now inebri- 
 ates them with happiness unspeakable ; how, I ask, is it possible 
 for them to adequately testify their gratitude towards her, for her 
 part in their present bliss ? How can they adore their Redeemer 
 in His glorified body without having her before their souls ? How 
 med'tate on the grand mystery of their redemption and ignore her 
 and her part in the work ? No ! a thousand times No ! As 
 well might you seek t<5 ignore the humanity of Jesus Christ in 
 the work of man's redemption as to persuade the beatified who 
 are ceaselessly pouring forth their gratitude to their Redeemer, 
 that they owe nothing to Mary, although their souls are ever 
 turned toward? that adorable body which she gave Him. In a 
 word, the Godhead honors Mary as the most beloved daughter 
 of the Father, as the Immaculate Mother of the Son, and as the 
 chaste spouse of the Holy Spirit — created by Him as the first and 
 grandest of His creatures — incomparably exalted above all the 
 beatified — highest, grandest, noblest work of the Creator, but yet 
 infinitely beneath the Divinity ; between whom and her a chasm 
 infinitely deep, wide and long must in the nature of things ever 
 exist. It is impossible for us whilst yet in the bonds of the flesh 
 to appreciate, at all adequately, the exalted and prominent posi- 
 tion accorded to Mary by the Divinity and His adorers in heaven. 
 Yet on earth, notwithstanding the words of the Holy Ghost, 
 " Blessed art thou amongst women " and " Behold, from hence- 
 forth all generations shall call me blessed," reformed Christian- 
 ity assumes to itself the ofiice of ridiculing every claim which 
 faith in the words of the Holy Spirit and right reason would as- 
 sert for her. Blessed among women ! rather would they abstract 
 from the sacred record every vestige of her connection with the 
 redemption. Blessed among women ! why should that be, see- 
 ing that her Son manifested, according to the above copy of 
 notes, the sheerest contempt for her, at the marriage-feast of 
 Cana, and did He not dissolve the eternal tie that naturally 
 should have always existed between Him and her ? Did he not 
 utterly ignore her, when told that she and His brethren were 
 without ? And although by her lips the Holy Ghost declared that 
 
ADORATIOr^ OF THE B. V. MARY. ^5 
 
 all generations shall call her blessed henceforth, who is now so 
 simple as to admit any such nonsense, even though the Holy 
 Spirit prophesied it and declared it should be realized ? Reformed 
 Christianity is too keenly sensitive, too tender and solicitous for the 
 honor due to God, to tolerate for a moment the verification of the 
 promise of the Holy Ghost. It sees in the Redeemer a disrespect- 
 ful child, one who was only too willing to ignore all filial deco- 
 rum, and who did, at last, succeed in ridding Himself, before the 
 world of the incubus of a mother, by palming her off on John, 
 "thus forever dissolving the natural relation of son and mother,'' 
 and in this unfilial, indecorous, disobedient course of conduct, 
 He had the unqualified approbation of reformed Christianity ! ! ! 
 
 In this connection, reverend sir, I cannot pass over a remark 
 of yours, viz.: "Lastly, the historical point, that the apostles 
 in the epistles and early fathers are all silent as to the Romish 
 doctrine with respect to her." I do not wonder that we should 
 find the apostles and early fathers all silent on the adoration of the 
 Blessed Virgin^ a fancy existing only in the bigotted and wilfully 
 ignorant brains of silly dolts. But that the early fathers are all 
 silent as regards the highest veneration, honor and invocation of 
 her, would be a hazardous assertion, which the following quota- 
 tions from their writings will superabundantly contradict. The 
 books of homilies authorized by your 35th article, state that the 
 church was pure during the four first centuries. I shall confine 
 myself to extracts from the fathers of these four centuries, and allow 
 you to judge, whether the teaching of the catholic church to-day 
 (as I have truthfully^ not as you have, it is to be hoped, ignorantly, 
 rather than maliciously, represented it) is not more in accord 
 with the teachings of the primitive church, than the position of 
 reformed Christianity, to decry the least demonstration of respect 
 for her, whether tendered by her divine Son, or others. I shall 
 quote them indiscriminately, the only difiiculty being the selec- 
 tion of a few out of the overwhelming superabundance, did space 
 permit me to present more. St. Augustine says of her, Etiamsi, 
 etc., "All the tongues of men, even if all their members were 
 changed to tongues, would be insufficient to praise her as she 
 deserves." I believe your sect affects some respect for St. Au- 
 gustine ; can you do so after such language ? How silent he is 
 on the dignity of Mary ! Hear him again : " She became also 
 
|g ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 by this co-operation the spiritual mother of us all, who are mem- 
 bers of one Head, Jesus Christ," De Virg. Again, addressing 
 her in his sermon, De Sanctis, says: "Thou art the only hope 
 of sinners, because through thee we hope for the remission of 
 our sins." And what shall I say of the beautiful apostrophe of 
 the same saint : ^'^ Memorari O piissima V'lrgo^'' " Remember, O 
 most pious Virgin, that it is unheard-of that any one fleeing to thy 
 protection was lost ?" Does the assertion, that " it is unheard-of," 
 indicate a new doctrine, or does it not rather imply the existence 
 of an old practical one ? Again he says, Caro Christi, etc. : 
 " The flesh of Christ is the flesh of Mary." Hear St. Athana- 
 sius (forty years before Augustine), and the reputed author 
 of that creed, entitled the Athanasian : " If the Son is King, His 
 mother must necessarily be considered and entitled queen," 
 Serm. de Desp. Here is rank popery for you in the year 362 ! 
 What do you think of St. Ambrose, after the following ? " Al- 
 though in the pure womb of Mary there was only one grain of 
 wheat, Jesus Christ, yet it is called a heap of grain, because in 
 that one grain were contained all the elect, of whom Mary was 
 to be the mother," De Insti. Virg. Again, De In. Virg.: " Oh 
 the riches of Mary's virginity ! like a cloud, she rained upon the 
 earth the grace of Christ, for concerning her was it written : 
 Behold, the Lord cometh, sitting upon a light cloud (Is. 19 c.), 
 truly light, she knew not the burdens of wedlock ; truly light, 
 she who lightened the world from the heavy debt of sin. She 
 was light who bore in her womb the remission of sins.' 
 How profoundly silent on the prerogatives of the blessed Virgin 
 was St. Ambrose, who, under God, gave the great Augustine to 
 Christianity! St. Ignatius (martyr), A. D., 107, says of her: 
 " Mary is always more loving than her lovers." Was he, living 
 in almost apostolic days, silent of Mary ? St. John Chrysostom 
 says, " Through her we obtain pardon of our sins." St. Jerome, 
 Ep. ad Eustachiam, " The blessed Virgin not only assists, but 
 hastens to meet the dying." What a profound silence does not 
 he maintain? Hear SS. Ephrim, the oldest father and writer of 
 the oriental church, and Basil, before Jerome : " Hail ! hope 
 of the soul," says St. Ephrim; again. In Parvenes, "To thee, 
 O Lord, together with an odor of sweetness, do we offer the 
 merits of the most blessed Virgin Mary." And St. Basil calls 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. jy 
 
 her, "after God, our only hope," Post Deum sola spes nostra. 
 Again, addressing the sinner, he says : " O sinner ! be not 
 timid, but, in all thy necessities, flee to Mary ; invoke her 
 aid, and thou wilt always find her ready to assist thee, for 
 it is the divine will that she should aid all in their neces- 
 sities," De Laudibus Virg. Once more, St. Ephrim : " We 
 fly to thy patronage, holy mother of God ; protect and guard 
 us under the wings of thy mercy and kindness. Most mer- 
 ciful God ! through the intercession of the most blessed Virgin 
 Mary, and of all the angels and of all the saints, show pity to thy 
 creature." How often has not the last extract from his Sermon 
 de Laud. Maria; Virg. been quoted from our prayer-books as an 
 unerring proof of our worship of her ! yet see the source whence 
 the church borrowed it, viz.: from the writings of the oldest 
 Greek father, although we were told that the fathers were all 
 silent on this question. Were I to quote others from this ancient 
 father, I would exceed the limits appropriate to this letter, and 
 would compel the conclusion, that had St. Ephrim hved in our 
 day, he would be regarded as the lankest idolater living. Let 
 me trespass once more on my space by a short quotation ; ad- 
 dressing the blessed Virgin, he says : "After the Trinity (thou 
 art) mistress of all ; after the Paraclete, another paraclete ; after 
 the Mediator, mediatrix of the whole world." I will now con- 
 clude my refutation of the charge of silence on the part of the 
 early fathers, by referring to the text from St. Epiphanius, at the 
 head of this letter, and at the same time inviting the testimony 
 of the same holy father to the perfect identity that exists between 
 the doctrine of his day and ours. No one will question his devo- 
 tion to Mary, after reading that text, any more than mine to her 
 on reading this letter, but as no one would be found more deter- 
 mined' in his protest against any innovation on the teachings of 
 the church, by rendering to Mary the least portion of the homage 
 that belongs exclusively to the Divinity, so likewise we find, 
 that when the Collyridian heresy made Its appearance — a heresy 
 which gave to Mary the homage that was God's exclusively, this 
 grand champion of primitive Christianity, and of the honor due 
 to God's mother, at once rushed to the rescue of catholic truth 
 by trampling under foot the innovation, and in this every catho- 
 lic on earth, with myself, would Imitate him. Hear him : 
 
18 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 *' Though, therefore, she was a chosen vessel, and endowed with 
 eminent sanctity, still she is a woman, partaking of our common 
 nature, but deserving of the highest honors shown to the saints 
 of God. She stands before them all, on account of the heavenly 
 mystery accomplished in her. But we adore no saint ; and as 
 this worship is not given to angels, much less can it be allowed 
 to the daughter of Ann. Let Mary then be honored ; but let 
 the Father, Son and Holy Ghost alone be adored; let no one adore 
 Mary^ Comment here would but serve to dim the brightness. 
 If, therefore, the catholic church of to-day is guilty of idolatry, 
 then the primitive church, in the second, third and fourth centu- 
 ries, in Greece, in Syria, Mesopotamia, Italy, etc., etc., was 
 plunged into deeper idolatry than we of to-day are, consequently 
 the church of England, which in her books of homilies claims 
 purity of doctrine for the primitive church, was guilty of a most 
 egregious falsehood. 
 
 Now, reverend sir, with the above array of testimony staring 
 you in the face (the want of space alone preventing the list of 
 quotations being doubled or quadrupled), will you, I ask, ever 
 again '' bear false witness " against that church that has, ages 
 ago, placed the seal of her condemnation on the very error that 
 you so falsely attribute to her in the nineteenth century ? Be- 
 hold how, whilst the fathers of that pure and undefiled church, 
 of the four first centuries, testify to the honor that was conferred 
 on the virgin mother of God, and in the same breath testify to 
 her promptitude in condemning a heresv which you so truthfully? 
 impute to her, and which she so long ago stamped with her ana- 
 themas ! 
 
 Dismissing now the charge of adoration of a creature, and its 
 necessary and immediate inference, idolatry, I proceed to offer a 
 itsN remarks on the remaining portion of your notes. In your 
 second point, you remark : " The point here is, if the Virgin, 
 etc., etc., and where would the human nature of Christ come 
 from ?" I ask, is it possible, that any one in his senses could 
 conclude that the blessed Virgin or any other being could not gen- 
 erate unless born in original sin ? If so, then alas for your pros- 
 pects and mine of existence had not Eve eaten the apple. Was not 
 Eve created immaculate, and were not she and her husband or- 
 dered to " increase and multiply .?" Alas for the philosophy and 
 
 /■ 
 
AEOKATION OF THE B. V. MARY. ^9 
 
 theology that form the basis of such a conclusion. 1 would re- 
 commend the application for the patent-right of that discovery. 
 
 Third. " Mary's submission, etc., the Saviour's treatment 
 of her," etc. The wilful blindness that seeks to place in the 
 strongest light possible, the would-be instances of disrespect man- 
 ifested by Jesus Christ to His mother, is to me incomprehensi- 
 ble. Alas for the man who, to gratify his prejudice, would fain 
 make the Son of God guilty of that which never fails to bring 
 down the vengeance of heaven ! I always thought that Jesus 
 came not to destroy but to fulfil the law. Now, one of the 
 most emphatic precepts of that law is to " honor thy father and 
 mother," and does not the scripture say that He went down to 
 Nazareth, and was subject to them, /. ^., to Mary and Joseph ? 
 And yet a sect of Christianity in the nineteenth century glories 
 in discovering in the Saviour a divine Model of disobedience !!! 
 May God pity the blindness that would pique itself on such a 
 discovery as this, which amounts to blasphemy ! I sincerely 
 hope you will begin to think better of Him as a Son, before you 
 again present Him as a model to Christian children. 
 
 But how can the christian world ever do you, reverend sir, ad- 
 equate honor for the all-important discovery of " the transfer of 
 natural relationship, etc., and Mary's satisfaction" thereat? 
 Well may you say, with the poet, ^^Exigi monumentum acre per- 
 enjiius /" Be these the spiritual rations whereon your children 
 are fed ? So St. John became her child in the natural order 1 
 Nicodemus' question, Must a man go back to his mother's 
 womb ? could not hold a light to that assertion. John it was, 
 then, whom she conceived in her womb, whom she loved as her 
 son and adored as her God for thirty-three years, and who, up 
 to and after this speech was ever and always her son, and when 
 that body was taken down from the cross, and when she received 
 it into her arms, it was not the body she gave Him ; the secret 
 was (and it was never discovered until December, 1878) that 
 Mary and John's mother had exchanged children in the infancy 
 of the children, and this furnishes the key to His ignoring of His 
 reputed mother on all occasions. What an error the poor woman 
 labored under, or rather made it appear that she labored under, 
 during His whole life. And what a blunder St. Augustine 
 
20 ADORATIOX OF THE B. Y. MAKY. 
 
 made, when he said, ^''Caro Christi caro Marios est^"" The flesh of 
 Christ is the flesh of Mary. 
 
 As to the remainder of that third division, about " the eternal 
 tie which binds together the church and the Lord," I characterize 
 that as " stuffing" — the veriest twaddle and nonsense, and a very 
 natural inference from the very unnatural premises that pre- 
 ceded it. 
 
 And lastly, in what language can I adequately stigmatize the 
 
 wholesale that asserts that over 20 to 30,000 Romanists 
 
 had abandoned their church in the past year on account of the 
 new dogma ? Now, reverend sir, that dogma was promulgated 
 December 8th, 1854, over nineteen years ago, and if you can 
 find for me a half dozen persons who, in that long period of time, 
 are known to have abandoned the catholic church for the reason above 
 given, I am prepared to make the most profound retraction of 
 the above assertion ; but until that is done, I shall always, as I 
 do now, aver that a more unmitigated falsehood was never before 
 palmed off on you, or on the deluded people that swallow with so 
 much avidity bait of that kind. 
 
 In reference to the doctrine of the immaculate conception, which 
 appears to betheZ'<?/^ «o/rofeveryprotestant journey man soul-saver, 
 and the ceaseless theme of so many eloquent and profound (?) dia- 
 tribes, let me call your attention to the fact that in inveighing against 
 that doctrine you have been attacking a long-existing belief of 
 the church of England, to whose " nursing-care and protection" 
 you owe so much, and from whose teaching the daughter protests 
 against any " intention to depart on any essential point of doc- 
 trine, discipline or worship ;" because in her calendar she pre- 
 serves (at least she did so up to 1751, for I have before me an 
 English Book of Common Prayer, published by Thomas Baskett, 
 of that date) the feast of the conception of the Blessed Virgin 
 Mary (Dec. 8th), a feast always distinct from the conception of 
 her Son ;. which was, of course, pilfered from the Roman Missal, 
 and is the same feast now observed with great solemnity through- 
 out the Christian world ; and inasmuch as your prayer-book pro- 
 tests against any difference in doctrine, discipline and worship 
 from the church of England, it is conclusive that you and your 
 confreres have been battling vigorously against your own doctrine 
 and discipline ; or at least, against that of the church of England. 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. Ol 
 
 I trust that the mother church whose " nursir,g-care and protec- 
 tion" have been so available will pardon you the intention, at 
 least, of attacking her belief in the doctrine of the immaculate 
 conception ; that is, if she has any belief in that or any other 
 revealed truth ; for the widest divergencies of opinion are coun- 
 tenanced in her bosom. Having vindicated the catholic church 
 from the foul aspersions which you have sought to fasten on her, 
 I will conclude the first part of this letter, by expressing a hope 
 that you will remember a truth of revelation which had escaped 
 your memory, viz. : that a day of retribution is fast approaching 
 when you will be summoned before the judgment seat of God to 
 render an account of the things done in the flesh, and that a com- 
 mandment exists, viz. : "thou shalt not bear false witness against 
 thy neighbor ;" and that you will be held amenable before God 
 for the violation of that command so fearfully infringed upon by 
 you in charging with idolatry the spotless spouse of Jesus Christ, 
 whose voice he commands you to hear, but against whom you 
 speak evil things and whom you misrepresent. 
 
 PART II. 
 
 "Immortal being^s, when at first they saw 
 Great England's Church expounding Heaven's law, 
 Admired such antics in the human shape, 
 And showed a Cranmer as we show an ape." — Parodt. 
 
 I will now, reverend sir, take a new departure, and having 
 vindicated the church of Christ, proceed to investigate the right 
 whereby you cite before the tribunal of your private judgment 
 the great body of christians now living, Greeks and Latins, as 
 well as the whole christian world, for the past (nearly) nineteen 
 centuries, and seek to fasten on them a crime the most abhor- 
 rent of all others to the christian soul, viz. : idolatry ; and did 
 you even possess such a right, I would call in question the good 
 taste that would warrant such a procedure. I would ask who 
 are you that calls in question the faith of 330,000,000 of living 
 christians ? What superior lights can you claim for yourself and 
 the sect of protestantism you represent that would render such a 
 course justifiable ? Is the source of your inspiration so clear, so 
 
22 
 
 ADORATION OF THE B. Y. MAR^. 
 
 pure, that you can afford to play the Pharisee and give thanks 
 that you and yours are not like the rest of men ? Or is it so 
 very safe for people who live in glass houses to throw stones ? 
 The fact is, the course to which you have become habituated of 
 saying all manner of things of the catholic church, and with im- 
 punity, is now so much a part of your nature that it will be very 
 difficult to abandon so congenial a pastime. But I promise you, 
 reverend sir, that no one shall hereafter, with impunity, misrepre- 
 sent the catholic church wherever I am, provided sufficient evi- 
 dence can be adduced of the fact. I shall now proceed. I feel 
 k due to myself and the religion I so unworthily represent to 
 unfold a tale that may not be very flattering to some " who 
 trust in themselves (who are well pleased with themselves) and 
 despise others." But in so doing I shall be careful not to avail 
 myself of the weapons of calumny ; availing myself of the use of 
 historical facts only that cannot be controverted. 
 
 I have quoted from your book of common-prayer, wherein 
 your branch of Protestantism recognizes its obligations to its 
 foster-mother, the church of England. The ackntowledgment 
 of obligations I object not to. Gratitude is a noble trait, but it 
 should be universal to be commendable, and the church of Eng- 
 land merits far less of your gratitude than the Roman catholic 
 church. You are grateful to the former, whilst for the latter 
 you have only the most objectionable and offensive epithets. 
 
 Now as I intend to indulge you with a panoramic view of the 
 institution to which you are so grateful, and which stands to- 
 wards you in the light of foster-mother, I will at once plunge 
 "/« medias res^ Did you ever give your attention, reverend sir, 
 to the baseless and preposterous pretensions of protestantism 
 generally, and of " the Establishment" (as the English call it) in 
 particular ? I mean in the light of history ? I fear not, for if you 
 did, I doubt very much how you could, with a clear conscience, 
 be where you are to-day. If not, follow me, and I shall treat 
 you to a bird's-eye view of your historic foster-mother — and in 
 so doing I shall nothing exaggerate nor aught set down in malice. 
 
 Protestantism, in all its Protean forms, professes to discover 
 its foundation in the revealed word of God, (the bible,) as its rule 
 of faith, and according to Chillingworth, "the bible is the reli- 
 gion of protestants." Exit the protestant does not live who can 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. «q 
 
 make an Intelligent act of faith in the bible as a Divine revela- 
 tion. In my controversy with Dr. Blackwell last fall, I gave 
 the world to see that the system which you, in common with all 
 protestants maintain — the motto of which is " the bible is the re- 
 ligion of protestants" — is utterly baseless. My reverend opponent 
 on that occasion did as well, /, ^., as little, as any other champion 
 could have done ; whilst his failure after four months' labor was 
 4s complete as it was aggravating and mortifying to the vast ma- 
 jority of protestants who read the discussion, and who had here- 
 tofore believed that the bible came to them " cut and dry" from 
 heaven, as the teacher appointed by God for christians, whereas 
 the issue proved irrefragably that not a luord of the christian part, 
 or new testament, could be proved to have been inspired by the 
 Holy Ghost. Now, reverend sir, if you think that Dr. Black- 
 well did not do justice to protestantism in his effort to sustain its 
 very foundation, and that you feel impressed with the conviction 
 that you can retrieve the bad fortune of the "cause" in Dr. B.'s 
 defeat, let n:e invite you to break a lance with me for the main- 
 tenance of the above "-motto," which Is the only foundation of 
 protestantism In Its thousand and one developments. In accept- 
 ing my gauge you will be far more legitimately occupied than In 
 misrepresenting the catholic church ; and although the occupa- 
 tion will not be as congenial nor as easy a task, it will be far 
 more legitimate according to christian ethics, and, if I may be 
 allowed to hazard an opinion, far more necessary, for the expo- 
 sure of the utter weakness of the foundation of protestantism was 
 so conclusive that were I a protestant hitherto, I should not re- 
 main so one hour after the close of that discussion. 
 
 If, then, you feel that you can restore the biblical system to a 
 solid basis by entering the lists with me for that end, I am at 
 your .service, with a promise of fair play and a clear stage. But 
 if, taught by a sad experience, you decline the issue, let me ask 
 you, as an honest man, how can your conscience permit you to 
 retain the I'dle of teacher of a religion, the very basis of which has 
 not one inch of solid ground whereon to rest? The controversy of 
 last fall has forever decided the fact that the biblical system 
 started on a false basis, viz. : the assumption of the bible as a 
 divine revelation, and every argument in its defence advanced by 
 Dr. Blackwell and demolished by me, was the death-blow to 
 
£4 
 
 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MAEY. 
 
 your rule of faith as well as to his, for you are " ab ovo prognatus 
 eodenC^ with him ; that is, your protestant episcopal church and 
 the methodist church are twin sisters of the same honored ! 
 mother. I am aware that you do not acknowledge the connection, 
 but before the close of this letter you will think better of your 
 '' poor relations." I take it for granted that you will have to 
 accept the result of that discussion, viz. : that neither you nor 
 any of your following can make an intelligent act of faith in the 
 Divine inspiration of the bible, the rule of faith common to all 
 protestants ; unless, indeed, you do me the honor to assume the 
 championship of the " cause," and enter the lists with me. Be- 
 fore proceeding further, I would call your attention to the gross 
 absurdity of a religion without one presentable argument to main- 
 tain its very foundation, a sad spectacle to men and angels, and 
 having invited attention to this irreparable defect, let me now 
 invite you to an analysis or rather a historic scrutiny of the 
 origin and development of the English establishment in the first 
 place, and secondly, of her daughter, the protestant episcopal 
 church of the United States. It is acknowledged by your prayer- 
 book that you derive what you possess of " doctrine^ discipline 
 and worship from the church of England, as by law established," 
 though the sequel will prove that you have not much to be thank- 
 ful for. In the year 1530, Henry the Eighth of England, in the 
 midst of his lustful excesses, conceived an adultrous passion for 
 one of his queen's train. She, Anna Boleyn, a bad catholic, en- 
 couraged the advances of the wretch. The king endeavored to 
 influence the Holy See to aid him in his lusts by declaring the 
 union with his faithful wife null and void. The church could 
 not, without proving faithless to her spouse, "put asunder what 
 God had joined together." A union could not therefore be 
 effected without a breach with the Holy See. Passion is blind — 
 the adulterers cohabit, and the christian religion is sacrificed. 
 And this is only one of the thousands of similar instances annu- 
 ally occurring in this so-called christian country, whenever pas- 
 sion, prejudice or interest impels spouses to shuflle off the marital 
 coil, and the legislatures, with scarcely an exception, facilitate 
 by divorce-granting this " wicked thing." 
 
 Anyhow, the king, by advice of Thomas Cromwell, a layman 
 and a soldier, proved himself equal to the emergency, and having 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 25 
 
 broken' relatiors with the Holy See by, of course, a mock-mar- 
 riage with Anna, improved his opportunities to replete his ex- 
 hausted treasury (although his father had died with the treasury 
 filled to repletion) by Inaugurating a system of pillage, rapine and 
 sacrilege unparalleled on the earth. 
 
 To give system and character to his projected spoliations he 
 appointed his trusty subject Thomas Cromwell (the right man 
 in the right place) to be his " royal vicegerent and vlcar-general" 
 of the new dispensation of which he, a layman, was the head. 
 This was the origin of that highly respectable Institution " the 
 church of England." 
 
 The extravagances of the. head, and the avarice of the vicar- 
 general very soon found fat pastures in the pillage of the religious 
 houses of once happy catholic England, and this brace of robbers, 
 with their only too-willing confederates, set their hearts on ap- 
 propriating 3182 religious houses of both sexes, and the king 
 issued his order that they be sequestered, and when his parlia- 
 ment offered the slightest remonstrance, he summarily informed 
 them, " I will have It (the sequestration-bill) pass, or I will 
 have some of your heads." The argument was equally striking 
 as overwhelming, and forty-seven thousand seven hundred and 
 twenty-one religious, the glory of England, the salt of that earth, 
 were forthwith cast forth on the world, houseless, penniless, and 
 succorless. 
 
 This inauguration of the church of England bears so close a ' 
 resemblance to the religion instituted by Jesus Christ that I can- 
 not forbear calling attention to it. Jesus went about doing good, 
 and so did bluff Harry, scattering to the mercy of the world 
 nearly fifty thousand souls — behold the first fruits of the glorious 
 reformation and the new birth of the church of England ! 
 
 The next step taken was to organize a department at once, as 
 a substitute for Christianity, now overthrown, and in order to 
 habituate the people by degrees to the change, the appearances 
 of religion were to be kept up, and forthwith a new form of 
 prayer-book is manufactured, for the missal and Its concomitant 
 devotional books will never suit the new religion — so-called. 
 " The Institution of a Christian Man," is the title of the new 
 prayer-book, which. In. a few years after, gave place to a new 
 production entitled " A necessary doctrine and erudition for any 
 
26 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 christian man." These, in the days of Henry, constituted the 
 sources whence English Christianity (reformed) was to draw its 
 inspiration. But it was in the days of Edward that " the book 
 of common-prayer and administration of the sacraments and 
 other rites and ceremonies of the church after the use of the 
 church of England," made its appearance ; and Dr. Short, a 
 bishop of the same church, and a writer of a history of the church 
 of England, says of the last production, that exists in a whittled- 
 down, or, to be more select, revised form, to this day : " On the 
 whole, this book forms a connecting-link between the missal and 
 the prayer-book." By-the-bye, my attention has been recently- 
 called to an attempt made to consider Henry a catholic all his 
 lifetime, and to accord the glory of the reformation to the well- 
 begotten and virgin daughter of Anna Boleyn ; but whilst I can- 
 not find fault with the sentiment that would seek to rob the good 
 father of the equally honorable paternity ! of the English church, 
 yet the fact is too patent ; the title of Edward's prayer-book "for 
 the use of the church of England," cannot be denied ; therefore 
 " the church of England" took precedence of the prayer-book ; 
 therefore Elizabeth could not be, possibly, the foundress of the 
 English church. If further proofs are needed to sustain this 
 position and deprive such quibblers of any consolation whatever 
 on this point, whilst at the same time it w!ll unfold the unblush- 
 ing hypocrisy of saints Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, of whom 
 the books of homilies are the joint production ; which books are 
 approved and commended by your prayer-book (35th article). 
 Read attentively the following words : " Honor be to God who 
 did put light in the heart of His faithful and true minister of most 
 famous memory. King Henry the Eighth, and gave him the 
 knowledge of His word, and an earnest affection to seek His 
 glory and to put away all such superstitions," &c. (p. 52, Am. 
 ed.). I challenge the world to produce a specimen of arrant 
 hypocrisy to equal that sentence. " God's faithful and true min- 
 ister" forsooth ! A monster, the disgrace not of Christianity 
 alone, but of humanity in its type the most conceivably lowest ! 
 A Nero whose monstrosities were never before or after matched 
 on this earth ! The impersonation for seventeen years of every 
 crime in the calendar! This wretch "God's faithful and true 
 minister." Language cannot be invented that could do justice 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 27 
 
 to the hideousness of the souls that gave expression to this speci- 
 men of double-distilled hypocrisy. 
 
 This Bluebeard ; this miscreant of whom it was truthfully said 
 that " he never spared man in his wrath, nor woman in his lust!'* 
 Were it proposed to distinguish between the characters of Nero, 
 Caligula and the saintly head of the church of England, " God's 
 faithful and true minister," could there be a moment's hesitation 
 in the choice of Henry as the monster^ par excellence, of the 
 human race ? And this is the man whom God had chosen to 
 reform His church ! And these arch-hypocrites are his apostles 
 and coadjutors ! Wonder they had not narrated how they had 
 heard a voice from heaven, announcing this " is my (God's) beloved 
 son in whom I am well pleased." And there yet exist people 
 who believe that God had chosen this monster and his accursed 
 brood for the purification of His church ! Did time and space 
 permit, I could furnish you a faithful picture of the origin of this 
 purified ! church of the Redeemer that would compel the blush 
 of shame to mantle your cheek for your connection with such a 
 nefarious and diabolical institution ; no word-painting would suf- 
 fice to portray justly its hideousness, and the sooner that its ex- 
 istence ceases in England (and this will not take four lustrums) 
 and its name be erased from the historic archives of England, if 
 that were possible, the better for England. 
 
 We have had a glimpse of Henry's tact in replenishing his 
 exhausted treasury, by the wholesale sacrilegious pillage of the 
 property of the church, how he could, in the most summary 
 manner, get rid of his wives, parliament, &c. Let me now in- 
 troduce you to his hopeful scion, Edward, "a chip of the old 
 block." I will quote the historian Heylin (Reformation). He 
 says, " Edward's death, I cannot reckon for an infelicity to the 
 church of England, for being ill-principled in himself* &c. And 
 why no infelicity ? " but that the rest of the bishopricks, before 
 sufficiently impoverished, must have followed Durham," &c. 
 Dr. Heylin plainly intimates that if Edward had not died so soon, 
 the establishment would have passed away before him (such was 
 his rapacity), and the English government would not have the 
 opportunity to preserve a department, rich in property sacrile- 
 giously sequestrated, and make it a soft place, for generations, for 
 the supporters of succeeding administrations. And now let us 
 
28 
 
 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MAEY. 
 
 see how this godly work under such godly and saintly patronage 
 and guidance progressed. Of course, the people of England, 
 influenced by the feeling of an absolute necessity for a reforma- 
 tion, entered with alacrity into the feelings of its pure and disin- 
 terested promoters and were only too glad to acquiesce in the 
 much-needed and promising change ! Alas ! for our anticipa- 
 tions : the people were wedded to their idols. Bishop Short tells 
 us that "the change was not so much that of the people as of 
 the king and parliament !" The truth is, a system of legal en- 
 actments was framed that compelled their compliance. 
 
 Hear Bishop Short on this point : " Individuals were not al- 
 lowed any christian liberty of absenting themselves from the 
 churches and of seeking elsewhere a service better suited to their 
 own opinions." So much for the treatment of the people gener- 
 ally. Now what mode of treatment was adopted towards the rich 
 and influential ? Hear Bishop Short once again ; he says : "The 
 masses of the common people neither understood nor rejoiced in 
 the doctrines of the reformation, against which their prejudices 
 were excited. The upper classes had been bribed into acqui- 
 escence in these changes, by the robberies committed on the 
 church property, in which they had been allowed to share." 
 What a picture one of your English B'shops presents of the mo- 
 tives that, from king to the least sacrilegious robber, actuated the 
 miscreants ! In plain English, the gentry, to gain them, were 
 bribed with more or less of the booty, and the poorer classes were 
 forced, like dogs, to comply with the mockery of religion which 
 the rapacious wolves had substituted for Christianity. Reverend 
 sir, can there be traced here any of the zeal that animated the apos- 
 tles of Jesus Christ ? Does it not amount almost to blasphemy to 
 mention them in such connection ? Were such the motives that 
 prompted Augustine and his companions, when they brought 
 Christianity to the British shores ? We cannot possibly conceive 
 the outraged feelings of the people of England, under this aspect 
 of affairs. They are forced by the severest penalties to enter 
 the churches which the piety of their ancestors had erected, and 
 which they loved to ornament and embellish, now defaced and 
 robbed of every vestige of beauty, their altars demolished, theif 
 shrines sacrilegiously pillaged, the jewelled chalices sold. But, 
 it may be asked, did the people willingly submit to these out- 
 
ADORATION OF THE II. V. MARY. 
 
 29 
 
 rages ? No ; they rose in arms in large numbers, in some sec- 
 tions of the country, but they were soon subdued, and there was 
 no alternative but to submit to the new dispensation, or perish 
 in prison or on the scaffold. In a word, the intimidation of 
 despotism forced compliance, and to unfold a specimen of the 
 apostolic, lady-like mode of church-government that prevailed 
 in those days, let me copy an order which Hallam quotes from 
 the petticoat head of the church (Elizabeth) to one of her Bishops : 
 
 " Coxe. Proud prelate, you know what you were before I 
 made you what you are ; if you do not immediately comply with 
 my request, by God I will unfrock you. Elizabeth.'* 
 
 Comment would be superfluous here. To proceed further, 
 would be " to pile Pelion on Ossa." Never before in the his- 
 tory of the human race, did there exist a more nefarious, system- 
 atized plot to blot out the religion of a christian people, and to 
 impose as a substitute therefor an organization, which in its in- 
 ception, progress and consummation, stands unrivalled in the 
 annals of infamy. Robbery, sacrilege, murder, fire, and sword, 
 and every conceivable instrument of despotism and infamy, were 
 the concomitants of this so-called reformation. Oh, the blas- 
 phemy underlying the declaration of the miscreants who called 
 this the work of God ! 
 
 It was conceived in lust, born in pillage, sacrilege and blood, 
 and was consummated in the substitution of a system for Chris- 
 tianity that emanated from the brain and hearts of the most cor- 
 rupt, debased, perjured horde, that, without exception, ever dis- 
 graced our race, or polluted, by contact therewith, this earth 
 of ours. Had I the time to do justice to each character that 
 won laurels for himself in this godly (!) work, and to adduce 
 my authorities from friendly sources, too,* I would compel the 
 conclusion that they stand unrivalled in their career of infamy. 
 And oh, my infinitely patient God, the blasphemy of attributing 
 to Thee, the infinitely beautiful, good and holy, the choice of 
 iuch miscreants to reform what Thou didst promise to preside over 
 to the consummation of the world ! Has blasphemy ever before 
 had its parallel in this ? And yet there are men, otherwise well 
 disposed, who seek to exculpate and find excuses for these fiends 
 and their brutal excesses I 
 
30 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MAEY. 
 
 As I have not the leisure to unlock and unfold further the re- 
 cesses of the abyss of wickedness which England will; for all fu- 
 ture generations, blush deeply for, and heartily wish had never 
 found a place in her history, I will beg leave to refer you to the 
 History of the Protestant Reformation, by Wm. Cobbett, formerly 
 a Member of the British Parliament, one who lived and died a 
 protestant; whilst no attempt has ever been made to contradict 
 the array of facts and figures furnished by him in reference to 
 the history of the murders, and wholesale pillage of church pro- 
 perty which will forever sully the escutcheon of England. 
 
 But it may be said, that after the first impulses of passion had 
 passed away, the new religion commenced to develop its reforma- 
 tory powers ; alas for any such hope ! the miscreants robbed the 
 people of their religion, and as a make-shift flung them a substi- 
 tute which they were by law compelled to adopt, that has never 
 had one particle of vitality in it. To be sure they secured the titles 
 together with the livings of the catholic prelates, but as to the 
 life-giving sources whence Christianity dispenses her treasures 
 to mankind, there is not a remnant of them left, nor did the loss 
 concern them, as I shall hereafter show. The fact is, when the 
 catholic church was uprooted in England the king deemed it 
 prudent to have at least the semblance of religion, and with this 
 view, he organized a new department of the civil service, to be 
 immediately under his own control, having ample funds (the in- 
 come of each diocese for the bishop's support), and calling the 
 embryo bantling, by a refinement of irony, the- church of Eng- 
 land, and which under his patronage, with the aid of a servile and 
 obsequious parliament, distributed to his minions the fruits of 
 that portion of the church property which was decided to be 
 retained, to furnish a pretext for the nominal existence of Chris- 
 tianity on the island. 
 
 That the so-called church of England, from the day king 
 Harry broke with the holy see, and gave it existence, to this day, 
 was and is a department of the civil administration of the English 
 government, follows from the confession of the books of homi- 
 lies — the above letter of Elizabeth, the quotations from Bishop 
 Short, recognizing the fact that its legislation and destiny were 
 controlled always by the king and parliament ; but lest I may not 
 have adduced sufficient evidence to enforce conviction on this 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 31 
 
 important point, and which will conclusively settle the question, I 
 will invite your attention to the following irrefutable, and at the 
 same time highly respectable testimony. 
 
 Lord iMacaulay (chap. I, " History of England ") says : "What 
 Henry and his favorite counsellors meant by the supremacy, was 
 certainly nothing less than the whole power of the keys. The 
 king was to be the pope of his kingdom, the vicar of God, the 
 expositor of catholic verity, the channel of sacramental graces. 
 He proclaimed that all jurisdiction, spiritual as well 
 as temporal, was derived from him alone, and that it was in his 
 power to confer the episcopal character and to take it away. He 
 actually ordered his seal to be put to commissions by which bish- 
 ops were appointed who were to exercise their functions during 
 his royal pleasure. According to this system, as expounded 
 by Cranmer, the king was the spiritual as well as the temporal 
 chief of the nation. In both capacities his highness must have 
 lieutenants. It was unnecessary that there should be any impo- 
 sition of hands. The king might, in virtue of authority derived 
 from God, make a priest, and the priest so made needed no or- 
 dination whatever." Thus, Baron Macaulay. Now hear a few 
 words from Cranmer himself: "All christian princes have com- 
 mitted unto them immediately of God, the whole care of all their 
 subjects, as well concerning the administration of God's word for 
 the care of souls, as concerning the ministration of things political 
 and civil governance ; as for example, the lord chancellor, lord 
 treasurer, etc., and the bishops, parsons, vicars, etc., etc. All such 
 officers and ministers to be appointed, with divers solemnitie's, 
 which be not of necessity, but only for good order and seemly 
 fashion." There can be now no doubt that Henry VIII., and 
 Thomas Cromwell, two laymen (the latter as vicar general of 
 his holiness, the former) created a new religion in England, and 
 controlled its machinery as fully as they did any other branch or 
 department of the government. That this condition of things 
 was fully maintained by his son Edward, and by his daughter 
 Elizabeth, without the slightest diminution of prero^-ative, is 
 evinced from successive acts of parliament, I Edward, 6, 3, and 
 I Elizabeth, i, extracts from which are now before me. How it 
 can be assumed that " the church of England, as by law estab- 
 lished," for such is its title, and it is evident that it does not, from 
 
32 ADOKATIUW Ut' THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 the very title, claim any existence until established by law ; how, 
 I say, it can be assumed that any more spirituality, either intrin- 
 sically or accidentally, exists or ever did exist, in this co-ordinate 
 department of the British government, more than in the treasury 
 or any other, I cannot possibly divine. Did the spirituality de- 
 rive from the king, his son or daughter ? whence their jurisdic- 
 tion unless self-assumed, and written in the blood and pillage of 
 their subjects, and in the enormous sacrileges in which the babe 
 of the new dispensation was ushered into the world? Were these 
 three immaculates ordained bishops, or did they prove by their 
 miracles their calling to the jurisdiction they assumed ? Not- 
 withstanding, we hear now and then something about apostolic 
 succession. Let us briefly sift the claim thereto. In addition to 
 the above testimonies very little need be said, the treasury hav- 
 ing as good a claim, and if any, a decidedly more decent one to 
 any interference or association with the Holy Ghost, than the 
 monstrosity, " the establishment ;" but we will devote a little 
 more space to the consideration of this absurd pretention. In 
 the thirty-fifth article of prayer-book we read : " The book of 
 consecration of archbishops, bishops, and ordering of priests an^ 
 deacons, lately set forth by Edward VI., and confirmed by act 
 of parliament," etc. Now the confirmation and setting forth by 
 parliament and king of the book of consecration, etc., of bishops 
 leaves no doubt of the source of the apostolic succession in the 
 days of Edward. Again, when Elizabeth ascended the throne, 
 she banished the catholic prelates from their sees, and to supply 
 their places was now the difiiculty. Parker was appointed by 
 the head of the restored "church of England," as archbishop of 
 Canterbury, but before the validity of his consecration, and 
 therefore the validity of the consecration of all future incum- 
 bents of sees, could be admitted, two points were to be settled : 
 1st. Did Parker ever go through any form of consecration what- 
 ever ? 2d. Was the form of consecration used in the days of 
 Elizabeth, and borrowed from Edward VI, a valid one? Were 
 it possible to prove for Parker any form or ceremony of conse- 
 cration whatsoever, and it is not possible so to do^ although the most 
 assiduous and persevering efforts have been made in that direc- 
 tion, it is a question of fact ^ and one of the highest importance, 
 that the form which alone had been in use for one hundred and 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 03 
 
 ten years, that is, during the reigns of Edward, Elizabeth, James 
 I. and Charles I., had no more bearing on the consecration of a 
 bishop than it would have on the ordination of a deacon ; as 
 judge by. the following verbatim copy in use over a century: 
 " Take the Holy Ghost, and remember that thou stir up the 
 grace of God which is in thee, by the imposition of hands ; for 
 God has not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love, 
 and soberness." It is evident, from the above form, to the most 
 superficial observer, that it is utterly indefinite, and would apply 
 to any order as well as that of bishop, so that the deacon or priest 
 (so-called) and for whose ordination the same form had been 
 used for over a century, by act of parliament, was as much a 
 bishop as the archbishop of Canterbury, and in this I am borne 
 out by Burnet himself, who, speaking of the authors of the arti- 
 cles, says : " Now Cranmer was the author of that form, after 
 he had discarded the form found in the Roman Pontifical," and 
 to prove how loosely he thought on the subject, I will quote 
 Bishop Short once more : " He (Cranmer), seems to esteem the 
 whole of the clerical office, as dependent entirely on the civil 
 magistrate, that there was originally no diff'erence between a 
 bishop and a priest, that the prince or the people might make a 
 priest for themselves, for whom no consecration was necessary." 
 Behold the man who composed the above form of consecration, 
 that for over a century gave bishops and priests to the church of 
 England ! Even Hooker admitted that " there may be very just 
 and suflicient reasons to allow ordination made without a bishop." 
 (Eccl. Polity, Book 7, chapter 14). Can any one, after this 
 exposS flatter himself with the fond delusion that such an idea as 
 apostolic succession was admissible, when the very authors of the 
 schism manifested so supreme a contempt for the silly dream .? 
 A vain attempt had been made to conceal the anxiety that pre- 
 vailed even then as regards the validity of orders, as the second 
 clause of the twenty-third article evinces : "And those we ought 
 to judge as lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called 
 to this work by men who have public authority given unto them 
 in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's 
 vineyard." Now I defy the most ingenious sophist to unravel 
 this specimen of studied ambiguity. It was composed to cover 
 
34 ADORATION OF THE B. V, MAEY. 
 
 tracks that must, if possible, be concealed. Who are the men 
 who have public authority in the congregation ? Are they 
 bishops or laymen ? It matters not, for the bishops derived 
 their authority from laymen and women. But hear Bishop Bur- 
 net on this article ; he says . " The article leaves the matter open 
 and at large for such accidents as had happened.'' Burnet was well 
 acquainted with the secret springs and backslidings of those who 
 controlled matters in those days, and mildly but plainly hints 
 that a screw was loose, that the chain of apostolic succession 
 was snapt in twain, never to be relinked, and that it was neces- 
 sary that this article should be so worded as to make the best of 
 the mishap plainly acknowledged, and cover up tracks that are 
 admitted to have existed and which necessarily are irreparable. 
 
 After this, what, think you, were the sentiments of Bishop 
 Burnet as regards apostolic succession ? The prospects of up- 
 holding any such delusion in his day were very far from being 
 likely to have secured his acquiescence. The only conclusion 
 deducible from the above array of facts and testimonies is, that a 
 more preposterous claim was never sought to be palmed off on 
 the deluded followers of a system, the origin, progress and con- 
 surhmation of which flings defiance in the face of the most infa- 
 mous organization that ever found existence amongst men ; and 
 as to your claim, a fort tori .^ to apostolic succession, the following 
 axiom seals its validity : " Quod ah initio nullum est., tractu tem- 
 poris non convalescit.'^ And did you have even a legitimate title 
 to be considered validly ordained, of which the above arguments, 
 facts, and testimonies prove you destitute of even the very shadow, 
 what would it avail you practically? St. Paul says: " So let 
 men regard us as the ministers of Christ and dispensers of the 
 mysteries of God." Your confreres in England are, ipso facto. 
 ministers of the English crown, salaried by her Britannic majesty, 
 the establishment being, to say the least, a kind of supernumerary 
 moral police establishment, harmless, but well supported (a large 
 fund having been reserved for the officials from the general pil- 
 lage over 300 years ago), but as to being regarded as ministers of 
 God, the whole christian world sees in them only the paid hire- 
 lings of Henry the Eighth and his successors, whilst it has ever 
 scouted the idea of their ever having had any intimation of a call- 
 ing from God. As to being considered " dispensers of the mys- 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 35 
 
 teries of God." These mysteries of God were the seven sacra- 
 ments instituted by Jesus Christ, the visible signs and channels 
 of the graces purchased by His blood for the regeneration, nour- 
 ishment and fortifying of the souls of christians, and where are 
 they to be dispensed ? Five out of the seven have, centuries ago, 
 been thrown overboard (a work of supererogation, there being no 
 dispensers of them) by the royal moral police commissioners and 
 subsequently by the foster-child, the protestant episcopal church 
 of the United States, your prayer-book testifying in its usually 
 intentionally-ambiguous style that there are only two generally 
 necessary to salvation. He would indeed be a clever interpreter 
 that could satisfactorily furnish light to read intelligently, or furnish 
 small change to clear up the ingeniously contrived lights and 
 shades of that phrase of Mr. Cranmer and Co. It is suggestive 
 of fraud and bad faith. 
 
 And what are these two sacraments ? They are entitled bap- 
 tism and the Lord's supper. The church of Jesus Christ has 
 always had a sacrament known by the title of the holy eucharist 
 — the Greek fathers gave it that name most appropriately, and 
 the church has ever since accorded It that nomenclature — this 
 holy sacrament contains unequivocally the body and blood of our 
 Divine Redeemer under the outward forms of bread and wine, 
 and no other teaching was ever received amongst christians from 
 the Infancy of the church, and such has been the belief of every 
 sect that separated from the church, even in remote antiquity. 
 But for the first time in the history of Christianity we are intro- 
 duced to a new sacrament called the Lord's supper — a discovery 
 for which the holy reformers deserve the fervent thanks of man- 
 kind ! But if you seek to analyze the ingredients of the new 
 gift, you are Invited to the book of common prayer for informa- 
 tion, and you will never, I promise you, arrive at a satisfactory 
 conclusion as to what it is composed of — the language of the 
 book having been, according to Tallyrand, purposely selected to 
 deceive. Should you consult the " lights," i, ^., the living ex- 
 ponents of the language of the prayer-book, on this important 
 question, you will close your investigation more mystified than 
 ever — for the lights In the adjoining States of Virginia and Mary- 
 land are " toto coelo'^ opposed in their views. The fact is, the 
 
Qg ADORATION OF- THE B. V. MABY. 
 
 oracle will not speak, or like the thimble-riggers pea " you see it 
 there, and then you don't see it." 
 
 Anyhow, the sad practical result is, that millions of well-dis- 
 posed christians are robbed of the grandest gift that God ever 
 bestowed on man by his last will and testament. What a sad 
 falling off, my friends ? What a parody on the infinite bounty 
 of the Redeemer! the gift which He promised should be infi- 
 nitely superior to the manna (a supernatural food), (John 6 c), 
 now dwindled down to the common food and drink of the eating- 
 house ! And this is, forsooth, one of the two sacraments that 
 are generally necessary to salvation. I can comprehend how in 
 some countries bread and wine are necessary to sustain animal 
 life, but I believe our Saviour's thoughts ranged somewhat h'gh'jr, 
 and that He had, as Creator, furnished us with a good supi y of 
 both nearly 6,000 years ago. Anyhow, the practical conclusion 
 is, that if the moral police commissioners yclept the church of 
 England, meant by the Lord's supper a piece of baker's bread 
 and a few drops of vintner's wine, then I can say " thank you for 
 nothing ;" but if the Sphynx could be compelled to speak intel- 
 ligibly, and pronounce the gift unequivocally the body and blood 
 of the Lord, then, I say too, " thank you for nothing," for you 
 are no more, commissioned by God to consecrate the elements 
 than I am to superintend the motions of the spheres, and my 
 argument on the apostolic succession leaves this beyond perad- 
 venture. 
 
 And now let me make a few observations on the last sad rem- 
 nant of the Redeemer's costly gifts to men. Ah ! what a spiritual 
 charnel-house Is this ! Did not your Baltimore convention an- 
 nounce, in the plenitude of its wisdom, that it was not prepared 
 to declare that any moral change took place in the subject of 
 baptism, by the ceremony ? of this I am well assured ; and if so, 
 that is, if no moral change takes place, then baptism is a sense- 
 less rite, a farce, and the sooner you rid yourselves of it, and 
 with it the last shred of spiritual life, the more consistent you 
 will be. 
 
 But let me, in the name of christian charity, implore you, for 
 the sake of the little children whom Jesus desires to come to 
 Him, to beware before you practically carry out that horrible 
 decision. If you have any faith left in the words of Jesus Christ j 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MAEY. 37 
 
 if you value in the least degree consistency, do not let the dy^ng 
 child (for you are authorized to do this) be forever deprived of 
 the beatific vision by any such nonsense and inconsistency. 
 
 Open your book of prayer, read this exhortation at the begin- 
 ning of the ministration of baptism of children, and cast your 
 eyes on the first w^ords: "Dearly beloved, forasmuch as all men 
 are conceived and born in sin ; and our Saviour Christ saith^ None 
 can enter the kingdom of heaven^ except he be regenerate and born 
 aneiu of water and of the Holy Ghost. ''^ How, I ask, could any 
 body of sane men, believing the words of Christ and the inter- 
 pretation of being " regenerate and born anew of water and the 
 Holy Ghost," rendered in that very exhortation.^ to signify bap- 
 tism, declare that they are not prepared to say that any moral 
 change takes place through baptism, in the face of the very 
 words of Jesus Christ Himself there quoted ? Words cannot 
 express the depth of this act of self-stultification; and the same 
 sapient body informed the christian world, too, that the word 
 "regenerate," used so frequently in that ceremony, ^^/^«(? meaning, 
 Alas for the cause that necessity forced to such an act of expediency 
 as this ! Words fail me to express myself worthily of the occasion. 
 ^^^em Deus vult perdere prius dementat^'' will suffice. Practi- 
 cally, therefore, the only one left of all the sacraments. of the 
 primitive church instituted by Jesus Christ, is robbed of its effects 
 and consequently of the necessity of receiving it ; should the 
 poor people hearken to the decision of the Baltimore convention 
 rather than to the words of Jesus Christ, above quoted, and in- 
 terpreted by your prayer book ; and consequently, what, may I 
 ask, of spirituality is left in either the parent or daughter institu- 
 tion ? Facts and arguments collated in this letter have irrefragi- 
 bly demonstrated that there never was any spirituality therein, 
 but whilst the claim is made for divine origin (which can neve 
 be recognized), the suicidal course of the claimants, renders it 
 unnecessary to prove their claim groundless. Should the de- 
 scendants of John Jacob Astor prodigally spend the last dollar of 
 their magnificent estate, and in their folly parade Broadway, 
 N. Y., in poverty and rags, calling public attention to the fact 
 that they were his heirs, their situation would not be more de- 
 plorable than that of the church of England. Heiress to all the 
 promises of Jesus Christ, and in the full enjoyment of all the 
 
OQ ADOKATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 blessings of Christianity attainable on earth, she bartered all hei 
 spiritual gifts for a mess of pottage, and apostatizing and deliber- 
 ately renouncing her birth-right, she preserves a false existence, 
 supported by the remnant of the pilfered property of the mother 
 church -y but how long this galvanized existence will last depends 
 entirelv upon the political exigencies of the government. Wise 
 men limit her existence to less than ten years. 
 
 Her children are to-day without a single christian sacrament, 
 and consequently without a single grace derivable from them, 
 except what they happen to secure from baptism when validly 
 administered, and even this is despite hers and her daughter's de- 
 cisions. A more melancholy picture of the spiritual destitution 
 of a nation never before presented itself. 
 
 However, it is a consolation to feel that she and her daughter 
 form a branch of the church catholic, and call themselves, by 
 every right, catholics ! I reply, that the claim is inadmissible, 
 for man/ reasons, ist. The term catholicity embodies univer- 
 sality, both as to time and place. Preposterous, indeed, is the 
 claim, viewed from either point. As to time, what has been already- 
 advanced of the civil institution called the church of England, 
 indicr.tes the year 1530 as the date of her origin. A new organ- 
 ization iniigurated by the English monarch that year, perfectly 
 distinct from what had hitherto existed, in every element consti- 
 tutive of autonomy, took root in British soil in the blood of thou- 
 sands of christians, and in the wholesale and indiscriminate plun- 
 der of every object and right sacred to the christian citizen, and 
 in th^ sacrilegious assumption of spiritual jurisdiction by laymen, 
 — ^which system exists to this day. The church of England, 
 " by law established," was ushered into light fifteen centuries too 
 late, therefore, to make good her claim to the title catholic, as to 
 time. As to catholicity of place, where, I ask, does she enjoy 
 an exis.enc", save in England, where she is fast passing away, 
 and in her r presentation in this country; and if there be any 
 truth in the s'gns of the times, her representatives here will have 
 good reason to augur "hard times" very soon. Nowhere else on 
 the earth can she be considered as having any tangible representa- 
 tion. And were her claim to the title " catholic " to present 
 itself in any practical shape, let me ask, what body of christians 
 would admit her right to the title ? The christian world, as repre- 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. gg 
 
 sented by the Roman catholic and Greek churches, have never for a 
 moment of her existence, recognized her ; and although she has 
 sat crouching for the past half century at the gates of the schis- 
 matical Greek church, imploring one faint smile of recognition, 
 her patience and humiliation have not been rewarded, the smile 
 of recognition has never yet been vouchsafed her. She stands 
 alone, even in the midst of her protectant sisters, assuming a 
 superiority over them by virtue of her so-called apostolic suc- 
 cession — a monomania that seems to have taken possession of 
 her — u^hich was never admitted by the great body of christians. 
 Another fond delusion I will now notice. I will present it in 
 the language of one of her own divines : " The church is, as it 
 were, a tree. For eight feet above the soil, its trunk stands one 
 and entire. Somewhere along the ninth foot, the trunk branches 
 into two main limbs. We will call the eastern the Greek limb, 
 and the western the Latin. Six feet further out on the Latin 
 limb, that is to say, fifteen feet from the ground, that western 
 limb subdivides into two vast branches. The outmost we will 
 call the Anglican branch, the other Ave will call the Roman. 
 These two branches and the Greek limb run up to a height of 
 nineteen and a-half feet from the ground. There they are the 
 three great boughs, each with its foliage, Anglican at the west, 
 Roman in the centre, Greek at the east." Behold the branch 
 system, which furnishes so much consolation to our imaginative 
 friends, fully developed ! Alas, however, for its advocates, it 
 lacks one very necessary ingredient, viz., its failure to be true to 
 nature. The figure of a tree is a very simple and natural figure, 
 and provided it be carried out distinctly and applied successfully 
 (our Saviour adopted it frequently and applied it beautifully) is 
 very available. Let us analyze our favorite figure. The root 
 is, of course, Jesus Christ j the trunk, which was eight feet high 
 before it threw out a limb, was the church of eight centuries' 
 growth. The Latin limb grew six feet long from the trunk, and 
 then threw out two branches, viz.: the Anglican and Roman, 
 which, with the Greek, has been growing apace, and luxuria- 
 ting in the densest foliage ever since their separation. But I fear 
 I am about to destroy (figuratively) this very unnatural tree. 
 Where, may I ask, is the trunk that, planted in Jesus Christ, the 
 root, flourished so vigorously for eight full centuries, without a 
 
AQ ADORATION OF THE B. V.MARY. 
 
 branch, and what has become of the Latin branch, that flour- 
 ished in company with the Greek branch for six centuries ? 
 They exist nowhere in our pretty figure, because they have no 
 representation in Christianity on the earth, nor have they had, 
 according to the figure, for the past three centuries. Therefore 
 we have presented to our contemplation, a great unnatural curi- 
 osity, which would be. another fortune to Barnum, if he could 
 succeed in taking hold of it. We have, in a word, three branches 
 dense with foliage, all perfectly distinct from each other, with no 
 trunk to furnish them with life and vigor from the root. This 
 is certainly a prodigy. Talk of the age of miracles having passed 
 away. Why, the most inveterate antagonists of miracles, are 
 those who have, for three centuries, been furnishing us with the 
 most astounding of all. But their natural modesty, combined 
 with papistical stupidity, has prevented the world hitherto from 
 admiring the great unnatural curiosity. 
 
 Reverend sir, you may rest assured that the Redeemer never 
 planted such a tree as that whose trunk He nourished for eight 
 centuries, but then allowed to decay and be lost, whilst He nur- 
 tured the branches in the air, perfectly detached from Himself 
 (the root), and from any trunk. That is expecting rather too 
 much. But He did plant a tree that has stood the storms of 
 nearly nineteen centuries, whose branches extend, and have ex- 
 tended all over the earth for ages, which branches are all in inti- 
 mate conjunction with the trunk, ever receiving life and vigor 
 from the root, Jesus Christ, and ever dispensing that vigor and 
 life to -its most distant branches. True it is that a number of 
 branches have, through their own fault, dropped off from the 
 trunk and rotted where they dropped (count the heresies of the 
 first ages), and that some have dropped off within the past 500 
 years, /. ^., the Greek and Anglican branches, and their fate is 
 as unmistakable as the fate of those already long defunct. A 
 new branch, however, has not only budded out where the Ang- 
 lican branch dropped from, but is assuming proportions that 
 authorize the assurance that it will ere long transcend the decay- 
 ing one. Such is the promise from its present development and 
 wonderful vigor and vitality. 
 
 Having, reverend sir, vindicated my religion from the unjust 
 and gratuitous aspersions which you thought well of heaping upon 
 
ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 4;j 
 
 her ; having adduced the most ample testimony that the church 
 of the primitive ages exceeded the church of this day in language 
 far more eulogistic than ourselves in reference to the Blessed 
 Virgiji ; and this in contradiction of your statement that the early 
 fathers were all silent on this subject. 
 
 Having repelled vs^ith just indignation each and every assertion 
 and inference sought to be deduced from premises that vi^ere 
 gratuitously assumed, and from facts that had no existence, save 
 in minds that derive their pabulum from inventions and calum- 
 nies uttered against the church of Christ, and in this respect 
 they are by no means particular as to the quality or quantity pre- 
 sented them ; so morbid is the appetite for this species of food. 
 
 Having, in the second part of my letter, begun by paying my 
 respects to your rule of faith, and having invited you to apply to 
 your sect every argument made use of by me in my controversy 
 with Dr. Blackwell (for there is not a pin's point of difference 
 between the sects in this particular) ; having demonstrated that 
 the source whence you derive your existence never had a spark 
 of spiritual vitality (I mean the church of England), but con- 
 tinues to live a pampered life on the ill-gotten goods of that 
 branch of the church of Christ which luxuriated for centuries in 
 the enjoyment of countless spiritual blessings derived from its 
 connection with Jesus Christ through the one church existing, 
 viz. : the holy Roman catholic church; having, too, demonstrated 
 the utter futility of seeking to vindicate for yourselves the apos- 
 tolic succession, which, even if possessed by you, has not whereon 
 to exercise such orders ; you having suicidally rejected five of the 
 sacraments and so razeed the two remaining that, of their own 
 weight, having no buoyancy, or rather being so completely sub- 
 merged, they are no longer visible to the eyes of men — leaving 
 .you completely deprived of any " mysteries of God," even had 
 you the power " to dispense" them. Moreover, having shown 
 how abortive is the effort on your part to obtain from the catho- 
 lic church, the Greek church, or any other schismatical body in 
 existence, a nod of recognition, and having, in fine, exposed the 
 fond delusion of the " branch" theory that seems to afford so 
 much comfort to your sect, to the prejudice and utter ignoring 
 of your other protestant co-religionists, I now beg leave to close 
 this letter, requiring, in justice to the millions of christians ^t- 
 
42 ADORATION OF THE B. V. MARY. 
 
 tered over the earth, either the proofs of what, I repeat, is an 
 unmitigated calumny reproduced by yourself before a number of 
 my fellow-citizens, or in failure thereof, an honest and manly 
 apology to the great body of christians, before that same audience ; 
 for less than that will not satisfy justice. As for my pirt, I hold 
 myself in readiness to defend the teachings of my religion against 
 all attacks thereon, and shall have recourse to all honorable means 
 to refute what I know to be misstatements and misrepresentations 
 of her doctrine. 
 
 Prepared to enter the lists with you, should you see fit to main- 
 tain your position, as indicated by your notes, for the further 
 development of the question — for the tighter the coat fits (theo- 
 logically) the better I like it — or to hear from you a retraction 
 of the above summarized slanders, which I will do you the justice 
 to believe you have, without examination, appropriated and ven- 
 tilated. 
 
 I am, reTeread eir, jours trulj, 
 
 M. O'KEEFE. 
 
U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 (i^S^ 
 
 ^JC. ^ 
 
t