Why does the Church of Rome hide the second Commandment from

Acerca de este libro
Esta es una copia digital de un libro que, durante generaciones, se ha conservado en las estanterías de una biblioteca, hasta que Google ha decidido
escanearlo como parte de un proyecto que pretende que sea posible descubrir en línea libros de todo el mundo.
Ha sobrevivido tantos años como para que los derechos de autor hayan expirado y el libro pase a ser de dominio público. El que un libro sea de
dominio público significa que nunca ha estado protegido por derechos de autor, o bien que el período legal de estos derechos ya ha expirado. Es
posible que una misma obra sea de dominio público en unos países y, sin embargo, no lo sea en otros. Los libros de dominio público son nuestras
puertas hacia el pasado, suponen un patrimonio histórico, cultural y de conocimientos que, a menudo, resulta difícil de descubrir.
Todas las anotaciones, marcas y otras señales en los márgenes que estén presentes en el volumen original aparecerán también en este archivo como
testimonio del largo viaje que el libro ha recorrido desde el editor hasta la biblioteca y, finalmente, hasta usted.
Normas de uso
Google se enorgullece de poder colaborar con distintas bibliotecas para digitalizar los materiales de dominio público a fin de hacerlos accesibles
a todo el mundo. Los libros de dominio público son patrimonio de todos, nosotros somos sus humildes guardianes. No obstante, se trata de un
trabajo caro. Por este motivo, y para poder ofrecer este recurso, hemos tomado medidas para evitar que se produzca un abuso por parte de terceros
con fines comerciales, y hemos incluido restricciones técnicas sobre las solicitudes automatizadas.
Asimismo, le pedimos que:
+ Haga un uso exclusivamente no comercial de estos archivos Hemos diseñado la Búsqueda de libros de Google para el uso de particulares;
como tal, le pedimos que utilice estos archivos con fines personales, y no comerciales.
+ No envíe solicitudes automatizadas Por favor, no envíe solicitudes automatizadas de ningún tipo al sistema de Google. Si está llevando a
cabo una investigación sobre traducción automática, reconocimiento óptico de caracteres u otros campos para los que resulte útil disfrutar
de acceso a una gran cantidad de texto, por favor, envíenos un mensaje. Fomentamos el uso de materiales de dominio público con estos
propósitos y seguro que podremos ayudarle.
+ Conserve la atribución La filigrana de Google que verá en todos los archivos es fundamental para informar a los usuarios sobre este proyecto
y ayudarles a encontrar materiales adicionales en la Búsqueda de libros de Google. Por favor, no la elimine.
+ Manténgase siempre dentro de la legalidad Sea cual sea el uso que haga de estos materiales, recuerde que es responsable de asegurarse de
que todo lo que hace es legal. No dé por sentado que, por el hecho de que una obra se considere de dominio público para los usuarios de
los Estados Unidos, lo será también para los usuarios de otros países. La legislación sobre derechos de autor varía de un país a otro, y no
podemos facilitar información sobre si está permitido un uso específico de algún libro. Por favor, no suponga que la aparición de un libro en
nuestro programa significa que se puede utilizar de igual manera en todo el mundo. La responsabilidad ante la infracción de los derechos de
autor puede ser muy grave.
Acerca de la Búsqueda de libros de Google
El objetivo de Google consiste en organizar información procedente de todo el mundo y hacerla accesible y útil de forma universal. El programa de
Búsqueda de libros de Google ayuda a los lectores a descubrir los libros de todo el mundo a la vez que ayuda a autores y editores a llegar a nuevas
audiencias. Podrá realizar búsquedas en el texto completo de este libro en la web, en la página http://books.google.com
This is a reproduction of a library book that was digitized
by Google as part of an ongoing effort to preserve the
information in books and make it universally accessible.
http://books.google.com
,_
V.-v-\_
I,
a ZR.
(2- ~
l/Q.
WHY} DOES
V
11%? ulf'burrtj 11f 3Knt iféiinz
THE
1
SECQND CUMMANDMENT
l
FROM
THE PEOPLE?
A TRACT,
BY THE REV. ALEX. M’CAUL, D.D.,
RECTOR OF THE UNlTED PARISHEB OF ST. MAGNUS THE MARTYR, ST.
MARGARET, snw FISH-STREET, AND 51. MICHAEL, CROOKED'LANE;
AND mummwuu 01‘ ST. PAVL’S.
LONDON :
WERTHEIM
AND
MACINTOSH,
24, PATERNOSTER-ROW.
1850.
PRICE FOURPENCE.
WHY DOES THE CHURCH OF HOME
fife tbr émmh (tummunhmut fer ll]! 36mph?
REVERENCE for the Divine commands is the only infal
lible proof of love and loyalty to Christ. Without it
no profession of zeal, no pretension to the possession of
exclusive privilege is of any avail.
“ Whosoever
therefore shall break one of these least commandments,
and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the
kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. v. 19.)
Why then does the Church of Rome hide the second
commandment from the people? This question implies
that she does keep out of sight the Divine precept, and
calls for an answer. To supply the proof of the fact,
and to answer the question, is the object of this tract.
The fact may be proved thus—
1. She adopts an incorrect division of the Command
ments, which deprives the second of its existence and
prominence as an independent and substantive declara~
tion of the Divine will.
5K
2
II. She leaves it out altogether in most of her
catechisms for the people, and in all countries.
III. Where she allows it to stand, she conceals its
meaning and force by an inadequate translation.
1. She adopts an incorrect division of the Com
mandments. She amalgamates the first and second
into one, and cuts the tenth into two. I say, she
adopts, because she herself admits, that this matter of
division is not an article of faith. Dr. Lingard, in
his “ Catechetical Instructions,” thus explains the
doctrine of his Church on this point :—
“But how was the number of ten made up? Was
it by dividing the prohibition of false worship, or by
dividing that of concupiscence into two precepts?
This has always been a. subject of debate in the
Christian Church: Origen and St. Jerome contending
for the first, and St. Augustine for the second manner
of division. ‘Forasmuche, however,’ says Bishop
Bonner, in his “Exposition of the Commandment,” ‘as
Saynte Augustine himself doth declare that both these
maners were used and allowed in his tyme: and for
that also neyther in the one or in the other, eyther the
sense, the word, or any one jote of the matter is
altered, no, nor yet anye more or lesse in eyther
of the sayde two tables thereby conteyned, no man
ought with thiss our dyvisyon (wherein for certayne
good considerations we followe Origins and St.
3
Hierome) to be in any wise ofi'ended.’
The same,
with equal reason, may be said by the English
Catholics of the present day, who follow the other
division, adopted by Saint Augustine.”
Here, then, is an acknowledgment, on the showing
of Bishop Bonner, that the Church of Rome had a
choice: that he for good reasons, and the Church,
in his days, adopted the division still retained in the
Church of England—that the Church of Rome,
as is seen in the “Trent Catechism,”* for other
reasons, and modern Roman Catholics in obedience to
this Council, adopted another. This division is incorrect.
1st. It is opposed to the statements of ancient
Christian writers. Neither the “ Trent Catechism”
nor Lingard refer to any one of the Fathers but
Augustine. It might be safely inferred that they had
not one to refer to: and this is the fact. Not only
Origen and Jerome, but Tertulh'an, Clement of Alex
andria, Gregory Nazianzen, Athanasius, Chrysostom,
Epiphanius, Ambrose, Sulpicius Severus, Cassian,
testify against the division adopted by Rome. Yea,
even Augustine himself in the “Epistola ad Boni
facium,” and the “ Speculum ex Deuteronomio,”
adopts the other division.
His only motive for
making three commandments of the first table was
* On the First Commandment, sect. xxxii., edit. Cologne,
1689, p. 257.
B 2
4
that mischievous mysticism, which has brought
so much evil into the Church; he desired to symbolize
the Trinity.
The Greek Church has always followed
the division adopted by the Church of England,‘
as is fully shown by Gefi'cken.
2d. It is opposed to Jewish antiquity. Josephus,
Antiqu., 111., c. v., pp. 5, 8, says expressly that the
second commandment is, “ Not to make and worship a
graven image.” Philo, De decalogo, intimates the same.
Both divide the tables into two fives, and both make
of “ Thou shalt not covet,” &c., only one commandment.
3d. It is opposed to constant tradition of the Jews'f
in their synagogues. Some advocates for the Roman
division refer, indeed, to the paragraphs in the
Hebrew Bibles, marked by the letters D and g, ten
in number, and the prohibition against covetousness
divided into two paragraphs. But to this is to he
replied that Kennicott found this division of the tenth
Commandment wanting in 234 copies of Exod. and
184 of Deut. He also cites Maimonides as protesting
against these paragraphs. But the true and general
opinion if the Jews is to be found in their synagogue
practice.
The synagogue tablets are the most
authoritative declaration of
Jewish tradition, and
* See Gefi'cken,—“Uber die verschiedene Eintheilung dcs
Decalogus, pp. 18—20, and 14.5.
1' Gefi'cken, p. 181.
5
they make the words, “I am the Lord thy God,”
the first Commandment; the prohibition against false
gods and false worship the second; “Thou shalt not
covet” the tenth. They neither add the prohibition
against image worship to the first Commandment, nor
divide the prohibition against coveting into two.
4th. It is opposed to the plain meaning of the words.
The first impression naturally made on reading the
Commandments is, that the prohibition against
coveting makes only one commandment. This seems
to make the whole of the preceding precepts spiritual,
and to apply them to the heart. For this one com
mandment is suflicient.
It is true that the words,
“ Thou shalt not covet,” occur twice in Exodus xx.,
and the words, “ Thou shalt not covet.
.
.
shall not desire," are found in Deut. v.
.
Thou
But so
strongly does the unity of the prohibition commend
itself to common sense, that the Vulgate, the favourite
and authorized text-book of Rome, in Deut. v. 18,
omits the repetition of “Thou shalt not covet,” and
thus prevents any division of the tenth Command
ment,—“ Non concupisces uxorem proximi tui, non
domum, non agrum, non servum,” 8tc.
And so the
Douay Bible, “ Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's
wife; nor his house, nor his field, nor his manservant,
nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor
anything that is his.”
6
Even the Trent Catechism bears witness against the
absurdity of dividing the tenth Commandment into
two; for after treating of each of the other command
ments separately, it throws the two prohibitions into
one in order to explain “ Thou shalt not covet.”
“ Nonum et decimum praecepta Decalogi. Non con
cupisces domum proximi tui; nec desiderabis uxorem
ejus,
non servum, non ancillam, non bovem,
non
asinum, nec omnia quze illius sunt.” So Dr. Lingard
himself found a difiiculty in making a palpable
distinction, and, therefore, p. 80, does not attempt to
explain them separately, but shows, in fact, that they
are one, thus :—
“Trm NINTH COMMANDMENT.
“ 1. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.
“THE TENTH COMMANDMENT.
“ 1. What is the tenth Commandment?
“ Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods.
“ 2. In what are these two commandments difl‘erent
from the others?
“ Others forbid external acts, these forbid thoughts
and desires.”
Thus, then, the unity of intention is acknowledged, and
so in many other Roman Catechisms. But here the at
tentive reader will observe a difference between the order
of the words as given in the Trent Catechism and in
Dr. Lingard. According to the former the ninth Com
p
1‘
mandment is, “ Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's
house;” and the tenth, “Thou shalt not desire his
wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his
ox, nor his ass,” 8w. According to Dr. Lingard their
order is reversed, the ninth is: “ Thou shalt not covet
thy neighbour’s wife;” the tenth, “Thou shalt not
covet thy neighbour’s
ence, is to be found in
alluded to presently.
Bavarian Catechisms
goods.” And this same differ
other Roman Catechisms, to be
The authorized Austrian and
agree with Dr. Lingard, and
difi'erfrom the Trent. The Sagan, or Silesian Catechism,
on the contrary, agrees with Trent and differs from
the others. And it is to be observed that the
command, as given in the Trent Catechism, cannot
possibly be divided as they are by Lingard and in
most Roman Catholic Catechisms.
It begins with
“ house,” a part of men's goods; it goes on to “ wife,”
and then servant, ox, and ass, other parts of men’s
goods. So that if you stop at “ house ” for the ninth,
“ you ought to stop at “wife” for the tenth, and
then there remain “ goods,” enough even for an
eleventh. Dr. Lingard’s division can only be effected
by forcibly taking the word .“ wife ” out of the words
given in the Trent Catechism, and then joining the'
first and last words together.
Which is right?
Surely an infallible Church ought to be able to tell,
without mistake, which is the ninth,v and which is
8
the
tenth
Commandment;
and
yet
the
Trent
Catechism and the popular Catechisms in use in
Roman Catholic countries are disagreed on this point.
This disagreement presents a fifth argument
against the division adopted by Rome. In the
Book of Exodus, chap. xx., where the account is
given of the delivery of the Commandments by the
voice of God, the words, “Thou shalt not covet
thy neighbour’s house,” stand first. When Moses, in
the Book of Deuteronomy, is recapitulating, enforcing,
and explaining all God’s laws, and, therefore, makes
sundry verbal alterations, the words, “ Thou shalt not
covet thy neighbour’s wife,” stand first. If there be
two separate commandments, then there is a difficulty
as to the order. But if they be only one prohibition
of coveting, as the Vulgate, the Trent Catechism, and
even Dr. Lingard imply, then the variation of the
order of the words is nothing. This very difficulty,
therefore, proves that the Church of Rome is wrong,
and the Church of England right.
In like manner common sense tells us that the
prohibition against other gods is different from the
prohibition against images. The carnal man may have
a false god without making any image, as the apostle
says, “whose god is their belly.” “The god of this
world” is the Devil, and yet men do not make images
of him to worship. A man, therefore, may have false
9
gods without making images, and he may be guilty of
idolatry by making an image of the true God. Thou
shalt have no strange gods is therefore one command
ment. Thou shalt not make nor bow down to any
image, whether of the true or the false, is another.
Thus Christian antiquity, Jewish antiquity, the
practice of the modern Jews, the meaning and object
of the commandments, as witnessed by the Trent
Catechism and the Romanist writers, testify against
the correctness of the Roman division. Why then did
she depart from antiquityand from her own convictions ?
Her practice suggests the answer.
It was for the convenience of leaving out the second
commandment in her popular catechisms. Had the
prohibition against image worship been acknowledged
as a separate command, it could not have been omitted
without being missed. Considered as only an amplifi
cation of the prohibition against false gods, it was easy
to leave it out without any change in the number, “ Ten.”
It was more convenient for image-makers and image
venerators not to have it generally known, and there
fore a division was deliberately chosen, which made
concealment possible.
II. The Church of Rome hides the second command
ment from the people, by entirely omitting it in most of
her catechisms, and in all countries.
And let it be
observed that I am not now quarrelling about form. She
10
deliberately omits most solemn and awful words, once
delivered by the voice of the Almighty. She leaves out,
“ Thou shalt not makeun to thee any graven image, or any
likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in
the earth beneath; or that is in the water under the
earth:_thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor
serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous
God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation of them
that hate me, and shewing mercy unto thousands of
them that love me, and keep my commandments.”
To prove this assertion it is necessary to refer to
the catechisms themselves, and here Italy and Rome
shall lead the way.
1. In' a “Catholic Catechism, translated from the
Italian of the Very Rev. Antonio 'Rosmini Serbati,
D.D., founder and general of the Institute of Charity,
. . . and dedicated to the Right Rev. W. B. Ullathorne,
B.D., Bishop of Hetalona,” published by Richardson
and Son, 172, Fleet-street: p. 56, Question 205, we
read—“ Explain to me the ten commandments accord
ing to the doctrines of your Saviour: What does the
first command, ‘I am the Lord thy God: thou shalt
not have other gods before me,’ ordain ?” Question 210 :
“ What is forbidden by the second commandment,
‘ Thou shalt not take the name of God in vain.’” Here
then the words of the second Commandment are al
11
together omitted, and yet the catechism itself occupies
213 pages. It was not, therefore, want of space that
caused the omission.
23“ In the Roman catechism, “Dichiarazione più
copiosa della Dottrina Cristiana, composta per ordine
della Santa Memoria di Papa. Clemente VII., dal Ven.
Cardinale Roberto Bellarmino, Riveduta ed approvata.
dalla V. congregazione della Riforma. In Roma 1841,
con licenza di Superiori, e privilegio." On page 101
we have the following words :—
Disciple. Let us now come to
Veniamo ora agli stessi Co
mandamenti : e prima insegnatemi these commandments themselves,
l’istesse parole con le quale furono and first teach me the words them
selveswilh which they werewritten
scritti da Dio in quelle Tavole.
by God on those table.
Ill. The words are these, I
M. Le parole sono queste,
“Io sono il Signore Dio tuo, il am the Lord thy God,who brought
quale ti ho cavato dalla terra di thee out of the land of Egypt,and
from the house of bondage.
Egitto, e dalla Casa di Servìtù."
1. Thou shalt have no other
1. Non avrai altro Dio avanti
Gods before me.
di me.
2. Non pigliare il Nome di
2. Take not the name of God
Dio in vano.
in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the
3. Ricordati di santificare le
feste.
festivals.
4. Onora il Padre, e la Madre.
4. Honour thy father and
mother.
Here, again, the prohibition to make or bow down to
images is omitted—although the request is, “ Teach me
*‘ For this extract I am indebted to a most interesting and
important book—~“Romanism as it exists in Rome.” Seeleys,
Fleet-street, 1847.
12
the words themselves written by God on the tables”—
so that the pupil is, led to believe that he is taught the
very words. The reader will also observe how the
fourth commandment is cut down and altered into
“ Remember to keep holy the festivals.” Is this con
sistent with truth and honesty?
3. Next let us take most Catholic FRANCE. In a
catechism entitled, “ Doctrine Chrétienne, ou Cate
chisme du Diocese de Castres, par Monseigneur Francois
de Lastic de Saint Ial, Evéque de Castres.
A Castres,
1747,” containing 156 pages, on page 62, we read—
“ D. Récitez le premier eommandement de Dieu ;
“R. Un seul Dieu tu adoreras et aimeras par
faitement.”
On page 70 :—
“ D. Récitez le second commandement;
“ R. Dieu en vain tu ne jureras, ni autre chose
pareillement.”
Here the second commandment is entirely omited. It
seems strange, too, that in a book of Christian doctrine
of such length the words of the Bible should not be
inserted at all, but only a rhyme such as is used in this
country for infants. After the 147 pages just spoken
of there is an “Abregé” of 39 pages, where the same
rhyme occurs instead of the real commandments.m
* As this rhyme is frequently referred to, it may be as well to
give it entire, that the reader may see how the French and Bel
gian Roman Catholics are taught the commandments :—
13
4. The next Catechism is that of the Empire, and
is a little better than the foregoing. “Catechisme
à l’usage de toutes les Eglises de l’Empire Francais,”
Paris, 1806. Like the preceding it contains a large
catechism of 144 pages, and a small one of 12 pages.
On page 51 we read—
"“ D. ‘ Combien y a-t-il de commandements de Dieu?
“R. Il y en a dix.
“D. Comment appelez-vous les commandements de
Dieu ?
“ R. Le Decalogue, ou les dix paroles.
* “ D. Récitez les commandements de Dieu.
“R. 1. Un seul Dieu tu adoreras et aimeras par
faitement. 2. Dieu en vain tu ne jureras, ni autre
chose pareillement. 3. Les Dimanches tu garderas,
en servant Dieu dévotcment, &c., &c.
“D. Rêcitez ces commandements tels que Dieu les
a donnés à Moise.
ΠSQP ?N.H
Un seul Dieu tu adoreras, et aimeras parfaitement.
. Dieu en vain tu ne jureras, ni autre chose pareillement.
Les Dimanches tu garderas en servant Dieu dévotement.
Père et mère honoreras afin que tu vives longuement.
Homicide point ne feras, de fait ni volontairement.
Luxurieux point ne seras, de corps ni de consentement.
Le Bien d‘autrui ne prendras, ni retiendras à ton escient.
. Faux temoignage ne diras, ni meriteras aucunement.
. L’œuvre de la chair ne desireras, qu’en mariage seulement.
HO . Biens d’autrui ne oonvoîteras, pour les avoir injustement.
l4
“ R. Je suis le Seigneur ton Dieu, qui t’ai tiré de la
terre d’Egypte, de la maison de servitude.
“ I. Tu n’auras point de dieux étrangers devant moi ;
tu ne feras aucune image taillée, ni aucune figure de ce
qui est en haut au ciel, ni de ce qui est en bas sur la
terre, ou dans les eaux: tu ne les adoreras point, et
ne les serviras point.
“ II. Tu ne prendras point en vain le nom du
Seigneur ton Dieu.
“III. Souviens—toi de sanctifier le jour du Sabbat.”
&c., &c., &c.
Here, then, the prohibition is retained, the fearful
sanction, “ I the Lord thy God am a jealous God,” &c.,
omitted. But the reader will observe to some of the
foregoing questions an asterisk ; to others none. This
is explained at the beginning thus,—“ On trouvera dans
le Catecbisme les demandes les plus nécessaires à
savoir marquées d’un astérisque;
et les catechistes
pourront se dispenser d’apprendre aux enfants les moins
intelligents des demandes qui n’ont pas cette marque.”
The words, therefore, of the Bible not having this
mark may be omitted in instruction. Besides, the
fourth command respecting the Sabbath is altogether
curtailed, although the question is, “ Repeat the com
mandments as God gave them to Moses.”
5. But the Empire has passed away, and its catechism
too, and with them the fragments of Bible language
15
and truth which it contained. In the “Catechisme du
Diocese de Paris, imprimé par ordre de Monseigneur
l’Archevéque, a l’usage des paroisses, Paris, 1847,” the
Bible language is altogether left out. The book
professes to give the commandments three times, first
on page 8 ; after an invocation of the Virgin Mary, the
tutelar angel and the patron saint, are found,—
“ Commandements de Dieu.
“ 1. Un seul Dieu tu adoreras ;” the rhyme as above.
Again, on page 28, where the same rhyme occurs
again in the “ Petit Catechisme,” and again on page 122,
in the larger catechism, where we read,—
“ Qu’entendez-vous par les commandements de
Dieu ? Par les commandements de Dieu, j’entends 1a
meme chose que la loi de Dieu donnée pour tous les
hommes, et pour tous les temps.
“ Combien y-a-t-il de commandements de Dieu ?
“ 11 y a dix commandements de Dieu.
“ Récitez les commandements de Dieu.
“ 1. Un seul Dieu tu adoreras,” 8m, omitting alto
gether the words of the Bible, and the prohibition to
make images. The whole book contains 212 pages,
and yet never gives the Bible wordsfi"
Now let us look into Belgium. There we find,—
6. “Le petit Catechisme de Malines, . . .publié par son
* Our Church Catechism contains only three or four similar
pages, and yet gives the commandments entire.
16
Eminence le Cardinal Sterckx, Archevêque de Malines,
pour l’usage, &c. Malines, 1843.”
Here we have, first, “ Instructions pour le premier
age,” where, on page 10, after the Creed is given, the
Decalogue, i.e., the same rhyme given already in the
French catechisms. Then follow, “ Instructions pour
la première Communion "—and here, on page 49, we
have,—
“ D. Récitez les dix commandements de Dieu.
“R. Un seul Dieu tu adoreras,” &c.
The same rhyme is begun just as here printed, but
not carried through. The words of the Bible are
altogether omitted, although the book contains 96
pages.
7. Next we come to Austria. Herewe find,—-“Grosses
Lesebuch für die deutschen Normal-nnd-Haupt
sehulen in den Kais. Königl. Staaten. Religions—Lehre
Wien., 1847.” On the back of the title-page are
printed in large letters, “ In den ofi‘entlichen Schulen
sind nur die vorgeschriebenen, mit dem Stempel des
Schulbücher-Verlages versehenen Bücher zu ver
wenden.” On page 13 of this book begins the great
catechism.
On page 68 we read,—
Translation.
Nach dem wesentlichen InAccording to main substance
halte sind die zehn Gebothe the ten commandments of God
Gottes folgende:
are as follows:
1. Du sollst allein an Einen
1. Thou shalt believe on one
Gott glauben.
God only.
l7
2. Du sollstden Nahmen deines
Gottes nicht eitel nennen.
3. Du sollst den Feyertag heili
gen.
&c. 8m.
2. Thou shalt not take the
name of thy God in vain.
3. Thou shalt keep holy the
Holyday.
On page 69 it professes to give the commandments
as they are in the Bible,—
The ten commandments are
Die zehn Gebothe sind in der
thus expressed in the Holy Scrip
heiligen Schrift also ausgedriic
ture:
ket:
l. Ich bin der Herr, dein
1. I am the Lord thy God.
Gott. Du sollst keine fremden Thou shalt have no strange Gods
Getter neben mir haben. Du beside me. Thou shalt make to
sollst dir kein geschnitztes Bild thyselfno graven image)“ to wor
ship it.
machen, dasselbe anzubethen.
2. Du sollst den Nahmen des
2. Thou shalt not pronounce
Herrn deines Gottes nicht verge the name of the Lord thy God in
blich aussprechen.
vain.
3. Gedenke, class (In den Sab
3. Remember that thou keep
bath heiligest.
holy the Sabbath.
Now, here the commandments are professedly given
as they are in the Bible. But every one who has a
Bible sees, at the first glance, that most important
words of the second commandment are wanting——
“The likeness of any thing in heaven above,” 8m.—
and so with regard to the Sabbath. This Austrian
catechism, then, though asserting that it gives the
commandments as they are in the Bible, deceives the
* The Romanists usually attempt to distinguish between
graven thing and graven image. This Austrian and French cate=
chism for the Empire, show that our translation is right.
C
18
Catechumen by not doing what it promises. The
decisive words are suppressed. The book contains
172 pages: is far superior to all the catechisms
noticed hitherto, by the number of passages of Scrip
ture printed at the foot of the page: yet the ten
commandments are mutilated.
8. Next let us see HOW BAVARIA deals with the
Divine law.
We have before us, “ Katechismus der
Christ-Katholischen Religion fiir das Bisthum Augs
burg. Miinchen, 1846.” It has a preface from
Ignatius Albert, by the grace of God and of the
Apostolic See, Bishop of Augsburg, to all pastors,
teachers, and parents. On page 2 we find, “Die
Gebote Gottes.”
l. Du sollst allein an enine
1. Thou shalt believe on one
Gott glauben.
God only.
2. Du sollst den Namen Gottes
2. Thou shalt not name the
nicht eitel neunen.
name of God in vain.
3. Du sollst den Sabbath heili
3. Thou shalt keep holy the
gen.
Sabbath.
Again, on page 45,—
144. Welches ist das erste Ge
bot T—Du sollst allein an einen
Gott glauben.
144. Which is the first com
mandment 'l—Thou shalt believe
on one God alone.
Page 49,——
145. What is the second com
156. Wie heisst das zweite
Gebot ?—-Du sollst Namen Gottes mandment ? — Thou shalt not
nicht eitel neunen.
name the name of God in vain.
' Here, then, neither first nor second is given as it is
19
in the Bible. The people are defrauded of the com
mands of God in a catechism containing 166 pages.
9. Now, then, let us look to Roman Catholic Silesia.
Before us lies “ Römisch-Katholischer Katechismus,”
printed at Sagan, cum privilegio et licentia ordinarii.
It contains, first, a short catechism for children of the
lowest class at school. On page 6, we have the com
mandments given rather better than in the preceding,
thus :—
Das Erste Gebot.
The First Commandment.
Ich bin der Herr dein Gott.
lam the Lord thy God. Thou
Du sollst nicht fremde Götter shalt not have strange gods beside
haben neben mir.
me.
Das Zweite Gebot.
The Second Commandment.
Du sollst den Namen deines
Thou shalt not use the name of
Gottes nicht unniitzlich fiihren.
thy God vainly.
Das Dritte Gebot.
The Third Commandment.
Du sollst den Feiertag heiligen.
Thou shalt keep holy the Holy
day,
Then follows a catechism for the second class, where
we have, page 20,—
Wie lautet das erste Gehot?
What are the words of the first
commandment T
Ich bin der Herr dein Gott.
Du sollst nicht fremde Götter
haben neben mir.
Page 21,—
Wie lautet das zweite Gebot?
Du sollst den namen des Herrn
deines Gottes nicht unnützlich
fiihren.
The same as just given.
_
The catechism runs through sixty pages; then fol
C2
2O
lows an appendix of thirty-six pages ; together, ninety
six pages; but the second commandrhent is totally
omitted.
10. In a child’s first book, published in Warsaw,
1826, on page 12 we have :—
DsiesiecioroBozego przykazania.
The ten commandments ofGod.
lam iest Pan Bog twoy ktorym
I am the Lord thy God, who
cie wywiodl z ziemi Egipskiey, brought thee out of the land of
z domu niewoli.
Egypt, out of the house of bond
age.
l. Nie bedziesz mial bogow
I. Thou shalt not have strange
cudzych przedemna.
gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not take the
2. Nie bedziesz bral Imienia
Pane. Boga twego naderemno.
name ofthe Lord thy God in vain.
‘ 3. Pamietay abys dzien swiety
3. Remember that thou keep
holy the Holyday.
swiecil.
Here, also, the second commandment is totally
omitted.
11. Next let us take IRELAND.
Here we have “ The
Most Rev. Dr. James Butler’s Catechism, revised,
enlarged, approved, and recommended by the four
Roman Catholic Archbishops of Ireland, as a General
Catechism for the Kingdom. . . . Twenty-sixth
edition, carefully corrected and improved, with amend
ments.
Dublin: Printed for the Catholic Book So
ciety, and sold at their General Depository, 5, Essex
bridge. 1833.” Page 36, we read,-'
“ Q. Say the ten commandments of God.
“A. 1. I am the Lord thy God: thou shalt not have
strange gods before me.
21
“ 2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy
God in vain. ‘
“ 3. Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath
day.”
This catechism contains seventy-two pages.
12. Another catechism, printed in Dublin, 1845, is
“ An Abstract of the Douay Catechism, revised and
improved for the use of the faithful. By lawful
authority.” On page 9, we find the following ques
tions :—
“What did God for them there [at Sinai] P—He
gave them the law. (Exod. xx.)
“ How did he give it ?—-In thunder and lightning.
“ Why did he give it in thunder and lightning ?—
To move us to a faithful remembrance of it.
“ \Vhat is this law ?—-The ten commandments.
“ Which are they?—I am the Lord thy God, Sac.
“ 1. Thou shalt not have strange Gods before me.
“ 2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy
God in vain.
“ 3. Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath
day.”
The same is repeated, page 35. This catechism
contains thirty-six pages. After the solemn introduc
tion, and the allusion to the thunder and lightning at
22
Sinai, one might expect a true declaration of the law
delivered under such awful circumstances. But no:
the prohibition against image-worship is totally
omitted.
13. Now let us see the catechisms published in
ENGLAND. The first I shall refer to is,—
“ The Catechism or Christian Doctrine, by way of
question and answer, illustrated by the sacred Text
and Tradition.”
It has not the name of the author,
but is “ permissu superiorum.” London: C. Dolman.
l843. On pages 25, 26, we read :—
“ Q. How many commandments has God given us?
—-A. Ten.
“ Q. Say them.—A. I am the Lord thy God, who
brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the
house of bondage. Thou shalt not have strange gods
before me. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord
thy God in vain.
Remember to keep holy the Sab
bath-day,” 8:0.
This catechism contains 249 pages, three of which
are devoted to an explanation “ of the beads or crown
of the blessed Virgin,” &c. So that the omission of
God’s command is not to be accounted for by the want
of space or the brevity of the work. The omission of
the prohibition to make and bow down before images
is clearly intentional.
14. “ The Poor Man’s Catechism, by the Rev. John
23
Mannock, A. S.R. Derby: Thomas Richardson and
Son. 1847.”
On page 126, we read,—
“ Q. How many commandments are there ?—-A. Ten.
Q. What is the chief end of the commandments P—A.
To teach us the love of God and our neighbour: he
that loveth hath fulfilled the law. Q. Who gave the
commandments ?—A. God himself in the old law, and
Christ confirmed them in the new. Q. Why did God
give the commandments to Moses in thunder and
lightning F—A. To warn the Israelites to be careful
in keeping them.
Is it possible to keep them all P
-—A. It is, through the grace of God. Q. Are we
bound, under pain of hell, to keep them ?—A. We are:
‘ if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandmentg.’
(Matt. xix. 17.)” After such a solemn declaration
concerning the necessity of obedience, and the danger
of transgression, a full and accurate enumeration of the
commandments might naturally be expected. But this
expectation is not fulfilled. The commandments are
only given in fragments, and those fragments not com
plete. Thus on page 129,—“ The first commandment.
—Section I. ‘I am the Lord thy God.’ ” Page 131.—
“ Section II. ‘ Thou shalt not have strange gods before
me.’ " Page 133.—“ Section III. ‘Thou shalt not make
to thyself any graven image,’ (30. ‘ Thou shalt not
adore nor worship them. i” The &c., to compensate for
24
the omission of “ The likeness of any thing in heaven
or in earth,” is the author’s. Then on page 135,—“ The
second commandment,—‘ Thou shalt not take the name
of the Lord thy God in vain..’ ” And on page 137,—
“ The third commandment,-‘ Remember thou keep
holy the Sabbath-day.’ " The prohibition then is
mutilated, and the words of the sanction altogether
omitted, and yet this catechism contains 329 pages of
close print, three of which are devoted to the expla
nation of the Jubilee, six to the explanation of the
“Hail Mary,” seventeen to the commandments of the
Church, and yet no room for the divine commandments
as delivered by the voice of the Almighty at Sinai.
To these fourteen I might add the titles of thirteen
Spanish and two Portuguese catechisms, a notice of
which has been kindly furnished to me by the Rev. E.
Tottenham, of Bath. I will give the title of one.
“ Catecismo de la Doctrine Christiana, compuesta por
El P. Jeronimo de Ripalda. Cotejado y corregido por
las editiones mas antiques, de orden de la junta superior
de inspeccion de escuelas de la nacion.
Madrid,
Imprenta de D. Victoriano Hernando, calle del Azeral,
No. 11.”
P. 94.
In this, the commandments are thus given.
“ El primero,amar a Dios sobre
The first,—to love God above
todas las cosas.
all things.
“ El Segundo, no jurar el nom-
hre de Dios en vano.
The second,—Not to swear by
the name of God in vain.
25
“ El Tercero, santificar las fies-
tas.
The third—To sanctify the festi
vals.
'
In all these catechisms the prohibition against making
or bowing down to images is altogether omitted. Even
the prohibition of the first commandment to have no
strange gods is omitted. Instead of the command to
keep the Sabbath is a command to sanctify the festivals.
Here then are twenty-nine catechisms in use in
Rome and Italy, France, Belgium, Austria, Bavaria,
Silesia, Poland, Ireland, England, Spain, and Portugal,
in twenty-seven of which the second commandment is
totally omitted ; in two mutilated, and only a portion
expressed. Is not then-the charge proved, that the
Church of Rome hides the second commandment from
the people? And let it be remembered that all these
catechisms are authorized by what is called “lawful
authority,” by the rulers of the Roman Church in the
various countries. Each has indeed a catechism or
catechisms of its own. But however they differ in size,
form, or language, the authorizers of them agree in one
common determination to mutilate the ten command
ments, and to hide the second from the people. Is this
accident, or is it intention, or is it the natural efi'ect of the
Popish system upon Bishops and Archbishops of every
country and clime to make them dislike the prohibition
to make or bow down to graven images, and to move
them to get rid of it? The fact is clear. The second
commandment is hidden.
26
. \Vhat can the Romanists reply? They say, “ We do
not hide the second commandment, for in some of our
catechisms the commandment is found.” But this
answer proves the accusation to be true. If the second
commandment be not hidden in the catechisms where
it is found, then undoubtedly it is hidden in those
where it is not found, that is, in all those catechisms of
all those countries to which reference has been made,
and it would be easy to multiply them. The answer
then proves the suppression to be sinful, and confirms
the fact. But now let us look at those catechisms
where the whole of the second commandment is found.
I have bought without selection, or given an order to
booksellers to send me, Roman Catholic catechisms, any
they could find, but I have been able to procure only
two, both published in England, in which the words of
the prohibition occur. The first of these is “Cateche
tical Instructions on the doctrine and worship of the
Catholic Church,” by John Lingard, D.D. London,
1 847.
On page 55 is found—“ Chapter II. The command
ments of the Old Covenant.
i. What do you generally
call these commandments ?—The ten commandments.
2. How do they begin ?-With these words: ‘I the
Lord am thy God, who brought thee out of the house
of bondage.’ 3. What do you observe of these words?
—-That they are the introduction to the covenant, and
27
shew that it was made with the children of Israel
exclusively.
4. Now what is the first commandment?
—‘ Thou shalt not have strange gods before me: thou
shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the like
ness of anything that is in heaven above, or on the
earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters
under the earth: thou shalt not adore nor serve them.”’
On page 58, the remainder of the commandment is
given. Now here it is to be observed that Dr. Lingard,
though giving the words, prepares beforehand to weaken
their force, and to insinuate into the mind that they
are not of much importance to the Christian. He heads
the chapter, “The commandments of the Old Cove
nant.” But in the preceding chapter he asked, “But
are Christians bound by commandments given to the
Israelites ?—Yes, we are bound by them, inasmuch as
they are moral commandments, but not otherwise.” In
a note at the foot of the page he adds, “ It is plain that
we, descendants of the Gentiles, are not bound by a
covenant made exclusively with the Israelites delivered
from bondage. Whatever, therefore, there may be of
precept in that covenant, it concerns us not unless it is
a precept of the moral law. That, indeed, is of univer
sal and eternal obligation, binding at all times and in
all places. Other precepts referring to the peculiar
circumstances of the Jewish people, are to be considered
as ceremonial or national regulations only.” And there
28
fore on page 59, Q. 11, he says, “ Is not then the
making of images forbidden to Christians P—Certainly
not: the prohibition was called for by circumstances
peculiar to the children of Israe ,” and in the footnote,
“ The prohibition then in the Decalogue was a national
regulation, binding only that people to whom it was
addressed, and imposed on them on account of their
idolatry.” Without all this precaution and fencing he
did not dare to give the plain words of God, even ac
cording to his own translation. Dr. Lingard’s attempt
to undervalue the commandments of the Old Covenant,
and his assertion that the Decalogue was given exclu~
sively to Israel is unknown to the Trent Catechism. It
asserts broadly and without limit that the Decalogue is
to be religiously observed, that it is onlya republication of
the national law implanted in the minds of men. In re
ference to the words of introduction, his assertion that the
Jews were forbidden to make any kind of images cannot
be provedfrom Scripture nor from the Rabbinical writ
ings. The prohibition to make images is in connexion
with the other to bow down to and serve them. Where
they were not made for this purpose there is no prohibition
in Scripture. Maimonides in Hilchoth Accum .0. iii.
§lO,l l,says expressly that it is only forbidden to make
for ornament figures of men', statues or in relief, but
to paint them on a tablet, or to have them concave is
permitted, when not objects of worship. Images of
29
the sun, moon, stars, and angels who serve God on high,
are altogether forbidden.
Images and pictures of
beasts, fowls, trees, &c., are permitted for ornament.
Dr. Lingard’s assertion therefore that the making of
images or likenesses was totally forbidden to the Jews,
and was therefore only a ceremonial or national regu
lation, is untrue. The prohibition was altogether moral,
and remaineth. Indeed Dr. Lingard to get out of this
difficulty has contradicted the Trent Catechism, which
ascribes nothing national or ceremonial to the Deca-.
logue, but asserts broadly that it is the sum and epitome
of the whole Law, to be religiously observed, a repub
lication of the Law written originally in the minds of
men, and says specially of the introductory words, “ I
am the Lord thy God that brought thee 'out of Egypt,”
not as Dr. Lingard aflirms, that they are a proof that
the Decalogue was given exclusively to the Jews, but
the contrary, that looking into the spirit of the words
they belong much more to Christians?
Lingard’s doctrine is also contrary to that which is
quoted above from the Poor Man’s Catechism, and still
more to what follows, p. 127. “ The Decalogue, or ten
* Singular-is motivu/m Amofis.
VIII. ' Qui eduxi te de terra
Egypti, de domo servitutis: etsi Judaeis tantum videtur conve»
nire Egyptiorum dominatus liberatis : tamen, si interiorem
salutis universae rationem spectemus: multo magis ad Christianos
homines pertinet. I Trent Catechism, Part iii., on first command
ment, § viii.
3O
commandments, was delivered to man by the authority
of God himself, as a rule to govern his outward actions,
as well as his inward thoughts and affections according
to the will of his Creator, nor is there any law on earth
so excellent : 1st. From the dignity of the author,
being written by the finger of God. . . . . . 2nd. As
to the tenor and perfection of its precepts, it is of all
other laws the most excellent; it renders man pleasing
to God, and truly acceptable in his sight, since it
enforces the practice of virtuous, and prohibits the
commission of vicious actions.
3rd. And as to its end,
11‘ HAVING NOTHING TRaNSITORY, but, on the contrary,
eternal life for its object.”
Dr. Lingard, in his anxiety to dilute the authority
of the prohibition against image-making, has departed
from the doctrine of his Church. But passing this by,
I must allude to the third method in which the Roman
Church hides the second commandment from the people.
Dr. Lingard translates, “ Thou shalt not adore them
nor serve them.” And so, also, the only Romanist
catechism, I know, which attempts to give the whole
of the Divine commands without break or omission,
“ An Abridgment of Christian Doctrine, revised, im
proved, and recommended by authority, for the use of
the faithful in the four districts of England.
1847.“
London,
On page 47 we read,--“ Say the first com
* Observe the lateness of the date.
31
mandment. A. I am the Lord thy God, who brought
thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of
bondage.
“ Thou shalt not have strange Gods before me.
Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven thing, nor
the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or
in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in
the waters under the earth : thou shalt not adore nor
serve them. I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous,
visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children,
to the third and fourth generation of them that hate
me : and showing mercy unto thousands to them that
love me, and keep my commandments.” Both follow‘
the Vulgate,—“ Non adorabis ea, neque coles.” The
original is,—Z:TT5 nwnnwn 8‘7, and the true transla
tion,—“ Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them.”
Dr. Lingard, p. 57, endeavours to guard against this
objection, saying, “ It has been asserted that the
Catholic translators have in this place substituted
adore for bow down, that they might thus disguise the
respect which Catholics pay to images. The objection
is naught; for the Protestant translators themselves have
repeatedly rendered the original word in the Hebrew,
by the English verb, to worship, and not to bow down
(see Exod. iv. 31 ; xii. 27 ; xxxii. 8).”
It is true
that the Protestant translators have used two words,
_“ bow down,” and “ worship,” for the one Hebrew word.
32
But the question is, —What the full meaning of
the Hebrew is, and whether the use of “ adore” in the
second commandment hides that meaning. That the
true meaning of the Hebrew word is, “ to bow down,”
and that the English word “adore” conveys a false
meaning, I shall show by Roman Catholic authority.
The original edition of the Douay Bible, in its
barbarous language, follows the Vulgate, and applies
the word “adore” to men as well as to God.
Thus,
Gen. xxiii. 12, it has, “Abraham adored before the
people of the land.”
Again, xxxix. 7-9, “ I thought
we bound sheaves in the field ; and my sheafe arose, as
it were, and stood, and your sheaves standing did adore
my sheafe.
.
.
.
I saw in a dream, as it were, the
sunne, and the moone, and eleven starres adore me.”
And so, Ruth ii. 10, “ Who falling upon the face and
adoring upon the ground, said to him ;” and 2 Sam.
ix. 6, “Mephibosheth fell on his face and adored ;”
1 Kings i. 16, “Bathsabee bowed herself and adored
the king.” In all these passages, the Hebrew verb is
fllr'U'ltDT'T, and the Latin, “adoro ;” and if it were
admitted or true that this word adore can be applied
to men as well as God, there could be no objection to
it; for then, “Thou shalt not adore,” would mean,
Thou shalt not even pay them that sort of reverence
which is due to men. But in everyday English, to
talk of Abraham’s adoring the children of Heth, or
33
Ruth adoring Boaz, or Bathsheba adoring her son, is
shocking to the ears ; and, therefore, in the edition of
the Douay Bible, published in Dublin in 1816, with
the approbation of the Most Rev. the Roman Catholic
Archbishop, the editors took the liberty of substitut
ing the word “ bow,” or “worship,” as the proper
English translation of rnnnbn; and, therefore, in
that Dublin edition we read in the texts referred to,
“Abraham bowed before the people of the land.” “ I
thought we were binding sheaves in the field; and
my sheaf arose, as it were, and stood, and your sheaves,
standing about, bowed down before my sheaf.
I saw in a dream, as it were, the sun, and the moon,
and the eleven stars worshipping me.”
Of Ruth it is
said, “ She fell on her face, and worshipping upon the
ground, said to him.”
and worshipped.”
“ Mephibosheth fell on his face
“ Bathsabee bowed herself, and
worshipped the king.” In other passages relating to
God, as Exod. xx. 5, Dent. viii. 19, Ps. xxii. 28,
Ps. xcv. 6, the Dublin edition
retains the word
“. adore.” But there is one passage which particularly
shows the feeling of the Dublin editors, as to the pro
priety of using “bow down” instead of adore, when a
false object of worship is spoken of: it is 2 Kings v. 18,
in the words of Naaman. The old Douay Bible has,—
“But this onlie is it, for which thou shalt beseech the
Lord for thy servant : when my maister shal goe into
1)
34
the temple of Remmon to adore, and he leaning upon
my hand, if I shal adore in the temple of Remmon, he
adoring in the same place, that the Lord pardon me
thy servant for this thing.” The Dublin edition has
bow down,--“But there is only this, for which thou
shalt entreat the Lord for thy servant, when my
master goeth into the vtemple to worship; and he
leaneth upon my hand, if I bow down in the temple of
Remmon, when he boweth down in the same place, that
the Lord pardon me thy servant in this thing.” It is
only one and the same word here, in Hebrew, for wor
ship and bow down. But the editors felt that even
worship was too strong to express the conduct of
Naaman ; they, therefore, apply to him “ bow down ;”
thus acknowledging that neither worship nor adore,
but bow down, is the simple meaning of 11171112771.
Hence, then, it appears that the word mnnwn, even
on the authority of the Roman Catholics themselves, is
a word applying to man aswell ascGod, and ought
therefore to be rendered by a word that can apply to
both—that the word “adore ” does not so apply, but
is restricted to the homage paid to God, and is not,
therefore, a suitable word to represent the Hebrew.
Further, the Roman Catholic version uses the words
“ bowthat
down”
some places,
acknowledging
that
is a in
meaning
of the thereby
word ; and
as it is ap-i
plicable both to man and God, it is an exact equivalent
35
to the original word.
The word “ adOre,” therefore,
is not a correct translation in the second commandment,
and it hides the Divine meaning. In English, the
word “ adore” usually signifies the external homage
given to God alone. It'is sometimes in a lower, and
metaphorical sense, but rarely applied to men. When
connected with a command relating to God, it can only
have its original sense.
To say, “Thou shalt not
adore them,” means, “Thou shalt not give them the
homage due to God.”
But the original, “ Thou shalt
not bow down to them,” means a great deal more,
“ Thou shalt not by outward gesture of the body give
them even that homage which Abraham gave to the
heathen children of Heth,—0r which the newly-con
verted heathen, Naaman, felt it was sinful to exhibit
in the house of Rimmon.” The Church of Rome,
therefore, by her false division of the ten command
ments, by general suppression of the words, and by.
false translation, when she inserts them, hides the
second commandment from the people.
Now, then, comes the question,--Why does she
hide it? Let us try to answer by a parallel case.
Suppose the inhabitants of Borneo, converted to an
open profession of Christianity, having catechisms for
the instruction of the people, but in these catechisms
omitting the command, “ Thou shalt not steal,” alleg
ing that it was included in the words, “ Thou shalt
D 2
36,
not covet anything that is his.” Suppose, also, that you found that these Borneans were in the habit
of appropriating to themselves all that they could
lay their hands upon.
Suppose, then, that you
were asked, “Why do the Borneans hide the
eighth commandment from the people?” Would
you not reply, Because they live in the continual .
practice of that which it expressly prohibits ? Similar
must be the answer which is given respecting the
Church of Rome. She hides the second command
ment, because she lives in systematic disobedience to
its words. She bows down to and serves, and en
courages her people to bow down to and serve, images,
the likeness of things in heaven ,and earth, and, it may
be, of things under the earth ; and that with the ser
vice which is due to God alone. We know that they
deny this. But we must judge not by what they say,
but by what they do. However, not to misrepresent
them, or rather to judge them out of their own mouth,
let us hear what they say. In the “ Abridgment of
Christian Doctrine,” last referred to, we read on page
48,—“ What is forbidden by the first commandment ?
-A. The first commandment forbids us to worship
idols, or give to any creature the honour due to God.
. . . Q. Is it lawful to honour the images of Christ
and his saints ?--A. Yes: it is lawful to honour the
images of Christ and his saints with an inferior and
37
relative honour, because the honour given to them is
referred to the things they represent; so that by kiss—
ing the cross or the images of Christ, and by kneeling
before them, we honour and adore Christ himself. Q.
Do Catholics pray to images ?-A. N0, by no means :
we pray before them, indeed, to keep us from distrac
tion, but not to them; for we know they can neither
see, nor hear, nor help us.” We might answer, as has
been often done before,--lst, that this is the excuse
formerly made by the heathen; and, 2d, that some of
their most celebrated doctors say that the same homage
is to be given to the image as to the Being whom the
image represents. But we will take them on their own
showing.
The words just quoted admit, 1st, that they
make images, likenesses of things in heaven, in human
form, therefore likenesses of things on earth; 2d, that
“ they kneel before images, and kiss them.” Now, is not
to kneel to bow down, and is not this expressly forbid
den? “ Thou shalt not bow down thyself before them.”
When God describes those who were not idolaters,
does he not do it by saying that they did not do what
the Roman Catholics say they do. “ Yet I have left
me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have
not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not
kissed him.” But the prohibition says,—“ Thou shalt
not serve them ;” i.e., as the above catechism says, not
38
give to the image “the honour due to God.”
What,
then, is this honour? How was God served?
1. He had a temple, or holy place.
2. In that holy place golden lamps were kept burn
ing.
3. To that holy place the Israelites made a pilgrim
age, according to Divine command, and thither they
brought presents. (Ps. lxviii. 29; lxxii. 10.)
4. They made vows. “Vow, and pay unto the
Lord your God: let all that be round about Him bring
presents unto Him that ought to be feared.”
5. They worshipped and bowed down to Him. They
put their trust in Him, and gave Him thanks.
6. They sacrificed in the place dedicated to .His
honour.
Now all this the Romanists do to images. That
they kneel and pray before them is admitted above.
In proof, I refer not to the dark ages, but to books
publishing in our own times. No later than 1848, a
book has been published in London, entitled, “ Visits
to the Shrines of our Lady,” giving an account of the
miraculous images of Mary, and the temples and
chapels built for their reception and honour. In the
Roman Catholic periodical, “ The Rambler," in Sep
tember of the present year, a series of articles was
commenced on the “ Celebrated Sanctuaries of the
39
Madonna.”
In the first, page 206, the Writer says,—
“We will begin, then, as in duty bound, with the
Eternal City, where ancient writers enumerate no
fewer than one hundred churches dedicated, under
various titles, to the honour of the Queen of Heaven.”
2. Before those images they place lamps and candles.
This is known to every one who has ‘ever visited a
Roman Catholic country. But “ The Rambler” shall
bear witness. Speaking of an image at Florence, he
says,-—“ Upwards of forty silver lamps, some of them
of considerable size and richly gilt, hung before the
altar. . . . Two of the magnificent silver candlesticks
which adorn the altar Were presented by a Florentine
noble in 1810; one of the largest and most splendid of
the lamps was given by the King of Naples, and
another by a Florentine Marquis, both within the
present century,” 8:0.
(Page 397.)
3. To these images they make pilgrimages, and
thither they bring presents. In proof, read what im
mediately follows in “ The Rambler :”—“ Sunday after
Sunday, at certain seasons of the year, long processions
of religious confraternities of men and women may be
seen wending their way through the narrow streets
and over the picturesque bridges of that fair city, all
guiding their steps towards the same sanctuary of the
Santissima Annunziata.
Some are come, perhaps,
from a neighbouring village, others only from a distant
4O
quarter of the city; and as they move along, with
lighted candles in their hands, and bearing aloft the
crucifix and the banner of their association, you may
hear them chant numerous psalms or hymns to the
praise and glory of God, and of her ‘ whom the King
hath a mind to honour.’ In the rear of each procession
follows a heavily laden donkey, bringing the wax, or
the oil, or whatever else they may have been able to
afford as an offering to their beloved Madonna." And
be it remembered, that these offerings proceed not
merely from the laity. The Popes themselves join
“in bringing presents,” not to Him that ought to be
feared, but to a dumb image. In “ The Rambler,” for
September, we read as follows, page 204, 205 :—~“ Sir,
—I do not know whether, in any record of the Pope’s
doings at Naples that has reached England, the solemn
coronation of an image of the Madonna was thought
worthy of being chronicled.
The coronation took
place on Quinquagesima Sunday, in the Cathedral,
(whither the image 'had been removed from its own
church a few days previously,) in the presence of the
King and Queen and all the Royal Family, of many
cardinals
and ambassadors, and an immense
con
course of people.
The ceremony was short and
simple. Having first said mass, and afterwards
assisted at another said by one of his private chaplains,
the Pope proceeded to bless the crown, and to place it
41
. upon the head of the image, repeating the appointed
form of words, wherein he prays that as by our hands
the Madonna [observe, the image is called Madonna] is
crowned on earth, so, through her help, we may here
after be crowned with glory and honour in the heavens by
Jesus Christ. . . . A burst of music from the military
band, stationed within the Cathedral, and a discharge
of artillery from- the different castles of the city,
announced the act of the coronation to those who were
not in a position to see it for themselves. . . . The
Neapolitans crowded to witness it, because it provided
them with a lasting memorial of the residence of
Pius IX. amongst them, such as Pius VII. had left
more than thirty years before to the inhabitants of
Savona, by crowning, shortly before his departure, the
image in their famous sanctuary of our Lady of Mercy.
Meanwhile the stranger who chanced to be present
found ample food for meditation, not only in the
historical parallel thus presented to him, but still more
in the attestation which was being thus solemnly given
to the celebrity of one particular image over another.
For the crown was not, in the present instance, as in
the case of Pius VII, merely a personal offering from
the Pope himself, and an act of his own private devo
tion; it was an offering from the Chapter of St. Peter
in Rome; or, rather, it was awarded by that body in
their capacity as trustees and executors of the will of a
42
certain Roman noble, of the family of Sforza, who,
about two centuries ago, left a considerable sum of
money to be expended every year in offering a golden
crown to some celebrated statue or picture of the
Madonna.”
4. As the Jews made vows to the Lord, the Roman
ists make vows to images. Take the following as an
example, as it occurs in “Visits to the Shrines,” page
1182—
'
“In 1603 a little child was given over by her
medical attendants as irrecoverable.
Her parents
having no hope for the recovery of their little one,
as a last resource, recommended the sufferer" (not
to Him who killeth and maketh alive) “to our Lady of
Mount Serrat, vowing that they would take her to her
sanctuary. On the following night the father of our
little patient observed a lady enter his room, and going
up to the bed (to all human appearance) of the dying
child, bid her arise, and conducting her to him,
said Be no longer uneasy, 8:0. I am Mary, the
Virgin of Monte Serrado, her (sic) to whose care
you have this day recommended your daughter.”
5. They bow down before, kiss, pray to, and put
their trust in images. In “Visits to the Shrines,"
p. 106, &c., the following story proves that with
respect to homage to images, even the brute creatures
43
are as wise as their masters. It is an account of the
image called “our Lady of Grace at Bruguiére:”—
“ The statue was discovered in the following
manner :-—A labourer, while ploughing in a field, was
much startled at seeing his cattle suddenly prostrate
themselves without any visible reason for so extra
ordinary an action. He did all in his power to urge
them to go on by pricking them with his goading iron,
but in vain; they were as insensible to his goad as to
his voice. In this dilemma he observed one of his
neighbours digging in a field in the vicinity; he
accordingly besought him to come and assist him in
raising up the animals. But after wasting their
time to no purpose, there remained but to admire
the posture of these creatures. Their astonishment
induced them to dig on the spot where the team
had prostrated themselves. . . . The peasants
commenced digging in a circle round the prostrated
oxen. . . . . A beautiful statue of the blessed
Virgin in relief, well executed with bright colours,
representing the blessed Mary holding in her arms
the infant Jesus . . . . was discovered . . . . . The
peasant lost no time in informing the Curé of the
parish,
who,
having formed a procession
to the
spot, there was seen an image, incomparany beautiful,
of the Virgin Mother bearing her divine Son on her
44
left arm.
Those present fell on their knees and
venerated the holy mother in her image.”
Further, let “ The Rambler” for October, 1850,
p. 300, give the proof. Speaking of the piety of the
Neapolitans, he says :—
“They come and pour forth their whole souls before
some image or picture of the Madonna, entering into
all their hopes and fears, doubts and anxieties,
every detail of their domestic circumstances, quite
as naturally as a child confides its little troubles
or desires to one, of whose sympathy and assistance it
has reason to be assured. At one time you may see
a poor woman who is going on a journey, or removing
from her usual place of residence, come to take leave of
her favourite Madonna * and talk to her, and lament
over the separation, and in every respect converse with
her as though she were her nearest and dearest friend,
from whom she was about to part; or you may see
another rush hastily into a church, evidently under
the pressure of some sudden trial, throw herself at the
feet of the Madonna,'|' and cover them with kisses,
&c., &c. As she withdraws with slow and unwilling
steps, ever and anon she turns her head to waft
"‘ Observe the image is called Madonna. There is only one
Virgin Mary, but many pictures, therefore one may be a
favourite to talk to and invoke.
1' That is, at the feet of an image.
45
another kiss to the Madonna; and you may hear such
parting exclamations as these bursting from her lips:
‘Addio, Mamma mia; I have told you everything; I
am going away now, and I reckon upon your help;
you understand me; I know you’ll not disappoint me;
Addio, Mamma mia, addio.’ "
In the account of the image of Monte Serrado,
in the “ Visits to the Shrines,” p. 124, we read,—
“A strong silver-plated door being thrown open,
we were bid to lean forward and kiss the hand of
Nuestra Senora.* It is half worn away by the eager
kisses of its votaries.”
That trust is put in these images is manifest, not
only from the above account of vows and the devotions
of the Neapolitans, but from their carrying them in
procession in order to remove pestilence.
One
instance shall suffice, taken from “The Rambler,”
Sept, 1850, p. 210:—
“What was done in the days of the first Gregory
was repeated in the days of the last (Gregory XVI.);
and twice within the space of four or five years the "
inhabitants of the Eternal City saw the very same
picture carried along their streets which their fore—
fathers had seen and reverenced more than twelve
centuries before, and for the very same purpose—to
implore the Mother of God to intercede with her
i" The image again called “Our Lady.”
46
divine Son, and remove from among them the
plague of sickness.
On the last occasion—the
cessation of the cholera inl837—the Pope made an
offering of two golden crowns, richly ornamented with
precious stones (one for the Mother, the other for the
Son), to replace the crowns of silver which had been
offered by Pontifl's in former times.”
Lastly, before images they offer sacrifice in order to
propitiate, not God, but the Virgin. In the above
mentioned “ Visits to the Shrines,” p. 120, we read,—
“ The name (Serrado) of this pilgrimage is derived
from something sawn asunder, as the Rocks are a
collection of a hundred pyramids placed on an
enormous basis completely isolated, and raised about
3,000 feet above the sea._ This pilgrimage was visited
by St. Peter, of Nolasco, founder of the Order of
our Lady for the Redemption of Captives. We are
further told by La Martiniére, that above the waters
is a steep declivity where are three crosses, where
the holy sacrifice is daily offered up for the purpose
of propitiating the favour of the blessed Virgin, in
order that the rock should not fall on them and
destroy , the monastery.”
Who can read such blasphemy without indignation?
The sacrifice of the Sonqof God was made to the
Father for the sins of men. Here the same sacrifice,
as Romanists tell us, is offered to propitiate the favour
47
of a creature. It is needless to prove more. The
Church of Rome here daily offers before three crosses,
to a creature, the honour due to God alone. Now
then let us sum up. The Romanists say, that to give
to creatures or images the honour due to God is
idolatry; and yet, accordingv to their own showing,
they give to them the honour which God, in the
Bible, claims for himself alone. They build sanc
tuaries for images, they light lamps and candles
before images, they make pilgrimages to images,
they bring presents to images, they make vows,
pray,
bow down to images, kiss them, put
their
trust in them; offer up, as they allege, the sacrifice
to the Lady of Monte Serrado,—that is, “ They bow
down and serve them,” thus continually and systema
tically transgressing the second commandment. This,
then, is the reason why they hide it from the people.
They are conscious that it condemns them. The
mere reading of it is sufficient to overthrow all the
sophistries of Rome, to convict her of rebellion against
God—0f foul idolatry. And, be it remembered, that
I have not made citations from books published two or
three hundred years ago, or by Protestants; but from
two books, published in 1848 and 1850, here in
London by RomanCatholic writers for the use of
their brethren. Here, then, is, a fair exhibition of
Rome’s dealings with the divine commands.
She
48
hides, suppresses, explains away, the second com
mandment, sanctions the grossest violations of it
by the laity, the priests, and the Pope himself. Is
this a safe way of salvation? Christ says (Matt. v. 19),
“Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least
commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be
called least in the kingdom of heaven.” But the
second commandment is not one of the least, but one
of the greatest, spoken with the voice of God himself.
However charity may hope that the poor, the un
educated, and the prejudiced, may be forgiven for
Christ’s sake, no one who has any reverence for
God’s commandments, or'care for his own soul, can
either enter the Communion of the Church of Rome
or remain there after reading the second command
ment. No one who “ bows down to images, likenesses
of things in heaven and earth, and serves them,”
can have a good hope through grace.
.21. 1A 511
Wertheim and Macintosh, 24, Paternoster-row.
BY THE SAME.
The TWO ROCKS; Christ or Peter. Second Edition.
Price 2d.
INTRODUCTION to HEBREW GRAMMAR; for
the Use of Beginners. 8vo., price 48.
The OLD PATHS. 8vo., Second Edition, 10s.
A SERMON preached in St. Paul’s Cathedral, on
Monday, October 19, 1846, on occasion of the
VISITATION of the Right Honourable and Right
Reverend the Lord BISHOP of LONDON. Pubs
lished at the request of his Lordship. Is.
The CHRISTIAN SANCTUARY CONTRASTED
with the LEVITICAL TEMPLE. A Sermon,
preached before the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor
and Sheriffs of London and Middlesex, on the occa
sion of the Re-opening of the Church of St. James,
Duke’s-place. 1.9.
An APOLOGY for the STUDY of HEBREW and
RABBINICAL LITERATURE. 1s.
PLAIN SERMON S, on Subjects Practical and Pro
phetic. 12m0., cloth lettered, price 68. 6d.
The CONVERSION and RESTORATION of the
JEWS; two Sermons, preached before the Univer
sity of Dublin.
8vo., Second Edition, 2s.
The PERSONALITY and WORK of the HOLY
Spirit, as revealed in the Old Testament; a Tract
for the House of Israel. 601.
NEW TESTAMENT EVIDENCES, to prove that
the Jews are to be Restored to the LAND of
ISRAEL.
Second Edition, 4d.
.
'
WERTHEIM AND MACINTOSH, 24, PATERNOSTER-ROW.
_\ {pr—w- v_