any errors or misstatements, which, if they exist, are unintentional.

To be understood by the lowest capacity has been a chief object, and hence, plainness in language and composition has been particularly studied. An endeavor has also been made, to avoid all harsh and irritating language, being fully impressed that it is not by such, truth ought to be maintained. Should any expression met with in the following pages appear to militate against this declaration, I have only again to assert, such is unintentional on my part, and that nothing is farther from my wishes than to give offence.

May 1, 1845.

JOHN R. COTTER.

THE

MASS AND RUBRICS

OF

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

MY DEAR ROMAN CATHOLIC BRETHREN

Ir has frequently excited the astonishment of many, why, in these days of scriptural light, you should remain apparently so attached to the religion of the Church of Rome; that you, many of whom are intelligent and well-informed persons, should, while you profess to be servants of the Lord Jesus Christ, hold sentiments and doctrines opposed to those which are clearly and plainly set forth in God's inspired word, by our Lord himself and his holy Apostles, whom you profess to reverence. You are taught to value yourselves upon belonging to the most ancient Church, which you are also taught is the mistress of all other churches. It is carefully impressed upon you, that every article of faith to which you are required to give assent, comes down to you from the remotest antiquity; that all other bodies of professing Christians are only upstarts and holders of novelties; and that you are fully justified, as belonging to a church which cannot err, in looking down upon all others with contempt. You are taught to inquire triumphantly of us Protestants-"Where was your religion before Luther?" implying that the doctrines we hold and the principles we profess, were only known in the Christian world since the time of Luther, or little more than three hundred years, and consequently must be mere modern inventions.

You are in great ignorance upon this subject. You cannot prove any doctrine held by the Reformed Churches to be a novelty, or less ancient than the times of the Apostles. In the great fundamental truths of the Christian faith, you profess to agree with us; and I trust, with the Divine aid, to show you, that those doctrines upon which your church and ours differ, and which we reject as being inconsistent with, nay, contradictory to, those fundamentals which we in common admit, are those which have been added from time to time by your church, at comparatively modern periods. The mode I shall adopt to establish this position is as follows. I shall translate your own service, which you call the 66 'Mass,' ," into English, and prove to you from the prayers of the Mass itself-First, that it is contradictory to God's own word; Secondly, that it is at variance with the practices of the ancient Christian Church; and, Thirdly, that one part contradicts another, and also contradicts several of your own favorite doctrines. In order to prevent the charge of misrepresentation, I shall bring forward your own authorities. Your own translation of the Testament, however obscure and corrupt we believe it to be in many places, shall be used.

In the Mass it is intended to celebrate the Lord's Supper, or the Eucharist, as it is termed, which word signifies "thanksgiving." Our blessed Lord, we learn, by reference to the Gospels, instituted his last supper the night before his crucifixion. We are told by the inspired Evangelists of the mode in which the disciples partook of it-how the Lord Jesus commanded them to do the same for a commemoration of Him. Luke xxii. 19. And we are also informed, Matt. xxviii. 18, how, previous to his ascension, he commanded his disciples to go and teach all nations to observe all those things which he had commanded them ;" and he said, "Lo, I am with you always to the consummation of the world.' "All power," said he, "is given to me in heaven and in earth;" thus impressing upon his disciples, that he would exercise his authority upon his church; that he would watch over the pastors and teachers, that they

may only inculcate those doctrines which he taught, and, as Peter says, 1 Epistle, chap. v. verses 2, 4: "When the Prince of pastors shall appear, such as faithfully feed the flock of God shall receive a neverfading crown of glory."

Let us now compare the ceremonies of the Mass and the Supper of our Lord. Such are the differences, so striking are the dissimilarities, that it is impossible to say with truth that the one is a representation of the other. If I can prove this assertion, how can it be said that you comply with the commands of our Lord in its celebration? And here I may well complain of the additional labor imposed upon me of rendering your prayers and formularies into English, in order to be understood by you; and is it not a strange employment for me to endeavor to make you understand the meaning of your own Liturgies? You cannot plead antiquity for the use of the Latin in your public service. If you wish for the ancient original language, you should adopt the Syriac or Hebrew, as one of these was the language spoken by our blessed Lord to his Apostles at the celebration of the last supper. He was addressing persons who understood the language in which he spoke; but you, who are unacquainted with Latin, know nothing of what the priest is saying. And besides, you have the uniform practice of antiquity against you. There were several ancient Liturgies in various languages from the beginning-St. Cyril's, St. Clement's, St. James's, St. Mark's, St. John Chrysostom's, the Ethiopic, and the Roman. Why was this, but to suit the languages of the several persons who were present at divine worship? I refer you, upon this subject, to a work of the Roman Church called "A Collection of the principal Liturgies which are used by Greeks and other Schismatics," as your author terms them. All those persons who are here termed schismatics by your church, positively assert that they have had these various Liturgies in their own languages from the times of the Apostles. I mention this only for the purpose of showing you that antiquity gives no sanction to one exclu

sive Liturgy or language. Origen says, Con. Celsum, lib. viii. p. 402: "The Grecians use the Greek language in their prayers, and the Romans the Roman, and so every one his own.' The popes or bishops of Rome gradually compelled the various European nations who used their own language in the celebration of their public service, to adopt the Roman or Latin. This is fully shown in many parts of church history.

We proceed now to prove from Scripture, that this practice of using a language in the service of the church, not understood by the people, is absolutely forbidden. I refer you to the 14th chapter of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, where St. Paul says, verse 8; "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? 9; So likewise you, except you utter by the tongue plain speech, how shall it be known what is spoken? for you shall be speaking into the air." Read on the 10-16." Else if thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that holdeth the place of the unlearned, say Amen to thy blessing, because he knoweth not what thou sayest." Again St. Paul says, verse 19; "In the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue," a strange tongue. Mark the expression in the church—that is, at public worship. Now, I propose a simple question to you here-Does your church follow the precept of the Apostle Paul?-The Saviour saith, "He that heareth you, heareth me"-Luke x. 16; and yet, you plainly and openly disregard the command of one of his chosen apostles, who was sent forth to teach and enforce those things which the Lord Jesus himself had spoken. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that we have preached, let him be anathema," or accursed.-So says St. Paul-Gal. i. 8. In a note I read in the Douay Testament upon this passage, respecting the use of unknown languages in your public church services, the practice is attempted to be justified by saying, that the Latin, so far from being an unknown tongue, is perhaps the best known tongue in the