The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-09-16 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

What connection religious establishments and the voluntary
principle have with education, I cannot perceive, or for what
reason Mr. B. introduces them; however, I shall follow him
into this new field. As to religious establishments, if all were
willing to appeal to the word of God, the question would at
once and for ever be set at rest; for in that holy word we have
the law on the subject clearly laid down by the Almighty him-
self. When God chose a peculiar people, and settled them as a
distinct nation in a common wealth or kingdom, he ordered them
to set apart a portion of the property of the state for the perma-
nent support of those who should afterwards be called upon to
minister in holy things; accordingly, when such were appointed
in their .iffice, there was a compulsory tax laid on the people for
their maintenance. E4ery worshipper was obliged to give a
certain part of his substance to the priest ; it was the priests'
right. God would not let his servants be used by the people
as their servants. The people were not permitted to treat them
as they pleaSed—he made them independent of them, that they
might, without any fear of losing their support, fearlessly and
boldly reprove for every crime. Thus God by his law sets his
servants over the people—he would not have them eleemosyna-
ries. But those who arc opposed to establishments say, that the
law given to the Jews is not binding upon christians. Those
who say so must settle the matter with St. Paul; for
.he says,
" for our sakes it was written," (speaking of the support which
christian ministers were entitled to;) and he proves their right
from the h,w given to the-Jews. It does seem to me an unac-
countable thing how any person can read the 9th chapter of the,
First Epistle to the Corinthians, and not be convinced that the
law given by God to the Jews is not binding upon christians.
Our author asserts that, "legal establishments of religion are
essentially tyrannical and persecuting; these features are not
accidental or extrinsic appendages, but enter into their very
essence." A more unfounded assertion could not be made.
This will be evident from the following fair statement of the
principle on which our present establishments are founded.
Government. feeling it to be a duty to provide for the propaga-
tion of religion, find that there are Churches which teach doc-
trines in accordance to scriptures; and they say to such,
"educate men whiff will instruct the people in these truths, and
we shall make provision for them out of the state property;
and such of the people as do not approve of their doctrines are
at full liberty to set up teachers for themselves, and support
them as they choose." Is there any thing in this principle of
a tyrannical or persecuting nature ?"
I beg to ask, in reference to the voluntary system, what has
it done as respects Ireland ? I can speak with confidence that
in more than nine-tenths of that country the voluntaries, with
all their exertions, have been able, for the last hundred years,
to accomplish comparatively nothing. What has prevented
them from succeeding? Did the Established Church stand in
their way ? By no means : the ministers of the Church were
the protectors of all evangelical teachers in their neighbour-
hood. But at the present moment, in the districts to which 1
allude, there are at least three hundred ministers in the estab-
lishment preaching clearly the gospel, and active and zealous in
every good work. And vet, strange to say, that though this is
the case, the voluntaries have joined with the enemies of all
true religion, in urging government to withdraw from those
ministers the support they now receive. Does such conduct
manifest the least degree of Christian principle. Your's, &c.
A LIBERAL DISSENTE

TO THE EDITOR OF THE, LIVERPOOL STAIVDIRD.
Slit —ln the Dublin Weekly Register of Saturday, the 10th
instant, I saw an extract from the Liverpool Chronicle headed
" The Rev. Thomas Maguire in Liverpool," in which, after it
is stated that that gentleman has delivered controversial lec-
tures there, the following passage is subjoined :--
" hi Monday evening he informed his auditors that he would
never shrink from a public avowal of the doctiines of his
church. He would at any time cheerfully and readily meet the
railers of his religion, theO'Sullivans and M`Ghees. He had
been informed that the Rev. Hugh M'Neill had rendered him-
self conspicuous in attacking the doctrines of the catholic
church and abusing its followers. If that gentleman was willing
to meet him (Mr. Maguire) in a public discussion on the doe-
trines of thir respective churches, he would gladly do so. He
understood, however, that the Rev. Hugh M'Neill was out of
town, and, in order to give his friends an opportunity of writing
to him, he (Mr. Maguire) would wait three weeks in Liverpool."
If this be a correct statement, I can only say that a more
gross piece of imposture was-never attempted to be practised on
the people of Liverpool. I shall aiinply state a few facts as to
Mr. Maguire's challenges. This gentleman challenged the
Bishop of Exeter three years ago fir a speech of his in the
House of Lords, when ha knew that it was impossible that pre-
late could answer him without abandoning his duty as a peer of
parliament. He was answered by a clergyman in Dublin; he
was challenged by an advertisement published in the Roman
Catholic papers, and he never even ventured to notice the
challenge.
Last Lent he came up to preach in Dublin; and thundered
forth his challenges to Mr. O'Sullivan and me. He dared us
to meet him, and he was to stay a month longer in Dublin for
the opportunity of this encounter. The same challenge which
had been given to him before was posted up on the doors and
walls of his chapel where he was holding his lectures. He af-
fected to answer it by evading and substituting another in its
place. This evasion was exposed. He professed then to call
on the challenger to attend him to settle preliminaries for a
meeting; but he would not commit himself by a specific answer
in the press to one iota of the challenge. This was again
exposed. Then he- affected to appoint Mr. Coyne and a
protes:ant gentleman to settle preliminaries for a meeting,
but still not one specific answer to one iota of the challenge.
Mr. Coyne was then applied to, to know if he was authorised to
answer the challenge. Mr. Coyne then evaded it altogether,
and attempted to substitute another challenge—this was again
exposed, and Mr. Maguire has never dared to answer one tittle
of this challenge since, but is now gone off it seems to Liverpool
to play off the same trick there, and make a blustering challenge
to Mr. M'Neile. Now, sir, I have desired my bookseller to send
over some copies of the whole correspondence, which has been
published under the title of "The Unanswered Challenge." I
know not where my rev. friend. Mr. 111'Neile is, but I hope that
neither he nor his -friends will take any notice of Mr. Maguire's
impudent bravado till he shall either distinctly and specifically
answer the challenge given to him, in ever tittle thereof, or in
common honesty confess the falsehood of his church's imposture
on the Roman Catholics, by the article ofthat creed which makes
them profess to receive the Scriptures on the interpretation of
the church, while the church has no interpretation to give them,
and can neither produce a priest who will pretend to give the
infallible interpretation of his church, or who will confess his
incompetence and produce one of his own.
It would be a paltry triumph over Mr. Maguire to repeat the
challenge to him, but, sir, you will find it in the 11th, 12th, and
13th pages of the pamphlet which I order to be sent herewith.
May I request of you to publish it in your paper, and though I
cannot hold any communication with my rev. brother Mr.
M'Neile, yet I fear not to say for him, knowing his zeal and
ability to maintain the cause of truth to be far beyond any which I
possess, that he will stand forward to meet any two priests, pro-
fessors, bishops, or any theologians of the church of Rome, who
will venture to put her truth, her creed, her pretended infallibi-
lity, her title to the name of christianity to the test, by venturing
to come forward to accept a challenge which no minister of the
church of Rome can accept witholit exposing the false preten-
sions of that anti-christian and tyrannical apostacy to the peo-
ple. Hoping, sir, sincerely that the Roman catholics of Liver-
pool will see the reasonableness of having their church's expo-
sition of the Scriptures given to them, if the articles of their
creed be true—most especially now since their children are de-
prived of the Scriptures in the National Schools.; and sincerely
hoping that they will admit the justice of having the fact ascer-
tained, that their church has nu interpretation of the article of
their creed, be false, and that therefore they ought to enjoy that
freedom and liberty of conscience for themselves and their chil-
dren, of reading God's word, which is their birthright as rational
and immortal beings.--1 remain; sir, ii faithful friend to my
Roman CathSlic fellow-subjects, find your obedient servant,
R. J. AI‘GHEE.

THE POPISH CONTROVERSY,

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Sra,—Not being at present a resident of Liverpool, I have
only heard some reports from thence that a Romish priest,
named Maguire, has been for some time past vapourin.g away
in that town, in asserting and endeavouring to maintain " the
infallibility of the doctrines of his immaculate church," and, as
I am informed; in vain challenging the ministers and other ad-
vocates of the reformed or protestant churches to a public dis-
cussion of the points at issue between their respective creeds.
If this be really the case, I know not to what cause the silence
of the protestant advocates is to be ascribed, unless it be a mo-
dest diffidence on the part of each in reference to his own per-
sonal qualifications for taking the lead in a controversy of such
magnitude and importance. I should hope, however, that even
this laudable feeling would not be permitted to operate so far as
to allow this impugner of their religion to bear away the wreath
of a presumptive victory from the culpable apathy of the pro-
fessors of a far purer creed, and an incomparably more scriptu-
ral as well as rational system of divinity.
In anticipation of such a discussion as it appears to be the
wish of Priest Maguire to provoke, permit me, through the me
dium of your paper, to call upon that gentleman publicly and
explicitly to state in print, the precise nature of the proposi•
ns by which he would distinguish and characterise the yell-
ut, as he would doubtless call it, of his church, together with
e authorities to which he would appeal for their support and
defence. This appears to be an indispensable preliminary to
any discussion upon the subject, that his opponents may not be
under the necessity of " fighting with shadows," or " beating
the air."
Le

,herefore, this champion of the Italian orthodoxy expli-
state, and accurately define his belief respecting such
eading doctrines of his church as are embraced under the fol-
lowing heads ;—prove them to be sanctioned by its dictation,
and show the grounds of their assumption thereby; and let him
say if he is willing to submit their decision to the criteria of
those scriptures whose divine authenticity is admitted by both
the Ronarsh and reformed churches, and of reason and common
sense; and if he is so, I trust this Goliath of popery may haply
meet with a David, whose humble sling and smooth stone mav,
by the blessing of his God, stretch the boasting giant, like his
great prototype in Judea, upon the ensanguined plain of this
long-contested controversy.
Among the most conspicuous of the particular points which
such a discussion might involve, I recognize the following,
viz.:-1. The dogma of transubstantiation. 2. The doctrine of
purgatory. 3. The invocation and intercession of supposed
saints. 4, 'The adoration of their images, and the actual wor-

Sin,—As you were so kind as to insert in your highly-res-
pectable paper some observations of mine on Mr. Blackburn's
pamphlet, I take the liberty of requesting the publication of the
following additional remarks.
Mr. Blackburn asserts that it is "the doctrine of high church-
men and tories, that power. gives them a right to trample on the
laws of nature, and to violate alike the dictates of justice and the
claims of benevolence." I am unwilling to believe that the
respectable author would write, to please any party, what he
himself knew to be incorrect; and yet I cannot think that he
does believe that these are the sentiments of the body against
whom he declaims.