The New York herald., 1844-11-12

idoistry Ever sincs the days Of the reisrmson how
Church, but stin believe that doctrine The separ-
ated Greek Church-the Russian Church, and all these
% M man s srs and
professors Of the pure Christian religion are reduced the
convention Philadelphia And let them beware TOT the
adoring a man whom you call God" Thus we see
to what Christianity 10 reduced BY the assumption
man But tnsy say nst Ss
the most dsting uished divnes Of the Church OF Eng
land Then take Bishop Andrews in reply 70 Cardinsi
present and truly adorable in the Eucharist" Therefore
the King dolator, and Bishop Andrews explains
the article that a,,empssn 01
Forbes in his "Treatise the Eucharist" Book H. ch
IL page says We adore with 81 Ambrose the assn o.
olics dolaors Bishop Forbes OF the fathers OIL
the Episcopal church. dolstor Also take the
that Of ThondyRs in his Epilosue book vii, CHI So
$50 where he says suppose the body and blood OF Christ
may adored wherever they and must be adorsd hy
which he communicates requires And, ID not the
sacrament of the Eucharist proper occasion to expres
or God ~ II Is clear that Thorndyke is an idolator
recommends doatry according to the decision given by
his Bshops-more modern, however than those o. ms
divines' Of the Church 81 England Now, Purge
practice @ leading to idolary, according Of course
to the explanatcn Of the most disting ushed divines
Here again learned Bishop Forbes rises up before
me- and thus in his Discourse Purgatory" procaim
- Let not the ancient practice Of prayer and making
ovations for the Dead throughout the universe
church Of Christ almost from the very time Of the apos
Ties any rejected by Protestapts unlawful
vain. Let them renounco the judgment OF the primitive
church, and admit practice sanctioned by the unnter
rupted profession Of many sges, and in public al
well az In private, attend to this duty, not a. es
pscally recommended by the divine law, but as pro
Atnble and always approved by the church that q
last peace earnestly desired by all sanity and piou
again. placing himself and all his school in the Epscopa
Church. in direct opposition to the assertion that WI
are dolatos the Bishop explains the article in question
Again, they exclaim against for an invocation Of thu
nexion with the " explanation Of the NEST distin
guished divinss" Well, then, let us do So Dr. Monta
que, Bishop of Chichester and Norwich, in his Anti
dote page 20 says ~ do not deny that the saints arr
in general, they interpose with God BY thsl
supplicaons and mediate by their prayers Thus then
DR.. Montague explains the article in question: in drec
opposition to the Philadelphia convention. Again in hi
treatise the Of Saints page loa he says
It is impiety t. say as they Of the Roman Catholic
Church do Holy Mary pray for us Holy Peter
pray for And yet his bishops assembled in council
declare that is wrongthat is the grossest impety
that is idolatry do not into or at all enter upor
any examination of the doctrines just alluded to- Tht
absurdity Of accusing US Of dolary because worship
Christ in the Eucharist s however, very manifest W.
admit that Christ ought to be adored it 10 impossible tina
commi. idelatry in worshpping him wheneve
he may manifest himself Therefore, it was that wher
think Of the idoatry ofthe mass7" Call not idolatry
said the Doctor " for the Catholics believe that Jesu
Christ present and they adore him. These the re
marks which propose to offer in this Introductory lee
the vndcation of the doctrines of the masspurgato
ry-transubstantiation-p the invocation of Saints