purifications of their hands and vessels. Thirdly, Such commandments as were given out by private men who are not authorized to make laws for others. But the precepts of the Church come under none of these heads. For, first, these precepts are not contrary to the commandments of God, but grounded in the doctrine he has taught us in holy Scripture; for instance of this, the canons of the Church which forbid marriage to the clergy, are grounded upon the doctrine both of the Old and New Testament (1 Cor. vii.; Matt. xix. 12; 1 Sam. xxi. 4, 5), which counsel continency and a single life, as the more holy and perfect state, especially for those who entirely devote themselves to the service of God and the care of souls; which require our whole attendance and cannot be so well discharged by those who are distracted with the. cares of a family, and are divided between God and the world. Nor, secondly, are our Church precepts vain and frivolous, but such as clearly conduce to our spiritual good. For instance, it clearly conduces to our spiritual good to fast, since we are assured that none can be victorious through the whole course of their lives, over that law of their members which continually fights against the law of their minds, unless they keep under their bodies, and bring them into subjection (Rom. vii. 23; 1 Cor. ix. 27); which cannot be effected without some kind of bodily mortifications, of which fasting was ever esteemed to be one of the most discreet. Nor, thirdly, are these precepts issued out by such as are not authorized to make laws, but by those who have the rule over us (Heb. xiii. 17); by those prelates whom the Holy Ghost has placed in the Church to rule the Church of God (Acts xx. 28); by those

whom Christ has commanded us to hear as himself. (Luke x. 16.) How ridiculous then do they make themselves who think that among the frivolous traditions and arbitrary commandments of the Pharisees, which our Saviour condemned, he intended to include the commandments of the apostles, and the precepts of his own Church. POINT XXXII.

PROTESTANTS hold, That it is an unlawful practice to perform the public service and liturgy of the Church in any tongue but the vulgar, that the people present may all hear and understand it.

Contrary both to their Bible and Testament:

1, "And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he (the High Priest) goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and all the congregation of Israel." Levit. xvi. 17.

2. "And it came to pass, that while he (Zachariah) executed the priest's office before God, in the order of his course, according to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord. And the whole multitude of the people were praying without at the time of incense.' Luke i. 8, 9, 10.

Here we find that the priest, in the time of the old law, offered sacrifice within the tabernacle and the temple, while the people were praying without; and so far were they from understanding all that was said, that they were forbid to be present where the priest was, and neither saw nor heard him. It is not necessary, therefore, that the public service of the Church be so said that all people hear and

:

understand it; but, as it was sufficient for the people of God, under the old law, to know and understand that the sacrifice which was offered was a holocaust, or sin-offering, or peace-offering, and that in those sacrifices the worship and adoration of God consisted, though they neither saw nor heard the priest when he was making the offering in like manner, it is sufficient now for the people, who assist at the eucharistical sacrifice, to know that this sacrifice was by our Saviour instituted to fulfil and answer the ends of all those ancient sacrifices; that it is both a sacrifice of thanksgiving and a propitiatory sacrifice; and that the adoration of God consists in this sacrifice, though the assistants do not chance to understand the language in which it is offered. The reason is, because the principal intent of a liturgy is not the same as that of a sermon or catechism, the instruction of the people; but that a daily tribute of prayer, thanksgiving, and adoration may be paid to God by the priests of the Church, and that all Christians by their presence assenting and saying Amen to these public prayers of the Church, may be partakers of the graces and benefits which are obtained by them.

We must distinguish between private prayer and public prayer: private prayer is the people's prayer for themselves; public prayer is the priest's prayer for the people. As to private prayer, we advise every one to pray in a language which he understands; but for the public service of the Church it is not at all essential that those who are present must hear it spoke in the vulgar tongue, because it is not the people's office, but the priest's for the people; and may not the prayers

of the priest for the people as soon penetrate the heavens, and reach to the throne of God, when they are worded in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, as if they were worded in the vulgar tongue of every country?

To this Protestants reply: That the Apostle forbids a liturgy in an unknown tongue, and brings many reasons against it, "For, if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise you, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood how shall it be known what is spoken? For ye shall speak into the air." 1 Cor. xiv. 8, 9. "Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an unknown tongue my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.' Ver. 13, 14.

"Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say, Amen, at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest. For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified." Ver. 16, 17.

In these words of the Apostle, Protestants think they have an unanswerable argument against a liturgy in an unknown tongue, which is a signal instance of their unskilfulness in interpreting Scripture, since it is evident that there is not one word about the public liturgy of the Church in all that chapter. For the public service of the Church being undoubtedly performed at Corinth in the Greek tongue, which was the vulgar language of that country, needed no such regulation as St. Paul here sets down for such as spoke and prayed in unknown tongues.

To understand the Apostle, let Protestants know that the gift of tongues, which was given to the apostles at the coming of the Holy Ghost, continued amongst the primitive Christians for a long time: this gift they exercised in their public assemblies, either before or after the liturgy was over, speaking some extemporary prayer, or prophecy, or hymn, or doctrine, in a language which sometimes neither he that spoke nor any one present understood in which St. Paul observing there was more of ostentation than of edification, he forbids them to utter those extemporary prayers or instructions in unknown languages, unless they had the gift of interpreting them themselves, or some one present could interpret for them.

Very well, says the Protestant, do not then St. Paul's arguments equally strike at our liturgy in an unknown tongue?

I answer: Never were Protestants more mistaken than in this matter, since it is most plain to every one that does but look into this chapter of St. Paul, that in this very chapter where Protestants think all praying in unknown tongues is forbid, the Apostle licenses the Corinthians to speak and pray too in any language, provided there were some one among them that had the gift of interpreting what was spoke to the people that were present. Wherefore, says he, let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. (1 Cor. xiv. 13.) .. If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course: and let one interpret. Ver. 27. Does not the Apostle here expressly allow them to speak and pray in unknown tongues, provided there be an interpreter? Now,