to cast away with contempt what has been the result of the disquisition and investigation of powerful intellect at any former period. I would prefer seeing the correction of the errors or mistakes of our ancestors added to their knowledge and our acquire disregard of every thing they knew because their system of natural philosophy was imperfect, and their expressions were too formal, and are now antiquated. This foolish fashion of treating them with contempt, has deprived us of much valuable matter which they had collected and arranged in their own way, and I must avow, however my nameless self might suffer from the avowal, that I look upon their metaphysics to exceed that of most of our moderns as much as our knowledge of physics exceeds theirs. school divines. It explained the bodily presence of Christ in the sacrament. The substance of the bread and wine, they said, is converted into his body and blood; but the absolute accidents, the substantial forms of both remain as before. Hence the word transubstantiation.” The schoolmen are here either not under-ments, rather than to witness the childish stood by our learned philosopher, or he plays Sir Agrippa with them. There is often to be found amongst our modern philosophers an overweening contempt for their predecessors of the period to which White has alluded. I can have no pretensions to rush into the ranks of the mighty men of mind who adorn the present age. They have carried forward the discoveries in natural philosophy of the laborious and scientific pioneers who have removed many of the obstacles which impeded the progress of man in the regions of air, of earth and of ocean. As White very White is either ignorant of their language properly remarks, this may very justly be call- or studiously misrepresents its meaning; he ed the epoch of the investigation and improve- plays upon the word substantial, and is guilty ment of physical science. At a great dis- of a dishonest quibble in its use, or he knows tance I admire the men who so assiduously nothing of the language of schoolmen. The and successfully cultivate the field of know- only difference which exists between us and ledge; my destiny, perhaps my taste, and oc- them, is in the mode of expression. In our casionally, it may be, my duty drew me in language at present, substantial does not another direction. I have gone amongst the mean what it did in the schools; and any schoolmen and conversed with them in the person who would attach to the word in the dust in which they slept; having roused them schools the same meaning which it has in from their slumbers, and brushed away the present common usage would be grossly in cobweb drapery in which they were enfolded, error. In the schools it means real, not chiI was left almost in solitude to learn their merical. Appearances or secondary qualities opinions and to receive their testimony. It of bodies which affect our senses, are by mowas fashionable to laugh at them; they were dern philosophers said to be nothing in the made objects of ridicule: and to sneer at the body, but are effects produced by the body schoolman was to an idle or a brainless youth, upon us; thus heat, according to some, is a a more agreeable or easy occupation than to sensation of the soul produced by the disporead, to understand, or refute him: language sition of the parts of that body which is said has changed, and in the lapse of time the to be hot. I find several bodies of unlike variation of phrases and their translation substance but of the same temperature; iron, have given ideas altogether different from brass, lead, stone, cotton are all different subthose which the scholastic writer intended to stances, but all have the same degree of heat. convey. The dignified baron and the chival- The schoolman said that the accident of heat rous knight of the 13th century would have existed absolutely in each of them, that they abundant theme for descant on the lisping all had the same substantial form of heat: a fopling who might strut or slide through a modern will tell you that they all emit the modern drawing room. There is no period in same quantity of caloric: another will tell which man in his civilized state does not ex- you that they are all so configured as to prohibit in society a blending of what is respect-duce the same sensation of heat: in fact they able and contemptible. In the days of the schoolmen, the minds of the learned were not directed to the same objects which now occupy the attention of our men of information, and could the dunces of former ages see the labors of our best philosophers, they would lament, or affect to pity the ignorance of men whose productions they were unable to estimate, just as the thoughtless and ignorant of to-day sneer at schoolmen of whose valuable works they have scarcely an idea. I do not think it useful to literature, are but different modes of expressing the same idea; the expression being accommodated to the philosophical theory of the day, which theory is as yet fluctuating and unsettled. White then asserts what is not the fact when he informs his readers that the schoolmen supposed the "forms or qualities" to possess a real and “substantial being" if by substantial he would have us believe any thing different from or beyond what the moderns mean by the same real existence of those qualities. I shall give an illustration. In the book of R Josue it is stated that an angel appeared to The good gentleman, I am convinced' that leader, in the shape of a warrior: there knows just as little of the scholastic authors, was here an angelic substance clothed with and of the Aristotelic philosophy, as he does human appearance. The schoolman would of the materials of the moon. I shall leave say, the substance of a man was not there, him and Bishop Kemp to get, as well as they but the substantial form or absolute accidents can, out of the transubstantiation of their of a man were there, and clothed the angeli- own Churches. Of one thing I must avow cal substance which was really there; thus my own perfect ignorance, upon which perthe figure, color, &c., of a human being ex- haps, some one might condescend to inform isted where the substance did not: a modern me, viz. "What is the doctrine of the Church philosopher would tell you that those secon- of England or what is the doctrine of the P. dary qualities cannot exist but in the sub- E. Church of the United States respecting stance of a human being, that therefore as the nature of the Eucharist." Do they bethe substance of a human being was not here, lieve the doctrine of the real presence? If they these accidents which can exist only in that do, which is it, by consubstantiation with substance did not exist here: but he acknow- the Lutherans, or by transubstantiation with ledges that the angelic substance was really the Greeks and Latins? If they do not bethere, and that God miraculously caused the lieve the real presence of Christ's body how impressions upon the senses of Josue to be can they eat it? Can they eat what they the same as if the substance of a human have not present? What is the difference being and not that of an angel were present. between eating and believing? Do the two Thus the modern and the ancient differ only phrases mean the same, "I eat," "I believe"? in their mode of expressing the same identi- How could the word elements be chosen to cal idea, which is "the substance of an angel avoid expressing transubstantiation, if bread appeared as that of man." Before the doctrine and wine were called elements because they of substantial forms or absolute accidents found were supposed to be changed into the body its way into the schools, Christians believed and blood of Christ? I can understand the that Christ was really present in the Eucha- doctrine of Zuinglius, who says that after rist by virtue of a change produced by God: consecration there is only what was before; when this philosophy prevailed, the school- but that in eating the bread and drinking the men said that the substance was changed, wine, you eat and drink what you have prebut the absolute accidents remained: when a sent, viz. bread and wine, that in doing so new philosophy succeeded, it was still taught you may call to mind a former occurrence, [that] the bread and wine are changed into the and that for doing so, you may receive grace body and blood of Christ; but [that] after con- from God: but this is not eating Christ's secration, God produces upon our senses the body. I can understand the doctrine of the same impressions by the new substance that Catholic Church, which says that at the he would by the old, if no change had taken consecration although no apparent change place; thus all the parade of our philoso- occurs, yet a substantial change takes place, pher is of no avail; the same idea was still and now Christ's body and blood assume the expressed in other terms suited to the age: appearance of bread and wine, or have the the doctrine remained unchanged. I doubt substantial forms, or absolute accidents of if many members of the holy alliance have those substances or matters: in this case I seen it before, but White does not under-eat Christ's body which is present, but I eat stand Aristotle's definition of the matter. Upon his next paragraph I shall make little comment: it is the following: not bread which has ceased to be present, and I only require the power of God to perform the change, which is within that pow"The idea of a general mass shaped by these er. I can understand the doctrine of the Lusubstantial forms or moulds, is so agreeable to theran Church which states that the body of the external impressions of mankind, and so anChrist is placed together with the substance alogous to the operations by which what we of the bread under its appearance, for in this call materials are converted into objects fitted for peculiar uses; that the words in which case I can conceive two substances, under the school philosophers expressed them, have one appearance; it requires more extensive been incorporated with all the European lan-miraculous interference than does the Cathguages."* olic doctrine, because it requires that two lities of things. "Omnium elementa possunt invicem in se transmutari, non generatione, sed alteratione." The bread and wine were elements because they were supposed to be changed into the body and blood of Christ. See Brucker, Hist. Philos. Part II, Lib. II, c. vii." bodies shall occupy the same space; but in this case the communicant eats the body of Christ, as also bread, because both are present. But I cannot understand the person who tells me; "You eat what is not present, you eat Christ's body although it is not there." Nor is the proposition made intelligible by informing me that the mode in which I eat the absent body is by Faith, because faith is belief, and eating and believing are not in fact synonymous. Hence I have always looked upon the doctrine of Bishop Kemp's Church on this sacrament to be too abstruse for my conception, or to be sheer nonsense: it might however be owing to my own stupidity. We now come to the last paragraph of the note, p. 245: of Aristotle was sought to explain its philosophy. Ages succeeding ages saw it spread through nations before the principles of the Greek philosopher were applied to the subject; and it now exists where that philosophy has been rejected, of which the selfcontradicting White himself bears evidence in this very passage; for he admits that the modern system of philosophy co-existed with the belief in the Spanish universities, though some advocates of the Aristotelic system raised the difficulties which he states. Did he deny what he here admits, I am prepared with abundant evidence to show the co-existence of the doctrine of transubstantiation, and of the modern theory of natural philosophy in the great majority of European universities, and in some of them long before the birth of White, who avows his own idleness, and consequently his own ignorance. Some of the most steady believers in the doctrine have been some of the best contributors to modern science in France, in Italy, in Germany, and even in Spain itself. 66 But of all the miserable attempts to put on the semblance of learning that ever fell under my eye, the following is the most ab"What do we designate by bread and wine but TWO AGGREGATES OF QUALITIES identical to what the analytical process will show after consecration." And this is the absolute accidents! Surely he ought to have man who laughed at substantial forms and known that bread and wine are substances, and not qualities, nor aggregates of qualities!!! Bread is an AGGREGATE OF IDENTICAL QUALITIES!! Bless him for the discovery! He has at last gone beyond my reach, "substance without qualities is a mere abstraction of the mind." Granted, good Sir; and so are qualities without substance, or as the old schoolmen would call them absolute accidents, also an abstraction of the mind; and yet White gives us this abstraction, this aggregate of qualities for bread! "With qualities, it is that which the qualities make it." By no means, good Sir; it is the substance which produces the qualities, or, if you will, makes them; and not they that make the substance. "That the doctrine of transubstantiation could not have been established without the aid of Aristotle, any one who examines the technical words of the Roman Catholic divines, upon that question, will readily perceive. Of this they were so fully convinced but a short time ago, that I recollect the opposition to which the modern system of natural philosophy was still subject in my youth, as depriving the Roman Catholic faith of its chief support, by the rejection of the substantial forms. Indeed, transubstantiation|ject. conveys either no meaning at all, or one entirely the reverse of what Rome intends; unless we suppose the separableness of substance, and forms or qualities. The substance of the bread and wine, it is said, is converted into the body and blood of Christ, which, translated into any language but that of the schools, means that the body of Christ (I wish to speak reverently) chemically analyzed in the consecrated bread and wine, will be found to consist of every thing which constitutes bread and wine, i. e. the body and blood of Christ will be found to have been converted into real bread and wine. What else do we designate by bread and by wine but two aggregates of qualities, identical to what the analytical process will show after consecration Substance without qualities is a mere abstraction of the mind; with qualities, it is that which the qualities make it. So here we have a mighty miracle to convert Christ into bread and wine; for such would be the substance of his body if it changed its qualities for those of the two well known compounds which the Roman Catholics adore. If it is said that Christ occupies the place of the bread and wine, and produces the impressions peculiar to them on the senses, the supposed miracle should change the name of transubstantiation into that of delusion. Surely transubstantiation has for its basis the most absurd philosophical system which ever disgraced the schools of a barbarous age!" The first proposition here is altogether untrue, upon the old maxim of the schoolmen, ab actu ad posse valet consecutio. The doctrine was established long before the aid You must, in all natural cases, have the substance of gold before you will have its color, gravity, taste, &c. It is not the taste and smell which make the wine, but the wine which makes, or produces, or causes them. Such is the case according to the laws of nature, and hence, though the qualities do not make the substance, we will generally, but not universally arrive at a knowledge of the substance itself, by ascertaining what the qualities are; this, I suspect, is what the philosopher was blundering to express, when way of sound instruction! Surely their doc- Charleston, S. C., May 21, 1827. LETTER XXXVIII. B. C. To the Roman Catholics of the United States of America. MY FRIENDS, The next passage of White's that comes under our observation commences at P. 89. "The abundance of ceremonies supposed to produce supernatural effects, must magnify the character of the privileged ministers of those ceremonies. Hence a Church possessing seven sacraments, is far superior in influence to one who acknowledges but two. Add to this the nature of four out of five Roman sacraments— trimony-and the extent of power which she thereby obtains, will appear. Penance, i. e. auricular confession, puts the consciences of the laity under the direction of the priesthood. Extreme unction is one of her means to allay fear and remorse. Ordination is intimately connected with the influence which the Roman Church derives from transubstantiation, and its being made a sacrament, adds probability to the miraculous powers which it is supposed to confer. Finally, by giving the sacramental character to matrimony the source and bond of civil soChurch." ciety is directly and primarily subjected to the penance, extreme unction, ordination and ma he compiled this paragraph of jargon. I said this was not universally the case; for there are several instances where our knowledge is so limited, that we draw our inferences too hastily; the principle upon which they are drawn is analogy, and this is not the most easily ascertained, our observation is not sufficiently close, nor experience sufficiently extensive, nor acquaintance with nature sufficiently intimate to save us from mistakes, and those of the most serious, and not unfrequently of the most fatal description. But in miraculous cases, it is totally inapplicable. I shall instance but one or two. The "aggregate of qualities" in the apparition of the angel of Josue would lead to the conclusion, that the substance was that of a man.* Did the qualities make the substance in this case? The "aggregate of qualities" would have made the Holy Ghost the substance of a dove in one instance ;t and the substance of fire in another. Will Bishop Kemp hold to the "identical analytical process?" In those cases, the substance was neither made nor detected by the qualities. And yet there was no delusion, because there was a mode afforded for discovering by the declaration of God and by faith, what could never have been detected or known by the unaided senses. But, mark the dishonesty of White, who set out in this paragraph by stating that our doctrine could not be established without the aid of Aristotle; and at its conclusion, gives its explanation by modern philosophy. "Christ occupies the place of the bread and wine, and produces the impressions peculiar to them on the senses." Thus he shows that he knowingly wrote what was not true. He however calls this delusion. What will he call the cases of the apparition of angels and of the Holy Ghost? It is not delusion; because we are informed that at the consecration a change is effected in substance, though not in appearance. God thus affords to us the means of knowing the fact; if we believe him there is no delusion; if we will not, we delude ourselves, and we are criminal; the fault is ours, not that of our Creator. given to me in heaven and in earth, go ye gave them power," &c.) "All power is I may then conclude this letter by stating, therefore, and teach all nations **** teachthat of all the wretched attempts of this man, ing them to observe all things whatsoever I that made by him in this note is the most commanded you: and lo, I am with you alunfortunate. It is, throughout, a combinaways, even unto the end of the world." Yet tion of false imputations, unsound philoso- in the very teeth of those declarations, White phy, undeserved sneers at men of extraordi- and the holy alliance would tell us that her nary acquirements and great natural ability, claim to spiritual power is internal evidence confusion of ideas, a betrayal of ignorance of the corruption of our Church: and there and self-sufficiency, together with low blas-is not a single one of the sects to which they phemy; and this is what the Right Rev. belong that does not claim and attempt to Bishop Kemp and the other members of the use more power over its members than any holy alliance recommend to their flocks, by * Josue v, 18. † John i, 32. ‡ Acts ii, 3. ciple having been previously disposed of, viz. SO 66 he general council claims or uses in our Church. Suppose, then, I were to admit the truth of White's first proposition, what would be the consequence? That the clergy had more spiritual power, because their commission was more extensive. It this untrue? No Christian will deny its truth, but even any rational man will say, that the important question is not whether the character is magnified or diminished, but whether any ecclesiastical ceremony is efficacious, and if so how many. The true question is, to what does the commission extend? Thus the very question which this man avoids is that which is important, and his rhapsody is but got up for creating prejudice, not for investigating truth: hence too his second proposition, and the whole sequel, are unfair and delusive. The number and the nature of the sacraments are to be known by inquiring what Christ instituted; not by asking what mankind may think of his bestowing character or conferring power. said to them, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost; temptation, true and perfect repentance of heart, without which there can be no reconciliation with heaven, is generally the result of reflection, prayer, and the grace of the most high God. This first and essential requisite Mr. White altogether omits when he tells us "penance, [and] auricular confession," mean the same thing. Another ingredient of penance is satisfaction. In the case before us, the criminal is bound to restore the sum which he had originally stolen to the person upon whom the theft was committed; to make good to him all the losses which he sustained in consequence thereof, and if possible to compensate for the feelings of mortification, pain and bitterness which were endured. This is something more than "auricular confession." But he has a far more extensive and difficult task to perform-he must use every exertion to restore the character of the innocent man, who, by his contrivance, bore It is untrue that penance is auricular con- the punishment due to an offence which he fession, or that auricular confession is pen- did not commit: he must compensate him for ance. I might as well assert that the Senate his losses, he must endeavor to soothe his is the Congress, the main spring is a watch, feelings: he must make reparation to his fathe rudder is a ship, or the axletree is a cart; mily. This is something more than "auricuin a word, that one of the parts of any thing lar confession." This explains the horror is the whole of that of which it is a part. with which dishonest Catholics contemplate Penance consists of three parts on the side confession; this accounts for their readiness of the penitent, and one on that of the cler- to unite with Protestants in decrying and vilgyman, that is, four parts in the whole: and ifying the tribunal of penance, and the difconfession is but one of those four parts, and ference of their conduct as regards this savery frequently the least necessary: so that crament is an almost infallible criterion by it is a gross misrepresentation to identify pe- which to judge of their general observance nance and auricular confession in this off of the code of Christian morality. Were handed mode in which the untruth is here put there no obligation to do more than to make forward. I will suppose the case of a man "auricular confession," there would be no who has committed a theft to a large amount, difficulty in penance: but confession leads to and contrived to shift the imputation of dis- satisfaction, and is useless unless accompahonesty upon an innocent father of a family, nied by contrition or repentance, and the by which his reputation is destroyed and his clergyman is answerable with his own soul family is ruined. This criminal may, how- at the bar of heaven for giving absolution, ever, through the merits of Christ's death, be except where he has a moral certainty, after forgiven by the sacrament of "Penance, i. e. close examination, that the person to whom auricular confession." The impression which he gives it has all the proper dispositions: but this conveys to the mind, is naturally that even then the mistake of the priest will be no according to the tenets of our Church, the more security to the sinner than would be the criminal has only to confess in the ear of a sinner's own insincerity: unless he be truly priest, and be forgiven. Such, I am aware, penitent, and fully disposed to satify the jusis the notion entertained by three or four mil- tice of God and man, the absolution will be lions of our enlightened fellow-citizens upon invalid, and his imperfect attempt will be a sathe subject. Yet an ignorant Spaniard would crilege. Thus, if auricular confession places tell us that this was by no means sufficient the consciences of the laity under the direcamongst Catholics; that besides this confes- tion of the priesthood; it also places those of sion, three other ingredients were necessary, the Pope, and of the Bishops, and of the Priests viz. contrition and satisfaction on the part of themselves, under the same control, for they the sinner, and absolution by the clergyman. must have recourse to the same tribunal for Thus, in the case stated, the crime is easily the same purpose, the remission of their told-but, a true and sincere sorrow for hav- sins; and the law of God is the great princiing offended God, a sincere intention of avoid-ple by which the director is to be guided, for ¡ng future transgressions, and of flying from when Christ breathed upon his Apostles and |