to the Inquisition as an heretic, because his journal abounded with blasphemies against the Pope and the Virgin Mary. When he confessed himself a Protestant before the Inquisitor, he was admonished to convert himself to the Roman Church, and was allowed eight days to deliberate on it. In the mean while the Inquisitor and JESUITS came to him often, sometimes wheedling him, sometimes threatening and reproaching him, and sometimes arguing with him. At length they endeavoured to overcome his constancy by kind assurances and promises. But all in vain. And therefore, as he was immoveably fixed, he was condemned in the beginning of Lent, to suffer the night following eleven most cruel torments, and after Easter to be carried privately to Granada, there to be burnt at midnight, and his ashes to be scattered into the air: when night came on, his fetters were taken off, then he was stripped naked, put upon his knees, and his hands lift up by force; after which, opening his mouth with iron instruments, they filled his belly with water till it came out of his jaws. Then they tied a rope hard about his neck, and in this condition rolled him seven times the whole length of the room, till he was almost strangled. After this, they tied a small cord about both his great toes, and hung him up thereby with his head towards the ground, and then cut the rope about his neck, letting him remain in this condition till all the water discharged itself out of his mouth; so that he was laid on the ground as just dead, and had his irons put on him again. But beyond all expectation, and by a very singular accident, he was delivered out of jail, escaped death, and fortunately sailed home to England." See History of the Inquisition, by Philip a Limborch, translated by S. Chandler, 2 vols. 4to. London, 1731. In the same volume as that from which the above is taken, (the second) an account is given of the yet more cruel treatment of Isaac Orobio, which the author had from his own mouth. I remain, Sir,

P. S. For another example of the barbarities exercised upon the victims of this tribunal, see Mr. Ellis's second series of Historical Letters, vol. ii. p. 139.

FORTY-NINE QUESTIONS, &c.

To the Editor of the Protestant Guardian.

SIR,-Happening to be in the county of Cork, in the month of November, 1824, I observed, in "The Southern Reporter, or Cork Com

mercial Courier," two articles, one signed "A Protestant of the Church of England," the other "Aliquis;" the former containing a series of entrapping interrogatories, the latter, brief replies to them ; and as both seemed likely to supply useful materials for prosecuting the momentous existing controversy between the rival Churches of England and Rome-a controversy of which the termination, yet at a distance, will, I have no doubt, be distinguished by signal results-I thought it advisable to preserve them, with the view of ultimately contributing to the elucidation of certain subjects of which I anticipated renewed discussions; and now beg leave to submit them, in a blended state, to the consideration of your numerous readers.

1. Is not the Word of God infallible?—Yes.

2. Was that Word ever committed to writing for the instruction of men ?—Yes.

66

3. Did there not exist, in the age in which St. John, the survivor of the Apostles, lived, a collection of writings, generally denominated the Scriptures," and regarded by all intelligent Christians as the vehicle of the Word of God, incontrovertibly genuine, and supremely authoritative ?--Yes.

4. Did there exist a genuine copy of these Scriptures when St. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin?—Yes.

5. Is any such copy extant at present?-Unimportant, as we are certain of having a true copy.

6. Does not the New Testament, published by Griesbach, contain all, or most of the various known readings of that part of the sacred volume?-No, not all.

7. Can the Word of God, if committed to writing, lead into any error, respecting doctrine or morals, without the interpretation of man?Without the interpretation of the true Church, it may become, not the cause, but the occasion of error; witness the crucifixion at Zürich, &c. 8. Is divine instruction dependant for efficacy and perfection on human aid?-God has commissioned human beings to preach his Gospel, "Go teach all nations," &c.

9. Would it not savour somewhat of blasphemy and folly to maintain that the Creator is, in any degree, or in any respect, dependant on any of his creatures?—Yes.

10. Is not the Holy Spirit the best interpreter of God's Word?— The Church, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is the only sure interpreter of God's Word.

* 11. Did not the Son of God tell his disciples-if what we call the Scriptures be genuine-that the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, would guide them into all truth ?--Yes.

12. Did he not plainly intimate that the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit would be given to all who should earnestly seek them?— Yes, if they seek them in the appointed way.

13. Were not the laity, as well as the bishops, presbyters, and deacons, favoured with the light and influence of the Holy Spirit in the Apostolic age?-No.

14. On what ground is it to be believed that the laity are not thus equally favoured now?-They are equally favoured.

15. Does the Church of Rome rely exclusively on the Bible for proof of her reputed infallibility?—No.

16. If not, what other means does she possess for proving it ?-She possesses Tradition, and all the marks that must distinguish the true Church from all heretical conventicles.

17. Are these means infallible ?—Yes.

18. If not, how can any body of men be conclusively and satisfactorily proved to be infallible by fallible means?-Roman Catholics prove their Church to be infallible by infallible means.

19. Is it not admitted that the Evangelists and Apostles were inspired by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth ?—Yes.

20. Is it not admitted that the narratives and epistles which have been ascribed to them respectively since the age of St. Jerome, were really written by them ?—Answer omitted.

21. If so, do they not contain the genuine Word of God?—Yes.

22. Was not the Bible, or collection of the Scriptures, uniformly appealed to as supreme standard authority, in all the debates which occurred in the successive general councils of the first four centuries? *23. Is not that the true meaning of any clear sentence, which is instantly annexed to it by all who read it, and fully understand the language in which it is written?-No answer to either of these important questions.

24. Are not the following sentences clear, unambiguous, and faithful translations of the original Greek, as found in all extant copies ?"Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Acts xvi. 30. "God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John iii. 16. "The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." Matt. xx. 28. "John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world." John i. 29. "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many." Heb. ix. 28. "If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righte ous, and he is the propitiation for our sing." 1 John ii. 1, 2. "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast." Eph. ii. 8, 9. Being justified by faith, we have peace with God." Rom. v. 1. "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead." James ii. 20. "I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you." Matt. v. 24. "Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets." Matt. vii. 12. "This people draweth nigh to me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matt. xv. 8, 66 9. Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your traditions?" Mark vii. 9. "God is a spirit; and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth." John iv. 24.-Omitting the citation of all these passages except the first, and substituting for them a couple of et ceteras, Aliquis answers thus:-Roman Catholics have the highest respect for. every text in the sacred writings.

25. Did any one of the primitive Fathers of the Universal Church of Christ ever annex to the foregoing sentences, significations different from those which are annexed to them by all persons, possessed of common sense, who read them, and understand the English language? -The primitive Fathers and immediate disciples of our Lord, were not in the habit of differing about the meaning of passages in the sacred writings, like Luther and Calvin, Mr. Pope and Mr. Grier, &c.

26. Was it not the general object of the Evangelists and Apostles to make known, by their respective writings, the docrines and duties of Christianity?-Yes.

27. Does not St. John tell us that what he had written was written that we might believe that Jesus is the Son of God; and that believing, we might have life through his name?—Yes.

28. Is there any article of faith, requisite to salvation, which is not delivered in the Bible in clear, unambiguous, and explicit language? 29. Is there any article whereof the belief is announced as requisite to salvation, by any of the more respectable and orthodox of the primitive Fathers, or by any one of the first five General Councils, which is not delivered in plain language in the Bible, or rationally, and easily, and consistently deducible from it?-To these two questions Aliquis answers thus :-"There is no article of faith, requisite to salvation, that is not rationally, and easily, and consistently deducible from the Bible, explained by the true Church.

30. Did not St. Paul assure the Corinthians that he had no power over their faith ?—Yes.

31. By what scriptural warrant can any of his reputed successors claim dominion over the faith of others?-The Pope and his ecclesiastics claim no more dominion over the faith than the Apostles did.

32. Were not the Jews of Berea applauded for examining the Scriptures, to ascertain whether that which the Apostles had taught them was true?-So may you, if you consider yourself under the same circumstances as the Jews of Berea. I applaud all who search the Scriptures, in the appointed way, for a good purpose. But remember that no prophecy (2 Peter i. 20) of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.

33. On what ground can Christians be reprehended for searching the Scriptures for a similar purpose?—The Church of Rome does not reprehend Christians who search the Scriptures for a good purpose.

34. Are the traditions of the Church of Rome equal in authority to the written Word of God?-The Church of Rome believes it to be entirely unimportant whether sound doctrine be handed down from the Apostles orally or in writing.

35. Are they to be received when evidently contradictory to, or plainly inconsistent with that word ?-Need I say No to this absurdest of absurd questions!!!

36. Can the dictates of the spirit of truth be repugnant to each other? -How would Mr. Grier and Mr. Pope answer this question?

37. Is not the Bible employed as a main constituent part of the foundation of the Hierarchy of the Church of Rome ?-Yes, in the sense in which Roman Catholics appeal to it at present, but not as Johanna Southcote, &c &c. &c.

38. Can those belonging to this Hierarchy who employ it thus, have any just right to interpret it as they please?-The Church of Rome is enabled to interpret the Scriptures, not as an individual may please, "And "but by that unerring spirit mentioned in the Gospel of St. John, I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may abide with you for ever, even the spirit of truth." John xiv. 16. 39. Does not the word "Church" occur upwards of one hundred times in the New Testament; and does that word any where mean the existing Church of Rome, or that Church as it has existed since Pope Boniface assumed the unscriptural title of Universal Bishop ?-The word often occurs, and means the existing Church of Rome; the use he makes of Pope Boniface is as unsupported and contemptible as any story in "the Protestant," or "the Popish Mass."

40. Are all the signs and evidences of the true Church of Christ found combined in the Church of Rome, without any mixture of the

signs and evidences of a spurious or fictitious Christian Church?―They are. 41. What is the moral essence of Christianity ?—To love God, and keep his commandments.

42. Is any hostile, or malevolent, or tyrannical principle compatible therewith?

No.

43. Can any uninspired, naturally-born man be a true representative and Vicar of the Son of God?—No; as the Protestant seems to understand the question

44. Can any vicious person be a true representative of a spotless one? -Yes, in the sense in which Roman Catholics believe the Pope to be the representative of Christ on earth.

45. Have not very many Popes been notorious for a continual commission of different mortal sins ?-No; and even if they were, it would not serve the gentleman's cause; for Catholics do not believe the Pope to be impeccable.

46. Can infallibility be justly ascribed to any man, or body of men, without the clear testimony of the Word of God?-No.

47. Do all men think alike on all subjects?—No.

48. Do all men think alike on any one subject of a complex nature? -Not all; but all Roman Catholics think alike on the articles of faith which have been determined in the usual way by the Pope and Council of Rome.

49. If the apparent unanimity of the members of the Church of Rome, respecting the peculiar doctrines of that Church, be not the result of an early-inculcated dread of their clergy, and an early-infused spirit of party, to what can it be rationally and scripturally imputed ?— To the unerring spirit of HIM, who has established one Faith, one Baptism, one Shepherd, and one Fold.

These questions, and their annexed replies, it will readily be perceived, afford abundant matter for controversy; and it is to be hoped that they will not entirely escape the practical notice of your many ingenious correspondents.

The closing paragraph of the Respondent contains the following somewhat incautious, and rather uncourteous remark :-"Never did ignorance, folly, and fanaticism, string together so many foolish, unmeaning, and absurd questions." Whether this remark be more suitable to these questions, than to the probable state of the Respondent's mind, on re-perusing them in connection with his own replies, it is for the intelligent and discriminating reader to judge. For my part, I have really been quite at a loss to discover any certain trace of the operation of either fanaticism, ignorance, or folly, on the part of the Questioner; and I confess I am rather prone to entertain a persuasion, that epithets, expressive of something like contempt, might, not unwarrantably, be applied to the Respondent. But this by the way: my chief object in noticing the remark in question is to guard unwary Protestants against those confident, hardy, reckless assertions, which, more or less, almost invariably distinguish the speeches and writings of the Jesuitical disputants of the Church of Rome; and which they seldom, if ever, hesitate to resort to when unable to refute the reasonings of their opponents, expecting thereby to stagger, at least, their less-informed and more impressible Protestant hearers and readers, and sufficiently persuaded by experience that their credulous, submissive, acquiescent, slavish laity, sedulously taught, from their earliest years, to regard the ipse dixit of a Priest as equivalent to the authoritative decision or declaration of an uninspired Apostle, may be satisfied almost as fully by dogmatic assertions on the part of these oracular ecclesiastics, as by sound, scriptural, logical reasoning on that of heretics.