For thou indeed givest thanks well: but the other is not edified. I thank my God, I speak with all your tongues. But in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also; than ten thousand words in a tongue. Brethren, do not become children in sense; but in malice be children; and in sense be perfect." 1 Cor. xiv. 2-20. The church of Rome feels this passage to be very condemnatory of her conduct; so there must needs be a note affixed declaring herself free from violating it. The note The note is indeed wonderful. It is on the word, Amen, found in the sixteenth verse, and is in these words: "Amen. The unlearned not knowing that ye are then blessing will not be qualified to join with you by saying Amen to your blessing. The use or abuse of strange tongues, of which the Apostle here speaks, does not regard the public liturgy of the church, (in which strange tongues were never used) but certain conferences of the faithful, v. 26, &c., in which, meeting together, they discovered to one another their various and miraculous gifts of the Spirit, common in those primitive times; amongst which the apostle prefers that of prophesying, before that of speaking strange tongues, because it was more to the public edification. Where also note, that the Latin used in our Liturgy, is so far from being a strange or unknown tongue, that it is perhaps the best known tongue in the world." Whew!!!

But do Romanists assign no reason for this practice that converts public worship into gross superstition? The answer is, they do not, except such as sets aside the word of God. A private member of that communion being asked, Why the Liturgy was kept in a

dead language? replied, "The devil does not understand Latin." Whether this is a general opinion need not now be determined. But Reynolds Scott, a writer of great learning, says, "Our witching writers saie that divells speake onelie the language of that countrie where they are resiant, [resident,] as French, or English," &c.

But must the people be kept from worshipping God understandingly, for fear the devil will know what is going on? And is it so certain, after all, that Satan is excluded from assemblies where the Latin is used?

Some learned Papists tell us of the "numberless, barbarous, half-formed, and daily changing languages of modern Europe;" and ask, would it have been respectful, or secure, or prudent, or practicable, to have their Liturgy in these languages? The answer is, Why not? The prophets, and Christ and the apostles, used the vernacular of the people to whom they spoke in their day. No part of the Bible was originally written in the Latin. Romanists have translated both Testaments into English. If God's word may lawfully be in our language, why may not the Roman Missal also? But the whole question is settled by God himself. In the passage already cited from Paul, it is shown that a religious service, conducted either in speaking, singing, or praying, in a language not understood by the congregation, is to be avoided, and that God's servants must earnestly desire gifts whereby they may edify the people.

2. The use of relics in the church of Rome clearly proves the power and extent of superstition in that communion. Till of late, relics made but little noise in the United States. But no doubt we shall hear

very soon and commonly of wonders performed by means of some old rag, or tooth, or bone, said once to have belonged to some one now esteemed a saint. In Rome itself, "they show the heads of St. Peter and St. Paul, encased in silver busts, set with jewels; a lock of the Virgin Mary's hair, a phial of her tears, a piece of her green petticoat, a robe of Jesus Christ sprinkled with his blood, some drops of his blood in a bottle, some of the water which flowed out of the wound in his side, some of the sponge, a large piece of the cross, all the nails used in the crucifixion, a piece of the stone of the sepulchre on which the angel sat, the identical porphyry pillar on which the cock perched when he crowed after Peter denied Christ, the rods of Moses and Aaron, and two pieces of the real ark of the covenant." Volumes might be filled with similar statements. In the Mass House at Dobborane, in Mechlenburg, Nugent says, they show the following relics: "1. Flax for spinning, which belonged to the Virgin Mary. 2. Hay, which the wise men had for their camels and left behind them at Bethlehem. 3. A piece of the garment of Lazarus. 4. A piece of linen worn by the Virgin Mary. 5. A piece of the head of Tobit's fish. 6. A part of Judas' bowels that fell out. 7. The scissors with which Delilah cut off Samson's hair. 8. A piece of the apron which the butcher wore when he killed the fatted calf for the feast of the prodigal son. 9. One of the five stones which David put in his sling when he went out to meet Goliath. 10. The branch of the tree on which Absalom hung by the hair. 11. A part of Peter's fishing net. 12. The heads of the apostles Thomas, Peter, and Paul."

3. In like manner one might refer to the super stitious use of charms, by which the Romish church leads those in her communion to expect to avoid or expel certain natural evils, asserting her authority over noxious insects by means of holy water and certain other superstitious acts and doings.

4. The Romish church makes also high, though false pretences to the power of working miracles. The Catholic Herald, of Feb. 1, 1844, intimated an expectation that some miracles might ere long be wrought at the graves of two deceased Roman bishops in this country. How perfectly idle all these claims are, it is not necessary here to discuss. Not one of them is accompanied by such evidences as to satisfy a reasonable spirit of inquiry.

5. Nor are the tortures self-inflicted by members of the Romish church less superstitious. But enough of these disgusting themes.

CHAPTER XVI.

THE THIRD COMMANDMENT.

THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN; FOR THE LORD WILL NOT HOLD

HIM GUILTLESS THAT TAKETH HIS NAME IN VAIN.

HE verb take, found in this commandment, occurs

THE

very often in the Bible. It is also rendered take up, take away, bear, bring, bring forth, stir, lift up, fetch, set up. Here, and in many other places, it has the sense of use or employ.

The name of God is a phrase of frequent occurrence in the Bible. Few words are employed in more varied senses than the word name; and yet there is seldom difficulty in ascertaining its precise signification. The name of God stands 1, for his proper name, as Jehovah, God, the Most High, the Almighty, I am what I am, &c., Deut. iv. 35; vi. 4; Num. xxiv. 16; Rev. i. 8; 2, for his titles, as Creator, Shepherd, Saviour, Redeemer, &c., Eccles. xii. 1; Ps. xxiii. 1; Isa. xliii. 11; Ps. xix. 14; 3, for his attributes or perfections, Ex. xxxiii. 19; xxxiv. 6, 7; 1 Tim. vi. 1; 4, for his word, Ps. cxxxviii. 2; Acts ix. 15; 5, for his grace and mercy shown to sinners through Christ,