lowing three points: 1st. That after the remission of sin, the justice of God still continues, in general, to require, in some way or another, the punishment of the Sinner. 2. That the Church has received from Christ, a power of remitting to the Sinner, who is properly disposed, that temporal punishment. 3. That the merits of holy, and virtuous men may be applied, in union with those of Christ, for that purpose, without any disparagement to the honor, or injury to the merits of Christ Jesus himself. These three points, I will endeavor to establish, in the three following letters.

I remain, &c.

J. C.

66

served, that, After the remission of Sin, the Justice of God still continues, in general, to require, in some way or another, the punishment of the sinner.

To any man, indeed, who opens, with an unprejudiced eye, the sacred writings of Scripture; I think, it will appear, that this is a fact, which is clearly established on that ground. During the progress of the people of Israel, through the solitude of the desert, there are recorded many instances of that people having grievously transgressed; and as many are recorded of their having obtained the remission of those grievous transgressions: and yet we find, that, in punishment of those sins, they were doomed to wander in the desert, for the long period of forty years, and with but two solitary exceptions, were all excluded from the enjoyment of that inheritance, which, we know was to each individual amongst them, an object of the fondest, and most anxious desire. By the same divine authority, we are also informed, that both Moses and his Sister had incurred the displeasure of Heaven; and though they were again received into favour, yet we find,

that they were each of them subjected to a rigorous or painful punishment, in consideration of their sins. Of a similar conduct of Providence, we also behold more than one instance, in the

person of King David. We know, on the express testimony of God, that in one of those instances, the guilt of his sin was remitted; and yet we also know that, on that very account, he was condemned to a punishment, which to his feelings was peculiarly painful.

Let it not be, however, supposed, that this sentiment of the Catholic Church, respecting the obligation of satisfactory works, arises from any idea, that there is any deficiency in the atonement or in the merits of Christ Jesus our Lord. Neither let it be supposed, that it proceeds on a belief, that our sufferings, and our bumiliations themselves possess any degree of efficacy, or, that, by any virtue of their own, they are capable of restoring us to the lost grace and friendship of God. We believe, that the merits, and the sufferings of Christ are perfectly sufficient, and even much more than sufficient to expiate all the sins of all the children of men; and we also believe, that the sufferings, and the merits of men, considered in separation from the sufferings and the merits of Christ, are perfectly unavailable, either to appease the anger of God, or to obtain the remission of our sins.

D

But can it be supposed, on any principle of reason or of justice, that because Christ has graciously condescended to suffer for our sins, sinful men are therefore exempted from every obligation of suffering something themselves? Or can it be supposed, that these penitential sufferings of men, can derogate, in any degree, from the infinite merits of Christ? St. Paul, speaking of his own exertions and labours, in the work of salvation, says: I therefore so run, not at uncertainty; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection; lest that, by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a cast-away. From this passage, it appears very clearly to be the opinion of St. Paul, that even for the just and virtuous man, works of mortification and of penance, are of indispensa ble obligation; that, in his judgment, they are neither incompatible with, nor injurious to the sufferings of Christ; and that they are not without merit, because they are represented as one of the means of securing the important object of eternal salvation.

*

In this light it is evident, these penitential works were considered, in the early days of the Christian establishment: or, on what principle,

* 1 Corinth. ix. 26, 27.

and with what view, are we to suppose, were introduced those long and laborious courses of penance, which prevailed, for so many centuries, in every part of the Church? Of those canonical courses of penance, the professed object was to make some degree of satisfaction to the injured justice of God, and to produce, for sinners, the grace of a perfect reconciliation, with his offended majesty. Those regulations, which originated in the zeal, and fervor of primitive christianity, owing to the less fervent dispositions of men, have now gone into universal disuse, in every province of the Western Church. To their discontinuance amongst us, has gradually succeeded the more frequent use of indulgencies: and if we consider them as destined to accomplish the same object, in a manner equally effectual, though less laborious, and less painful, the present practice of the Catholic Church, in granting those indulgencies, if she possess the power, will be found to be both reasonable and just.

I remain, &c.

J. C.