54
REMARKS.
So far Archbishop Ussher. The objects of making the above extract from his learned work have been as follows: first, in order to present before the reader a clear and conclusive argument against the Romanists, whose tenet of Purgatory seems therein to be fairly encountered and exposed. This, be it observed, is proposed as the chief object of this series of Tracts; viz. to erect safe and substantial bulwarks for the Anglican believer against the Church of Rome, to draw clear and intelligible lines, which may allow him securely to expatiate in the rich pastures of Catholicism, without the reasonable dread, that he, as an individual, may fall into that great snare which has bewildered ths whole Latin Church, the snare of Popery. And it is conceived that the foregoing citation from Ussher proves thus much at least, that Romanism is not the pure creed of antiquity, that the tenet of Purgatory in particular is but the gradual creation of centuries, and has no claim on our consideration.
In all controversy it is a great point to keep on the offensive, and it is well we should be seriously aware of this, and use our advantage. Romanists have been entangling us too long in questions, which our deficient knowledge of antiquity has kept us from retorting on themselves. The true answer to their accusations is to adduce, as we may well do, counter charges: which are not only more effective, both from their nature and their number, than any which they can bring against us, but especially from the circumstance that they profess in all matters of faith to be infallible.
A second motive for the foregoing republication has been a hope to obviate a danger to which controversialists will be exposed, who have not mastered the facts of the case. It is shown in the above pages, that it does not follow, that, though Prayers for the dead were an Apostolical institution, (granting it,) that therefore Purgatory was; whereas unlearned persons, when
