PASTOR CHINIQUY’S SECOND LECTURE.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2159, 19 February 1880, Page 2

PASTOR CHINIQUY’S SECOND LECTURE.

TOWN EDITION.

Pastor Chiniquy delivered his second lecture to an audience of a about 250 in in the Presbyterian Church last evening. The Rev, T. B Hallowes presided. The subject of the lecture was, “Is the Church of Rome a branch of the Church of Christ; or is it old heathenism under a Christian name V" Pastor Chiniquy contrasted the Catholic religion with Paganism, and contended that they were very similar, as regards idol worship. He said he had no desire to abuse the Catholics, but he told them, as Paul told the Athenians, that their gods were idols ; and that when their priest told them that a wafer was God, he deceived them. He considered the Protestants were idolaters themselves who defended the doctrine of transubstantiation. This doctrine be vigorously denounced as absurd, and opposed to reason. The Catholic Church, he alleged, maintained that the bodily presence of Christ could be received in the form of a wafer. This, he contended, was idolatory of the worst description, and repugnant to common sense. At the conclusion of his lecture he announced that his next subject would be “ Rome and Education.”

Mr James Granger, as one of the Pastors’ Committee asked leave to say a few words. Ho said lie would yield to none in his desire to see Protestantism triumph but he considered the address just delivered to he disgusting and disgraceful. He had been struck by two lines of hymn, “Speak to them tmdcrly speak to them kindly.” He would ask anyone present whether there had been any tenderness shown in connection with the Homan Catholics. From that night he should sever his connection with the Committee. The Hev. Mr Hallowes rose and said : Mr President and Christian friends, —I will undertake on Pastor Cbimipiy’s behalf, and to the best of my power, to vindicate the lecture that has been delivered to-night. (Hear, hear and tremendous applause.) And I say to any Roman Catholic here that nothing has been said intentionally to insult them. None of us want to insult them, but we are all determined to speak the truth, while we speak it in love. (Applause.) I have not a word to say against Mr Granger ; I thoroughly respect and esteem him, but [ must say that I thoroughly endorse all that Pastor Chiniqny has said, and I am sure you do the same. If these things are done it is right Ave should knoAV it, and let the Homan Catholics know that we know it Wo are not to be frightened or ashamed out of speaking out in the very plainest and simplest terms of Avhat avc consider most degrading things. (Hear, hear, and loud and continued applause.)

Pastor Chinujuy alluded to the inconsistency ot Mr Granger’s conduct and remarks. He contended that if it was a sin in him to describe what took place when a priest vomited a wafer, it must be a sin in the Church of Home, and Mr Granger, in condemning him, condemned the Church of Home. He then repeated a portion of his description of what took place Avhen that occurred.

Mr Granger, while the Pastor was speaking, descended from the platform and, amidst suppressed hisses, walked out of the church.

Mr Hallows having read a portion of the 44th chapter of Isaiah, Pastor Chiniquy alluded to Mr Granger as a respectable man sadly misled and mistaken. He asked those who approved of his address to hold up their hands when three-fourths complied, while only one hand was held up in disapproval. The result was received with applause, and the proceedings terminated with the benediction.