Facts and Assertions: or a Brief and Plain Exhibition of the Incongruity of the Peculiar Doctrines of the Church of Rome: With Those Both of the Sacred Scriptures and of the Early Writers of the Christian Church Catholic

In Short

This book functions as a pointed, systematic critique of the Roman Catholic Church’s specific doctrines, such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the invocation of saints. It argues that these beliefs are not merely unbiblical but represent significant departures from the teachings of the earliest Church Fathers. By cross-referencing modern claims with the writings of the first few centuries of Christianity, the author attempts to strip away what he considers late innovations. The work remains an essential historical artifact of 19th-century theological debate, reflecting the intense intellectual friction between Protestant and Catholic thought during that era.

The Story

The inquiry begins with a challenge to the doctrine of transubstantiation, which the author characterizes as a departure from the spiritual interpretation held by early writers. He guides the reader through the New Testament and the works of figures like Tertullian, Athanasius, and Eusebius to demonstrate that the elements of the Eucharist were historically viewed as symbols or images rather than a literal, physical transformation. He posits that the Church of Rome’s insistence on a corporeal presence is an "idle phantasy" that contradicts the plain sense of Scripture, which describes Christ’s words as "spirit and life."

The argument then shifts to the doctrine of purgatory. The author contends that the Bible is entirely silent on the existence of such a place and that the practice of praying for the dead—which eventually morphed into a system for delivering souls from fiery punishment—originated from a misunderstanding of ancient prayers meant for the first resurrection. He uses this as a springboard to attack the broader reliance on unwritten tradition. He argues that the Church of Rome elevates tradition to equal status with the written word only because its specific dogmas cannot be verified by Scripture alone. He compares this methodology to that of the Gnostics, who similarly claimed that truth could not be discovered from the written word without access to a secret or supplemental tradition.

The narrative reaches its climax in an analysis of ecclesiastical authority and the "monstrous phantasy" of supererogation, where the author scrutinizes the papal claim to control a "sacred treasure" of merits. He demands proof of the Pope’s hereditary succession from St. Peter, arguing that even the concept of Peter as the first diocesan bishop of Rome is historically unsubstantiated by early records. Finally, the author addresses the veneration of images and saints, providing liturgical examples he finds idolatrous. He concludes by accusing Roman Catholic apologists—specifically naming figures like Bishop Trevern and Mr. Berington—of "corrupting the witnesses" and using "expurgatory indices" to erase or alter historical texts that contradict modern Roman claims. The book ends not with a narrative resolution, but with a firm directive to the reader to verify all religious assertions through the original, untampered historical record.

How It Unfolds

The challenge of substance The author initiates his investigation by contrasting the literal interpretation of the Eucharist with the spiritual understanding found in early writers. He argues that the physical interpretation was a late innovation that ignores Christ’s own explanation of his words as being spirit and life.

The silence of scripture The focus turns to purgatory, where the author highlights the total absence of biblical support for the doctrine. He demonstrates that early prayers for the dead were intended for resurrection, not for release from a state of post-mortem purging.

The battle over tradition The argument addresses the Roman Church's claim that unwritten tradition holds equal weight with the Bible. The author warns that this allows for doctrines that are not only unsupported by Scripture but often directly contradicted by it.

The crisis of authority The text examines the papal claims to succession and the distribution of merits through indulgences. By stripping away the layers of institutional assertion, the author challenges the reader to find any evidence for these powers in the early Church.

The evidence of expurgation In the concluding sections, the author provides evidence that historical records were intentionally altered to support later doctrines. He presents specific examples of erased indexes and modified quotations to illustrate a systematic effort to hide the "incongruity" of Romish peculiarities.

The People

The book is driven by the author, George Stanley Faber, who positions himself as a meticulous, truth-seeking investigator. He is guided by a profound skepticism of institutional power and a deep devotion to the "written word." His adversaries, a group of modern Romish doctors and apologists including Bishop Trevern, Mr. Berington, and Mr. Husenbeth, serve as the targets of his critique. Faber views these men as defenders of an indefensible position, accusing them of selectively citing or outright manipulating the ancient Fathers to sustain their Church’s claims.

Faber also invokes the authority of the "early writers," such as Athanasius, Tertullian, and Eusebius. These figures are cast as the unsullied witnesses of the "Christian Church Catholic," used by Faber to highlight the discrepancy between original Christian practice and modern Rome. The Pope, specifically Leo, appears as the personification of the institutional overreach Faber seeks to dismantle, particularly regarding the claims of papal authority and the control over the "sacred treasure" of saints' merits. Each figure is placed within a grid of evidence: those who rely on the Bible are validated, while those who rely on "assertions" are dismissed as having abandoned the primitive path.

In Its Own Voice

The author highlights the necessity of relying exclusively on established, written evidence, as supported by the early Church fathers:

It is the part of mere triflers to propound and to speak the things which are not written.

He further emphasizes that the literal interpretation of the Eucharist contradicts the spiritual nature of Christ’s message:

It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.

Finally, he summarizes his frustration with the doctrinal shifts he observes:

Assertions of the apostolicity and perpetuity and immutability and primeval universality of Romish Peculiarities are cheaply made: but FACTS and ASSERTIONS are matters widely different from each other.

What It's Really About

The central theme is the conflict between institutional authority and textual evidence. The author is deeply concerned with the question of how religious truth is defined: is it through the evolving, authoritative tradition of a central church, or is it bound strictly to the "written word" as interpreted through the earliest, most reliable historical documents? The work examines the danger of "unwritten tradition" as a mechanism for creating new doctrines that lack an original foundation. It is an argument for the primacy of historical record over institutional dogma, posing the question of whether a church can legitimately claim to be "apostolic" if it cannot prove its central practices existed during the first three centuries of the faith.

Why Read It Today

Readers with an interest in the history of religious controversy or the development of theological argument will find this text compelling. It reads like a courtroom brief, filled with sharp, logical cross-examinations and a relentless drive toward factual verification. You will feel the weight of the author’s intellectual conviction, though you must be prepared for the dense, polemical style characteristic of 19th-century theological writing. The book is not for the casual reader; it demands patience as it navigates complex citations and specific debates over Greek and Latin terms.

However, the reward is a front-row seat to a foundational debate in Christian history. The author’s insistence on "actual and personal verification" is a modern-sounding command, encouraging a skepticism that remains relevant in any era of information. While the period attitudes toward Roman Catholicism are stark and uncompromising—reflecting the intense sectarian tensions of the 1830s—the underlying questions about how communities preserve and alter their own histories are as pressing today as they were when Faber first sat down to write. For those willing to engage with the difficulty of its language and the sharpness of its bias, the book offers a rare look at how historical records were used as weapons in the battle for the definition of truth.