able to make good their vows to you, than men married before, and their wife alive, can confirm their contract with another. The continuance of their kindness would be a habit of sin, of which they are to repent, and their absolution is to be had upon no other terms than their promise to destroy you. You are therefore to be hugged now, only that you may be the better squeezed at another time. There must be something extraordinary when the church of Rome setteth up bills, and offereth plaisters for tender consciences; by all that hath hitherto appeared, her skill in chirurgery lieth chiefly in a quick hand, to cut off limbs: but she is the worst at healing of any that ever pretended to it. To come so quick from one extreme, is such an unnatural motion, that you ought to be upon your guard. The other day you were sons of Belial, now you are angels of light. This is a violent change, and it will be fit for to pause upon you it before you believe it: if your features are not altered, neither is their opinion of you, whatever may be pretended. Popery now is the only friend to liberty, and the known enemy to persecution: the men of Taunton and Tiverton are above all other eminent for loyalty. The quakers, from being declared by the papists not to be Christians, are now made favourites, and taken into their particular protection; they are on a sudden grown the most accomplished men of the kingdom in good breeding, and give thanks with the best grace in double refined language. So that I should not wonder, though a man of that persuasion, in spite of his hat, should be master of the ceremonies. Not to say harsher words, these are such very new things, that it is impossible not to suspend our belief; till, by a little more experience, we may be informed whether they are realities or apparitions.'" P. 36.

The observations contained in the following passage are equally worthy of the consideration of those who feel the value, and are capable of estimating the danger of the church of England:—

"Now if the removal of the disability to purchase advowsons would essentially benefit the Roman catholics, how can Mr. Butler in any fairness tell us, they seek not to interfere with the church of England? or with her hierarchy? I will not say what Mr. Butler personally seeks; but till there be some such formal renunciation of the church in Ireland, as the pope and his clergy themselves think to be binding, I shall not be able to place implicit confidence in a private gentleman, whose authority to make any such declaration as Mr. Butler makes, the church of Rome can, in the most convenient manner, disavow: But Mr. Butler is quite in error respecting the views of the church of Rome upon the national church in Ireland. The Rev. T. Le Mesurier says, in his PlainStatement' lately published, Nor should it be considered as a trivial matter, that at this day, every archbishop and bishop of the established church, in that part of the united kingdom, has his regular double' (counterpart) of the Romish persuasion; and it is a fact very worthy of observation, that every one of these popish prelates, after his confirma

tion at Rome, actually makes it a point to be formally enthroned in the very cathedral which appertains to the see, whose title amongst his fellow Romanists he bears, and which they consider as his: thus keeping up, in the most pointed manner, what in the law phrase is styled a continual claim to those possessions, and those honours of which he considers himself as impiously dispossessed.'" P. 30.

On the declaration of Mr. Butler, that it is not an article of, the catholic faith that the pope is infallible, the writer comments with great force. He observes upon the difficulty of framing an oath to bind the conscience of a Roman catholic, when his religion or church is the subject.

"If they do not hold that the pope is infallible, they certainly do hold that infallibility is to be found somewhere in the church. This is perfectly clear from multitudes of documents. I will just quote Dr. James Butler's catechism, recommended by the four Roman catholic archbishops of Ireland, and which is now in general use. It puts the question, Can the church err in what it teaches?' A No; because Christ promiseth to the pastors of his church, 'Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.' Matt. xxviii. 20.-Q. Who is the visible head of the church?" A. The pope; who is Christ's vicar on earth, and supreme visible head of the church.' Q. Are all obliged to be of the true church?” A. Yes: no one can be saved out of it.""

As to the tenet of the church of Rome, that no one can be saved out of it, Mr. Butler, according to the pamphlet, 66 turns round and runs away,' 99 66 begging leave not to enter into the discussion of the question.' In doing which," says our author, "he acted wisely, because he knows that, of all the tenets imputed to the church of Rome, it is the least possible to deny this to be one." But Mr. Butler says that this objection cannot be urged by a protestant of the established church, as the Athanasian creed forms part of her writings. Upon which the pamphlet asks, "what has the Athanasian creed to do with it? The Athanasian creed does not teach that no man can be saved out of the church of England."

We were as much surprised as the writer of the pamphlet at Mr. Butler's assertion, that "a protestant of the established church swears that the doctrine of transubstantiation is damnable." And we ask with this writer, "where is such an oath to be found?". We know what is said of it in the 28th article of the church, but we know not where we are made to say or to swear that it is damnable. The only answer therefore to this assertion which occurs to the protestant advocate is, that the fact is not so; and the same answer may be made to the assertion alluded to in p. 11, "that the children of the English Roman catholic poor are sometimes forced into protestant schools."

On the question whether it is still an article of the Romish church that" it is lawful to break faith with heretics," the reasoning in this little tract is very forcible. It is clear that the Emperor Sigismund gave a safe conduct to John Huss; it is equally clear as a fact, that this virtuous and holy man was delivered by the church, on account of his doctrines, to the secular arm, and burnt alive, although it was on the faith of this conduct that he attended the council which condemned him as a heretic. It does not ap→ pear that the doctrine declared by this council has ever been disclaimed by the church of Rome.

"Dr. De la Hogue tells us, it is true, that the council of Basle proposed safe conducts to the Bohemians, and that the council of Trent proposed safe conducts to the Germans, and he argues very absurdly (as I think) that these councils would not have proposed safe conducts if they had not thought the decrees of the council of Constance had been exorbitant; but he does not tell us that the protestant divine's refused to come to the council of Trent, unless they had the fullest assurance that the pledged public faith should not be violated by that council. And in the safe conduct granted by the council of Trent to those divines, it is expressly mentioned that the council would keep good faith with these persons, and not avail itself of the precedent afforded by the council of Constance, from which they differed on this point and for this time. This is certainly a plenary acknowledgment that the council of Constance had made the offensive decree in question, which the council of Trent did not see good to revoke, but only to dissent from it in that point, and for that time. The protestant divines however did not see they were safe for all this professed candour, for when the safe conduct came, under the authority of the council, they found that the pope had not signed it, and thus he had dexterously left himself at liberty to disavow any act done by the council."

But the very apologies for the act of the council in question, distinctly shew the extent of the claim to independent power which the church of Rome arrogates to itself. "In truth," says a professor," it (the doctrine that faith may be broken with a heretic) leans upon this principle alone, which is clearly consonant to equity, that of two powers, each supreme in its kind, and altogether independent, one cannot prohibit that the other, when it shall deem it seasonable, may use its own right, and discharge its own duty." From which mode of reasoning, a reasonable inference is capable of being formed, as to the use which the catholics would be disposed to make of power of any kind, were they once to acquire it; and how far the construction of detriment to the church might induce them to disregard civil authorities, and religious liberties. The writer, whose work is before us, very pertinently asks how far those men ought to be eligible

to offices and situations which give power, and may give preponderancy, who are the instruments of a church which can teach that the safe conduct of a secular government is not of such force, that by it any prejudice may be produced to the catholic faith, or ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But Mr. Butler says, that "if the council of Constance authorized the violation of the safe conduct, it did infamously, and there's an end on't." To which the writer of this appeal thus, answers: "I wish Mr. Butler's declaration would make an end on't, and of all other difficulties attending this important question; but neither his declaration nor opinions, nor those of the universities to which he refers, can make an end on't.

Mr. Butler seems to have placed considerable reliance on the questions said to have been propounded by Mr. Pitt to the foreign universities. The writer of the Appeal states his belief that the English catholics drew up the questions in their own manner: he denies that it appears that Mr. Pitt considered that the answers to them were to determine the whole question; he denies that it appears that Mr. Pitt was satisfied with them as far as they went: he denies that the universities were more competent than well-informed individuals to declare and pronounce the doctrines of the church of Rome: and, lastly, he denies the wisdom of the questions themselves. His observations on this head are so good that we cannot withhold them from our readers.

"But if all my remarks upon these famous questions and answers are considered as being without force, I must still insist that the questions themselves were not worthy of a great statesman to propound, nor were the answers such as to satisfy him, or to warrant him in taking them as a basis for the admission of Roman catholics to legislative and high political power in this protestant state. The questions of a wise statesman, upon a measure which amounts to a total change of domestic policy, should be far more extensive and searching, and every answer returned by the claimants of political power should be examined and sifted in proportion to the anxiousness with which they pursue their claims, and the hostility they have hitherto shewn to our protestant establishments, which this change of policy must necessarily affect. The statesman has a right to know, and it is his duty to inquire, who, and of what character they are who claim admission into the citadel of British power; he, as a vigilant and faithful centinel, will demand, who comes there?' whether friend or foe, before he admits him within the portals; he will acknowledge no pretence of right in him who approaches, unless the latter can shew his fitness for service; and his ability to defend and add strength to the fortress, as well by his personal and mental vigour, as by his faithfulness to the governor, and his regard to the indefeasible rights of his fellow-soldiers, without which there can be no harmony or reciprocal confidence.

"The offices claimed by the Roman catholics, or to which they wish to be declared eligible, were created not for the advantage of those who should fill them, but for the benefit of the public; and it should be the care of a wise legislator, that those who occupy them are of principles which do not render them dangerous to the public security, and which make them feel an interest in the preservation of those establishments which the bulk of the community consider necessary to their security and happiness.

"The peace and happiness of this protestant country require that the crown should descend in a line of protestant princes, who should be restricted from marrying Roman catholics. The enquiry should then be, as to what principles the Roman catholics hold, whether religious or political, which, on the repeal of all disabilities, would have an unfavourable effect upon the protestant succession, For the purposes of this inquiry it might be asked, Are the principles of the Roman catholics friendly to the perpetuity of the crown in the protestant line? or would it not more consist with the policy of the church of Rome, and be more agreeable to the Roman catholics in general, that the monarch of the British empire should be a Roman catholic? and would it not be the duty of the members of that church to support a Roman catholic succession rather than a protestant succession? and would it not be within the policy of the church of Rome, in any competition between a protestant and a Roman catholic prince, to endeavour, whether by influence or otherwise, to obtain an alteration of those laws which guard the protestant ascendancy? Other questions might be necessary, but true answers to these might shew the probable effects of the proposed measure upon the succession."

The principle of persecution is disclaimed for his church by Mr. Butler, which induces a question on the part of the Appeal writer, why, in the oath of her bishops, the following passage occurs: "Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord (i. e. the pope), or his foresaid successors, I will, to my power, persecute and oppose." He reminds him, also, of the pope's circular letter of the 5th February, 1808, in which that prostrate potentate, relying still on his power over the conscience, states that he has rejected the article, proposed by Buonaparte, for granting the free and public exercise of religious worship to those who should dissent from the Roman catholic communion. He reminds him, also, of what his favourite Bossuet says on the subject of the spiritual legality of persecution. "L'exercise de la puissance du glaive dans les matieres de la religion, et de la conscience; chose qui ne peut être revoquée en doute-le droit est certain-il n'y a point d'illusion plus dangereuse, que de donner LA SOUFFRANCE pour un caractere de vraie Eglisse. Hist. des Var. 1. x. p. 51. Par. 1740. 12mo.

As Mr. Butler produces several instances of intolerance on the part of protestants, for the purpose of pleading, as he terms it,