meanest cabin in Ireland, one Church is the watch-word of Catholicity: Catholics cannot consistently acknowledge any other; nor are they at liberty to sit with indifference in any assembly, where the interests of another Church are promoted.

"If, on being admitted into Parliament, they were to 'act according to their principles, their first effort should be to abolish the Church of England, and to establish the Church of Rome. I do not mean to blame them for this; but I blame them for denying it. Let them come forward as Catholics; but let them come as Catholics who wish to be consistent; and let them candidly declare, that their principles are such as to require the overthrow of the present Church Establishment, and the setting up of their own ;— and then let the Legislature judge of the true character of their claims.

"I may be told that the Catholics disavow the intention which I have laid to their charge: I know they disavow it; and I know, also, that they disavow the principle of intolerant religious exclusion, which I have ascribed to their system; but how is the disavowal made? It is made by individuals who have no authority to make it! The character which I have given to Catholicity, has been drawn for it in the Bulls of Popes, and in the Canons and Decrees of Councils; but it has been disavowed by individuals only, or by bodies of Laity, not competent to make such disavowal, or by unauthorized meetings of Clergymen, equally incompetent.

"The claims of ancient Catholicity have been dexterously lowered or raised, according to the spirit and circumstances of the times; but nothing has been changed: all has been reserved for future exigencies. Every one will admit that the obnoxious and intolerant principle to which I have adverted, is to be found in the Bulls of Popes, and in the Canons and Decrees of Councils; and yet I am certain

that none will affirm, that authority équally competent has been employed to disavow it. To say that individuals do so, or even bodies of individuals, is saying nothing to the purpose. If any man, or body of men, the subjects of this realm, should propose entering into a commercial contract with me, which an act of the British Parliament had pronounced to be illegal; would not the public consider me a fool were I to embark my whole property in such a contract, merely because the individuals concerned had said that they did not acknowledge the obligation referred to? Should I not act more consistently with my own interests, were I to tell them, that, however promising the results of the contract might be considered in itself, yet, as their disavowal of the law that made it illegal would be of no avail in a day of trial, I could not enter on the contract until that law should be repealed by the same authority by which it was at first enacted?

"Common sense would in this instance approve my conduct. I would act the same part in the question of Catholic Emancipation. Let the Church of Rome, by Bulls of Popes, and Decrees of Councils, remove from her standards her anathemas against those Churches which differ from her for, until this be done, those CIVIL Constitutions of which such Churches form a part, are bound to exclude Catholics from so FREE a participation in their privileges as might give them an opportunity of doing those Churches an injury."

:

Another Dissenter, of popularity and respectable name (Mr. John Hyatt), has just published a warning Sermon, which contains these passages:

"To an unprejudiced mind, there does not appear the least room for doubt respecting what is the paramount object for which the Catholics are struggling. Their pretext, till of late, has been religious liberty; but, now it is evident that civil power is the object to which they aspire. Already,

they have more religious liberty than Protestant Dissenters enjoy. Their unquestionable aim is to grasp power; and for what purpose? Certainly not to suffer it to lie dormant in their hands, but to employ it against Protestantism. He whose eyes are but half open, and whose mind is but half awake, must see that, the very hour the Catholic claims are granted, a foundation will be laid for the total subversion of the British constitution, which is composed of an union of the Established Church and the State, and which Church is declared by the law of England to be Protestant; and the very hour that the Catholics obtain a majority in the British Parliament, the Protestant Church will be annihilated, and Popery declared the established religion of the British empire: and, to have Christianity marred and distorted by the mummery and the blasphemy of Popery, were but little better than to have the candlestick taken out of its place. Then, instead of holding the celestial light which promotes peace, and holiness, and happiness amongst mankind; the candlestick would hold a torch lighted up in the infernal regions, which would promote discord, and malice, and the most savage cruelty.

"Who, that is but partially acquainted with the history of Popery, and that has any degree of holy zeal for the cause of unsophisticated Christianity, but trembles at the prospect of what is speciously, yet sophistically, denominated Catholic emancipation?" What, my brethren, is • Catholic emancipation,' but the first sure step towards Protestant slavery? God forbid that we should be permitted to fall into the cruel hands of the pretended successors of Peter! God forbid that our descendants should be afflicted with the curse of Popery! Some persons, however, can see no danger that can possibly arise from granting the Catholic claims; and assert, that, on the principle of justice, they are entitled to what they demand. If a person demanded a sword which you held; and, from his known inveteracy

against you, the reasonable inference would be, that, if you surrendered it to him, he would instantly employ it to run you through the body; ought you, on the principle of justice, to grant him his demand? Civil power is that sword— it is now happily in the hands of Protestants, and in their hands it slays none on account of difference in religious creeds; but, put the weapon into Popish hands, and it will soon slay thousands. Popery is still what it was, in days of yore, when its adherents immersed their murderous hands in Protestant blood. Which of the sanguinary tenets of the Church of Rome have the Catholics abjured? and if they have not, as a body, abjured ONE, what rational argument can any man advance to prove that, if modern Catholics were placed in circumstances favourable to their views and rooted inclinations,, those tenets would not be productive of the same dreadful consequences as heretofore? In the prospect of what is before us, we feel it to be a duty to which we are imperatively called, to urge our hearers to exert themselves in a lawful and peaceable way in resisting the claims of the Catholics. Our liberty-our lives-and the dearest interests of our posterity, are involved in this long agitated question.'

6

Mr. Hyatt adds, "We hope that, when the Catholic question is again brought forward, another flood of petitions' will roll into both Houses of Parliament, and prove equally successful with that which deluged the House of Lords, when it was proposed that the Toleration Act should be ' explained and amended.' The enemy stands knocking at the door, imperiously demanding admittance. The scorpions are already prepared for the torment of Protestants.. The wolf no longer assumes the temper of the lamb: only let him into the fold, and we shall soon witness the treachery and the cruelty of his intentions."

It is to me perfectly inconceivable, how a Roman Catholic who steadfastly holds all the notions inculcated by the

Creed of Pope Pius IV. (which every beneficed Clergyman, and every non-Catholic before he shall be admitted into that Church, is sworn to profess), can possibly be either tolerant or a friend to religious liberty in others: for he swears to many points of faith very inimical to peace and concord, as the following-" I PROFESS, AND UNDOUBTEDLY RECEIVE, ALL THINGS DELIVERED, DEFINED, AND DECLARED BY THE SACRED CANONS, AND GENERAL COUNCILS, AND PARTICULARLY BY THE HOLY COUNCIL OF TRENT AND LIKEWISE, I ALSO CONDEMN, REJECT, AND ANATHEMATIZE ALL THINGS CONTRARY THERETO, AND ALL HERESIES WHATSOEVER CONDEMNED AND ANATHEMATIZED BY THE CHURCH.

THIS IS THE TRUE CATHOLIC FAITH, OUT OF WHICH NONE CAN BE SAVED; WHICH I NOW FREELY PROFESS, AND TRULY HOLD, &c."

If these offensive principles be not injurious in their tendency, restrictive of mental freedom, and incompatible with toleration, at least under a settled PROTESTANT Government, I am much mistaken; and it is the opinion of one of their most moderate authors (p. 140, State and Behaviour of English Catholics, 1781), that "whenever it is found that any sect of men profess principles in religion, which either tend to the destruction of social happiness, or are incompatible with the established order of Government, it will not be denied that the most rigorous means should be used for their suppression."

Yet, this same author tells us,- "He is convinced that, were certain obstacles removed (such as the views of interest, the animosity of party, the blindness of prejudice, and those thick clouds which controversy has raised), it would appear that the Protestant Church of England and Catholics are divided by a VERY THIN PARTITION." He says, "Take the two professions of faith; ours, as it is sometimes given without the comments of schoolmen; and that of Protestants, as contained in the Thirty-nine Articles