adieu to the liberty of the children of God. He must submit his judgment to the infallible decisions of his church, or he must forfeit, what many men will prefer to the exercise of their judgment, the civil rights to which, as an Englishman, he is entitled by his birth. So erroneous was that saying of our Redeemer, my kingdom is not of this world.

Let not Mr. Le Mesurier, however, suppose that I shall grant the truth of his assertion. It is one of the many mistakes into which those frequently fall, who study books instead of facts; and judge of the present practices of Catholics from the bold assertions of prejudiced controvertists, who lived a century ago. In defiance of his prohibition, the Catholics, both laymen and ecclesiastics, do read, and will continue to read, the sacred volumes, even in their native tongue. But how, perhaps it may be asked, are we then to account for the contrary assertion so frequently and so confidently made by our adversaries? I conceive it must be a theological axiom, which is taken for granted, to spare the labour of enquiry. To doubt its truth would mar many a controversial sermon, and deprive the preacher of an eloquent triumph over the superstitions of popery. But were Mr. Le Mesurier to enquire of his next Catholic neighbour, he would learn that this axiom is, like many other axioms, admitted only because its truth has not been examined.

To his observation respecting the prohibition of books of controversy, the same answer may suffice. I am, however, happy in being able to relieve his anxiety respecting his own works. The church of Rome is not so impolitic as to forbid the perusal of writings which are so favourable to her cause. If ever she condescend to notice the controversial lucubrations of the Rector of Newnton Longville, it will be to recommend them to the perusal of her children. For Catholics, when they observe one of their most eager opponents directing his fiercest attacks against imaginary articles of their creed, will naturally infer, that if he has spared their real principles, it has been

because he felt himself unable to refute them. The power might, the will could not be wanting.

It cannot have escaped the notice of the attentive reader, how frequently, since the very commencement of this controversy, doctrines have been ascribed to us which we most emphatically disclaim. Had not the history of mankind explained the baneful influence of the odium theologicum, how rapidly it obscures the understanding, and palsies all the more generous feelings, it might have been expected that our reverend and right reverend opponents, men, who from their education and their rank in life should be, and on other occasions are, liberal, dispassionate, and enlightened, would take the trouble to study our religious belief, before they attempt to refute it. Yet so it happens, that they generally choose to frame for us such a creed as they think proper, and then insist on our admitting it as our own, whether we will or not. How far this may be reconcileable with theological sincerity, I shall not determine: it is certainly an ingenious and politic device. It establishes a kind of barter, without any reciprocity of risk. The profit is all theirs: the loss must fall upon us. They take from us our civil rights, and in return give us erroneous articles of faith. All the emoluments, all the honours in the state, they confine to themselves: and then very charitably bid us to console ourselves with the belief of the absurd and impious doctrines, which they have so liberally bestowed on us.

When we claim the faculty of knowing what it is we believe, we certainly ask but little. Yet this little is refused us. Our opponents arrogate to themselves a privilege which no pontiff ever dared to claim, even in the proudest days of the papal power. The successors of St. Peter might decide what each Catholic was bound to believe: these new inquisitors decide what each Catholic actually does and shall believe. The pontiff might define, but he could not compel the assent of the understanding: these men define, and will not allow us even the power of dissent. Their

infallibility extends over all our faculties, both physical and moral. The papist must necessarily be whatever they please to represent him. To disclaim the false and odious tenets which they have added to our creed, is an idle, hopeless task. They laugh at our protestations, and condemn us of insincerity. Among the graces of their ordination, they appear to have received the peculiar privilege of penetrating into our breasts, of discovering our most secret sentiments, of analyzing and exposing the hidden motives of our conduct. To every argument which we adduce, they haughtily and tauntingly reply, that we are shifters and equivocators, and that, as it suits our convenience, we can disguise or disown each article of our creed.* Whence they have learned to form so unfavourable a notion of our character, I shall not inquire but if it be well founded, we must have been bunglers indeed, not to have escaped that load of penal restrictions, and legal disabilities, which their intolerance has heaped upon us. Were I disposed to retaliate, I would desire the Rector of Newnton Longville to look for instances of insincerity, shuffling, and equivocation, not among the Catholic writers, but in another class of men, among whom, if report belie them not, there are those, who have been accustomed to make religion a matter of calculation, to weigh tithes against subscriptions, and to estimate the orthodoxy of a creed by the amount of its temporal emoluments. But peace to the errors and weaknesses of human nature, when they do not wound the feelings, nor trample on the rights of others. Were the doctrinal forgeries of our adversaries of this innoxious character, we should not complain. Their false notes might be permitted to circulate without interruption, for the edification of the illiterate, and the amusement of the learned. They might then call for unlimited credit: they might draw to any amount on the igno

⚫ Le Mesurier's reply, p. 39, 42, 52, 197, &c. The Remarker has no reason to complain of such language, as he must share it with other writers more distinguished thau himself.

rance or the prejudices of the public. But when their only object is to stop the current of national justice and national liberality, to deprive of their civil rights millions of his majesty's subjects as loyal as themselves, and to degrade them beneath a level with the meanest of their Protestant countrymen, their misrepresentations become an evil of the most alarming tendency, and deserve the execration of every honest

man.

In his last page, Mr. Le Mesurier advises the Bishop of Durham to reprint some of the old tracts against popery. I am not surprised at it. He would be proud to appear in the company of his elder brethren, the controvertists of a former age. Pares cum paribus, veteri proverbio, facillime congregantur. Unfortu

nately he was born a century too late. The books, which he so much admires, have long lain covered with dust on the shelves of our libraries: and there, it is probable, they will continue to lie

Like rusty mail in monumental mockery.

At the present day, Englishmen are, I trust, too wise to fight with each other for modes of faith. They would rather unite men of every religious persuasion to oppose the designs of a bold, powerful, and fortunate enemy, who with all Europe at his back, threatens our very existence as an independent nation. Let Mr. Mesurier devote his abilities to this purpose, and he will deserve the gratitude of his country. As long as he continues to employ himself in collecting the superannuated follies of ancient polemics, and in republishing them to disturb the harmony, and consequently to divide the strength of the nation, his readers will be inclined to throw down his book, and to exclaim with the poet.

Hunc tu, Romane, caveto.

REPLY

ΤΟ

THE REV. G. S. FABER,

VICAR OF STOCKTON.

IT is truly edifying to observe the alacrity with which the clergy of the diocese of Durham continue to espouse the defence of the bishop's charge. Formerly, that prelate thought it his duty to accuse them of lukewarmness and indifference:* now, at least, he must recal his censure, and applaud the zeal and promptitude of their exertions. To the other adversaries of the Remarker, has lately been added, a new, and more celebrated champion-the Rev. G. S. Faber, B. D., and vicar of Stockton-upon-Tees. This gentleman is certainly at liberty to select, for the exercise of his abilities, any subjects which suit his judgment or inclination: but I think that the reputation which he has already acquired, cannot be improved by his interference in the petty squabbles excited by an episcopal charge. Prophecy, not controversy, is Mr. Faber's peculiar department. In his progress through that region of mist and darkness, he has outstripped the speed of all his competitors. By his profound acquaintance with the helio-arkite mythology of the Cabiri, and

* Charge, p. 21..