This, as Mr. Faber had the opportunity of noticing it, could only be the first edition by Mr. Berington principally, as we have already observed. But a second edition appeared by Mr. Kirk alone, in the very year of the second edition of the Difficulties of Romanism. This edition is entitled to remark. The new editor has given it a preface of his own; and he has ascribed to it, in the new edition, the important character of "a kind of Class-book, and standing work among Catholics," and therefore requiring peculiar perfection-no very obscure intimation, that the first edition wanted the character which is claimed for the second. After specifying his own improvements, the editor mentions particularly his extended treatment of the Discipline of the Secret, and copious extracts from the Liturgies; acknowledging at the same time his large obligations to Dr. Trevern. There follows immediately a passage full of edification and some consolation to Protestants.

"I only regret that DR. TREVERN, except when he had The Faith of Catholics' before him, seldom refers us to the pages, and not always to the volumes of the fathers, from whom he quotes. This omission has caused me great, and, sometimes, fruitless trouble. The same omission is observable in some other learned works of Catholic controvertists. Their quotations are in themselves excellent, and are admirably well chosen; but would have been much more satisfactory, had correct reference been also given to the works, and to the pages of the works, from which the quotations are taken. The omission is sometimes quite provoking: and never more so than when they quote Protestant authorities against Protestant opponents."

Here is an undissembled and unexceptionable testimony to the habitual omission of correct references by papal writers; and particularly where they adduce Protestant authority. We know and understand the practice perfectly well. These Protestant authorities are copied from generation to generation, and the modern appellant knows nothing, or next to nothing, of them. Still less does he know, or care to know, or wish to be thought to know, of the answers which have been given to them. They answer his purpose, and he has no disposition to put his reader in a way to discover the truth. Hence those everlasting references to Taylor, Thorndyke, Montague, and some others, which have repeatedly been reduced to their true value, and very lately by Bishop Phillpotts. But no: qui vult decipi decipiatur -these are the people for us, and we have abundance of them. But we have already alluded to a dissatisfaction expressed from a high quarter against the first edition of the Faith of Catholics. In the Orthodox Journal, for 1817, p. 463, a "Midland Catholic Pastor" writes-" The midland prelate, who did not see it, (the Faith of Catholics,) till it was printed and circulated throughout his district, in his turn printed and

A A

circulated his reasons for not approving of it, in a Charge to his Clergy, Part II., at the same time officially declaring to them as follows:- This often published treatise is not to be received by you or your flocks as an authentic exposition of Roman Catholic principles, and still less as the faith of Catholics.'" So we see that a book under the ban of the Vicar Apostolic of the midland district, Dr. John Milner, was yet suffered to circulate in England, from 1813 to 1830, as the authorized exposition of Roman Catholic belief. Few were in the secret of the episcopal proscription, which was published no earlier than in 1817, and fewer still perhaps cared for it. It served as " pig's meat for the swinish multitude," and as "a tub for the whale." Mr. Berington, probably only for his natural honesty, lost favour with his communion; and it is now the fashion with those who are far his inferiors, to disparage him"He is not much esteemed;"-that being the usual form with Romanists of putting down merit, to which they are unwilling to draw attention, as a stronger expression would excite curiosity. We have no interest in the reputation of this individual; but weare inwardly assured, that an intention to have him forgotten is the only reason for undervaluing his creditable and useful work, the Literary History of the Middle Ages. He did indeed repay the Bishop of Castabala in his own coin; and the Memoirs of Panzani, which afterwards assumed the title of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Catholic Religion in England, could not fail to provoke as much as it wounded.

It is no part of our present engagement to review Mr. Kirk's authentic edition of the Faith of Catholics, (for his superior we suppose has not yet transfixed it ;) there is one portion, however, upon which we feel it important to make some remarks, as illustrative of the general march of integrity among soi-disant Catholics. In the first, or Mr. Berington's edition, pp. 239240, we have a translation of the celebrated passage in Theodoret's Dialogues against the Eutychians, where the words of one of the speakers, with reference to the mystical symbols in the Eucharist after consecration, are as follow:

66

'They remain in the former substance, figure, and appearance, (or rather, in the shape and form of the former substance,") &c.

In Mr. Kirk's edition, p. 254, we find the parallel passage thus:

They remain both in the figure and appearance of their former substance," &c.

omitting altogether the first version given in his predecessor's edition, and which, to make the discrepancy more visible, we have put in Italics. This might have passed, and the reader been left to travel on without hesitation or doubt, and in the idea that

every thing was right. But unfortunately the last editor forgot the following note, appended to the place by the first editor:

“ μένει γὰρ ἐπὶ τῆς προτέρας ουσίας, καὶ τοῦ σχήματος, καὶ τοῦ εἶδους. -The word porépaç, i. e. former, seems to imply the second translation."

All this is straight and intelligible enough in the first edition, where two translations were given: but in the second, where only one appears, it answers no other purpose than to betray the abstracted translation. And it farther betrays the illiberality, grammatical ignorance, and general incompetence of the translator, who ought to have known, not only that his translation was totally inadmissible, but that it was inconsistent both with the immediate and entire argument in the work containing it. Truly, if Romanists go on improving in this way, there will at last be no common language in controversy. It is sickening to observe so much want, not only of conscientious, but even just or honourable principle. But we fear, while such a system as that of Rome must be defended, nothing better is to be expected.

The mutilated and misleading way in which both editors have exhibited the creed of Pius IV. at the end of their work, would justify some severe remarks, particularly as regards the latter. Neither of them tell us, that the creed is likewise an oath, in all the most important cases of its being professed. In the heading they both coolly observe, that it is subscribed by Catholics on several occasions." It is, in fact, sworn to by all the ecclesiastical portion of the Roman church, and by the individuals of other efficient offices or stations. And what apology will Mr. Kirk in particular give, for omitting the last clause of the creed and oath, which exhibits the juratory form, and the obligation imposed on the whole priesthood-no inconsiderable portion of the church-to promote the doctrines of that church, out of which is no salvation, to the utmost of their power? The example of this disingenuous and unjustifiable omission was set by the Vicar Apostolic, Dr. Challoner; and there was an obvious policy in it. But it fared as such policies frequently do; it drew the celebrated C. Butler, Esq. into the public humiliation of having to profess that he was not acquainted with the one shortest, and perhaps most binding, formulary of his own church. He has indeed, in his Confessions of Faith,* introduced the word swear: but he has altogether suppressed, or omitted, (as the thing was done knowingly or unknowingly,) the obligation which every parochial priest juramentally takes upon himself to promote his church's faith, to the utmost of his power, and to his latest breath. And lest it should be replied, that

* P. 11.

this obligation is limited to the priest's own particular charge, all, who are baptized even by heretics, are claimed as coercible subjects by the laws of Trent, and must fall within the jurisdiction of some pastor or other, who will not need to be taught, in what manner promoting his religion to the utmost of his power is to be understood and put in execution.

So much for the Faith of Catholics, and Mr. Kirk.

Those who have paid attention to the progress of the papal controversy in modern times, will observe, that one of the stratagems of Roman polemics is, to get to some new and unexplored ground; and if it be difficult or impossible to be explored by the opponents, so much the better. This has happened in particular in the speculation set on foot as to the agreement of the Greek church with the Roman, on the subject more especially of the Eucharist, or transubstantiation. The great monarch of France, Louis XIV., lent the royal influence through his ambassador at the Porte; and great was the execution done. Greek signatures and a council of Bethlehem or Jerusalem were obtained, to the heart's content of the speculators. Well was it for the cause of truth and religion, that our countryman Covel was at Constantinople at the same time; and in his preface to his valuable work on the Greek Church, has exposed the whole imposture to the back bone. The signatures were obtained, like those in our country to a popular or radical petition, and the council was got up to order, with such trading accuracy of form, that the Perpetuitists, the grand projectors of the scheme and the grand trumpeters of the splendid triumph, were absolutely ashamed to insert in their work the Legalization of the royal ambassador, Olier de Nointel, wherein he gives an account of what the Greek prelate Dositheus had done. But the document stands in the Paris edition of the above-mentioned council, and in Hardouin's collection. Labbé and Cossart's stop short of the date, 1672.* It is remarkable, that Arnauld and his assistants have, in their bulky work, found a new seat for the infallibility of their church. Hunted without mercy from pope, from council, and from both in conjunction, the distressed creature, (ens rationis, vel stultitia,) has at last found a place of repose and security, in the Body of the Faithful-yes, the body of the faithful, that body, which has neither a name, nor a place, nor a voice, in any council; with whom it is preeminent presumption to have a judgment of their own; and who, of all others, are the least entitled to have the perusal of scripture unrestrictedly intrusted to them. For the grand argument of the Perpétuité is-such is the belief of the church

* The Monumens Authentiques, &c. of Aymon should be read by those, who would entitle themselves to judge on this subject, and it will well reward them.

now it must have been the same in every preceding generation up to the beginning; for had the doctors of the church at any time varied from the received doctrine, the body of the faithful would incontinently have been up in arms, and reclaimed against the profane innovation. No such reclamation is on record; the inference follows. The trodden-under-foot laity of the Roman church have here indeed obtained a full compensation for all their prior under-valuation, and are exalted to a rank which they could little expect-that of guardians and arbiters of the faith. Here are the pillars of Roman doctrine, particularly transubstantiation; and heretics, except the most obstinate, must at once bow down and submit.

We could have wished to enlarge a little on the other speculation in a terra incognita, the Disciplina Arcani, of which we have already said something, and the readers of Mr. Faber may find enough, pp. 403, and onward. In fact, this pseudo-christian method is little more than an impolitic and mischievous imitation of the heathen mysteries; and was, suitably enough, first adopted by various heretics; and, in succeeding times, corrupt Christians, who would not be called heretics, took to the occupation themselves. It is an excellent contrivance for performing feats of legerdemain in the dark.

We have less space than we had anticipated left for Mr. Husenbeth, the main, or at least last, opponent of Mr. Faber, in whose pages he has the best chance of longevity. We exceedingly regret that the master of Sherburn Hospital should be obliged to waste his time and attention on such incompetent opposition; although we must acknowledge that Mr. Faber adorns every subject which he touches. His late pamphletAn Account of Mr. Husenbeth's professed Refutation of the Difficulties of Romanism, on the entirely new principle of a refusal to meet it-is a sufficient proof of this.** Mr. Husenbeth scarcely knows how to do more than, in a smart way, repeat old exploded arguments, and make new blunders. Perhaps the cause rather than the advocate is to be pitied. Mr. Faber has administered some wholesome discipline to his under

Mr. Faber's Supplement to the Difficulties of Romanism, in answer to Dr. Trevern, is a masterly performance, and by no means superseded by his subsequent writings. It is remarkable for a complete discussion of the celebrated Catechesis of Cyril of Jerusalem, on the subject of transubstantiation, a translation of which is given entire, in order to obviate the usual objections. The tract, likewise, entitled Facts and Assertions, which is an abridgment of the last edition of the Difficulties, is a felicitous effort, and contains, both for matter and argument, what would supply information, even to the educated, many of whom are as ignorant as the generality of Protestants are on the subject of papal doctrines.