those only to approach him, who first make a full surrender of their judgment to Popes and councils. A belief in Christ and his work of redemption, grounded on the Scriptures and their evidences, is thus made useless, unless it is preceded by a belief in Roman supremacy, grounded on mere surmises. Christianity is removed from its broad foundation, to place the mighty fabric upon the moveable sand of a conjectural meaning.

This looks more like love of self than of Christ; more like ambition than charity. The title to infallibility and supremacy being at the best doubtful, the benefit of the doubt should have been left to Christian liberty.-But may not the opposite conduct of the Roman church have arisen from sincere zeal for what she conceived to be the true intention of Christ? Christian candour would demand this construction, were it not for the use she has made of the assumed privilege: yet if we find that, having erected herself into an organ of Heaven, all her oracular decisions have invariably tended towards the increase of her own power; it will be difficult to admit the purity of her inten

By comparing the articles of the church of Rome with those of the church of England, we shall find that the points of difference are chiefly these tradition, transubstantiation, the number of sacraments, purgatory, indulgences, and the invocation of saints. Such are the main questions on doctrine, at issue between the two churches; for the differences about free-will and justification might, I believe, be settled without much difficulty, by accurately defining the language on both sides. Now, I will not assume the truth of the Protestant tenets on these points, nor enter into arguments against those of the Roman church; my present concern is with their tendency.

To begin with tradition: let us observe how broad a field is opened to the exercise of infallibility, by the supposition that an indefinite number of revealed truths, were floating down the stream of ages, unconsigned to the inspired records of Christianity. The power of interpreting the word of God by a continual light from above, might be confined by the Scriptures themselves, as it would be difficult to force doctrines on the belief of Christians, of which the very name and subject

faith, out of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess, and truly hold, I, N., promise, vow, and swear most constantly to hold and profess the same whole and entire, with God's assistance, to the end of my life. Amen."

The Latin original." Hanc veram catholicam fidem, extra quam nemo salvus esse potest, quam in præsenti sponte profiteor, et veraciter. teneo, eandem integram, et inviolatam, usque ad extremum vitæ spatium constantissime (Deo adjuvante) retinere et confiteri, Atque a meis SUBDITIS, VEL ILLIS QUORUM CURA AD ME IN MUNERE MEO SPECTABIT, TENERI, DOCERI, ET PRÆDICARI, QUANTUM IN ME ERIT, CURATURUM EGO IDEM N. spondeO, VOVEO, AC JURO.".

Now, the words in small capitals, omitted by Mr. Butler, contain the very pith and marrow of the strongest argument against the admissibility of Roman Catholics to parliament. For if the most solemn profession of their faith lays on every one of her members who enjoys a place of influence, the duty of" procuring, that all under him, by virtue of his office, shall hold, teach, and preach. the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, and

this under an oath and vow; how can such men engage to preserve the ascendancy of the Church of England in these realms?

When, in the New Times of the 5th of April, I exposed this important omission before the public, I thought that Mr. Butler would have explained the origin of it. But I am not aware of his having given any explanation. Neither on that, nor on the present occasion, is it my intention to cast a suspicion on that gentleman's good faith. He probably copied from some garbled translation, prepared by less scrupulous members of his communion, who wished to conceal the real tenets of their church from a Protestant public. At all events, this fresh instance of inaccuracy on a most important point, gives additional propriety to caution in reading Mr. Butler's defences of Catholicism.

LETTER III.

Examination of the title to infallibility, spiritual supremacy, and exclusive salvation, claimed by the Roman Catholic Church. Internal evidence against Rome, in the use she has made of her assumed prerogative. Short method of determining the question.

AT the conclusion of my preceding Letter, I entreated you to examine the title by which your church deprives her members of the right of private judgment on religious matters, and denies salvation to those who venture to think for themselves. In making this request I may appear to have overlooked the very essence of your religious allegiance, and to demand a concession which would at once put you out of the pale of the Roman church. But I beg you to observe, that whatever be the extent of the authority of that church over you, there is one point which it cannot withhold from the judgment and verdict of your reason. The reality of her title to be the guide and rule of your faith, must be a matter, not of authority, but of proof. He that claims