"to your Right Honourable House, " stating the principal grievances un"der which they lie, &c.—And "they are firmly persuaded, that adequate provision for the maintenance "of the civil and religious establish"ments of this kingdom, may be made "consistently with the strictest adhe 66 Finally, in attempting to justify a faulty formulary by logical sophisms, the pastoral writer has fallen into a still more glaring theological error, the publication of which has caused great confusion in one part of the Catholic flock, and has ended in the interdiction from the sacred ministry of as learned a divine, and as exemplary" and zealous a pastor, as is to be found on the English mission, the justly venerated Mr. R. P. of Br -1. 66 66 rence, on their part, to the tenets "and discipline of the Roman Catho"lic Religion; and that any arrange❝ments founded on this basis of muOften has the prelate been reminded "tual satisfaction and security, and of his own description of the Fifth Re- extending to them the full enjoysolution, namely, that it involves con- "ment of the civil constitution of their sequences, probably injurious to Reli- country, will meet' with their grategion: often has it been demonstrated "ful concurrence."--Now, if any to him, that, from Lord Grey's speech, intelligent man, unacquainted with our on presenting it to the Peers, down to controversies, be asked, at the present the late speeches and publications of day, what is his sense of this passage, Sir J. Hippisley, every public man I am confident he will express it to who has mentioned it in Parliament or the following effect:-I understand written upon it, has represented it as by it, that the provisions which Para pledge to Lord Grenville's requisi- | liament is about to make for securing tion upon our discipline. To all this their own Religion against the danger he gives no answer, but recurs, on apprehended from your Emancipation, every occasion, to the terms of the Re- are, in your persuasion, perfectly resolution, which he logically maintains concileable with your tenets and discido not imply this: just as if the pre-pline, and that you will concur in mainsent business were to defend a scholas-taining the former, by adapting the tic thesis, and not the independence latter to the purposes of it. Now, of the Catholic clergy and discipline, which have been, and are still, in imminent danger, from the Fifth Resolution. I shall begin the present discussion of the terms of the Resolution with giving the whole of the contested part of it, as it was signed in the form of a Petition to the House of Lords, by five English prelates and certain other Catholics, and as it was published by the Board in their folio edition, p. 3, word for word, and stop for stop."whose names are under written, "Roman Catholics of England, beg "leave to represent to your Right Ho"nourable House that your Petition "We ers, in common with the general "body of the English Roman Catho"lics, have lately signed a Petition * The distinction here made between "the "general body of the English Roman Catho"lics, who are stated to have sigued the first or principal petition, and those individual "English Roman Catholics who signed the "second or accompanying petition,” resolved upon at the St. Alban's Tavern, Feb. 1, 1810, and who are stated in the folio edition to have amounted in all to near two hundred persons, cannot fail as striking the reader, Agreeably to this distinction, there is a note in the Board's official print, THE PRESS, Feb. 23, 1810, containing the first petition, concern ing this second or "Accompanying Petition," in the following words:-"The instrument "here alluded to (the Fifth Resolution) not "being the general act of the English Ca"tholics, but only of a certain number of This them, it is not necessary to insert it. tion, and Mr. C. Butler, with his usual fidenote was suppressed in THE GLOBE edility, in his subsequent publications, always entitled it "The Fifth Resolution of the "ENGLISH Catholics, met at the St. Al"ban's Tavern."-Letter to an Irish Gent. p. 3.-Hist. Acc. of Laws, p. 37.--The Pastoral writer goes beyond Mr. B, and in order to implicate the Scotch Catholics in the Tavern Resolution, he quotes the words of it as a declaration of THE BRITISH CATHOLICS, 66 | 66 66 rangement as I have described, that "this measure has my support.- -To every letter, principle, and word of "it, (Lord Grenville's Letter,) I beg "to be understood as implicitly subscribing." 66 Let us now attend to the junior Prelate's glosses, and other scholastic operations in his late Pastoral on the passage in question. "It became their, "the British Catholics loyal charac"ter to declare- "That they were actuated by a desire to secure-the peace-of the British Empire, &c.” ”""—and whilst they expressed their conviction that ""ade 66.66 66.66 66 (by the Legislature, to whose pro"vince it exclusively belongs) "66, con""sistently with the strictest adherence on their part to the tenets "" and discipline of the Roman Ca 66.66 66 what could be more rash and dangerous in a conscientious Catholic than to express a conviction of this nature, without knowing (we have since learnt them) what these Protestant securities were to be? On the other hand, what is more sinful in a member of the Catholic Religion, than to concur in maintaining another which protests against it? | In the next place, let any plain honest man or woman, who is acquainted with our controversies, be asked the meaning of the Resolution? Why," that the Veto is lawful, to be sure, and that you are ready to accept of it, he or she will immediately answer.-Let us now hear what the Noble States-""quate provision might be made" " men, who framed the Resolution and presented it to the House of Peers, say, as to its meaning? Lord Grenville, from whose letter the Resolution was extracted, thus expresses himself in it :-" That adequate arrangements may be made for all these purposes "(the safety of our own Religious "Establishments, &c.) consistently ❝ with the strictest adherence, on your 66 part, to your own religious tenets, "is the persuasion which you have "long been labouring to establish"that these objects may be recon66 ciled, in so far at least as respects. the appointment of your Bishops," " is known with undeniable certain66 ty." Lord Grey, in presenting the Resolutions to the House of Peers, said this I have the satifaction of 66 being authorised to add, that, while "they (the English Catholic Peti❝tioners) pray for relief, they are willing to accept it accompanied with "such provisions, not contrary to "their feelings, as you may think 66 necessary for the security of your 66 own Establishment, and that any arrangement on this basis will be thankfully accepted by them. The declaration of what I have stated "is contained in the Second Petition which I have presented to your "Lordships. It was adopted lately "at a meeting in the metropolis, and 66 was signed by several Bishops, &c. 66 66 -It is with a view to such an ar tholic Religion,' "" it became their "piety to guard against pledging them"selves to any measure that might "not be perfectly consistent with the integrity and safety of their religion, and thus to declare, that any arrangement founded on the basis of mutual satisfaction and security, and extending to them "" the civil constitution of the coun"try, will meet with their grateful 66.66 66.66 66.66 95 99 concurrence." What disjointing and transposing, and enlarging and altering the resolution do not we here witness, for the fruitless purpose of reducing it to the standard of sound Catholic doctrine! It is plain that none of these logical operations for rectifying the formula, occurred to the Prelate on the first of Feb. 1810, when he declared that “it would probably involve consequences affecting the spiritual interests of the districts, nor even some quarter of an hour afterwards when he signed the same, as appears by his printed letter, dated a fortnight afterwards. But to proceed *The words in italics are those which precisely contradict the decision of the Irish Prelacy, Feb. 26, 1810; a decision which the Pastoral-writer had declared to be an insult to him. But were willing to hear from you was, how far we can secure our religion in conformity and coalition with the tenets and discipline of yours. After all, this evasion does not appear to be the invention of the Prelate, as it occurs in Mr. C. Butler's Letter to an Irish Gentleman, printed three years ago; and it may pass in a lawyer's pamphlet, whose motto is, Dolus an veritus quis in hoste requirit? But it is certainly unbecoming a Bishop's Pastoral Letter. to the gloss by reference to the first SO There is, however, something still worse than this in the passage quoted, and which I apprehend must be laid to the Prelate's individual account; I mean not to his tenets, which I am convinced are pure, but to that of reflection. On looking back to the passage quoted from the Pastoral, its writer will be found to have expressly asserted, that "it exclusively belongs to the province of the Legislature to "make adequate provision for the "maintenance of the Religious Esta"blishment of this kingdom." Such is the doctrine which occasions much disturbance among the Catholics of the West of England at the present day. Now this evidently supposes, and is grounded upon the false and irreligious principle of Erastus and Hobbs, that every government has an inherent right to establish whatever creed and worship it may at any time prefer within its own dominions: the consequences of which would be, that the Pope, Bishops, and Clergy, would have no claim to interfere even in the Catholic doctrine and discipline where these are established in a state, except as far as its Legislature may give them leave to do so. I say, that the writer supposes this as a general principle, in what he says relative to the "exclusive province of the Le"gislature of this kingdom," since he cannot possibly maintain his proposition upon any other ground. But to consider the assertion apart, and as it is laid down, it is evidently false and censurable upon Catholic prin◄ ciples, as appears from the following syllogism: It does not belong to the province of any man, or body of men, to make provision for the maintenance of a schismatical Religious Establishment; but the Religious Establishment of this kingdom is schismatical : therefore, it does not belong to the province of the Legislature of this kingdom, to make provision for the maintenance of it. Having been reduced to these extremities in his attempt to defend the former part of the Resolution, when the prelate comes to grapple with the succeeding part of it, he is forced to disjoint and essentially alter it. The whole of the Fifth Resolution, when fairly copied, forms one single period, and runs on in a connected tenor, as may be seen above. The subscribers, having expressed their persuasion that provision may be made for maintaining the Protestant religion, consistently with their adherence to the faith and discipline of their own, immediately add in the same sentence, that 66 any arrangement founded on THIS "BASIS of mutual security will meet "with their grateful concurrence," which concurrence to the maintenance of a schismatical Establishment, even though our own religion were not thereby injured, it would be unlawful in us Catholics to give. Now in order to evade or lessen this objection, what does the Letter-writer do? He disjoints the latter part of the Resolution from the former part, making it a distinct, sentence; and he alters the definite clause, THIS BASIS of mutual security, into the indefinite clause, THE BASIS of mutual security. The fact is, there was no reciprocity in the very term of the Resolution, much less in the sense of the parties concerned in it. The Catholics were to be content with THIS basis of security, the one which had been described consisting in an adherence to their existing discipline (it being always understood that the efficient Veto, &c. was compatible with it,) whereas Protestants were to make as many new provisions for the maintenance of their Church, and this by undermining ours, without the possibility of our counteracting them, and even with the obligation of our concurrence with them in the attainment of their object. To the man who may be disposed to contest what is here stated, the writer says: look at the late Bill. In case the Junior Prelate, in summoning the late gazetted Meeting at Durham, was bent on reviving the Fifth Resolution, and forcing the greater part of the English Catholic Clergy to defend and praise it from their altars, and, at the same time, to contradict a synodical decision of the universal Irish Prelacy, (thus arraying the English Mission againt the great Catholic Church of Ireland,) or if he intended barely to hold out the delusive hopes of fresh arrangements, for Protestant securities, say, rather, for Catholic sacrifices, to the laymen, who defrayed the expenses of the Meeting, such as are seen in the second or private Pastoral from Durham, he acted wisely, according to this world, though not canonically nor decently, in excluding his undersigned senior from it. J. MILNER, D. D. Wolverhampton, Jan. 19, 1814. * It has been alledged, that a meeting of three V. V. A., without the fourth, upon important Church business, took place in 1792; but the above-named, who himself was present at it, testifies that the absent prelate was regularly summoned to attend it. The writer cannot conclude, without calling upon the Rev. Mr. H-n, or some other able man, to solve the dilemma, if this be possible, which has been heretofore stated. The pastoral extols the leading subscribers of the Fifth Resolution for their uniform disposition "to refer all terms of emancipation, of a re ligious nature, to the judgment and decision "of their pastors. Hence it follows, that either this is not true, in the instance of their agreeing to the religious clauses of the late Bill, or that this Pastor and his colleague, on the spot, decided that they might lawfully agree to them. To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal. were preserved. Mr. W-, in his discourse on the 19th of December SIR-I was so much pleased with last, observed, that some men reproyour answer to Mr. Blair's Letter, bated the Catholic Fathers, but he that I could not refrain shewing it to thought it would be better if they several of my acquaintance, who are followed their example. Mr. Wesley Dissenters, and they are of opinion, published the works of the good Archas well as myself, that that gentleman bishop Fenelon, and Thomas a Kemwill find it a difficult point to reply to pis, &c.; Dr. Gill also stated, that you. Mr. Blair seems to think it preCatholics would beat by argument. sumptuous in the Catholic to believe In this he was very right, for it is the in the infallibility of his Church, and only weapon they use, with the assistsays that Protestants make no such pre- ance of the Grace of God. From my tensions. The latter may, perhaps, connexions, and situation in life, I am not feel themselves so confident; but not ignorant of many of the unscripCatholics rely on the words of Christ, tural doctrines now disseminating in and look to the Pastors of the Church, our "land of Bibles," through the with whom the Holy Spirit was promeans of this unlimited-judgment inTo enumerate them mised to dwell, as the expounders of terpretation. the true faith, well knowing that they would be a task too great for me, and do not buy their livings, nor make us would require too much room in your hear them against our wills. We ac- useful miscellany; but I cannot help knowledge no infallibility, nor per- observing, that their multitudinous fection, in human nature, as some of creeds, more discordant than the Mr. Wesley's followers do. We rest tongues of Babel, convince me of the on the promises of Christ, and the necessity of a spiritual guide, and congift of the Holy Spirit. Mr. Blair firm me in that ONE Faith spoken of also considers Catholics as unchari- by St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephetable to those who differ from them in sians. I hope, Sir, you and your points of faith and doctrine, and par- readers will excuse whatever incorticularly the Clergy, in not allowing rectness may be found in this letter, an unlimited judgment in the Laity as it was my lot to be born in that to interpret the Scriptures. Now, unfortunate island, where the laws of Sir, you know very well that no Ca- the country made it penal for a Papist tholic is called upon to point out the to exercise the profession of a schoolfuture destiny of any man, nor yet master; and near a town too, in to limit the mercy of God; and as to which, at the time I am speaking of, the interpretation of the Holy Scrip- a Papist was not suffered to reside. tures, what is it but our own unlimit-But the times are altered; and Popery, ed judgment and consciencious opi- as Mr. Blair calls it, is increasing, notnions that make us adhere to the Ca- withstanding the vast exertions of our charitable Protestants to rescue tholic Faith, for which adherence we are treated as slaves in a land of from spiritual tyranny. freedom!-Man is an active, and not a passive being; and as true philosophy is in a progressive state, so is the justice of our cause increasing.-But how can it be otherwise, when even our dissenting brethren bear testimony to the goodness and merits of Catholic works. The late Rev. Mr. Gunn, in one of his sermons, said, that it was through the long channel of the Catholic Church that the Holy Scriptures us I am yours, &c. R. ARUNDEL. ENGLISH CATHOLICS. (FROM THE DUBLIN EVENING POST.) The extraordinary progress which the cause of the Catholics of Ireland has made within the last few years, |