cause of an increased delusion being practised on them. I make no doubt I am not the only one who has had reason to complain of their partiality. Among the most conspicuous of them all stands Mr. Cobbett, who latterly has been so ably handled by yourself, and for which you are certainly entitled to the thanks of your fellow-Catholics, however the Veto principles of some may cause the jealousy with which they look on you: he is one of those to whom I meant to allude in speaking of the third party, although in general I am much gratified by his arguments on political topics, still I agree with yourself in opinion that his effusions on religious topics are void of every thing but ignorance. But now, Sir, that we have in a manner surmounted the difficulties which we had to encounter from the editors of the newspapers and magazines, through the means of your Journal; now that we felt our imaginations gladden at the idea that no empty or ignorant editor should with impunity insult our feel ings; now that we had anticipated the enviable liberty of self-defence, the birth-right of mankind, and bulwark of social order, fresh difficulties startle our hopes and disappoint our wishes, and which in my opinion demand the most particular attention of the Catholics, and call loudly for an expression of our sentiments in some acknowledged shape, and I trust the example which our fellow-Catholics of Lancashire have given us, will not be suffered to remain nugatory, and that they alone should stand the torrent of abuse which will be thrust at them by the venal editors of the ministerial prints. No, on this occasion, it is our duty to forget the differences existing amongst ourselves, and join in à Petition to the Legislature, which shall have first been drawn up by persons appointed by ourselves at a general meeting held specially for that purpose, and which should have been submitted, for their approbation, to the Vicars Apostolic, and to which every Catholic should have fixed his name and residence. Such is the idea I form of the subject, and something in this manner ought to be adopted without loss of time; the Parliament has already met, and our Petition ought to be presented immediately, or as soon as convenient after the Christmas recess. One of the difficulties I allude to, is the choice of Parliamen tary friends; for, unfortunately, those on whom we had trusted with the greatest confidence for so many Sessions, we must now rank among our most dangerous enemies: in Parlia ment we can find a Donoughmore, yet no Hutchinson; a Grattan, yet no Curran; a Mathew, yet no Jones; a Plunkett, yet no Phillips; a Wilberforce, and yet no real friend to the universal abolition of slavery; who, although always professing charity for the unfortunate Africans, still is no enemy to the persecution and slavery of the really unfortunate Irish. Here I would ask this gentleman, or any one so well informed in the Bible and New Testament, what part of these holy writings recommends more charity to be observed towards the Africans than the Irish?-In this Session we shall have to combat against boasted friends and declared enemies, and will, I believe, find it difficult to de cide as to which are the most dangerous or insulting. The detested re script from Quarantotti, I fear has done more injury to the Catholic cause, than it has obtained benefit from the many annually repeated discussions it has undergone. I would gladly leave that rescript to oblivion, but cannot help regretting the publi city it got: however, I will drop the subject, not wishing to hurt the feelings of those who, I believe, from the best motives, urged its publication.As to the Veto, I have no doubt that subject has been well settled long before now at Rome; indeed from the appearance of Doctors Milner and Murray at that place, no doubt can be entertained as to the result. Indeed it has ever caused me the greatest surprise, how any Catholic, on ma ture reflection, could give his sanction | vince every one of the dangers which are the sure accompaniments of such laical interference. I would also re commend the perusal of the "Eluci dation of the Veto," by Felix Mac Carthy, Esq. as a wholesome deserty after the more substantial food. Even some of our Clergy have, I understand, given their sanction to a Veto. However, I trust by this time their eyes will have been opened, and warned of the deadly stroke aimed at one of our first doctrines, namely, the supremacy of the Pope. But in this country, and most particularly in our district, Mr. Editor, we have too much reason to complain of laical interference; but it is to be hoped the time has passed by The Catholics, I fear, will have much to encounter in the course of next year; but I hope the greater the danger the more firm will be their stand: for much will necessarily depend on unanimity among ourselves. How desirable will it not be then to be well acquainted with one another's sentiments. And how is that acquaintance to be obtained, unless by frequent meetings? For, alas! we have friends, in proportion, as nu merous, and far more dangerous, among ourselves, than amidst all the different sects who profess in this country exclusively to preach the gos pel and adhere to its principles: while some are preaching from principle, others are from opposition; while others are by method, and others again, by every species of blasphemy, are announcing new Messiahs, &c. In fact, with all their boasted enlightenedness, education, wisdom, religion, and morality, the English is, on religious topics, the most darkened nation on earth; and their papers only serve to encrease the darkness and ex to the measure of the Veto: it is like a traveller, who, fearing the attacks of the beasts of prey, seeks the tiger's den, and there' demands protection for the remainder of his journey. The dangers resulting from such measures are not visionary; they are not shadows which start before you and then vanish; they are real; the more they are sifted the more substantial are they in demonstration, and already have they been too severely felt in Canada. Let any Catholic read over the instructions of this Government to that of Canada, published in your Journal for July, p. 245, and then draw their own conclusions. Here I must again stop my subject, to express how sincerely grateful the Catholics of England ought to feel towards you, for had it not been for the noble and independent zeal which urged you to come forward and advocate their cause, they must still have remained the general subject of abuse and insult, without the means of defending themselves in your Journal alone have these instructions appeared in this country; for on this occasion also do we find the boasted liberality of the English venal Whig, Talent, and Infidel writers slackened, (for they are all equally boastful) as it generally does when the real interests of the Catholic Church is the question. Those instructions were known to them, as well as to most, if not to all, our Parliamentary friends (as they are termed). But to return to the Veto; all those who would still sanction such a proposal, I would recommend the perusal of a most valuable work, published many years ago, and which really ought to be read by every Catholic and Protestant in the kingdom; I refer to the "History of the Anglo-cite more confusion. This island, like Saxon Church," by the Rev. John Lingard: then will they percieve with what difficulty the Veto was obtained for the Catholic princes, and what misfortunes were usually attendant on its being granted. The reign of William Rufus alone will, I think, con the Tower of Babel, contains at present nothing but confusion: the difference existing between these two is, that while the inhabitants of the former are confused in arguments, the labourers of the latter were confused in languages, but both are equally J 1 presumptuous. In England, religion | Bible Societies, &c. has now publish. is in every gaping mouth you meet, and still no where can you find it properly understood. One is of the established church, because his father was so before him; another is a Dissenter, because he conceives the church of England to hold principles not consistent with universal charity; while another feels the spirit moving within him, "Yea, verily, the spirit moveth me," and yet no pure flame issues forth; a thick smoke darts forth, and darkness overshadows the whole. Bigotry has taken such deep root in this island, that in every corner you meet some public or private building adapted to the cure, or rather care (cure being out of the question) of persons whom false ideas of religion have driven to madness; in no country are places of this description so numeJous as in England; and the physicians say that five eighth parts of the distempered minds proceed from religion, two-eighths from politics, and the other one-eighth from the natural causes: but I believe the only sure method of ascertaining the causes would be to go from one meeting to another, and hear the arguments which each of the various sects have to urge one against the other, and imagine for a single moment, what must be the inevitable following of such inconsistencies, and answer, whether a bewildered brain will not be the real, consequent, and natural effect of such conduct, particularly on an uncultivated mind. How many fatal instances of such an effect on a cultivated mind might we not quote, were not delicacy in the way. Renewing my former wishes for your success, I again subscribe myself your's sincerely, London, Nov. 24, 1814. T. M. To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal. SIR,-Dr. Marsh, the Margaret Professor of Theology, in the University of Cambridge, in addition to his late publications relating to the ed a "Comparative View of the Churches of England and Rome." This work is printed by the university printer, and is sold by Rivington, St. Paul's Church Yard; and by Deightons, Nicholsons, and Barrett, Cambridge. It is sold at the moderato sum of 7s. 6d.: it contains 350 pages. The book is unbound, being in boards; yet the contents are so valuable, that no person, particularly a true Protestant, can object to the price. The quantity certainly is not great, but then, the quality !-Oh! this will make ample amends. And, who shall dare say, (to make use of a common expres sion) that the money is fooled away? who shall dare say, that the book shall not sell well; and that a Margaret Professor, who gives theological brains to his readers, does not merit, in return, an episcopal mitre? In the first part of the "Compara tive View," he has published (as it seems to us) an almost worn-out Lecture on Tradition; and in the second, he has, beyond all doubt, insulted, and called in question, the allegiance of Catholics. He may again repeat his Lecture, or Lectures, on Tradition; again may he read Bellarmine, the Council of Trent, and Dr. Delahogue: but, in virtue of what authority does the Margaret Professor assert, that, Whoever swears, Jura, honores, privilegia, et auctoritatem Sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesia, Domini nostri Papæ, et successorum prædictorum, conservare, defendere, augere, et promovere curabo, must swear it at the expence of his fealty to his Sove reign? Supposing, then, the Right Rev. the Vicars Apostolic of this coun try have, amongst other clauses, taken the above in their consecration oath, the consequence, according to the doctor, is, they have forfeited their allegiance, violated their fidelity to their lawful sovereign, and are no longer good subjects, but traitors.→ As also are the Irish Catholic prelates, who may have taken the same oath. Is Dr. Marsh apprized of the impor There is a variety of other topics to be met with in this "Comparative View." Amongst others, I cannot but notice the one, writing on which, he has endeavoured to prove the Church of England to be a system of religious liberty, and the Church of Rome a system of religious slavery. Whether the church of England be, or be not, such a systém as he has described, I have at present neither time nor inclination to make a minute enquiry. It is however worthy of notice, that every Protestant is so free, that he is at liberty to withdraw himself from the communion of his church. And will Dr. Marsh venture to assure his readers that such a man is free; when he is shortly after met by the parson of the parish, who comes in search of the strayed sheep, not indeed with the Bible in one hand, and the 39 Articles in the other, to convince him of the error he has committed in deserting an establishment almost 260 years old; but he comes to him, demanding his tithes! In vain does the free man urge that he no longer belongs to his church; that he is now obliged to assist those ministers who have received him into their communion, and who are perhaps equally deserving; and that a Dr. Marsh has written a book, in which he says, that the church, which he has left, was a system of religious liberty. The parson replies, My good friend, I must have my tithes: with regard to those ministers who now preach to you, assist them as you can: and as to Dr.- he would act just as I do. To return, however, to the charge, that the church of Rome is a system of religious slavery. Many grave and weighty and conclusive arguments are adduced in proof of this assertion. The doctrine of exclusive salvation, as maintained by the Catholic church, is very grating to the religious feelings of the Professor; although he exultingly brings it forward, to prove that it enslaves the conscience, and enchains the faculties of man. On this subject I have only to remind this theologian, that "he that believeth not shall be condemned;" 'that the Christian is not at liberty to affix salvation to his own conditions; and that if the Catholic hopes for eternal happiness, it is, in the first instance, because he stedfastly (not to use the term slavishly) believes in all the truths which God has revealed, and which the church of God has taught: and in the second, because he endeavours to ob serve, strictly and religiously, the commandments of God, and of his church: whereas, the Margaret Doetor of Divinity would have the consciences of all men at liberty, to believe and disbelieve whatever accords or disagrees with their notions of religion. To admit that the church of England may have erred, is certainly very considerate and condescending in one of its most conspicuous theological professors. Every member, therefore, of the established church, is at full liberty to secede from its jurisdiction: and he is at liberty to become, what? Not a Catholic; for of a free man, he would become a slave; the church of Rome being a system of religious slavery. What then may he become? 1 imagine Dr. Marsh himself would blush for the honour of his church, in answering this question: not, however, that the man has no choice; but, indeed, because he has so great a choice. Relinquishing then the tenets of the church of England, and permitted to do so, he is now a Dissenter, then a Seceder; today a Brownist, to-morrow a Pædobaptist, Baptist, or Quaker; on Sunday next a Calvinistic Methodist; the Sunday after an Arminian: and, not- | To the Editor ofthe Orthodox Journal. withstanding his strength is now exhausted in groping his way through this, maze of irreligious-I beg the Doctor's pardon-religious confusion, his conscience yet impels, and the Professor permits, him to become a Jumper! Such are the happy, such the salutary consequences of the church of England's system of religious liberty; such the effects which have been, and are to this day to be attributed to private interpretation of the Scriptures. The Margaret Professor has in formed his readers that the church of England is a system of religious li berty. Does this system extend it self to the State. As the Church and State are held to be inseparable, (As Jack and Gill .... by many persons who oppose the Catholic claims, with as many arguments, though with fewer tears, than my Lord E... I am very desirous that Dr. Marsh, in his next publication, should give us his opinion on the subject. Should the Professor, after mature deliberation, be of opinion that they are not inseparable; but that the State, compared to the sun, and the Church very properly to the moon, alternately controul and influence their respective members, I shall thank the Doctor for the hint; and I will candidly tell him and his admirers, (if he has any) that, as a British subject, I obey the laws of the State, I would therefore be not deprived of the cheering rays of the political sun; but as a Catholic, in religious matters, I follow the dictates of my conscience, and am, therefore, not ambitious to place myself under the influence of the Doctor's ecclesiastical moon. The consequences would really be too serious.* Nov. 20, 1814. M. J. W. S. The Margaret Professor is respectfully informed, that Joanna Southcott is at present in the full and perfect enjoyment of re ligious liberty. MR. EDITOR,I am happy in peru sing your excellent Journal, to find you always, and on all occasions, with temper, firmness, and dignity, defending and maintaining the cause of truth; or, in other words, the Catholic orthodox faith and disci pline, in all its bearings. This is standing your ground with consistent dignity: this is defending the invinci ble good old cause, as every orthodox champion ought to defend it. Let no ancient approved Catholic principle; let no approved Catholic practice, which we have received from our venerable forefathers, be given up, or hid behind a curtain, through shame, or a modern temporising false prudence: let us not desist from fre quent and fervent invocations of the Mother of God, and the saints and angels. Did not St. Paul always exhort the faithful to hold fast the tra ditions as he delivered them," that is, undoubtedly, without either changing us not see a Catholic neglect to make or omitting them on any account. Let the sign of the cross on all proper occasions; but let us see him do it with that respect that is becoming so sacred an action: let us see him always use holy water; and, on all proper occasions, make a most respectful genu flection before the divine sacrament of the altar; and not content himself with tapping his breast with the points of his fingers at the Confiteor, Agnus Dei, and Domine non sum dignus, &c. For to what can we, attribute, either neglect in doing these things as they ought to be done, or not doing them at all, but to a false shame, or a torpid negligence. Ought not the wise Christian to be ware of the works, and wiles of Satan, to destroy immortal souls? Let us see what the arch fiend does amongst those whom he separates from the one Holy Catholic Church; the one true fold, under the one shepherd, the spouse of Jesus Christ. Does he not banish from them the use of the sacred |