*

Pius the Fifth, and Sixtus Quintus, in publifhing their bulls of depofition against queen Elizabeth, and abfolving her fubjects from their allegiance; could not perfuade the Catholics of England, to rife up in arms against their fovereign, though they were fuperior in numbers, and had room to expect every aflift

ance.

Two proofs which will ever ftand upon record, that Catholics never hold difference in religion, as a fufficient plea for dethroning kings; nor a pope's bull a fufficient caufe, for withdrawing their allegiance,

In the dark ages, popes were depofed by the council of Conftance; and John the twenty-fecond, who preached up the Millenarian doctrine, and held that fouls do not enjoy the clear fight of God until after the refurrection, could not perfuade the members of his church to believe him; nor diffuade the university of Paris from cenfuring a doctrine, which the bead of their church preached from the pulpit at Avignon, and which he himself retracted before a notary public, and feveral witnesses in his laft fickness; nor diffuade a French king from writing this fhort letter to him, "Retracte, on je te "ferai

*Such proceedings are accounted for in Loyalty Alerted, in the difcuffion of the depofing power.

66

"ferai ardre,"-retract or I will get you burned. An evident proof that the pope cannot perfuade the members of his church, to "what he lifts; nor enjoin it them on pain of "eternal fire."

For the honour of Locke's memory, let my correspondent throw the fifty-ninth page of his treatise on toleration into the fire; for it is a jumble of nonfenfe. He argues from falfe principles taken up without examination.

All the popes bulls from the time of St. Peter, to the end of ages, cannot make an article of faith for Roman Catholics, without the acceptance of the Univerfal Church, and the church has no power over the temporals of kings, much lefs to command any thing against the laws of God.

Catholics never follow an arbitrary doctrine. The ftandard is fixed. The boundaries are prescribed, and the pope himself cannot remove them. They confider him as the head paftor of the church. Subordination in every fociety, requires pre-eminence in its rulers. But his will is not their creed.

As to Mr. Wesley. His reply to me is little more than a repetition of his firft letter. He denies that he himself, or his followers, were

66

દ

66

ever perfecuted." For the truth I appeal to his own confcience. I appeal to his "Farther appeal" to men of reafon and religion, wherein he defcribes the fufferings of feveral of his followers in England; how he himself was dragged by the mob; and the proceedings of a magiftrate who difperfed a pamphlet, entitled, "A parallel between the Papifts and Me"thodists," in order to kindle the rage of the populace against him. I appeal to the letter he wrote, many years ago, to doctor Bailey of Cork, wherein he complains that the grand jury, of that city found indictments against Charles Welley, who makes the hymns, and ordered him to be transported as a vagabond. Mr. Wefley has got the letter printed, with the names of the grand jury. But, after having weathered the ftorm, the mariner on fhore forgets his diftreffes as well as his fea-chart.

To fhew that his friend, John Hufs, never 66 kindled any civil wars in Bohemia, and that "he was quite innocent of any offence what"ever;" he quotes the following teftimonial, given to John Hufs, by the bishop of Nazareth. "We Nicholas, do, by these presents, make “known unto all men, that we often talked "with that honourable man, John Hufs; and "in all his fayings, doings, and beliaviour,

"have found him to be a faithful man, finding “no manner of evil, finifter or erroneous do"ings in him, unto thefe prefents." To this Mr. Wesley fubjoins, a teftimonial from the archbishop of Prague; declaring," that he "knew not that John Hufs was culpable or "faulty in any crime or offence whatsoever."

Let us now fuppofe thofe teftimonials to be genuine, and grant them to Mr. Wefley to get rid of a bad caufe. What advantage can he derive from them? The bishop, of Nazareth declares, that he talked very often with John Hufs, and that in their converfation, he dif covered nothing finifter or erroneous in him. Doubtless, in converfing with a bishop who was an Inquifitor, John Hufs was upon his guard. The archbishop "knew not that he

was culpable." The converfation of the first, and the know not of the other, muft counterbalance the pofitive and decifive proofs, produced on a criminal's trial, in presence of a general council, no ways interefted in the condemnation of a man, in whom there "was no

evil, nothing finifter or erroneous!" Teftimonials are often granted to people from tendernefs, or ignorance, which will avail but little on a trial.

The thirtieth propofition, extracted from Hufs's works, and condemned by the council,

runs

rans thus: "There is no temporal lord, there "is no pope, no bishop, when he is in the state "of mortal fin." Hufs himself acknowledged this feditious propofition, which authorizes the fanatical faint to take the king's crown, if he fees him but once drunk: or to feize the property of the lord of the manor, if, in fcolding his coachman, he curfes. The fruits of this doctrine were, as vifible in Bohemia, as the fruits of Mr. Wefley's Apology for the affociations, are legible in the glowing embers of London !

L'Enfant, the Calvinift hiftorian of the council of Conftance, better informed than Mr. Wefley, can inftruct him in these words: "John Hufs, by his fermons and writings, and " violent and outrageous conduct, had ex"tremely contributed to the troubles which "then diftracted Bohemia."*

What becomes now of teftimonials which carry contradiction on the very face of them, whereas John Hufs. was excommunicated a year and a half before he obtained them? Those bishops, then, must have been miftaken if their teftimonials be genuine. Each of them muft have been the Burnet of his days; of whom Proteftant as well as Catholic hiftorians remark,

* L'Enfant, B. 3. No. 57.