that Judas sold our Saviour for thirty pieces of silver. Mr. Wesley then must charitably presume, that no priest will forego his personal interest in compliment to his successor, and as it is his interest to impose upon his votaries, to slacken the rein, and shelter himself under the shade of the laws; either perjury is no part of his belief, or he must be too scrupulous; which in Mr. Wesley's opinion is heresy to believe. In ethics, as in mathematics, there are self-evident demonstrations; no proposition in Euclid is more clear than the following: A person who does not think perjury a crime, 'would not forfeit a guinea from reluctance to an oath.'The Roman Catholics forfeit every privilege rather than take an oath against their conscience.

Are not they Adam's children? Have they not the same sensations of pain and pleasure as other men? Their vices and virtues, do they not run in the same channels with those of their Protestant neighbours? Are they not animated with the same desires of glory, allured by the blandishments of pleasure, courted by the charms of riches, as eager for the enjoyment of ease and opulence? If perjury be their creed, if their clergy be endued with the magic power of forgiving not only present but future sins, why do not they glide gently down the stream of legal liberty, instead of stemming the torrent of oppression? Why do not they qualify themselves for sitting in the Senate, and giving laws to the land in concert with their countrymen, instead of being the continual objects of penal sanctions? It is, that they are diametrically the reverse of what they are represented. Their religion forbids them to sport with the awful name of the Divinity.They do not choose to impose upon their neighbours, or themselves, by perjury; nor run the risk of eternal death for a little honey, Were it otherwise, in three weeks time they could all read their recantations, and be on a level with the rest of their fellow-subjects: they could imitate that philosopher who had two religions-one for himself, and another for his country. Yet the archives of national justice can prove, that Catholics, reduced to the necessity of discovering against themselves, preferred the loss of their estates to the guilt of perjury, when a false oath could have secured

them in their property. Notwithstanding this imputed creed, they prefer the smarting afflictions of the body to the stinging remorses of the soul; and when worldly prosperities stand in competition with conscience, they rather choose to be its martyrs than executioners.

Gentlemen, reconcile, if you can, perjurers from principle, with sufferers from delicacy of conscience, and I shall style you the children of the great Apollo. But are not the Catholics a set of passive machines, veering at the breath of the Pope, who can dispense with them in any thing? Or 'what security can they give to Protestant governors, whilst they acknowledge his spiritual power?' If this be any ob jection to their loyalty, Catholic kings should banish their Catholic subjects, and introduce Protestants in their stead for, as the Roman Catholic faith is the same all over the world; and that France and Spain are more convenient to the Pope than the Britannic islands, he would have more machines to move, more votaries to obey his mandates, and more facility in compassing his designs. In England and Ireland all the Protestants would oppose him; whereas in Catholic kingdoms, if his power has such an unlimited sway over the conscience of man, as Mr. Wesley asserts, every subject, nay, kings themselves, would be bound to obey him. But Catholic subjects know, that if God must have his own, Cæsar must have his due. In his quality of pontiff, they are ready to kiss the Pope's feet: but if he assumes the title of conqueror, they are ready to bind his hands. The very ecclesiastical benefices, which are more in the spiritual line, are not at his disposal. When England had more to dread from him than now, a Catholic parliament passed the statute of premunire; the bishops and mitred abbots preferred their own temporal interest to that of the Pope, and reserve the benefices to themselves, and the clergy under their jurisdiction. Charity begins at home, and I do not believe any Catholic so divested of it, as to prefer fifty pounds a year under the Pope's government, to an hundred pounds under that of a Protestant king. Queen Mary, so devoted to the Pope's cause, both on account of her religion, and the justice done to her mother by the inflexible resolution of the sovereign

pontiff, still would not cede her temporal rights, nor those of her subjects, in compliment to his spiritual power. After the reconciliation of her kingdom to the apostolical see, a statute was passed, enacting, that the Pope's bulls, briefs, &c. should be merely confined to spirituals, without interfering with the independence of her kingdom, or the rights of her subjects. The history of Europe proclaims aloud, that the Roman Catholics are not passive engines in the hands of Popes, and that they confine his power within the narrow limits of his spiritual province. They have often taken his cities, and opposed Paul's sword to Peter's keys, and silenced the thunders of the vatican with the noise of the cannon.-They know that Peter was a fisherman when kings swayed the sceptre, and that the subsequent grandeur of his successors, could never authorize him to alter the primitive institution that commands subjects to obey their rulers, and to give Cæsar his due,

With regard to his spiritual power, you will be surprised, gentlemen, when I tell you, that, from Lodowic Muggleton down to John Wesley, those who have instituted new sects amongst the Christians, have assumed more power than the Pope dare to assume over the Catholics.

They may add or diminish: but, with regard to the Pope, the landmarks are erected, and we would never permit him to remove them. If he attempted to preach up five sacraments instead of seven, we would immediately depose him. Mr. Wesley may alter his faith as often as he pleases, and prevail on others to do the same; but the Pope can never alter ours: we acknowledge him, indeed, as head of the Church, for every society must have a link of union, to guard against confusion and anarchy; and, without annexing any infallibility to his person, we acknowledge his title to precedence and pre-eminence. But, in acknowledging him as the first pilot to steer the vessel, we acknowledge a compass by which he is to direct his course. He is to preserve the vessel, but never to expose it to shipwreck. Any deviation from the laws of God, the rights of nature, or the faith of our fathers, would be the fatal rock on which the Pope himself would split. In a word, the Pope is our first Pastor; he may feed, but cannot poison us: we acknowledge no

power in him, either to alter our faith, or to corrupt our morals.

If the Pope's power were then rightly understood, his spiritual supremacy would give no more umbrage to the King of Great Britain, than the jurisdiction of a diocesan bishop. But deep rooted prejudices can scarcely be removed; and little can be expected from the generality, when the learned themselves are hurried by the tide of popular error.

From want of rightly understanding the case, and attention to the discriminating line drawn by the Catholics ber tween the Pope's spiritual and temporal power, Sir William Blackstone himself gave into the snare of vulgar delusion. This learned expositor of England's common law, declares the Roman Catholics as well entitled to every legal indulgence as the other dissenters from the established religion, maugre their real presence, purgatory, confessions, &c. But still the Pope's ghost haunts him to such a degree, that he would fain have the Catholics abjure his spiritual supremacy. But Sir William, who has exposed himself to the censure of Mr. Sheridan, in establishing the formidable right of conquest over Ireland, and to the animadversions of the divines, by declaring that an act of parliament. can alter the religion of the land,' (as if, by act of parliament, we should all become Turks, be circumcised, and expect an earthly Paradise ;) has exposed himself to the reproaches of every smatterer in divinity, who could ask him: If, in acknowledging the spiritual jurisdiction of the bishop of London, he encroached upon the privileges of the Lord Mayor.

But in talking of the power of parliament to alter the religion of the land,' Sir William has argued from facts: and in talking of the spiritual power of the Pope, he must have argued from hear-say. The lawyer may be excused when he talks of spiritual powers: but what apology can be pleaded by the apostle and divine, who, like Tristram Shandy's priest, baptizes the child before he is born, and grants Popes and priests the power of forgiving all sins, not only past and present, but sins to come; this Mr. Wesley asserts: it is surprising magic that forgives now, the sin that

is to be committed a hundred years hence: let no one de. prive Mr. Wesley of the glory of the invention. Past sins, in our belief, can be forgiven by Popes and priests, not as primary agents, but as subordinate instruments in the hands of the Divinity; not according to the absolute will of the priest, but according to the dispositions of the penitent, and the clauses of the covenant of mercy, which the priest can neither alter nor disannul.

The dark recesses of the criminal consciences must be searched. The monster must be stifled in the heart that gave it birth. A sincere sorrow for past guilt, a firm resolution to avoid future lapses, and every possible atonement to the injured Deity, and the injured neighbour, are the previous and indispensable requisites. Take away any of the three conditions, and the Pope's and priest's absolution are but empty sounds; the keys of the church rattle in vain, they are no more than the mutterings of sorcerers, or words of incantation pronounced over a dead body, without ever imparting to it the genial heat of animation and vitality.-Popes nor priests can do no more than God himself and the Scriptures declare, that God will never forgive the sinner, without sorrow and repentance. And the schoolmen dispute, whether, by an absolute power, he could raise to the beatific vision, a soul polluted with the defilements of guilt. If then the priest's absolution be any plea against Roman Catholics, it may as well be said, that the promise of the Most High, 'to pardon the repentant sinner, although his sins were as red as scarlet,' encourages men to commit sin; or that a man may take an oath contrary to his conscience, under the idea, that a subsequent repentance will gain forgiveness and pardon.

But is it not intolerable presumption in man to arrogate 'such power?' Be it so; I am no apologist when I write in a public paper: controversy I leave to the schools. If I make my confession to a priest, what is it to my neighbour? Society will gain by the pretended superstition; for the most immortal Catholics are those who seldom or never frequent the sacraments. I look on the pretended conferences of Numa Pompilius with the nymph Egeria, as a mere fiction, devised

U