verance was purchased:..could I dream, Sir, that it would be called indecorous,.. that it would be represented as indecent,.. that I should be accused of treating the English Roman Catholics like vilia corpora, if in such a work I spake the sentiments and used the language of the Church of England?

It is not long since, happening to take up one of the numerous journals with which the press is swarming, I there found some mention of the Convocation, in allusion to a real or supposed expression of regret on my part for the disuse of that assembly, and the consequent loss of its wholesome restraints; upon which the editor observed that I seemed, "like many others, to forget that the Church of England subsists by toleration as much perhaps as those who dissent from her authority." Though not surprised either at the ignorance or the audacity of this remark, I thought it worth remembering. The tone of reprehension, Sir, which you have taken on this occasion, brings it to my recollection, and makes me ask whether indeed the times are such that the Church of England exists but by sufferance, and that he who records its history, or pleads its cause, must accommodate his language so as not to displease its enemies?

In speaking of the Papal System as a prodigious structure of imposture and wickedness, I stated in few words what had been more fully expressed by Burnet. "Learn," says that prelate, to view Popery in a true light as a conspiracy to exalt the power of the clergy, even by subjecting the most sacred truths of religion to contrivances for raising their authority, and by offering to the world another method of being saved, besides that prescribed in the gospel, Popery is a mass of impostures, supported by men who manage them with great advantages, and impose them with inexpressible severities on those who dare call any thing in question that they dictate to them." When you reprehend me thus unwarrantably for my language concerning the Papal System, you† instance Barrow's Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy as one model of the manner in which controversy should be carried on between scholars and gentlemen. The design of Barrow's Treatise was to prove the falsehood of all those arguments upon which the Papal supremacy was maintained; and what is his language?

* Conclusion to the History of his own Times, vol. iv. p. 400. ed. 1815.

† Book of the R. C. Church, 49.

Upon supposition of its falsehood," he says, (which falsehood, be it remembered, he had engaged to demonstrate, and was demonstrating,)" the Pope and his chief adherents are the teachers and abettors of the highest violation of divine commands and most enormous sins; of usurpation, tyranny, imposture, perjury, rebellion, murder, rapine, and all the villanies complicated in the practical influence of their doctrine."* This, Sir, is from that learned treatise, (and most truly have you so called it,) which you have instanced as an example of the proper kind of controversy. Yet neither Burnet nor Barrow was reproached for having insulted the English Romanists. The Roman Catholic reader knew that they had written as Protestants, and as it became Protestants to write. No personal offence could be intended, and none was taken.

You have yourself, Sir, written Historical Memoirs of the English, Irish, and Scottish Roman Catholics; and though three editions have been published, I do not know that a single remonstrance (not to say reproach) has ever been made against you for the accusations you have there advanced against the English Church, its

* Barrow's Theological Works, vol. vi. p. 27. ed. 1818.

founders, and its martyrs, in words which, though "softer than butter," and "smoother than oil," are yet intended to be "very swords."

But what is written in the Book of the Church requires no precedents to justify it, nor is any apology to be made for it. I have said it, and shall repeat it, and will maintain it. It was said in its proper place, and with its proper proofs. I expressed what I believed and knew to be true,..knew it with the sober certainty of one who was writing upon a subject into which he had long and diligently inquired. It was fully borne out by the view there given of the Papal System,..a view which, in all its parts, I am prepared to vindicate and authenticate. I stated the facts which rendered our Reformation necessary; and in so doing I expressed the sentiments which the Church of England professes and inculcates, which I believe with all my heart and with all my soul, and which I will defend with all my strength.

The Romanists are offended if the Papal System is called a system of imposture. The Protestants are not offended when they are called Heretics by the Papists; they receive the appellation just as they would that of Dogs or Kaffers from the Moors. They are not galled by it, because their withers are unwrung."

66

57

LETTER II.

FIRST INTRODUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY.

CONCERNING the introduction of Christianity among the Britons, the documents are scanty, and, by your own admission, questionable. But it seems difficult," you say, "to deny that they favour the Catholic doctrine of the Pope's Supremacy, and his right of general superintendence over the spiritual concerns of the Church of Christ." To so qualified a mode of insinuating an opinion, it is sufficient to reply that it would be bold to assert, and impossible to prove it. And with this I conclude a letter which may remind the reader of the Chapter concerning Owls in Horrebow's Natural History of Iceland.