dead before them. The rebel camps were constantly attended by numbers of priests, saying mass every day, and pretending to give charms which would prevent the balls of the soldiers from injuring them." "That no compunction might arise in their breasts, on account of the murders they were daily committing, their priests assured them, it was ordained by God, and that it had been prophesied there should be but one religion, and that was to be the Roman Catholic; so that in destroying the Protestants, they were performing a duty to Heaven." Page 240.

In the report of the secret committee of the house of lords, we have the following singular disclosure:-From the information, on oath before four magistrates, of Richard Granby, farmer, 23d of June, 1798, who had escaped from the rebels ;-" Saith, that he attended mass, celebrated by Edward Murphy, parish priest of Bannow; that, after mass, he heard said Murphy preach a sermon, in which he said, Brethren, you see you are victorious every where,-that the balls of the heretics fly about you, without hurting you,-that few of you have fallen, whilst thousands of the heretics are dead; and that the few who have fallen, was from deviating from our cause, and from want of faith; that this visibly is the work of God, who is now determined, that the heretics who have reigned upwards of a hundred years, should be now extirpated, and the true Catholic religion established.' And deponent saith, that this sermon was preached after the battle of Ross; and saith, that he has heard several sermons preached by the priests to the same effect; and farther saith, that he has heard several of the rebels, who had been at the battle of Enniscorthy, and elsewhere, declare, that Edward Roche, the priest, did constantly catch the bullets that came from his majesty's army in his hand, and give them to the rebels to load their guns with. Deponent farther saith, that any Protestant who was admitted into the rebel army, was first baptized by a Roman Catholic priest and that every Protestant who refused to be baptized, was put to death; and that many, to save their lives, suffered themselves to be baptized." Page 249.

The reader is requested to remember, that this is not a narrative of what took place hundreds of years since. It happened little more than twenty years ago, soon after Papists had obtained what they had formerly considered complete emancipation; and, if I am not misinformed, there are Papists at this day in Glasgow, who know the truth of these things, not from mere report, but from their own personal acquaintance with them. Surely these facts ought to convince every one of the bloody hostility which still exists with Papists, not only against the Protestant religion, but also against the persons of Protestants; and they assure us of what we may expect, whenever such enemies shall obtain power

over us.

CHAPTER CLXX.

CONDUCT OF THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANS IN RELATION TO CIVIL RULERS.

BUT PAPISTS

ASPIRE AFTER CIVIL POWER. PROOFS FROM THEIR OWN ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, THAT THEY AIM AT SUBVERTING THE ESTABLISHED GOVERNMENT IN CHURCH AND STATE. CASE OF DISABLED EPISCOPALIANS IN SCOTLAND.

SATURDAY, October 13th, 1821.

A FEW days ago I had a call from a venerable old man, who addressed me to the following effect:-"You ought to tell the Papists, that seeing they are the only Christians and are sure of going to heaven; and that, as we are heretics and must go to hell, they ought to be content with the kingdom of heaven; and leave us unmolested to manage the affairs of this world, which, they say is all our portion." Having "dropped this word," my visitor immediately took leave, and left me to ruminate on what I had heard. His words have often recurred to my mind, and the more I think of them, the more force I perceive in the sentiment which they express.

66

Papists are incessantly boasting that they hold the very religion which the apostles taught; that their doctrines are in every iota the very same that were held by the Christians in Rome, when Paul wrote to them, that he thanked God on their behalf, and that their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world. I have just been reading Bishop Milner's great work, "The End of Religious Controversy the alpha and omega of which, seems to be what I have here stated; namely, that the church of Rome is in every respect such a church as the apostles planted; the Papists are just such Christians as were addressed by Paul in Rome, Ephesus, and Corinth; and that this would have been the case though the apostles and evangelists had not taken the trouble of writing a word about a Christian church, or Christianity itself. I must, however, do the bishop the justice to say, that he does not in so many words deny the truth of what the apostles wrote, though he adduces many things from what he calls the unwritten word of God," (tradition,) not very consistent with that which has been written. But, in reference to the point in hand, I have not found, even in his work, a scripture, or even a traditionary example, of the primitive Christians demanding to be admitted into high offices in the state. We do not hear a clamour or even a whisper of discontent among them because they were excluded from such offices; or because the heathen Romans kept the good things of this world to themselves, and managed the business of this world without calling Christians into their council. The fact is, the primitive Christians were satisfied with their heavenly inheritance, as my visitor says Papists ought to be, and which they would be, if they were like them. They were not desirous of great things in this world. If the civil government afforded them protection, and freedom of worship, it was all they desired; and whether they were favoured with these or not, they were taught to pray for kings and all in authority over them, that they might live quiet and peaceable lives, in all godliness and honesty.

We know that there were Christians even in the court of Nero, when Paul was a prisoner in Rome; (Philip. i. 13,) and seeing the provi

dence of God had brought them there, or his grace had found them there, they would no doubt study to behave in every respect as became Christians; but we hear nothing of Christians aspiring to places at court, or in the senate, or clamouring about exclusion from the senate, being an infringement of their natural rights. If they had, we may be sure Paul would have addressed them in some such language as Jeremiah did his companion, Baruch, "Seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not." After all, we have no evidence that Nero's Christian courtiers were men in power, like modern ministers of state, else they would surely have found means to release Paul from bondage, which would have been a very laudable "emancipation." I believe these courtiers were slaves themselves-men and women whose personal emancipation would have been a desirable boon; yet Christians, even in these circumstances, were instructed by this apostle so to prize and rejoice in their heavenly inheritance, as to make little account of their personal slavery. "Art thou called, being a servant, (the word is a slave,) care not for it; but if thou mayest be free, choose it rather."

The question is not about the lawfulness of masters having slaves; but since the state of society was such that servants were generally in that condition, it was the duty of Christian servants, or slaves, to serve their masters faithfully and without repining. In like manner the question is not, whether the Roman emperors acted wisely or lawfully in not taking Christians into the senate but seeing they were not admitted, at least for many ages, it was their duty as Christians to be content without civil power; and to be in subjection to lawful authority as much as if they had held places of authority themselves. And such was the case in point of fact. The inspired apostles enjoined subjection in the strongest manner; and it does not appear that they were disobeyed. Seditions were classed with other immoralities which rendered those who did them, unfit for the kingdom of heaven; and had Paul heard of a seditious person in any church, or of one who disturbed the public peace by claiming to have a share in the government of the empire, he would have reproved that church as severely as he did that in Corinth for suffering an incestuous person among them.

Now, if our modern Papists were precisely of the same faith and character as the primitive Christians were, they would be equally peaceable, and contented with their religious privileges, especially as they enjoy protection and toleration, which the primitive Christians did not, and as they have the happiness of living under a government a thousand times more worthy of respect and obedience than was that of Rome in the time of Nero. If it shall be replied that the Romans were heathens, and that Christians could have little comfort in being associated with them in the government of the empire, I shall admit that it is true; though this is not the reason given for the duty of obedience; nor does it appear that it would have been the duty of Christians to decline being associated with heathens when they were lawfully called to serve their country along with them, though, having their inheritance and their hearts in heaven, they would not be desirous of honour or power in this world, much less would they be clamorous for it, or disposed to disturb the public peace if they did not obtain it.

But if the Romans were heathens, Protestants are heretics, which in the view of a Papist is much worse. The pope does not excommuni

cate heathens, but heretics he does excommunicate every year, on Holy Thursday. It must, therefore, not only be very uncomfortable for Papists to be associated with them in parliament, or in the government of the kingdom, but it must be absolutely unlawful; for to have any voluntary, unnecessary communication with heretics, is to partake of their heresy. It is known, and ought not to be forgotten, that a dreadful sentence of excommunication and damnation lies particularly upon the throne of Britain, and upon all the states of parliament. It was first pronounced against the throne, in the person of Henry VIII., and repeated in those of Elizabeth and James I. As this sentence was never revoked, it remains to this day in as much force as ever. Now, I ask Papists, how could they hold places in a government that lies under such a curse? It is possible to be associated with heathens in any sort of public business, especially such liberal and tolerant heathens as most of the Romans were, without suffering inconvenience, or being conscious of contamination; but with heretics, who lie under the solemn curse of the most holy head of the Catholic church, it is impossible to be so associated, without danger of incurring a part at least of the dreadful malediction; and, therefore, to return to the point from which I set out, Papists ought to be content with the kingdom of heaven, which, they say, is exclusively theirs, and leave the government of this worldly kingdom to those who have no portion or part in their inheritance. If they cannot be persuaded to act thus from choice, as the primitive Christians did, they should feel themselves compelled from necessity to do it. And, indeed, I am persuaded this would be their feeling on the subject, were it not that they expect, by getting into power, to supplant the heretics altogether; and they know well how to submit to a little inconvenience, or even do a little evil, for the sake of effecting a great good.

This, I know, is the very point they would be at; and they are not now at much pains to conceal it. They have now got such a broad "standing ground" in their legal privileges, and in the favour of nominal Protestants, that they can venture to speak plainly out, and tell what they want. Thus, on a late occasion, when it was proposed to lay open parliament to them, and all places of power, with two or three exceptions, the proposers of the measure, in the childlike simplicity of their hearts, proposed something that they called securities; and they had not a doubt but that Papists would become bound not to do any thing that should tend, directly or indirectly, to injure or affect the interests of the established church. Some leading laymen among them were, I believe, willing to come under this obligation; but the clergy instantly took the alarm. Meetings were held both in England and Ireland, and resolutions were published, in which it was explicitly declared that the securities were inadmissible; and one document in particular, which was signed by Vicar Apostolic Milner, plainly stated, that they could not become bound not to do any thing that should tend to the overthrow of the established religion, seeing that was the very end and tendency of all their preaching and writing. This was honest and honourable. It contained nothing new; for every person acquainted with Papists and their system, knew it before. But persons ignorant of these, did not know it, and would not believe it, till they had it from such high and unexceptionable authority; and there are some on whom my writing VOL. II.-54

could make no impression, who were convinced in a moment, when they saw it under the hand of JOHN MILNER, D. D. F. A. S. V. A. M. D.

That Doctor Milner speaks the sentiments of Papists in general, is very evident, from the applause with which a speech by Dr. Dromgoole was received by a great public meeting in Dublin, which speech the doctor afterwards published and defended. Speaking of the "oath for Catholic members of parliament," he says, "it is nearly similar to the ordinary oath of allegiance; it is drawn up in the same cautious and suspicious manner-the clauses and observations are of the same insulting and calumnious kind. But both go to a solemn pledge to support, not the succession, but the PROTESTANT succession of the crown." This is what Papists cannot swear to; and it is considered "insulting" to propose it to them. "How gross," says he, "the ignorance that would propose such an oath unless it was meant to insult! and how absurd and presumptuous to suppose that it would be accepted! Are these the securities that are sought for the protection of the Protestant church? If so, she cannot obtain them. She might, according to the penalties of that bill, see, indeed, the Catholic pastors driven from their flocksshe might see them subjected to obloquy, privation, and insult—she might see them transported as felons, and suffering as murderers; but she would never see them so lost, so abandoned, as to take the oath which was proposed an oath not to seek, directly or indirectly, the subversion of the Protestant church! Why, this would be to abuse the divine command, which says, 'Go, teach all nations.'" After describing what he considers the danger of the established church from dissenters, he adds, "the columns of catholicity are collecting, WHO CHALLENGE THE POSSESSION OF THE ARK, and unfurling the oriflamme, display its glorious motto, Εν τουτῳ νικα.

νικα.”

Yes the possession of the ark is what they challenge;—that is, the established church and its immense property; for this purpose "the columns of catholicity are collecting," that is, Papists are collecting their strength, and preparing to take by storm what they are not yet sure of getting by capitulation. This is pretty plainly intimated by the allusion to the fiery cross with its Greek motto. In his published defence of the speech, the orator tells us how much it was applauded by the meeting:"It met," he says, "with the most complete concurrence. The speaker was frequently interrupted by applause; and the resolution was passed with marks of enthusiastic approbation. The whole assembly, the galleries, and all the members of the board, with the exception of two or three individuals, rose up together; and with clapping of hands, waving of hats, and long continued cheering, gave the most unequivocal proofs of their entire satisfaction."

In another speech, the same orator addressed the board as follows: "My opinions, as I have given them, I would declare before the privy council or the bench of bishops. I desire no man to adopt them; and, in their rejection, for myself I shall feel nothing, but I shall feel a great deal for the character of the board. Recollect, gentlemen, that those are the opinions of a Catholic-that they are yours, if you be Catholic-and that they are notoriously the opinions of every well informed Catholic on the face of the earth. I have ventured, in order to prevent an oath from being enacted, which could not, in its present form, be taken, to state one of the religious objections which we have to the Protestant