INTRODUCTION.

THE attention of the public has been again directed to the ancient controversies between the Romanists and the Protestants, by the work of Mr. Southey, entitled "The Book of the Church," and by the reply of Mr. Butler to many of the statements it contains. Being deeply interested in the discussion, as a citizen and as a Christian, I have considered it my duty to peruse both works with much attention. Mr. Southey has unfortunately omitted his references. If, therefore, he has inadvertently, or hastily, made assertions which are not capable of proof, he must defend his own cause. I am neither his accuser, nor his apologist. Mr. Butler has not fallen into this error; but his authorities are partial, and his conclusions questionable; and to his labours I confine my remarks.

B

2

Mr. Butler's Work.

When I first heard of that gentleman's publication, I was very anxious to read all that could be urged in reply to the charges which the pages of History have brought against the Church of Rome. I was willing to change my opinions, if my Protestantism could be shewn to be wrong. Whatever zealous attachment to an unpopular creed; whatever sound learning, deep research, a courteous spirit, and powerful language could produce, would now, I imagined, be alleged in favour of that Church, by its approved and eloquent advocate. I have been disappointed. Whether the work be regarded as a defence of his Church, or a more faithful survey of our past controversies; or, even as a reply to the observations of Mr. Southey, it must be considered an entire failure. The acute and learned author appears to have given a false colouring to History; and to have deduced unwarrantable inferences from his peculiar views. This serious charge, under which so many advocates for the Church of Rome seem also to labour, will be substantiated by an impartial examination of the pages of History, to which both parties make their appeal.

No apology can be necessary for any attempt to elicit the truth of the facts, upon which alone

Revival of Romanism.

3

the decisions of the Romanist and the Protes. tant must be founded. The re-action from Infidelity to Belief has begun. The Christian religion, in all its modes, receives again the homage of the civilized world. The former system of opinions, which our fathers rejected, after centuries of controversy, has been successfully revived; and on the Continent of Europe, Christianity is again identified with Romanism. The English Romanist rejoices at the prospect. He believes that his Church is the one only true Church upon earth; and that it is unchanged, and remains unchangeably the same. He believes, that the opposition to this Church began, and was continued-by heresy, rejecting her true doctrines-by covetousness, aiming at her wealth-and by tyranny, jealous of her influence; until ignorance and prejudice excluded from the service of the state, a noble, wealthy, loyal, and deserving people. They now require from an enlightened Legislature, that the errors of our ancestors be cancelled; and the Romanists be again admitted to the privileges and honours, to which they are entitled, by their talent, rank, and possessions.

The Protestant, on the contrary, gives credit to the accusations of history against the Church

4

Opinions of Protestants

of Rome. He believes that, though a true, it is a corrupt Church; and that it obtained a gradual ascendancy over other Churches, by weakness on their part, and usurpation on its own. He believes that to the tyranny of its conduct, and to the corruptions of its institutions, may be attributed the success of those attacks which were made upon it at the Reformation. Much of the opposition of that period may, certainly, be attributed to inferior motives; and these deserve every censure. But the Protestant believes, that hostility to the Church of Rome was, and is, essential to the good of mankind; because he considers that Church to be adverse to the three most invaluable blessings which can be secured to its people by any wise government,Morality, Religion, and Good Order.

To Morality-because it teaches that the prayers of the living may be beneficial to the dead; and that sins may be pardoned on the payment of money.

To Religion-because it bestows a part of that homage which is due to the one Mediator, the Son of God, to inferior beings, to saints and angels; and enforces various absurdities and errors, which it would be now tedious to enumerate.

concerning the Church of Rome.

5

To good Order-because it teaches that the head of their Church is entitled to their spiritual allegiance; and the duties arising from a sense of this spiritual allegiance have clashed, and may therefore again clash, with those which arise from their civil allegiance to the temporal Sovereign. And this is more especially urged; because the principal religious dissensions which have agitated this country, uniformly originated in those conscientious scruples; which have always induced the Romanists to prefer, to the laws of the realm, the mandate of a foreign Pontiff.

I am not conscious that I have stated the differences between the Romanist, and the Protestant unfairly. I am anxious to discuss the question with the utmost candour and impartiality. The writers of both parties appeal to history; they are right in so doing. Philosophy, which is our safest companion in the study of history, assures us that the same causes will always produce the same effects; and as the opinions of the Romanists are unaltered, the same results would follow from their more general adoption. The experience of the past, therefore, is the best guide of the present and the future. I trust, in proceeding