diffidence and disaffection with respect to the authors of them, and especially to one individual among them, who has been the calamity of the Catholic body for a long series of years. *I have abundant opportunities of knowing the fact; and hence I gather the facility of collecting such a genuine Catholic meeting, as your respectable correspondent recommends, the greater facility of getting a Petition, drawn up in the ancient and true spirit of their Religion, signed by as many Catholics, as may be deemed requisite, should either or both these measures become absolutely necessary.

A reference to the learned scribe's present Petition to Parliament, adopted by the Board and left for the general signature of the Catholic body, will illustrate some of my former observations and afford me an opportunity of publicly stating my opinion on a subject of general importance. It must be confessed that the scribe avoids certain defects which occurred in his former compositions of this nature. He no longer soars into the bombast, while emulating the truly sublime flights of the Irish penmen; he no more rants about Cressy and Agincourt, to the sickening of his own partisans; he does not again arrogate

the numbers and public services of Catholic Ireland, to a quarter of a million of British Catholics: his Petition is short and simple enough; still, with all my wishes to serve the gentleman himself and his fellow Boardmen in their temporal as well as in their eternal interests, I find the Petition to be such that I can neither sign it my self, with satisfaction to my mind, nor recommend it to others for signature.

I object, in the first place, to the restricted ground of the Petition, since it complains of no other grievances, on the part of Catholics, but the want of "Civil rights and privileges." Have we then no Religious grievances, no persecution of our soldiers and sailors, at the discretion of their commanders, while the laws remain as they are? no restriction on the administration of the sacrament of matrimony? nó confiscation of property for the support of our religion and schools? Or are these grievances unworthy to be named, when the question is to get rid of civil disabilities? Or, finally, is it really more difficult to get redress for the religious than for the worldly grievance. So far from this being the case, it is well known, that when the Speaker of the House of Commons inveighed so emphatically against Catholics getting seats in Parliament or high offices in the state and army, at the rejection of the late Bill, May 24, he invited us to petition for the removal of the two former religious complaints, with an equivalent promise of such petition being granted. But it has been long known to the present writer, and he is able to prove that some or other among cating Protestation of 1789, the main source of all the errors and divisions among English the leading men of the Board have Catholics, and the Irish gentleman's con- pointedly objected to the removal of nexions and correspondence were traced to each of the above named religious the well-known general author of religious mischief in this country. The person, alluded grievances. It is reported, indeed, to, is the same that has been detected tamper- that when Dr. P. moved, at a meeting ing with a Dublin bookseller to give an edition held on the 3d instant, that the matriof the Blue Book in Ireland, and on a sub-monial grievance should be mentioned sequent occasion tampering with him to deny the fact before a witness, and lastly, excusing his subornation on the pretence of sickness When honourable men throw the mantle of their votes over these and such like deeds,

*Within these few weeks, a member of the Irish Catholic Board, being in England, religious formulary was put into his hands, with an assurance, that if his countrymen Would sign it, their Emancipation would be granted. Upon his return to Dublin, he preseuted it to his Board, who referred it to the Archbishop, when it was discovered to be neither more nor less than the fatal equivo

they sully the mantle, but they do not purify

the deeds.

ORTHOD. JOUR, VOL, II,

in an Address to the Public, which is coming out from the Board, (Dr. P. ought to have required its insertion in the Petition to Parliament) some sort

of promise was made that it should be

N

the constitution are UNRESERVED and UNQUALIFIED," taking into consideration, as I ought to do, the sense of Protestants on this subject, (who constantly object to us that our allegiance is reserved and qualified, while we acknowledge the spiritual supremacy of the Pope) as likewise the tenor of our former oaths, which always make or imply the distinction between submission in temporal matters, and submission in spiritual matters. The necessity of caution in this matter is evident from the declarations made by our leading advocate sin each House of Parliament in the debate of 1808, no doubt from the instructions of wrong-principled Catholics. Mr. Grattan assured the House of Commons that Catholics have" abjured the Pope in all mixed " cases." Lord Grenville told the House of Lords that, " In all matters "of Civil Government, even of that "mixed nature in which Ecclesiastical

privately stated to some of the members by the Deputies of the Board, who are to present the Petition to them: but what reliance can be placed on the exertions of men for the redress of a grievance which they are ashamed or afraid to avow publicly as a grievance at all. I am sensible that my second objection to the Petition, will be laughed at by Catholics, as well as Protestants, of the Modern School of Morality and Religion, but I am resolved, especially in the situation in which I stand not to be laughed out of it. The petitioners complain of being deprived of 66 legitimate objects of AMBITION." Now, I have learnt from the Holy Scriptures, the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church, and I am bound to teach that ambition, the worst species of pride, is a fatal vice and the source of infinite misery in this world and the next. Hence it is impossible there should be legitimate objects of ambition for real Christians. Indeed, as far as concerns this world, it might and Civil Government are combined, be expected that the groans of the un- "the Catholics submit, without rehappy victims of ambition which are serve, to the supreme authority of heard throughout a great part of it," the King in Parliament, and in other would cure all rational people of the councils, as civil Governor of the absurdity of transferring the worst of" Empire." See Faulder's Debates, vices into the list of virtues. Setting published by N..N. and N. N. Cathoambition fairly aside, may not the lics, p. 16. p. 185. This implies that learned scribe be answered by our we admit the lawfulness of second marlegislators: "You complain falsely, riages, in cases of divorce, and I know "in your Petition, of not being able not how many other sinful actions. "to exert yourself honourably or "usefully in the service of your king "and country; for cannot you pay "double taxes, as you used to do, or ❝serve in the ranks honourably and "usefully, since it is money and men "we want, not officers or members of "Parliament? Whereas your friend "and panegyrist pretends that he canserve his country, without 66 speechifying among us as he does among you." The learned scribe is as unfortunate in the choice of his arguments as of his words.

" not

66

I next object to the terms in which the Catholic Petitioners are made to declare that " Their allegiance to

their king and their attachment to

66

66

My main objection, however, lies against the concluding paragraph of the Petition, which, after mentioning the late transactions of the House of Commons, respecting Catholics, without the slightest hint of dislike to the schismatical part of them, prays that it "Will adopt SUCH MEASURES, "for the repeal of the penalties and "disabilities to which the Catholics "of Great Britain are subject, as "the Honourable HOUSE SHALL "DEEM EXPEDIENT." Such is the prayer of the Cabinet Members of the Board, (the others we may presume, from various circumstances, were taken by surprise,) addressed to a Protestant legislature! They petition

tions, have held the shadow, at least, of a salvo, by way of shield, over the tenets and discipline of the Catholic Church. Even in the last Petition, which preceded the schismatical clauses, the subscribers expressed a hope, that Parliament would not render void its own work, by requiring conditions inconsistent with the Catholic Religion: but, in the present Petition,

have repeatedly declared, that the unrestricted Veto, with all its accompanyments, is the expedient, if not the necessary measure for granting Emancipation, are pressed by Catholics to grant the Emancipation, and to "adopt the measures which they deem expedient" for this end!

for relief, and they leave the conditions of granting it, entirely to the discretion of an assembly which is bound to swear hostilities to their Religion! Would Sir John Hippisley, or Dr. Duigenan, wish for more favourable terms than these? In fact, they are a Carte Blanche, or complete surrender of that independent spiritual jurisdiction, and Ecclesiastical discipline of our Church to Protestant politi-even the unsubstantial shadow, is cast cians, which they have, for so many | aside, and Protestant legislators, who years, been struggling to obtain. For is there a Catholic so uninformed as not to know what the measures are, which our advocates no less than our opponents in both Houses of Parliament, deem expedient for the repeal of our disabilities? Did not the whole House of Commons, speak plain enough to this point last May, in their votes on the schismatical Bill? That the Board itself understands the above quoted passage of the Petition in the same sense that I do, is sufficiently clear from the studied speech of its public orator, on the 17th of last month, when the Petition was under deliberation; for he then bewailed the failure of the late Bill, and again severely reprobated the conduct of X those Catholics who are supposed to have caused that failure; and this without reproof from any person present, except from one, a gentleman from Warwickshire! What strengthens this proof, is the Resolution then passed by the Board, that means should be taken to get "a distinct and separate "discussion of their Petition," namely, distinct and separate from the dis-lators make a law injurious to the incussion of the Irish Petition. And why so? Evidently, because the Prelates of Ireland, have three times over resolved in solemn Synod, that it is not expedient to make any change in the existing discipline, and because the laity have as often resolved, in their public meetings, that they never will, or can consent, that the Crown or the servants of the Crown, should control or interfere with the appointment of their Bishops. Hitherto, Mr. Butler and his friends in their Petitions and Resolu

66

I am aware of the pretexts and excuses which the more conscientious laity and clergy, (for there are some Catholics, as the Secretary of State has declared, who wish for the subjugation of their Church,) will resort to in their own defence, when the dreaded evil has taken place. The former will say, as they began to say, in May last: "The Act is entirely a Pro"testant Act: our friends in Parlia"ment would have things so:" the latter will say: "Who could help it ? "We entreated the Board to exert "itself in favour of Religion." But I here protest beforehand, and in due time, against the plea of a Protestant Act of Parliament, and the excuse of, Who could help it: and I maintain I have made it evident, that if Protestant legis

tegrity or safety of our Religion, it will be in consequence of their being invited and prayed to do so; and I am moreover ready to prove, that if certain English Ecclesiastics would sincerely and heartily make common cause with the immortal Prelacy of Catholic Ireland, and with one hapless brother of theirs, who need not be named, the evil may still be helped, and the Catholic Religion in this country be kept secure. J. MILNER, D. D. Wolverhampton, March 17, 1814.

To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal.

rally gave to their adversaries the advantage of wielding that two-edged weapon, the reductio ad absurdum; but these men were at least acquainted with their subject. A century of polemical security has rendered the Protestants almost as little informed of the faith of their forefathers as that of the followers of Confucius or the grand Lama.

But Protestants are very fond of entering, whenever opportunity offers, into conversational controversy with Catholics: on the conduct of such conversations, I now beg leave to offer a few words of advice. We are commanded to "be ready to give an ac"count of the faith that is in us, for "the purpose of defending it, (the word "apology has taken a different sense), "to those who ask it with meekness ❝ and reverence."

SIR, By the hope which I expressed in my last letter, that Ireland may continue to this Island a perpetual possession, I have approved myself, to you, and your readers, a better patriot than the Anglican divine. In recommending a plan of co-operation between the Catholics of both islands in the work of our common Emancipation, I think I have pointed out an efficient mean of securing the union of the two islands during the continuance of religious disabilities, and of strengthening that union when the disabilities should be removed. The Catholics of Ireland are a large proportion of the people of the United Kingdom: but they are the mass of the population of Ireland. It is my wish that an attractive force between the Catholics of both islands may counteract the repulsive tendency of certain proceedings in this country. Thus, also, I approve myself a good patriot. I shall not address you at present on the subject of petitioning; let us wait the course of events with patience they will, according to my apprehension, afford us abundant occasion for the exercise of that virtue: let us endeavour to edify our prejudic-ject of religion, could make any one ed neighbours, by the example of that and all other Christian virtues-a mode of conciliation perfectly unexceptiona

able.

The correspondence between Mr. Blair and yourself is amusing enough. Perhaps, for you must permit me to entertain some doubts on the matter, perhaps it was worth while to publish his letters, as a fair average specimen of the quantum of ignorance and absurdity usually exhibited by Protestants in their religious disputations with Catholics. But I presume not to offer any comment on polemics issuing from the press-only this, Jewell, Hooker, Barrow, Chillingworth, &c. were not ignorant of their own or of the Catholic religion: the ground which they took, and which every Non-Catholic Christian must necessarily take, gene

There will be very few controversial conversations, under such a condition, between Catholics and Protestants. The latter generally begin the controversy with an overbearing air, assuming that the Catholic religion is so entirely ridiculous and founded, that no rational apology can be made for it; that nothing but a total want of common sense, or an ability to apply common sense to the sub,

un

profess it. They start a topic: when on this they have received a reasonable answer, they put on an incredulous, contemptuous grin, and, not in the least abashed, for they know they have the law on their side, they start another; they shift their ground:-You complain that Mr. Blair has done so, as if it were not a common case; the skips of a harlequin and the tricks of a merry-andrew are stedfastness and repose when compared with their evolutions. I speak only of what ordinarily passes in conversational contro. versies, which I exhort all Catholics carefully to avoid, as dangerous to charity and useless to the purpose of conviction: even when some impression is made on the Protestant, though he may be afraid he is in the wrong, he is much more afraid of being induced

ever the assertion may shock Mr. Blair, can have but human authority, if the Church be not a divinely constituted body. To this effect also speaks St. Augustine. Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus, is but an amplification of the word Catholic. If the world ever wondered that any other than the Catholic faith was adopt

to be in the right. I have heard but of two cases in which an affair of this sort was rightly conducted. The Rev. Father O'Leary was once accosted by a Protestant Irish Bishop--" Mr. "O'Leary, I do not like your doctrine "of Purgatory." "My Lord," said the Rev. Divine, "you may go further "and fair worse." A Religious at Rome was desired by some English-ed, it could only wonder because that men to enter into a discussion of controverted points: he told them to go and place themselves before the altar, and repeat three times the Lord's Prayer, and then return to him.

I hope it is unnecessary for me to disclaim the presumption of intending to give advice to those who are heirs to the sacred precept and obligation"Go and teach all nations." To the lay Catholic, in his intercourse of common life with the Protestant, I will endeavour to give some hints, if you should think them worthy of insertion, amid graver matter, in your valuable Journal, and he of adoption.

other faith was NEW. Thus, let all special topics be avoided, till the authority of the church and the evidence of prescription be acknowledged. As a test of his sincerity let the Protestant be required to agree to the following proposition, which, to unbiassed understandings, must appear as an axiom, but to which I never yet could obtain the assent of a Protestant :-if two religions differ wholly or partially, one of them must be in the wrong, in so far forth as they differ. From his renitency against this plain self-evident proposition may be inferred his predetermination, at all events, not to acknowledge himself in the wrong.

There is a sort of itching of curiosity sometimes observable about the Pro- Names govern the world, said Cætestant, as if he were not perfectly sa- sar Augustus; I wish to make some tified with his own belief. He asks ques- observations on terms which may octions: let the answer be perfectly se- cur in these or other conversations.rious, if prudence so require; otherwise We have hitherto preserved, and shall let it be in good humoured jest. If preserve to the end of time, the excluthe Catholic judges that it is adviseable sive title of CATHOLICS : let all attempts to enter into conversational controver- to deprive us of it be resisted. Notsy, let him take care that it shall begin withstanding the high authority and at the right end. Let him remember the charitable purpose which suggested. that it is not for him to justify the the phrase "Catholics of the Church faith of the church, but for others to "of England," the phrase must not be justify their dissent from it; this task allowed in our polemics. Attempts are they have undertaken. Before he en- made to give to the title Roman Cathoters into any question as to what ought lic a discriminating meaning, as if to to be believed, let him, if he can, make contra-distinguish the Roman from the separatist understand why he be- some other Catholic. Rather than adlieves any thing, even that portion mit the use of the term in this sense, I which he does believe. The general would prefer being called by our old arguments for the faith of the church nick-name of Papist. The Church calls are as old as the church, and have at itself the Catholic Roman Church, inall times co-existed with it. "Id ve- tending its communion with the Bishop, "rius quod priùs,” said an early wri- successor of that Apostle on whom the ter: vous n'eties pas hier,' said church was founded. It is usual for the father of Louis the Sixteenth. The members of the establishment to call Church began at Jerusalem, said St. themselves Churchmen, and the reliAugustine. The Scripture itself, how-gious community to which they be

66