only enkendled this cruel warre, but also was alive and present in the Armie."*

Such was the actual Conduct of a man whom Mr. Butler and his friend Dr. Fletcher declare to have been actuated by Charity to his fellow men; and who joined the tenderness of benevolence to the ardour of Zeal: whose exertions in the cause of Religion and Mercy were blessed with the approbation of Heaven, and rewarded by I God with the Gift of Miracles!!! Let us now however proceed to take a cursory view of some few particular passages wherein Mr. B. appears to have proceeded upon false premises.

In the very title Page of " the Book of the Roman Catholic Church," we meet with an instance of that Craft with which the Popish writers have ever laboured to deceive both themselves and the world. We allude to the term Roman Catholic, which he has assumed for the name of that professes adherence. and papist," he tells

denomination to which he "The words Popery, papal

us, being particularly

* The Defence of the Apologie, folio, p. 492-3. Lond. 1567.

offensive to Roman Catholics, I have altered it by substituting the word "Roman Catholic" for the word "papal." We also would add that the term Roman Catholic is particularly offensive to Protestants: nay, We would add, that for a Protestant to concede it as required by a Papist, is not merely inconsistent with his Protestantism, but is a base abandonment of it: is an utter renunciation of what he must deem the Religion: of the Bible, which alone is the Religion of a Protestant. Not to insist upon the absurdity of joining the name of that limited tract of land, included under the title Roman, to the word Catholic or Universal, which perhaps might be at least plausibly got over; We would ask, whether, by the union of these most incongruous terms, it is not intended to claim Catholicism as the peculiar attribute of that Church which admits the Supremacy of the Pope of Rome; and to deny that any other which rejects this supremacy is a member of the true Catholic Church of Christ?

To call that Body Romanists or Papists, ought not to be considered in any other light than as designating them by the great tenet by which

they are distinguished, of the belief in the Supremacy of the Popes of Rome: just as the terms Trinitarian, Supralapsarian, or Sublapsarian, are expressive of the peculiar tenets of those who respectively bear those several denominations. But the term Catholic implies not distinction (the very meaning forbids such an assumption) but exclusion. It not merely designates a sect, but it declares that that sect alone claim to themselves the attribute of Catholicity. To call them so is to admit this claim; to admit this claim is to resign our pretensions to be members of that One Church of Christ consisting of "all the churches of the Saints," in all times, in all places, under all the varieties of outward circumstances: that Church for which alone Christ died; which is alone Catholic, and imperishable, in the solemn promise that "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it."

And why should these terms be offensive to them? If they are not ashamed of a belief in Papal Supremacy; if they are not ashamed of the infallibility of the church of Rome; why be so very tender upon these terms of Romanist and Papist? But the word Catholic is an im

posing term: it enlists the most ancient prejudices on its side; they know the value of making the world believe that their Church alone possesses the qualifications of Truth and Apostolical antiquity and however in the courtesy of common conversation even great points like this may be conceded, Mr. Southey did right, when coming to the solemn tribunal of the Public Press, not to forfeit the just claims of the Protestant Churches to be esteemed legitimate members of the true Catholic Church of Christ.

It is the same Religious Feeling, the same uncharitable spirit of exclusion, which has put into the hearts of the modern disbelievers in the Divinity of Christ to claim to themselves the title of Unitarians; and unblushingly to assert, that the great Doctrine of the Divine Unity is maintained by themselves alone. And here we would demand of the members of the Church of Rome, whether, believing as they must that this great foundation of every religious sentiment is maintained by themselves in as much primitive and Catholic simplicity as by any other sect of Christians, they would submit to the degradation of conceding a title, which

stamped upon their own Church the character of Polytheism? And why then should we be called upon to compromise our principles at the expense of our faith? To let our politeness go beyond our belief? To give up our title to the most important privileges; merely because weak men pretend to be offended at a term in which, if they are true to their opinions, they ought to glory and crafty men wish to shelter their corruptions and designs beneath the exclusive claim of the venerable name of Catholicism?

Wherever Mr. Butler brings forward Scripture, we instantly recognise the baneful effects of the Tradition of the Church of Rome; for nothing less than the infallible interpretation of an infallible Church could ever have so completely obscured the sense, which a rational criticism would put upon it. We venture to assert that of all the perversions of criticism, that must be the most notable, which would interpret St. Peter's speech (Acts ii. 39.), and our Saviour's (John xiv. 12. 13.) (Mark, xvi. 17, 18.) in the sense of a promise for the Continuance of Miraculous Powers in the Church. To interpret also the passages produced in Letter, XI. be