sion: the vicars apostolic adhere to their unfortunate step, a bill is introduced into parliament of a schismatical tendency, which is suffered to go through several stages of debate, without any opposition on their part. Luckily, it is rejected, to the great joy of the whole people, and the discomfiture of the knot of intriguers, who call themselves The British Catholic Board. These servile and unprincipled men thank the framers of the bill, and through the instrumentality of a crafty Scotch priest at Rome, by the basest misrepresentations, they deceive the ecclesiastical authorities left in that ca

is dangerous to religion; and the people in England and Ireland believe them and co-oper te in opposing the dreaded innovation. What now should have been the conduct of the English vicars apostolic? To appeal to the pope was impossible-the cavons prescribed the judgment of provincias, and this had been given unanimously. A sense of duty to religion and the welfare of their flocks, should have induced them to submit to this authority, backed as it was by the vox populi vox Dei, and all would have been well. An attempt however was made to render the respective districts of England insulated, as it were, and subject,pital, in the absence of the holy fain matter of opinion truly, to the bishop. I recollect in consequence of my insertion of the pastoral of Dr. Poynter, that one of his vicars general called upon me to know by whose authority I put it in the Jour nal. In the course of the conversation, which turned on the scandal I gave in publishing such a work as this in London, without the authority of my bishop, which doctrine I had before heard from the lips of Mr.Secretary Jerningham, I happened to mention the approbation given to my la bours by a venerable archbishop of Ireland. On which my reverend visitor augrily exclaimed, What had he to do with the London district. For my part, I was foolish enough to think that what was catholic doctrine in Ireland was also catholic doctrine in London; and therefore, by receiving the approbation of a metropolitan of Ireland, I conceived that I had not violated the doctrine or discipline of the church, and consequently had in-had they kept themselves separate curred no offence. Holding these notions, I confess I felt some surprise at the question, and answered, Is he not a doctor of the church ?The worthy vicar did not reply a word, but turned upon his heel, and left me without bidding me good morning. But to leave this digres

ther, and procure a rescript to be
addressed to the London vicar apos
tolic, commanding the catholics of
this kingdom to accept with grati-
tude that which would not only de-
stroy their religion, but also the
civil freedom of the country. This
insult offered to the catholic body
was rejected with that disgust and
contempt which it justly merited;
and the merciful interposition of
Providence reinstating the holy fa-
ther in the chair of supremacy, the
matter was again carried to Rome,
and has ever since continued to in-
volve that see in the intrigues and
machinations of party-spirit.
the restoration of the supreme pon-
tiff, however, the bill was condemn-
ed, the rescript approving of it was
condemned, and nothing definitive
has yet been come to. Let me now
observe, that had the vicars aposto-
lic followed the same line of conduct
pursued by the hierarchy of Ireland;

and distinct from the lay intrigueys; bad they considered the question, as the Irish bishops did, only as it regarded religion, and not as it affected the temporal advantages of the aristocracy; had they, in fact, acted purely in their spiritual capacity, and not suffered themselves to be in

that Dr. Poynter was the author of
it, allowing it to have been presented
to propaganda, would be to outrage
his character. It abounds through-
out with falsehood, fiction, misre-
presentation, and sophistry, inter-
mingled here and there with some
few facts. It is a laboured composi-
tion to blacken the fair fame of Dr.
Milner, and white-wash the dark
deeds of protesting-catholic-dissent-
ers. To the author of the blue-
books, the busy casuistical lawyer of
Lincoln's-inu, we owe the publicity
of this production. He is the editor
of it; and if this epistle have ob-
tained the signature of the bishop of
Halia, all I can say is, the lawyer
has given a greater stab to his cha-
racter by the publication of it, than
he ever received from the pen of Dr.
Milner, or all the writers against
the fifth resolution put together. As
I have before said, and given my
reasons for holding this opinion, Dr,
Poynter cannot be the author of this
letter, although his name is affixed
to it. It must be the work of some
wicked designing trickster, who,
wishing to screen, if possible, the ir-
religious practices of the sham lead-
ers, obtained the signature of the
bishop to it, without his knowledge
of its contents.

fluenced by the representations of interested lay politicians-there cannot be a doubt but their decision would have corresponded with the judgment of the Irish prelates, and we should have been spared witnessing the deplorable scandals which have been occasioned by this want of unanimity between the spiritual authorities of the two countries, and Rome would not have been disgraced by the proceedings which have taken place there during the last six years. To the right of denouncing error to the public, to the right of appeal to public opinion, must we attribute the safety of religion, especially in the case of the fifth resolution. Had not the indefatigable and courageous vicar apostolic of the Midland district laboured with his pen to inform and caution the catholics of England and Ireland, schism would probably have raised her head, and the English catholics would have been separated from the centre of unity. In doing this, he only followed the example of all the other great writers and doctors of the church, from St. Paul to the present epoch; and therefore to believe that Dr. Poynter would ask if such couduct be "conformable to the doctrines and discipline of the catholic church and the rights of the aposto lic see," would be to consider him unworthy to hold the episcopal office, for his ignorance of the rights and privileges granted by the church. I could say much more on this subject, but I have already exhausted the patience of the reader. I will therefore conclude with expressing my sincere regret that such a document as this Apologetical Epistle should have been made public. Iquisite, and that is, the disavowal know nothing that has appeared in print within these hundred years more calculated to disgrace the episcopal character, coming, as it does, with the signature of the bishop of Halia affixed to it. To suppose ORTHOD. JOUR. VO VIII.

Under this per

suasion, I have defended the venerable prelate, as it was my duty to do, without looking for either fee or reward. If my remarks are thought to be conclusive, I hope some good will be derived to religion from them, and the public will be stil more on their guard against any thing else which may emanate from the same quarter. My defence, however, to be complete, wants one essential re

of the prelate himself that the letter is uot genuine, or that his signature was obtained surreptitiously. This disavowal once made, the disgrace will fall upon the guilty head of the offender, and he will be the mark of

3 K

scorn and contempt with the public, as be justly ought to be, until he repents his treacherous ways, and make reparation for the scandal he has occasioned.

WM. EUSEBIUS ANDREWS.

CORONATION OATH.

To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal.

SIR,-Through the medium of your paper, I beg leave to consider the coronation oath as bearing on the catholic question. For we are told that it places an eternal barrier against the concession of the catholic claims. My object is to shew, that such a proposition is indefensible in principle, and is revolting in its consequences. A love of truth shall guide me in the discussion, and not an expression shall escape me that can be wrested to party purposes.

It re

:

If this supreme legislative power can alter, it can evidently modify nay, if the catholic emancipation should amount to a change of the established religion, (though, in fact, the catholic petition has no reference whatever to the constitution of the church of England,) parliament would still be competent to make that change, and propose a different oath to the sovereign; and the king's present oath would be no real obstacle to such proceeding for his oath is to maintain that religion which is established by law, and as long as it may be sanctioned by the legislature.— The acts of one parliament cannot tie up the powers of another parliament. All possess equal powers: what one parliament can make, another can unmake, and vice versa.This principle has been fully recog nized by the parliament, which passed the act of union between the kingdoms of England and Ireland. It shewed that the disqualifying test and corporation oaths were merely provisionary and temporary, by de claring, Art. 4, that they must be taken "UNTIL THE PARLIAMENT OFTHE UNITED KINGDOM SHALL OTHERWISE PROVIDE."

I maintain, then, that the coronation oath does not prevent the sovereign from yielding to the declared sense of both houses of parliament in favour of the catholic emancipation. What says the oath ? quires a promise to "maintain the protestant reformed religion established by law, and to preserve unto And what absurdities must follow the bishops and clergy of the realm, from forgetting the simple principle and to the churches committed to of the transcendent and absolute their charge, all such rights and pri- power of parliament! For other vileges as by law do or shall apper-wise we must, 1st, believe and ad

tain unto them, or any of them.”This promissory oath owes its authority and its very existence to parliament; that power, says Blackstone, which 66 hath sovereign and uncontrollable authority in making, confirming, enlarging, restraining, abrogating, repealing laws, concerning matters of all possible denominations, ecclesiastical or temporal, &c.; and can alter the established religion of the land, as was done in a variety of instances in the reigns of king Henry VIII and his three children. (Book 1, ch. ii, Commentaries, &c.)

e.

mit that the reformation is built upon perjury; that Henry VIII and queen Elizabeth, after swearing to preserve and maintain the catholic religion then established by law, after invoking heaven to witness their solemn promise, did subsequently found the present established, church on the basis of the foulest perjury.

2d. That the memory of Charles I, that martyr of the church of Englaud, must be blackened with perjury, for his assenting to the exclusion of bishops from the house of lords. We know that this unfortu

nate head of his church did lament, ou the scaffold, his unworthy sacrifice of Strafford; but what remorse did he shew for depriving the bishops of their legal rights and privileges? 3d. It will follow again, that the very first of our kings who took the coronation oath in its present form was the very first to break it. Believing, as William III did, that the spirit and not the letter of the oath was to be attended to; in other words, that it was his bounden duty to provide for the security of the constitution in church and state, he soon after altered the oath of supremacy and allegiance in favour of the dissenters; nay, what is more, he engaged himself by oath to protect and support a different church in the precincts of this very island, viz. Calvinism, "the true religion then received and preached within the realm of Scotland,”

and loyal subjects," it is manifestly unjust to punish them with disabili ties like public delinquents.. True policy consists in administering equal justice to every class of good and loyal subjects. It is justice, says

the bible, that exalteth a nation Prov. xiv. 34. Be just, then, I would say to my country, and fear not. Let those who deserve well of the nation be partakers of your honours and favours. Let those who contribute to your safety and renown be cheered by your praise, and rewarded for their labours. Let all be treated as your children; let merit alone be the title to your predilection.

Perhaps some persons are to he found so prejudiced and so unreasonable as not to be convinced by any arguments; or if convinced, will act against their own conviction. If there be any such, it is not to them that I would address my arguments. They remind me of Dido expiring in the agonies of suicide:

Oculis errantibus alto Quæsivit cœlo lucem ingemuitque repertâ. Thrice op'd her heavy eyes, and sought the light,

But having found it, sickened at the sight,

4 Lib. Encid.

With every good wish, Mr. Edi

AMICUS PATRIE.

5th. It will follow also, that we must condemn the late father of his country, "the love and delight of mankind," king George 111, for extending his benevolence to his catholic subjects; for admitting them into his presence; for recommending them to the protection of his parliament; for granting the elective frauchise. and repealing the test act in the kingdom of Ireland; for ratify-tor, I remain your's, &c. ing the Quebec act in the beginning of his reign, and confirming the Corsican constitution in 1794, &c. &c. Will the Pitt clubs assert, that the heaven-born minister and his friends advised their conscientious sovereign' to cover himself with perjury? Will they say, that the best of kings neglected the care of the established church, when he dispensed the blessings of christian toleration to dissenters, and especially to the quakers and unitarians?

As a further argument, I maintain that the oath can never bind to injustice. But parliament having actually pronounced catholics to be "good

P. S. For copious information on this subject read "The Case of Conscience Solved," with a supplement, 1807, by the night rev. Dr. Milner.

To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal,

SIR, I make bold, in the absence of any other correspondent, to send you a few lines, in reference to PECCATIS OBNOXIUS's communication in your number for April last, on the subject of Mr. L's (one of the clergy of the chapel in Warwick-street) having reprehended from the pulpit "the persevering practice