ART. X.-1. A Letter to Archdeacon Singleton, on the Ecclesiastical Commission, by the Rev. Sydney Smith. London, 1837.

2. Quarterly Review for February 1837, Article VII.

3. Pusey on Cathedral Institutions. London, 1833. 2d. edit. HEN Dr. Philpotts fulminated, ex cathedrâ, his malignant

W charge of " treachery, aggravated by perjury," against

our Catholic legislators, the alleged "treachery," as distinguished from the charge of perjury, must have consisted in the supposed exercise of their legislative functions to the prejudice of the Anglican Church, in breach of some solemn compact which they had entered into with the Legislature; and their alleged perjury must have consisted in their supposed violation of an oath by which they were pledged to maintain that compact. The absurdity, injustice, and futility of these charges we have demonstrated in another article in our present number. Our reasons for what we conceive would otherwise have been a labour as unnecessary as it is degrading, we shall develope in the present article; and we have quoted Dr. Philpotts for the purpose only of showing, upon his high authority, that in the abstract, and independently of any question of perjury, in HIS opinion, the attempt to violate a solemn compact, entered into with the Legislature, is an act of "treachery." In the simplicity and sincerity of our hearts, we had believed and trusted that the Emancipation Act was intended as a real and substantial recognition of our civil and religious rights and liberties; and that although we had not the protective sanction of oaths for their preservation, yet we had in truth the highest guarantee for the full toleration and exercise of those rights and liberties-the honour and faith of the British nation. If this be no delusion,-if such be the substance of the compact between the Legislature and the Catholic body - then, in our opinion, a design to eradicate our holy religion, and to subvert our dearly purchased civil rights, is "treachery treachery" indeed. The MOTIVES which have led to this attempt upon our dearest privileges are open and avowed:-the necessity of reorganizing and reconstructing the Anglican Church; the incompatibility of HER safety with the existence of OUR religion; the necessity of TRANSFERRING the influence of our clergy to her own; and, THEREFORE, the necessity of the suppression of our

faith.

It is our deliberate conviction that this charge of treachery and perjury, which has been so industriously raised against the Catholic legislators, is used only as an instrument to promote this most treacherous conspiracy; and in this use, which is intended

supposed to have this meaning, except as equivalent to that Greek term.

It may be necessary even sometimes to consult St. Jerome's commentary, to ascertain the exact sense in which he used words or phrases. For example, "Butyrum et mal comedet, ut sciat reprobare malum et eligere bonum."* From his commentary on this passage, it is evident that he used the particle ut in the sense of quamvis, as Ovid does,

"Ut desint viros, tamen est laudanda voluntas."†

The sense would be, that the Messiah should eat the common food of infants, although he, in truth, possessed discretion and knowledge.

These examples are, we trust, sufficient to elucidate our views regarding a complete and authorized revisal of our English Catholic version. Much we have to say respecting the prefaces and notes, the indices and titles which should accompany any such authorized edition. On these matters it will be time enough to express our sentiments, when we shall perceive that the hints here thrown out have been esteemed worthy of notice, and that attention is turned to the necessity or propriety of providing us with a standard edition, no longer subject to alteration from the caprice or ignorance of individuals. The new version which has led to the remarks we have made in this paper, cannot, as we have already observed, supersede the necessity of such a revision. With several of its verbal changes we are certainly pleased; but there are others of which we cannot bring ourselves to approve. The change of "Christ" into "Messiah," and "gospel" into "good tidings," seems unnecessary, and likely to startle ordinary readers. For the rejected words have long become part of the language.

Throughout the notes and preface there is a drift which cannot be overlooked, and which has our cordial approbation; it is to place the gospels in their proper light, as narratives not intended to form a complete digest of our Saviour's life, but as "occasional pieces," so to speak, suggested by particular circumstances, and primarily directed to readers possessing different qualifications from ours, who could understand much that to us must be obscure. The impression on the reader's mind, after having perused this edition, must be, that Christianity never depended, for its code or evidences, upon the compilation of these documents, and that they never could have been intended for a rule of faith. Considering the work in this light, we have an additional pleasure in bearing witness to the learning, diligence, and acuteness of its author.

* Is. viii. 15.

De Ponto, lib. iii. ep. iv. 19.

ART. X.-1. A Letter to Archdeacon Singleton, on the Ecclesiastical Commission, by the Rev. Sydney Smith. London, 1837.

2. Quarterly Review for February 1837, Article VII.

W

3. Pusey on Cathedral Institutions. London, 1833. 2d. edit. HEN Dr. Philpotts fulminated, ex cathedrâ, his malignant charge of "treachery, aggravated by perjury," against our Catholic legislators, the alleged "treachery," as distinguished from the charge of perjury, must have consisted in the supposed exercise of their legislative functions to the prejudice of the Anglican Church, in breach of some solemn compact which they had entered into with the Legislature; and their alleged perjury must have consisted in their supposed violation of an oath by which they were pledged to maintain that compact. The absurdity, injustice, and futility of these charges we have demonstrated in another article in our present number. Our reasons for what we conceive would otherwise have been a labour as unnecessary as it is degrading, we shall develope in the present article; and we have quoted Dr. Philpotts for the purpose only of showing, upon his high authority, that in the abstract, and independently of any question of perjury, in HIS opinion, the attempt to violate a solemn compact, entered into with the Legislature, is an act of "treachery." In the simplicity and sincerity of our hearts, we had believed and trusted that the Emancipation Act was intended as a real and substantial recognition of our civil and religious rights and liberties; and that although we had not the protective sanction of oaths for their preservation, yet we had in truth the highest guarantee for the full toleration and exercise of those rights and liberties-the honour and faith of the British nation. If this be no delusion,-if such be the substance of the compact between the Legislature and the Catholic body—then, in our opinion, a design to eradicate our holy religion, and to subvert our dearly purchased civil rights, is "treachery" indeed. The MOTIVES which have led to this attempt upon our dearest privileges are open and avowed:-the necessity of reorganizing and reconstructing the Anglican Church; the incompatibility of HER safety with the existence of OUR religion; the necessity of TRANSFERRING the influence of our clergy to her own; and, THEREFORE, the necessity of the suppression of our faith.

It is our deliberate conviction that this charge of treachery and perjury, which has been so industriously raised against the Catholic legislators, is used only as an instrument to promote this most treacherous conspiracy; and in this use, which is intended

to be made of the charge, consists, in our opinion, its only importance; an importance, however, which justifies our exhibition of its absurdity and iniquity.

In order to explain our situation-religious and political-to our fellow-countrymen, we are bound to examine into the present state and prospects of the Anglican Church; and our only apology for so doing, is, that we act on the defensive, and that silence would be treason to our Catholic fellow-subjects.

Let us then proceed to enquire into the motives which have led to this calumnious accusation against the Catholic members of the legislature; and we have no hesitation in saying, that they are founded on a conviction of the ultimate failure of the Anglican establishment, and an increasing dread and hatred of the Catholic religion, which lead to a desire to throw odium upon its faith, nay, even to seek its utter destruction, in order that, with safety to herself, the Church of England may adopt those means of acquiring influence, diffusing opinions, and maintaining authority, which the Catholic Church so eminently possesses, and of which the former is obliged to acknowledge herself wholly deficient; and which, in truth, are the necessary and natural results of the divine authority which is vested in the Catholic Church.

Not ten years ago, the Anglican Church was fenced by legislative protection from all rivalry whatsoever. The repeal of the Test Act and the emancipation of the Catholics have reduced her ascendancy to a mere superiority in worldly advantages, and given to the people, for the first time, the free and unbiassed exercise of the Protestant right of judging for themselves in their choice of a religion. What has been the consequence? Already she is uttering the language of despair; already do her ablest champions proclaim that her only hope of safety is in the recovery of her exclusive privileges, and in the destruction of her Catholic antagonist by the secular arm. Nor is this all. She proclaims that, even though she should recover her former advantages, she can have no moral controul over the people unless by a new infusion of principles, and a re-organization of her fundamental construction; that, from the absence of these principles, and the errors in that construction, she has passed the end of her third century, without having acquired any hold upon the affections, or authority over the conduct, of the people. She proclaims that her new principles are to be derived from the Catholic faith; and her new authority is to be a transfer of that once enjoyed by the Catholic pastors to her own teachers. And lest, in her new garb, she should be confounded with, or mistaken for, the true Church, and the people, following up her new principles, and examining her new-born authority, should dis

cover their source, and should prefer the original to the counterfeit, she has determined to follow the maxim of odisse quem læseris, and, by every species of calumny and misrepresentation, to render hideous the features of her great original, so as to scare the people from any enquiry after the source of truth.

We are fully borne out in this view of the subject by her own authorities. In a former article* we adverted to the "Tracts for the Times," by certain distinguished members of the University of Oxford. From the same source a third volume has lately issued, which contains a most remarkable combination of advoсасу of Catholic principles and practices †, and an anxious longing for their introduction into the Establishment, with a calumnious misrepresentation of the Catholic religion. In the same spirit, but with greater eloquence and more extended views, a writer in the last number of the "Quarterly Review," has appealed to the Protestancy of the empire; and, to enable our readers to judge of the truth of our representation, we shall lay before them copious extracts, which we will endeavour to classify. The following passages, we are satisfied, will command the admiration of all our readers; and, by their Catholic beauty, will justify the length at which we quote them :

"Our cathedrals were consecrated virtually by the spirit of their founders, and expressly in their charters, to the glory of God, and to the promotion of his glory, in a mode which to us may seem strange, though the Church, in her best of times-at all times, till nothing but utility engrossed our thoughts-esteemed it the greatest, and most natural, and most necessary of her duties. They were intended, not like our present churches, as lecture-rooms for teaching religion, or decent shelters against weather for the convenience of assembling on the Sabbath, but as great temples, where daily, and almost hourly, a solemn service might be celebrated to God, even if no worshippers were present but those by whom it was performed. The Church, in her best of times, never made, as we make, the preaching of man the first of her objects: she rested most on prayer; and, as in all other cases, what she received from the authority of her first teachers, and naturally adopted by the instinct of her own pure spirit, was, also, most consistent with reason. Even as an instrument of christianizing man, prayer is better than preaching. Prayer requires the active exertion of our own minds; preaching places us at our ease, to be moulded and fashioned by an outward influence. Preaching fixes our thoughts on man, prayer upon God. Preaching may make us vain, conceited, and judges of our teachers; prayer leaves us humble and contrite. We sit during the one, we kneel at the other. Preaching is precarious, and its power in human

Vol. i. p. 256.

Our Catholic Readers will be edified by a complete translation of the Catholic daily office for "a confessor," adapted to the Life and History of the Protestant Bishop Ken.