the Church. Received as we receive it, with due submission to ecclesiastical authority; and interpreted, as we interpret it, in due conformity to the dictates of the apostolic see, it is by no means opposed to, but, on the contrary, altogether consistent with the doctrines of our holy religion; while our adversaries, having departed from the Church, may be said, also, to have departed from the gospel, for they reject the only guidance under which it could be truly understood. In sacrificing the Church, because of their attachment to the gospel, they are altogether unconscious that they are sacrificing the gospel from their hatred to the Church.

And long may they continue in that delusive state of self-confidence, which causes division amongst themselves as well as separation from the centre of Catholic unity. Thus may they best be eventually brought from the errors of their ways, and led to recognise, from the contemplation of the harmony which prevails amongst true believers, the only source of certainty and security in matters of faith and doctrine, by the meek and reverent submission to which men may have peace upon earth, and attain, after their mortal pilgrimage, the blessedness of heaven.

Our position here, therefore, is abundantly consolatory at present. It is surely a cause of grateful thanksgiving, that our adversaries should experience embarrassment and weakness from what might be supposed to give them strength, while we experience strength and confidence from what might be supposed to embarrass and impede us.

Of liberality upon the continent you have some reason to complain. And I fully agree with you, that the present state of our Church would be less deplorable, if the defection from the faith that has taken place carried men the whole way into infidelity, without suffering them to touch, on the road, at any of those resting-places where they become enamoured of the follies of some fantastical sect, and persuade themselves that, by becoming attached to it, they may still be Christians. Those who have been, in this way, inveigled from us, we rarely if ever reclaim,

while stark-staring infidels are very frequently re-converted-to be sure, in most instances upon the deathbed, but then, one such conversion is better than a dozen sermons. Besides, infidels, in this country at least, have been of amazing use to us. Without them, I do not think the Parliament would have ever passed the Catholic Bill; and, I assure you, their hatred of the heretical church exceeds that of true believers. They are known here by the name of li beral Protestants; and you may be sure that we do not refuse to bic them "God speed," when they vo lunteer to act as pioneers for the de struction of Protestant institutions.

There is, therefore, a wide difference between the meaning of the word "liberality" amongst us and amongst you; or rather, the differ ent circumstances in which we are placed give it a different application With you, it is anti-popish; with us it is favourable to popery. With you it is the mask under which infidels carry on their designs against true religion; with us, it is the mask un der which the faithful, who are for. this one purpose in league with infi dels, carry on their designs agains the Established Church. With you it starves religion; with us, it feed: it. With you, it has deprived the Church of its own property; with us it has taxed an heretical community for the purpose of educating ou clergy, and is about to appropriate part of the revenues belonging to the heretical establishment for the purpose of conferring upon them a reputable independence. Therefore, say I, long live "LIBERALITY," in the sense in which it is understood in Ireland.

MY DEAR FRIEND,

I said in my last, that there was something in the discipline of the Church of England adverse to its stability. You shall judge. The patronage of the bishoprics and of the higher dignities is vested in the government, who also have the disposal of a vast number of the inferior preferments. The remainder are shared between the bishops and the lay impropriators. Now, we may lay it down as a certain truth, that the condition of the Church will be determined by the manner in which the patronage is employed. If it be conscientiously used, the Church must prosper;-if it be sacrilegiously abused, the Church must decay.

What, then, are the motives which influence the government in the choice of bishops? For, as are the bishops, so will be the Church. Are they appointed for political or for spiritual considerations? A man would here be laughed at who seriously asked such a question :—so notorious is it, that family connexion and parliamentary influence are the only passports to that lofty station! The consequence of this is, that in the Church of England real merit is overlooked, or scantily and inadequately rewarded; while individuals, by no means eminent either for learning, or piety, or talent, or eloquence are promoted, not only beyond their deserts, but despite their deficiencies, and without the slightest regard to those peculiar qualifications which can alone ensure a wise discretion in the management of ecclesiastical affairs. Now, the advantage which we derive from this is twofold. It excites a just clamour against the heretical Church from without, and it weakens its defences within. The same arts which fill its high places with incapables, augment the hatred and strengthen the hands of its ene

mies.

The bishops, you may be sure, follow the example that has been set them, and do unto others as the government has done unto them. Their best benefices are seldom conferred upon any one beyond the circle of their kinsfolk or acquaintance. Thus, from the top to the bottom, a system of partiality and persecution pre

vails, such as, in the days of Luther, furnished the most plausible of the accusations which were levelled against our holy Church, and which, more than any thing else, contributed to the event miscalled the Reformation.

At present, when a man who is eminent either for learning, piety, zeal, or eloquence, begins to be professionally distinguished, the sons and relatives of the bishop, in whose diocese he is, immediately begin to take the alarm. They consider him as a kind of interloper, who is disposed to interfere with their legiti mate claims, and nothing is left undone, which petty artifice and malevolence can accomplish, to injure him in the opinion of his diocesan, who, indeed, too frequently is disposed to view him in the same light; so that, as Shakspeare says, “his virtues are his enemies," and he soon begins to learn from experience, that "that which is comely" may 66 envenom him that bears it." He sees that the sycophant and the parasite thrive, while he is compelled to subsist upon a scanty pittance, scareely sufficient to ward off actual famine from his wife and children!

It has, I know, been said, and it is thought by many sensible persons, that the lay impropriations are a great means of giving stability, and ensuring permanency, to this accursed system. I never have thought so; and least of all can I think so now. Of all the English Church preferments, the lay impropriations are the most notoriously and scandalously abused. The government sometimes, even the bishops sometimes, have regard to merit in their choice of rectors. They become ashamed of being influenced in every instance by sordid and unworthy motives, and they endeavour to gull the public, and at the same time throw a sop to their conscience, by sometimes promoting an honest man; but lay impropriators never. I say, therefore, that the part of the system that is most objectionable can never permanently uphold the rest. No CHURCH CAN EVER BE PROTECTED AGAINST ITS OWN ABUSES;

and amongst the rottenest abuses of the Church of England, I look upon lay impropriation. I have no doubt the

individuals to whom they belong would like well to continue possess ed of them, and must be blind indeed, if they do not see that their interest in this respect is linked inseparably with that of the Established Church. But if that Established Church be felt to be a public nuisance, not merely by us, but by Protestants also, from the manner in which its patronage is administered, to the neglect of those ends for which it was appointed, and to the scandal of true religion, the lay impropriators will find themselves in a miserable minority, if their temporal interests should inspire them with the hardihood to stickle for the continuance of such a system, in opposition to the judgment and the feelings of the community at large. Depend upon it, it cannot last; and the lay impropriators, so far from being a protection to it, are a dead weight, which must accelerate its downfall, and ensure its destruction.

Nor is this all-as soon as the Church tumbles, the lay impropriations must cease. We are acquainted with every acre of Church property which has thus undergone sacrilegious alienation; and, think you, that we shall be slow to put in our claims when the day of retribution comes? No, truly. If what was appropriated to religious purposes may be resumed, -much more, what was misappropriated to secular purposes. If churchmen, who perform spiritual duties in consideration of the possessions which they enjoy, may yet be deprived of those possessions;-much more those who perform no such spiritual duties. The lay impropriators reason right in saying, “our property is part and parcel of the property of the Church; let us, therefore, unite to defend it." But we, also, reason rightly when we say, you cannot defend the property of the Church; and, therefore, a fortiori, not your own possessions." They are an engrafted shoot, which all the care that can be taken of them will not enable to survive the extinction of the parent stock. So may we pronounce, with at least equal certainty, of those vested interests which have been acquired out of the patrimony of the Church, and the security of which cannot be greater than that of the property of which

they once constituted part and parcel, and which, if an heretical govern ment had a right to alienate it for the support of heresy, the faithful may surely reclaim for the maintenance of true religion.

Now, compare all this with the practice which obtains among us in similar cases, and recognise our su periority. In our Church merit ob tains its due reward. An able and efficient minister never is neglected The curate, after a certain routine o service, if his conduct be approved of, is certain of becoming a paris] priest;-and the parochial clergy according to their merits, may enter tain an equal expectation of bein elevated to the mitre. But this is no all. We not only provide for ou clergy according to their merits, bu dispose of them according to thei fitness. We endeavour, as far as i us lies, not only to give good thing to good men, but to put proper me in proper places. This, as you may well suppose, gives us a prodigiou advantage. It is a consideration whic never enters into the mind of a Pro testant patron, who only thinks o the living as a good thing for the fa voured individual who is appointe to it. Now our only consideratio: is, whether the individual appointe is good enough for the living. Wher ever a vacancy occurs, and befor any promotion takes place in conse quence of it, we consider all the cir cumstances of the case-the exten of the parish, its population, the dif ferent denominations of heresy tha are to be found in it, what particula species at that time happens to be epidemic; how the people are di vided into parties; the characters and abilities of the Protestant clergymen; the names and the dispositions of the principal Protestant gentry; it is unnecessary to tell you that we enquire very particularly into all those things, because you know that we are under obligation to make a regular return of them to the Holy See; and you may easily imagine. the advantage which we possess, from the knowledge which we thus acquire, in choosing the individual upon whose conduct in his sacred charge so many important consequences may depend, and who may so considerably either promote by his discretion, or injure by his inca