no more than principal ecclesiastic in the dominions of the former, were investigating at Trent the claims of that religion in which they had been bred, other divines, commissioned for that very purpose by the government of their own country, were similarly engaged in England. These clergymen were like the Trentine deliberators, bred Romanists, they were among the best scholars of their age; they possessed unimpeached",

The most prominent objections levelled by Romanists against the Reformation, are founded upon the characters of its principal promoters; but they are futile, resolving themselves into the facts, that most of the reforming clergymen married, and that many of the laymen answered political or interested ends by the part which they took. These absurd charges run through all the Romish attacks upon the revival of Scriptural Christianity, and they are embodied in a small tract, entitled, "A Short History of the Origin and Progress of the Protestant Religion, extracted from the best Protestant Writers, by way of question and answer: by the Ven. and R. R. Dr. R. Challoner, V. A. Lond. 1813." The "best Protestant Writers," who have furnished this array, are chiefly Heylin and Collier, two authors of great learning and industry, who have exposed the innovations of Popery in many important particulars; but these great men lived during the time when Presbyterianism triumphed over the Established Church, and being keen political partizans, the former of Charles I., the latter of James II., they were willing to go all lengths in support of regal and sacerdotal privileges. This bias caused them to speak severely of the clergy who carried the Reformation through, because these were generally moderate in their views of the priestly character; and of the laity thus employed, as having been concerned in pillaging the Church. This pillage is undoubtedly a stain upon the Reformation, because it was carried too far; but had it stopped time enough to leave a sufficient maintenance to all the bishops, and the impropriate tythes to the parochial clergy, little objection could be made to

and unimpeachable characters, they were remarkably free from rashness or enthusiasm, and they plainly shewed their original attachment to their early principles by the slowness and caution with which they admitted such articles of faith as were new to them. The English divines, however, came to conclusions widely different from those of their Trentine contemporaries; and the reasons were, because they could not admit the Pope to be a judge in his own cause, nor allow uncertain traditions to weigh against the genuine record of God's word. To the correctness of their judgment several successive generations of intelligent and learned enquirers have borne a grateful testimony. Their contem

it. Few men would desire to see the whole body of English dignitaries possessed of that enormous landed property which was in their hands three centuries ago. Many of those, however, who shared the plunder, were no doubt sincere converts to the religion of Holy Scripture, and it is obvious, that such share could have fallen to the lot of very few among those thus converted. As for the marriage of reforming clergymen, even if no motives for it but the most unseemly ones, will content Romish polemics, it is undeniable, that these ecclesiastics resorted to an expedient far more honourable than their infamous contemporaries, the Popes, and other such ecclesiastical grandees, who notoriously lived in lewd concubinage. It should besides be observed, that several of our leading English Reformers never married, as the Bishops Ridley, Taylor, and others. Nor did any of them display those violent political feelings which disgraced some of the low-church party abroad. It may, therefore, be truly said of those divines who planned and executed the English Reformation, that their characters were such as their enemies have never been able successfully to impeach.

poraries, however, were far from being so decided and unanimous. Many, indeed, of the most able and zealous religionists in England looked on with admiration, while the leading Reformers were engaged in their important labours, but the great majority of men in every rank and station were riveted in their early prejudices, and hated the prospect of surrendering that seductive religious system in which their fathers had lived and died c.

It is hence obvious, that if Somerset had consulted political expediency alone, he would have allowed the continuance of the mitigated Romanism established under King Henry. His determination to overthrow that system completely, must, therefore, have arisen from an imperious sense of duty. At that period religious toleration was unknown. Dissenters, indeed, from the Established Church had existed during the whole course of the papal usurpation, but these were branded as heretics, and had been usually treated as capital criminals. The only notions, therefore, entertained by European legislators as to their ecclesiastical duties, were, that one religion was to be protected, and all men subjected to their

"The use of the old religion is forbidden by a law, and the use of the new is not yet printed: printed in the stomachs of eleven out of twelve parts of the realm; what countenance soever men make outwardly to please them in whom they see the power resteth." (Sir William Paget, to the Lord Protector, Strype, Eccl. Mem. Appendix II. 431.) This letter bears date July 7,

authority constrained to live within its pale. Of course, no conscientious ruler, holding these opinions could thus maintain a religion which he deemed erroneous and pernicious. That the Protector thus viewed Romanism must be inferred both from his acts, and from the known opinions of his confidential associates. He lived upon terms of intimacy with eminent divines who had spent years of unwearied toil in examining the papal faith, and who had at length become fully convinced that they were bound to abandon it. As it is indisputable that Somerset had imbibed the opinions of his friends, it is plain that he could not conscientiously permit the continuance of ecclesiastical affairs in their existing state. Among Romanists, there were, no doubt, then, as ever, many genuine Christians. There were also many virtuous and enlightened heathens among the nations of classical antiquity. But the excellence of a religion is not to be measured by the characters of a few individuals. That religion is best which is most extensively beneficial. Now Romanism, as a religion for the people, is liable to the most serious objections. Its base alloy of Paganism cannot fail of captivating all superstitious minds, and of rendering them obtuse to sound religious impressions. Those who look upon graven images, bread, salted water, beads, dead men's bones, and other contemptible objects, as holy things; those who believe that departed spirits may be won over to become their especial patrons; and that idle delusions, or shameless

impostures practised among the silly or unprincipled, are indubitable marks of Divine favour, will be little likely to conceive a relish for the pure and rational doctrines of the Gospel. Nor can the endless forms of Romanism fail of obstructing the spiritual welfare of many persons rather above a grovelling superstition. If a man be persuaded, that the mass is a propitiatory sacrifice certainly beneficial to him, that by means of a periodical confession, he will assuredly escape the eternal punishment denounced against sinners, and that bodily mortifications, or tedious absurdities, will wipe away that temporal penalty which he considers himself liable to pay; there is very great danger, that he will content himself with an exact attention to these pharisaical forms, and imagine, that he is thereby thoroughly discharging the duties of his Christian calling. Persons in authority who witnessed such evils, were awakened to their real character, and knew the causes from which they sprang, could hardly, with a safe conscience, allow to Romanism the exclusive possession of a country under their go

vernance.

The 15th of October had been named for the meeting of Parliament, but that important assembly was then prorogued until the 24th of the following month. The plague having made one of those visits to London which narrow streets, crowded with an uncleanly population, so fatally encouraged, it was thought unreasonable to require the attendance of members in town until