The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-07-10 00:00:00

Now, what has the rev. gentleman to say for himse

Will h'e still maintain his opinion in direct contradiction to
his own oath, the opinion of the church, and that of the cele-
brated Thomas Maguire ? If he will, it is the duty of the
Bishop instantly to adopt measures to have him deposed; if
he refuse to do this, he also is guilty of perjury; for he
swears, "That he will take care that the doctrines of the
church be held, taught, and preached by all those that are
under his power, and by such as he shall have charge over
in his profession."--[See " Protestant, vol. 3, page 7.]
Both these gentlemen, I think, are in an awkward posi-
tron, but the Rev. Mr. Parker especially, will have some
difficulty to extricate himself from the dilemma in which I
have placed him.
With respect to transubstantiation, I have to say that I

consider it 'a
doctrine so monstrous, so contrary to common
sense and to all our senses, that it is not only unchristian,
but really disgraceful, that we should be anathematized' for
rejectingit. We do not curse them for disbelieving any one
of our opinions, and I am sure we do them no injustice nor
are guilty of any want of charity, when we denounce such
doctrines as transubstantiation, even in the strongest terms.
When the doctrines of any church are fairly stated, (and I
am sure those of the Catholic Church are in this letter, for I
have stated them in their own words,) the adherents of that
church, whatever it may be, cannot with propriety charge
any person with uncharitableness or injustice in publishing
them. If, therefore, Catholics are displeased with me in
writing this letter, or with you in publishing it, it is because
they are actually ashamed of the doctrine referred to. I know,
indeed, some who are actually ashamed of it, they care not
"to hear the Church" in this matter, and I should like to
know why it is they are not considered "as heathen men and
publicans''—and why the Ilev. Mr. Parker is not treated as
such. In conclusion, I beg to say that I consider the state,
meats which I have made in this letter quite incontrovertible,
but if any answer to them be attempted, you will, I hope, in
fairness, give it publication. My object in writing it is to
show what the doctrine of the Catholic Church really is re.-
Ppectinct the salvation of tiro without itti pales and it for
•• .;,

you and the public to judge, whether or not I have distinctly,
correctly, and fairly stated it. Being engaged in business,
and not having time for much writing, the controversy (if
this letter lead to one) must end with two letters from each
side, which number 1 consider quite sufficient to settle this
question' hat if you, Mr.: gditoi,.Jio,A a tovillin to extend it
even id this length, I have to request. (as I wish'eatholies to
be dealt with fairly and impartially). that you will select and
publish what you consider the best and ablest answer out of
those you may receive in reply to this letter. With this 1
shall be satisfied, and what could my opponents desire more.
—1 am, yours respectfully, A SCOTSMAN.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIFERPOOL•ST.INDARD.
Sin,—ln the -Mail of the sth instant I find the following
extract from a letter written by a person in North Shields,
for a paper in London', professing to come out under the
sanction of Christian Dissenters:7-

, Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in North Shields.
"I hope we shall be required again to importune parlia-
ment in our cause—by demanding the abolition of the sugar
bounties. Surely Hume and his train of economists, and the
true reformers, friendly as they are to slavery, will give us
their votes. Oh. I should like to starve those villains (the
planters) to do justice to their. victims! And I do like the
idea thrown out in the late Emancipator, of adeising the negroes
not to work for wages in the boilingseason. I cannot encourage
a single wrinkle of despondency to settle on my brow (as some
of our friends do) on hearing of defeat after ilefeatin parlia-
ment, whilst we have so many clear-headed champions in
Tokenhouse-yard, &v.., and any bright spots in our horizon—
and, moreover, the'God of the oppressed for us—and in so
many instances, manifestly workint! with us, notwithstanding
the -powerful phalanx of whit's, and forks, and planters and
DEVILS, work, with all their might against us. That the mi-
nisters and their opponents obi all other subjects should join the
diphthong-unity, in the cause of cruelty, oppression, and injus-
tice, is a monstrous and anomalous sight. -I understand the
reason and object of the opposition of Gladstone and the rest
of the planters to the measures; but that the ministers and
their jealous opponents should unite an such a cause is to use
incomprehensible. As soon as the important claims of merey
and justice, and of a whole nation are made, the old leaven
is forgotten and cast out7-the fermentation ceases! The
planters surely must have great influence with them. And
as to our M.P.'s, who cant about theirindependence; and the
national faith,' they seem to be equally infatuated, and set
the demands of their constituents at naught: Jew, Turk,
and Christian differ but in creed. •
"Our late resolution published a short time ago, and sent
to our members, I think, was not strong enough—a little more
• red-pepper' applied tnight,possibly have opened their eyes.
I have little doubt- but their conduct on this question will prevent
their. being returned to parliament again. - •
"The coronation of the-queen will tie a fine subject for the
caricaturist. A virgin Queen of England to be crowned a
`Queen of Slaves!! Why, it will be as revolting as the star-
bespangled flag of liberty waving on the top of. the Capitol
of Washington! Yea, more so,—for she is extending the
commerce—beginning a new slave-trade—bringing • fresh
slaves from India, to feed the lampreys of British Guiana,
Gladstone and Co." •

In addressing you, it is noj to make any particular coin--
ment upon the extract, but to notice the remarks of the
editor of the•Maitpcsisictrhe has been pleased to make upon-
the character of a minister of a christian community, the
Rev. Samuel Lake, of Chester, because his name unfortu-
nately appeared amongst the names of a reading society into
which that paper has been.introduced, though, in doing so,
I cannot do otherwise myself than censure that gehtleman
for sanctioning the circulation of a paper disseminating, as
it does, falsehoods and principles contrary to christianity;as
the above extract, which is only a minor sample of what ap-
peats in its columns, clearly proves. Yet, whilst one finds
fault, it is not necessary to amend to ribaldry, as the editor
has in this, as he does in most instances, but to take the
highest 'vantage ground we can command, and none can
take a higher stand than the Editor of the Mail; yet he de-
lights in expressions derogatory to the character of either a
christian or a gentleman, which may. appear keen and
cutting to the ignorant reader, but to the better informed it
is disgusting in the extreme, heaping praise where censure
was intended.
To all who are acquainted with the rev. gentleman in
question, the Mail's remarks upon him would have no effect;
and to those who are not, it signifies little or nothing. Yet,
if these remarks had been made as they ought to have been,

they might have had the desired effect, by making that rev.
gentleman more cautious in future what publication he
sanctions by allowing his name to appear upon it; but I fedr
the end will not be gained. I therefore advise the Editor of
the Mail, when he writes again, to write as a gentleman.—l
am, &c., A PLANTER.
Liverpool, 101 h July, 1838.