The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-06-14 00:00:00

LAST OP THE COURSE OF LECTURES ON THE
CREED OF POPE PIUS THE FOURTH.

The twelfth and last of the course of lectures on the twelve
novel articles of the creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, was de-
livered on Friday evening last, in the Music-hall, Bold-street,
by the Rev. Hugh M`Neile. Every part of the room was
crowded almost to suffocation. On the platform we observed
a great number of the principal clergy and gentry of the
town.

Mr. MIDDLETON having been called to the chair, the pro-
ceedings commenced with the offering of prayer by the Rev.
J. R. Connor, minister of St. Simon's church.

Mr. WNEILE then stepped forward, and the enthusiastic
cheering with which he was saluted having ceased, he spoke
nearly as follows :—Sir, I think it must be obvious to every
man of even common discernment, that there exists now in
our community a disposition to quiescence, that, after being
kept in a'state of agitation for many years under a govern-
ment who were not their own masterst and who therefore
were not to be trusted, the country is disposed now to enjoy
rest under a strong and independent government. (Hear.)
Politically speaking, we rejoice that this is so, and partake
of this rest; but, sir, while this change has taken place in
the things that are seen, no change has taken place in the
relative importance of the things that are not seen. (Hear.)
And if we be asked why, while we acknowledge this disposi-
tion to quietness, we persevere in agitating the Roman Ca-
tholic controversy, our answer is given in the language of an
apostle, " we having received the same spirit of faith, ac-
cording as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I
spoken ; we also believe, and therefore speak." (Hear.)
We believe the Gospel, the Gospel of the grace of God, in
all its direct majesty and in all its exclusiveness, as the way
of human salvation. Sir, all that is distinguishing in Roman-
ism is comparatively novel ; all that Romanism holds, or
professes to hold, of primitive Christianity is not distin-
guishing, for we hold it also. (Hear, hear, hear.)
In the course of lectures now to be concluded, attention
has been called to the peculiarities of Romanism, not as they
are described by interested or prejudiced opponents, but as
they are cautiously enumerated in the successive clauses of
the creed of Pope Pius the Fourth. It is not my intention
to attempt to retrace the steps of any of my predecessors in
this course, of to reiterate arguments already well and suffi-
ciently urged.; but to call attention at once to the distin-
guishing features of the last article in that creed, entrusted
to my care. In the printed list for this course, the article
in question is thus given :
" N. N.. do at this present freely profess and
sincerely hold this true Catholic faith, without which no one
can be saved : and I promise most constantly to retain and
confess the same entire and inviolate, with God's assistance,
to the end of my life."
This is given as the last clause of the creed of Pope Pius
the Fourth ; but there is a- mistake here. The article is
mutilated, and an important clause is suppressed. (Hear,
hear.) This is a very grave charge; but, wherever the fault
may be, this is the fact, that this article, so given in the
printed list circulated as our notice for these lectures, is not
correctly given. I repeat it is mutilated, and an important
clause suppressed. (Hear.) Whose fault is this ? Ido not
think that any fault attaches to the gentleman or gentlemen
who prepared this list. They took the article as they found
it translated into English in both Roman Catholic and Pro-
testant writers; no fault, therefore, attaches to them. I
think some fault does undoubtedly attach to those Protestant
writers who have given the article in a mutilated form. At
the same time, there is some degree of excuse for them.
They found it so given in Roman Catholic books ; and, con-
scious of their own fidelity in transcribing documents, they
were willing, as all honest men always are, to give credit to
their opponents for the exercise of a similar conscientious-
ness. (Hear.) But what excuse shall be made for the Ro-
man Catholic writers who have thus printed their own creed
in a mutilated form ? (Hear, hear.) Mr. Charles Butler,
the most distinguished of modern Roman Catholic contro-
versialists in England, has given it thus in his " Book of
the Roman Catholic Church," as may be seen upon the Bth
page of that book. Messrs. Berrington and Kirk, two Roman
Catholic priests, who published a condensed controversial
manual entitled " The Faith of Catholics," have given it in
the same mutilated form, as may be seen on the 454th page
of their book. (Hear, hear.)
It becomes my duty now to supply the suppressed clause.
I have the original Latin in my hands, and I will read it
first in that language, and then give you a translation of it.
The suppressed clause is this :
" Atque a meis subditis vel illis, quorum cura ad me in
munere meo, spectabit, teneri, doceri et prEedicari, quantum
in me erit, curaturum.
" Ego, idem, N. spondee, voveo, ac juro : sic me Deus
adjuvet, et haec sancta Dei Evangelia."
The English of this is :
" And to take care, as far as in me lies, that it [that is,
the faith] shall be held, taught, and published, by my sub-
jects, or by those the care of whom shall appertain to me in
my office. _

" This I, N., do promise vow and swear, so help me God,
and these holy Gospels of God."
We shall see that this is no unimportant clause ; and we
shall see also too palpable, and, under the circumstances,
too tempting reasons for the suppression of it.
First, however, I call your attention to the former part of
the article, as given in the printed list:—" I, N. N., do at
this present freely profess and sincerely hold this true Ca-
tholic faith, without which no one can be saved." Now it
is not to libel this statement to say, that it declares that
there is no salvation for any man who does not hold all
the preceding articles of this creed. (Hear, hear.) The
" true Catholic faith " referred to in the last article
comprehends all the preceding articles. The charge azainst
the statement is this, that it declares there is no salvation
for any man who does not hold all the weeding articles of
that creed ; and this I venture to call the climax of Rome's
direct offence against God and man. To make the nature
of this offence clear to you, it will be necessary to make a
few important distinctions • and first—this creed avowedly
makes ADDITIONS to what is alleged to be contained in
holy scripture. 'Phis it does by binding on its disciples in the
first article " apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions," and
in the eleventh article " all the sacred canons and general
councils." Omitting, therefore, for the. present, the limita-
tion which it places upon the reception of scripture in the
second article refusing to receive it, unless " in accordance
with the unanimous consent of the fathers,"—that is, in
fact, refusing to receive it at all, for it is held in abeyance
until the unanimous consent can be found, and unanimous
consent cannot be found—(cheers)--but omitting this for
the present, omitting also the erroneous interpretation of
many parts of Scripture which are dogmatically assumed in
the other articles of the creed, I consider simply now the ad-
ditions to Scripture avowedly here ixtroduced, traditions,
canons, and councils. (Hear.) Concerning all these,it is
here declared, that without a belief of them, no man can be

saved.
Now that a belief in the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
God and man, is indeed indispensable to salvation, is a great
truth, and it is no offence to say it. Orr Saviour himself
said it; his inspired apostles said it; his orthodox church,
and we as a portion of it say the same when we read his
Gospel, and when we read the Athanisian Creed. The
Church of Rome in professedly retainin; that creed, says
the same. Here, then, there is no controversy between us.
In declaring that the Gospel of God, as revealed in the word
of God, must be believed for salvation, we ire but repeating
upon earth what God himself has declarec from heaven ;
therefore, it is disingenuous in Roman Catholic controver-
sialists, as it is unreasonable and unfair in itself, to attempt
to put the declaration of the Athanasian Creed concerning
what is in Scripture upon a par with this declaration in the
creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, concerning wLat is avowedly
not in Scripture. (Hear, hear.)
Another distinction must be made. Additions to Scrip-
ture are of a twofold character : first, things not forbidden
in the Scripture, and, consequently, in themseeres indiffer-
ent ; and secondly, things forbidden, and consequently
unlawful. An example of the first may be supplied in the
wearing of a surplice, or the use of a liturgy ; an example
of the second in bowing down to an image. (Hear.) The
first I call indifferent, for Scripture leaves them untouched;
they are not forbidden. The second I have called things
unlawful, for Scripture forbids them. Now I call attention
to the first--things indifferent; and I ask you to consider
the use that may properly be made, and the use that ought
not to be made of additions to Scripture in things indifferent.
For any church in any country to add to the general princi-
ples laid down in Scripture, special regulations and special
ceremonies of her own, for her own management and her
own order, and to declare that compliance with these regu-
lations is indispensable towards participation in her commu-
nion—this is no offence at all. This is no more than any
voluntary society among men has a right to do, holding out
special advantages and prescribing special conditions ; and
this any particular church has a right to do. This the church
at Jerusalem did, the church at Alexandria, and the church at
Antioch, and this the Church of England does. To the general
principles contained in Scripture, she adds, of things indiffe-
rent, a variety of regulations for her own order, and her
own management, and she requires compliance with them all
as indispensable to communion with her. These need not
be always and in every church the same. The 34th article
of our church says, " At all times they have been diverse,
and may be changed according to the diversities of countries,
times, and men's manners, so that nothing be ordained
against God's word." And again " Every particular or na-
tional church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish
ceremonies or rites of the church ordained only by man's
authority, so that all things be done to edifying." This is
the use which may properly be made of additions to Scripture
in things indifferent. (Hear.) But now, mark, if any church
in any country pronounces that compliance Pith such things is
indispensable, not only towards communion with her but also
towards salvation with God, then she is grilty of an awful
offence, for then she presumes to elevate her private and
local regulations into a parallelism of authorit: with the word
of God. (Hear, hear, hear.) Of this offence the Church of
11Nland would be guilty if she declared that a faith, com-
prising her articles, her catechism, her homilies, was neces-
sary to salvation ; and of this offence the Church of Rome is
guilty when she says, in this creed, that a fails comprising
her traditions, her canons, her councils, is necessary not only
to communion with her, but to salvation with Gad. (Hear.)
Thus, even if we were to grant, which we cannot do, but if we
were to grant, that the preceding articles of thiticreed contain
nothing opposed to Scripture but only additions in things in-
different, and that, as such, they might fairly he required by
the Church of Rome for communion with herself yet even
then to pronounce, as she has pronounced, and required all
her disciples to pronounce upon oath in this creed, that they
are indispensable to salvation with God, is a daring offence.
Even supposing it were things indifferent, observe, her de-
claration, even so, would be a daring offenm against the ma-
jesty of God's written word. (Cheers.)
But this is not all. Now, look at the other species of
additions to Scripture which are unlawful For any church
in any country to add to the general principles of Holy Scrip-
ture special regulations of her own, for he own management
and her own order, involving things unlavful—that is, things
forbidden by the divine word, and for nut church to require
compliance with them as indispensable tovards her own com-
munion, this would be a grievous offence. It would resemble
the guilt of an illegal society among men holding out special
supposed advantages but prescribing caiditions condemned
by the law of the land. No loyal and true subject of the
realm, properly instructed in the laws o his country, and in
the requirements of such society, couldoecome a member of
such society. (cheers.) This is what be Church of Rome
has done—enacting as indispensable towards communion
with herself what the King of Heavn has forbidden and
condemned—as the use of images in wrship for instance, and
no loyal and true subject of the kingdom of heaven, properly
instructed in the laws of his God and ,n the requirements of
that church, can belong to that societ• (Loud cheers.)
One step more. Concerning unlieful things, enacted in
verbatim hostility and daring deflate to the law of God,
the Church of Rome declares, not oily that they are indis-
pensable towards communion withher, but indispensable
towards salvation with that God whoa she is thus outraging.
Engaged in systematic rebellion aganst the great Sovereign,
she denounces the everlasting angeiof the Sovereign against
all who have not joined her rebelbn. (Cheers.) This is
what 1 have ventured to call the )ax of Rome's direct
offence against God and man. (Her.) m
To see this offence in its true lig t, and see the full extent
of its heinousness, we must look i contrast to the majesty
and exclusiveness of inspiration (Hear, hear.) " All
Scripture is given by inspiration o God ;" and is, therefore,
immeasurably separated from ever tradition and every com-
position of man, however excellet, however wise. (Hear,
hear, bear.) Scripture is not to word of prophets, and
patriarchs, and apostles ; it is th word which God spake by
the mouth of those holy men. :hose men were not left to
a human, and, therefore, a fallile choice in selecting the
infalliblechin e sn. thinker words they should use. They wre the voice or voices of the
he s same ter." Tearindcd, tha.tbuthteGyowdewreornkost
withina
nsuedenistpizker ;ley were " the pens of the
creatures in divers s
ready
with each according
e thatan dp
le
ee
worksare ,
to the constitution of its senses,natal. True it is that the sacred
writers exercised the abilities f their own minds and judg-

ment in selecting acceptable words to convey the revelation ;
but equally true it is that the Holy Spirit, who is more inti-
mate with the skill and movements of man's mina than man
himself is, did so order and direct every movementin that
choice, that every word they used was as truly His ivord as
if He had given it to them with an audible voice, and they
had transcribed it from the sound. (Cheers.) " Well spoke
the Holy Ghost by the prophet," exclaims the apostle;
again, " Thou, 0 God, has said by the mouth of thy servant
David ;" and again, " Holy men of old spake as they were
moved by the Holy Ghost." (Cheers.) Now this distin-
guishes Scripture immeasurably, as I said, from every other
word. (Hear.) The Word of God so spoken, the Word of
God so spoken alone, and ALL the Word of God so spoken
—by this shall men be judged at the last day. (Hear.)
Nothing is to be added to this, nothing is to be taken from
this, with respect to salvation. (Hear.)
I have already distinguished between communion with the
church and salvation with God. Many things may be added
to this, if they be lawful in themselves, for communion with
any particular church ; but nothing is to be added to this for
salvation with our God. The Church of England observes
the distinction ; for, whilst she adds many things for her own
regulation, she no where says that the reception of these
things is necessary for salvation with God. Roman Catholic
controversialists object this to us. They say, " How can
you defend yourself, against the charge of making the 39
articles what we make the creed of Pope Pius IV. ?" The
answer is, we never said that the 39 articles are necessary for
salvation; never; and were we required to say so, I can an-
swer for some, that we would rather lay down our hands from
our arms, and have our tongue cut from our lips, than say so.
(Loud cheers.) We value them as condensed expressions
of truth ; we prefer the community hedged within them, and
value them to guard against needless diversity of sentiment;
we declare their reception necessary to communion with us;
but to say that the reception of them is necessary to salva-
tion, is abhorrent to our very souls, To elevate any word of
man, any tradition, or composition of man to a level with any
word of God, is to open the door for indefinite and intermin-
able superstitions ; while to lower any word of God to the level
of man's fallibility, or subject it to the crucible of human criti-
cism, is to open the door for every species of infidelity. The
Socinian, upon the one side, lowers the word of God to the
level of man's word, and criticises and explains it away by the
rules of grammar, as if a fallible man had spoken it. This is
the way to infidelity. The Romanist exalts man's word to a
parallel with the word of God ; and this is the way to super-
stition. (Hear, hear.) The Church of England distinguishes
always between these ; keeps scripture upon its high pedes-
tal, as that wherein alone God deals with man ; and upon a
secondary platform she has her own regulations, wherein it
is lawful for her to deal with her own children, not with man-
kind in general. (Loud cheers.)
I hope that these distinctions, though briefly stated, have
been made plain to your minds. (Hear.) I have endea-
voured to condense the matter, in order as much as possible
to avoid much speaking in such an atmosphere as we are
confined in at present ; but I hope they have not been too
much condensed to convey, simply and fully, the meaning,
which will bear expansion in your meditations. (Loud cries
of " hear, hear.")
Now I come to the suppressed clause of this article. You
will see, by reference to this suppressed clause which I have
transcribed, that it requires every sincere Romanist not only
himself to hold, but to cause as far as he can that others shall
hold—and not only that others shall hold, but that others
shall teach, the whole of this creed. (Hear.) He not only
promises to hold it himself, but he says—" And to take care,
as far as in me lies, that it shall be held, taught, and pub-
lished by my subjects, or by those the care of whom shall
appertain to me in my office. This Ido promise, vow, and
swear, so help me God, and these holy gospels of God!"
The language is comprehensive of all classes of society. (Hear,
hear, hear.) When this oath is taken by a Roman Catholic
Sovereign, the expression " by my subjects" applies literally;
and he is bound by oath to take care, as far as in him lies;
that the Roman faith, as expressed in this creed, shall be
held, taught, and published by all his subjects. (Hear, hear.)
Our second James endeavoured honestly to act up to this
oath, to act up to his obligations as a Roman Catholic ; he
was not content to hold the faith himself according to the
first clause of the article given by all the modern writers, but
he took the whole article ; he felt, as an honest man, bound
to propagate the faith ; and he endeavoured to do so. In
the good providence of God his attempt was premature ; the
bishops of the English church preferred prison to apostacy !
(Cheers.) The nation sided with the faithful prelates ; and, in-
stead of England losing her unadulterated Bible and her pri-
mitive Christianity, the popish violator of her charters lost his
crown! (Renewed cheers.) But it is not to Sovereigns only
and Bishops that this creed is administered ; and, there-
fore, there is another clause which may have escaped your
notice. It says not only "by my subjects," but " those the
care of whom shall appertain to me in my office." (Hear.)
This includes all offices ecclesiastical and civil, public and
private ; and it binds every priest with reference to his flock,
every magistrate with reference to his community, every pa-
rent with reference to his family, every master with refer-
ence to his servants and apprentices. (Hear.) The whole
population under this creed become the pledged and sworn
disciples and proselytisers of Rome. (Hear, hear, hear.)
This is the clause they have kept back !,(Hear, hear.) On
this suppressed clause the Rev. Richar ope, in his admi-
rable treatise called " Roman Misquotation," after exposing
the suppression, makes the following remarks :
" It needs scarcely be observed, that this solemn promise
of interference with the creeds of men exhibits in colours not
to be mistaken, the proselytizing character of the church of
Rome. Now lam very far from asserting that determina-
tion, in a religious body, to propagate, their opinions is not
commendable. It is clear, however, that a system, like Ro-
manism, if avowedly pledged to the extension of its princi-
ples, might be regarded with distrust in a Protestant country.
Was it then to prevent such a feeling being entertained by an
unsuspecting public that in two volumes, one of which was
specially designed for a Protestant nation, the authorised
symbol of the church of Rome is presented, divested of the
clause, in which her members bind themselves to the zealous
dissemination of their faith ?"
In other words, was it for the purpose of deceiving the
British public that, in the series of years immediately ante-
cedent to '29, Roman Catholic controversialists, putting the
fairest face they could upon their system, obliged to give the
creed of Pope Pius IV., as a known document, did, never-
theless, so far calculate upon the ignorance of the people of
England, that they ventured to mutilate that document, and
give it, divested of this obnoxious clause ? Mr. Pope gives
no answer to this question. He concludes the chapter with
the question, significantly enough, leaving his readers to sup-
ply the answer, giving them credit for sufficient discernment
to supply the right answer. None of his Roman Catholic
readers have given him a reply. (Hear.) How, indeed, could
they, when their leading aim in these our days has been to
represent themselves as the friends of religious liberty, warm
advocates of universal religious liberty ? And not only so,
but absolutely horrified, horrified, like the lowest dissenters,
at the bigotry of interfering with the opinions of others !
Holding, indeed, in all sincerity, their own opinions, but pro-
testing against the intolerance of interfering with the religious
opinions of other people ! (Hear.) To convey this idea of
themselves, they have written, they have spoken, they have
sworn. (Hear.) To propagate this idea, at this moment,
Dr. Murray flatters, Dr. Wiseman coaxes, Dr. Baines insin-
uates. (Laughter.) Who would have thought it, that these
very men, and all their archbishops and bishops,and all their
peers, and all their members of parliament, and all their ma-
gistrates, and all their masters and schoolmasters, and if there
be any other office appertaining to them—that they are all
bound by oath, as far as in them lies," to interfere, to pro-
pazate and teach and publish, all Pope Pius's creed ? (Hear.)
Who would have thought it? (Laughter.) Mr. Charles
Butler knew the creed in the original. That is no libel ;
(laughter)—or if it be the commencement of a libel upon his
honesty, then what is it upon his information ? (Hear, hear.)
He knew the creed in the original ; he wrote a book in which
he professed to give this creeed—that is no libel—and he, did
not give all the creed ! (Hear, hear.) That is no libel.
(Hear, hear, hear.) Messrs. Berington and Kirk knew the
creed in the original—that is true. Messrs. Berington and
Kirk wrote a controversial book in which they professed to
give this creed ; but Messrs. Berington and Kirk mutilated
the creed—they gave only part of it. That is true. (Hear,
and cheers.) Now our good friends of the Protestant Asso-
ciation—including Mr. Crisp, have been deceived by these
mutilations, and they have sent me before you with this mu-
tilated article to lecture upon ! That is true ;—(hear, hear)
—but I was determined to bring the clause forward, and I
hope the suppresed clause will lie printed both in Latin and
English. (Hear, hear.)
Although Mr. Charles Butler knew the creed in the origi-
nal, and although Messrs. Berington and Kirk knew it in
the original, the Protestants of England did not know it, and
most of them do not know it now, and among those to
whom it is told, many will not believe it. I hope that will
not apply to any of you, but it does apply—many will not
believe it. (Hear, hear.) They are so disposed to be quiet,
they are so determined to be charitable, they are so indis-
posed to be asked to believe these things that they seem
rather inclined to silence us by the charge of bigotry than
take the trouble of examining our awful statements. (Hear.)
But as I said at the first, so say I now again, " having the
same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and
therefore have I spoken—we also believe, and therefore
spake." (Hear, hear.) At the same time I feel that there is
a subject that it may be well to offer a fele words upon in
connection with this grave argument before us, and that is
upon the hacknied charge so constantly reiterated, and so
injuriously believed against us, that we are harsh in this
matter and our opponents mild; that we are bigotted and
our opponents charitable ; that we are vulgar and our oppo-
nents gentlemanlike. (Hear.) Sir, it has been well and
truly said, that a good christian ought never to be outdone
in good manners. I quite agree in that sentiment ; but I
think it is equally true that a good christian ought never to
be outdone in honesty, sincerity, and truth. (Cheers.) Now,
sir, to speak of Romanism with honesty, sincerity and truth,
and all the while to give no offence in word, or gesture, or
tone against good manners, to be a faithful controversialist
without ceasing to be a polished gentleman—this is an at-
tainment of no ordinary excellence. In aiming at it we
should at least have some fixed and determined standard of
good manners, to which to refer our judgment, and by which
to regulate our procedure; otherwise that which seems suf-
ficiently polite and gentlemanlike to some, may wear to
others the aspect of rudeness, perhaps even of vulgarity.
(Cheers.) In like manner the species of language which
some may consider sufficiently mild and gentle, may appear
to others uncourteous, to say the least of it, perhaps un-
kind—perhaps worse—but I desire to refrain from any lan-
guage unsuitable to the context. (Hear, hear.) For ex-
ample, when a controversialist, a member of the Church of
Rome calls all of us HERETICS, which they have no scruple
in doing, does he offend against good manners ? (Hear.) It
seems not. There does not appear to be the least feeling
that he has offended : his character as a mild conciliatory
man is in no way blemished. (Hear.) Perhaps upon some
other occasion, or it is very possible upon the same occasion,
he may have called the " heretics" " beloved fellow chris-
tians !" (Hear.) What then? Why then, sir, his incon-
sistency is overlooked, and some of his soft expressions are
eulogised as perfect models of christian charity ! (Hear.)
This is no fancy sketch ; I paint from the life. (Cheers.)
But now let us reverse the picture. (Hear.) A controver-
sialist, a member of the Church of England, ventures in the
tempest, torrent, and whirlwind of his eloquence to call Ro-
man Catholics " heretics." Does he offend against good man-
ners ? (Hear.) Oh, shocking! Oh, dreadful ! Never was
any thing heard so uncharitable ! Such language is not to
be tolerated for a moment ! (Hear.) Where is the stan-
dard of good manners? What is gentlemanlike, I should
like to know, and what is not? (Hear, hear.) What is the
reason that Roman Catholics are offended when we use such
words as " imposture" or superstition," and that we are not
offended when they use such words as "heretic?" (Hear.)
I think we take the appellation " heretic" from them, as
Mr. Southey remarks, just as we would the appellation of
dogs or kaffers from the Turks ; he says that Protestants are
not galled by such terms, because their " withers are un-
wrung." (Hear, hear.)
but
I have said this, not as an apology for harsh words, for it has
not been my intention to use any,—l protest I intended to
steer clear of all, and I believe I have done so all this evening,
—but I say this to call attention to the treatment we receive,
and to the manner in which. we bear it, and to the language—
the gentleman-like title of " heretics"—whereby we and all
not
by the most authoritative docum e oman Catholic
only Protestants
b y
Roman a r aredistinguished
Catholiccontroversialists
ts' ll tah eR angry faithful
ma a,
C—hauardc a
mI t is
sa
ronly I a
haveday oara ttwo
brought o I hiat dp
withut into
here--an
yr
etna horrid
address from the Roman Catholic bishop of this district, to
creederet to
us ;he is writing to " all the faithful,distinguished from
us. (Hear.) And not only the name, but the treatment to
" all the faithful" in Lancashire !
a,shde.sies not.writing to
nrdthtoe h
be given to " heretics," both in this world and in the next,
Is plainlyl'ong,but laidwa
adto won
put n
tthese
passaged ea
unptasa. r
elcawridl i
anot quote
—I will not trouble you with the Latin, but I will read the
connec-
tionwhichwith e
they
hsewceraere di
n tbefore
he last us, a
rfotircl ite s
7th involvedreg
regard

translation that is here—they are to be thus treated,—

" Such as are condemned are to be delivered over to the
existing secular powers, or their officers, to receive due
punishment. If laymen, their effects shall be confiscated :
if priests, they shall be first degraded from their respective
orders, and their property applied to the use of the churches
in which they have officiated. Those who have incurred a
public suspicion of heresy shall be punished with anathema,
and their company shunned by all men, unless they tho-
roughly clear themselves from the charge. If they remain
under excommunication a year, they shall then be condemned

as heretics."
And you have heard what is to be done with such as are
condemned. It goes on,—
" Secular powers of all ranks and degrees are to be warned,
induced, and, if necessary, compelled by ecclesiastical cen-
sures, as they desire to be accounted faithful, publicly to
swear that they will exert themselves to the utmost in defence
of the faith, and exterminate all heretics—[the original ex-
pression is exterminare hereticos.to exterminate heretics]—
denounced by the church, who shall be found in their terri-
tories. And whenever any person shall assume government,
whether it be spiritual or temporal, he shall be bound to
swear to abide by this decree.
" If any temporal lord, after having been admonished and
required by the church, shall neglect to clear his territory of
heretical pravity, the metropolitan and the bishops of the
province shall unite in excommunicating him. Should he
remain contumacious a whole year, the fact shall be signified
to the supreme pontiff, who will declare his vassals released
from their allegiance from that time,. and will bestow his
territory on Catholics, to be occupied by them on the con-
dition of exterminating the heretics [exterminatis hereticis],
and preserving the said territory in the pure faith."—(Third
Canon of the Fourth Council of Lateran.)
Oh, sir, the age we live in is one of toleration. Light,
liberty, and knowledge have spread their wings over the
nations; and if men are to be swayed now, it must be by
means which, apparently at least, are fair and reasonable.
To plead guilty to sentiments and principles so odious as
these, would now be fatal to any party or any system. Of
course, therefore, the defenders of the Church of Rome deny
now that they hold these principles : they repudiate them
loudly, boldly, and, to all appearance, honestly ; and they
call it wilful calumny in us to persevere in citing such senti-
ments as theirs. (Hear, hear.) But, sir, unfortunately for
that system, all these fair professions are neutralized by
stubborn facts. (Hear.) The great fact, comprehensive of
many facts, is this, that the creed of Pope Pius IV, with that
winding up oath which I have been commenting upon just
now, remains to this hour, the authorized, accredited, pub-
licly used—not laid upon the shelf—but the publicly used
document of the Church of Rome, sworn to by every bene-
ficed clergyman in her communion, and publicly professed,
with assent and consent, by every convert to her communion,
(Hear.) A part of that creed so bound upon their consci-
ences by an oath is, that they receive all that is contained in
the sacred canons and general councils of the church. I
have quoted from one of their general councils. They are
as legitimately bound, as ever a man was bound by oath, to
these sentiments. The creed of Pope Pius IV. is not denied
by them ; it is put forward by themselves as their own docu-
ment. Mr. Charles Butler, whom I have already named,
says, the creed of Pope Pius IV. is an accurate and explicit
summary of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, to
be received without restriction or qualification ; while at the
same time that very same gentleman loudly repudiates many
of the principles to which that creed binds him ! (Hear,
hear.) He acknowledges the creed, and he rejects the con-
tents of the creed ! (Hear, hear.) Upon this subject, Mr.
Southey, in writing to Mr. Butler, has used the following

words:—
" The creed, Sir, which you have thus brought forward,
comprehends all those obnoxious opinions which, in the
name of the British Roman Catholics, you are so eager to
renounce or disavow. It comprehends an acknowledgment
of the temporal authority of the popes, of their power to de-
pose kings, and to absolve subjects from their allegiance. It
includes an assent to the propositions that heretics are to be
persecuted; faith is not to be kept with them ; that simula-

tion is lawful."
He has a note on this, which is worthy of observation for
the melancholy perversion it exhibits in reference to the Holy
Scriptures. The canon law says—" Simulatio utilis est, et
in tempore assumenda," that is, simulation is useful and
sometimes ought to be practised." (Hear, hear.) A curious
passage occurs in the Decretals—" Ipse dominus noster, non
habens peccatum, nec carnem peccati, simulationem pecca-
tricis carnis assumpsit." Our Lord himself not having flesh
or sin, took upon him the pretence of sinful flesh ! And this
is quoted as Scriptural authority for the lawfulness of pre-
tending what is not fact! Here we get at the root, in the
canon law, of the practise I have been exhibiting. Just as if
I made bold to ask Mr. Charles Butler, or Messrs. Berington
and Kirk, or any other Roman Catholic, when they put for-
ward the creed in the mutilated form—
" Gentlemen, did you not know the original ?—Yes.
" Did you profess to give the whole of the creed of Pope
Pins the Fourth ?—Yes.
" Did you give it as it stands in the original ?—No.
" Did you profess to give it as it stands in the original ?

Yes.
" Was that right ?—Yes. Simulatio utilis est, et in tem-
pore asssumenda. Simulation is lawful, and sometimes it
must be practised. (Tremendous cheers.)
Mr. Southey proceeds, " it includes an assent to the pro-
positions that heretics are to be persecuted ; that faith is not
to be kept with them ; that simulation is lawful, and that the
guilt of homicide is not incurred by killing excommunicated
persons, if zeal for religion be the motive. For these
principles have been laid down in the canons, or proclaimed
by councils ; and upon these principles the papal church has
acted so far in strict conformity to its own creed. In my
heart, Sir, I believe that you heartily disavow them, and that
the great body of the British Romanists are sincere in dis-
claiming such intolerable opinions. But they are distinctly
asserted in your canons and by your councils ; and they are
comprehended in this creed which you yourself present as
"an accurate and explicit summary of the Roman Catholic
faith" to be received without restriction or qualification."
It is impossible, Sir, that you, and the body for which you
speak, can assent to all that this creed includes ; your
feelings, your opinions, your solemn protestations are
in opposition to it. But in rendering to you and to them
this willing justice, I must add that there are some among
you whose temper and whose doctrines are in perfect accord
with these principles. There are men amon,,, you upon
whom the mantles of Gardiner and Bonner have descended;
who equivocate like Jesuits, and who would persecute like
Dominicans, if the power were in their hands. And these
are the consistent 'Romanists, Romanists in heart and soul
as well as profession, who assent to all that the thirteen ad-
ditional articles of their creed comprehend, and would joy-
fully act up to the very letter of their law. But for yourself,
sir, and those who with you renounce in full sincerity these
abominable tenets, and who are, therefore, reduced to the un-
comfortable necessity of denying in public declarations what
you profess and swear to in your confession of faith, this re-
ligious grievance must surely be more painful than the
political disabilities which those tenets have rendered neces-
sary for our safety. Is it unreasonable to suggest, then, that
the British Roman Catholics might with more propriety
apply for relief to the court of Rome than to the British
parliament; and that instead of agitating these kingdoms
with their demands for political power, they would do well
to petition the head of their church for a revision of the
creed of Pope Pius IV for a removal of the restrictions which
it imposes upon their understanding, their loyalty, and their
conscience, for emancipation from ie moral and intellectual
bondage in which it holds them ?" (Hear, hear.)
Sir, this suggestion of Mr. Southey's is most pertinent
and valuable ; for I ask you only imagine a Roman Catholic
gentleman, a man of understanding, of conscience, and of
loyalty, a man attached to his own church but ignorant of
the contents of the canons and councels of that church. He
is taking some office, and he is called upon to sign this creed
of Pope Pius IV, and he comes to the clause I am lecturing
upon, which binds by oath all the preceding clauses upon his
conscience; he looks at one of those preceding clauses, and
finds that it involves all that is contained in the sacred
canons and general counsels.' Why, would not such an
honest man pause, and start back, and say, " What is all
this lam going to sign? Without knowing what is in those
documents I am going to put my hand to a paper that in-
volves whole volumes that I have never read ; as an honest
man I cannot do it ;—(cheers)—l must see what these canons
and general counsels are before I can sign this paper. (Re-
newed cheers.) There is one of them, I find, that Protestant
controversalists often refer to, that is the fourth counsel
of Lateran ; perhaps it does contain what they say, and if I
sign the creed of Pope Pius IV I shall make myself liable to
all they say, and what they say will no longer be calumny in
them, but the height of imprudence in me—so I must see
what is in the counsels before I sign that paper." (Cheers.) I
protest in all honesty that I am giving what I believe would
be the movements of mind, and the final determination of
conscience of many and many a Roman Catholic gentleman,
if they were at liberty to follow the dictates of their con-
science, if they were not enslaved by a foregone conclusion.
(Hear.) But they have not taken Mr. Southey's advice;
they have not gone to the head of their church • they have
not asked for any revision of the creed of Pope Pius IV, and
subscription to that creed in this country still hangs its mill-
stone weight upon the understanding, and upon the con-
science, and upon the loyalty, of every British subject of the
court of Rome ! (Cheers.)
Now, sir, 1 have done. I pray sincerely in harmony with
the prayer offered before I began, that a blessing may rest
upon what has been spoken. I have spoken to those who
have opportunities of hearing the gospel of God, of contrast-
ing it with the peculiarities of Romanism. I have spoken to
those who have been partners in an act which has deprived
England of all defence against the machinations of the papal
court, except the defence found in the principles of her
people. (Hear.) Legislative defence is removed, and more
entirely removed from England than from any country under
the sun. (Hear.) I will briefly tell you why, sir. During
the period when the papal court was felt to be formidable,
the continental courts of Europe took security against the
aggressions of that court, by requiring that every rescript of
the court of Rome which entered their dominions should be
submitted to the Minister of the Interior before it was passed
on to the Archbishops, in order that the minister might take
cognizance that it contained only o clesinstical matter. In
those days England was so shielded by the state of her laws
that she did not require such a guard as that. She was
guarded then more than any state ; but when her laws were
altered, nothing tantamount to the guard in other states was
enacted, and England, from being more guarded than any,
became more exposed than any. (Hear, hear.) Her de-
fence now is in the principles of her people (cheers) ; her
genuine defenders in the established pastors of those people
whose duty it is to set those principles before them ; deli-
berately, fairly, honestly to argue those principles out • with-
out railing (of which they falsely accuse us), without ani-
mosity, without anger, without bigotry to call attention to
the word of God, and to the traditions and compositions of
men as contrasted with that, and say, in the powerful lan-
guage of that word, " He that bath a dream, let him tell a
dream, and he that bath my word, let him speak my word
faithfully ; what is the chaff to the wheat ? saith the Lord
of Hosts. ' The reverend gentleman then retired amidst
great applause from all parts of the room.
The Rev. F. PARRY moved, and Mr. JOHN HOWARD
seconded a vote ofd anks, which
hies carried by acclamation,
to the Ray. Mr. Neile for able, eloquent, and con.
vincing lecture.
A doxology was then sung, and a blessing having been
Pronounced, the meeting separated.

ATITLCNE ELECTION PETITION.—The committee have
decided that G. de la Poer Beresford was not duly elected,
and that D. 11. Farrell, Esq., ought to have been returned.
Mr. Bertsford is allowed to petition against the return.
It is slid that Mr. Brunel, who is about to enter into a
contract with the Sardinian government for a railway to
communbate with Milan and Turin from Genoa, intends to
avail himself of the atmospheric propulsion for some part,
at least, )f the distance.

THE lONDON TOWN-CLEE.KSHIP.—The committee, ap-
pointed by the Town-council of London to inquire into the
circumstmces attending the resignation of Mr. Pearson, the
city solicitor, who wasp candidate for the vacant office of
That we, your committee,
Town-clerk, have repted
having taken the same into our serious and attentive con-
sideratio.l, are of opinion that Mr. Pearson had an undoubted
right to withdraw himself as a candidate for the office of
Town-cltrk. That under the circumstances and documents
we now respectfully lay before you, he was bound in honour
to do so; and that the privileges of your hon. Court have not
been interfered with." It is quite a matter of doubt upon
whom tie election will fall. Mr. Pearson's friends, who are
very numerous, seem to be determined to propose him as a
candidate in the event of the non-suspension of the standing
order of the Court, which, if acted won, will certainly ex-
clude Serjeant Merewether. The contest will then be be-
tween Mr. Pearson, Mr. Pritchard, and Mr. Hughes Hughes.
If Serjeant Merewether's friends are strong enouugh to sus-
pend the standing order, the Serjeant will, it is supposed, be
elected,