and established laws. But when reform is made use of as a specious term to conceal innovation, change, and utter destruction, we must protest against the impious and hypocritical attempt. The reformation, so called, was not the act of the church of England reforming itself; it was a daring attempt of the civil power to change the religion of the land for interested purposes, and to remove Christianity in its original form; under which this country had flourished for nine hundred years. The church was not an acting party in this most melancholy business: the work was achieved by laymen, and completed by legislative enactments. Henry VIII. it is well known, became captivated with the charms of a young damsel, whom he wished to make his wedded wife, while his aged consort was still living; and because the Sovereign Pontiff at that period refused to admit his fictitious plea to obtain a divorce, that wicked, violent, and despotic monarch rejected an authority, which he had before reverenced; and from which he had derived one of the brightest jewels in his crown. Under the reign of his juvenile successor, Somerset the protector, in order to promote his own interested views, and to satisfy the rapacity of his partisans, completed the destruction of the Catholic church in this kingdom. He held forth the plausible plea of reforming the church, that he might en rich himself with its abundant spoils. After the short reign of Mary, her sister Elizabeth, fearing that her crown and the pontifical authority could not easily be reconciled, and willing to pursue the plan of plundering the church with more security, threw herself into the arms of the reformers, in opposition to the most solemn assurances, accompanied with the most frightful imprecations, which she had before uttered, to calm the disquietude of her sovereign and sister. This is the simple, plain, undisguised, unvarnished history of the event; confirmed by the accounts. both of Catholic and Protestant historians. The church took no part in plundering itself: the "reformation," as existing at this day by the Act of 1 Elizabeth, was established in defiance of the clergy, of the convocation, and of the two universities. Even Kitchin of Landaff, whom Camden calls the calamity of his see, voted against the measure in the House of Lords; though he was afterwards induced to close with the designs of the court1. 1 Heylin's Hist. of Refor. Pref. p. 2. Hist. ad an. 1547; p. 33, 47, 48, 56, et seq.; 73, et seq.; ad an. 1558, 1559, 107, et seq. Camden, p. 28, et seq. Fuller, b. ix. Bossuet. Variat. liv. vii. Lingard's Hist. vol. vi. c. iii. edit. 8vo. et vol. vii. c. i. Ibid. c. iii. p. 329, 330.-Note. I feel the highest possible gratification in referring to the great work of this gentleman, as the only performance of the kind, on which a II. The catechist records a divine command to private men, not to be deceived by cunning and craft; therefore he infers, that a national church ought to be more on its guard. This reasoning implies, that the event called the reformation, was an attempt on the part of the church of England, to reform itself in opposition to the craft of its enemies. This I have proved to be false, and not resting on a plausible foundation. The sleight, cunning, and craftiness referred to, appeared in the conduct of those, who, under the pretext of a laudable reform, sought to gratify their passions, and promote their interested views. III. The observation in the third number labours under the same unfounded supposition. If the bishops, on the accession of Elizabeth, had not been restrained by violence from performing their duty, the change of religion would never have taken place. IV. When the catechist states, that no reformation was to be hoped for from the Pope, reader, solicitous for truth, can place any reliance. It really seems to me, upon the fullest consideration of the subject, that the History of England, by Dr. John Lingard, of which ten volumes 8vo. have been published, exhibits a splendid monument of historical research, literary skill, and honourable impartiality; and that it is likely to perish only with the language in which it appears. he either involves the question in affected obscurity, or states a malicious falsehood. The pastors of the church never can, under any pretence of reform, surrender the faith once delivered to the saints; but as to any just and laudable reform of manners, correction of abuses, and unremitted attempts to establish salutary discipline, the Catholic church, in all her councils, has ever exhibited instances of this spirit, but particularly in the holy council of Trent1. V. When the catechist terms the spiritual power of the Pope an usurpation, he vilifies a point which has been before established beyond contradiction2. VI. The remark in number 6, exhibits a matchless display of ignorance and impudence, in a small compass. For the writer compares the efforts of lay reformers in England, in discarding the old faith, to the conduct of the Catholic pastors in communion with the See of Rome, in preserving the ancient doctrine inviolate. Common sense and an ordinary knowledge of ecclesiastical history, should have informed him, that the conduct of the reformers in the sixteenth century, was a complete counterpart of the achievements of the Arians in the fourth; 1 See the preceding observations. and that as those impious heretics opposed the decision of the council of Nice, at which the Pope presided by his representative, the celebrated Hosius, of Corduba; so the modest reformers of the latter period, set at defiance the decisions of the council of Trent, at which the Pope presided by his legates. VII. In this last number of the answer to the last question, the catechist appears willing to produce, by way of a final flourish, a splendid specimen of bold and unfounded assertion; and to shew to what lengths ignorance, prejudice, and misrepresentation can be carried, he says, that the reformation did not make a new religion, but it restored the old; that the house was not destroyed, but that the rubbish only was removed. Can any man in his sober senses make such an unfounded assertion, and convince the world of the sanity of his mind? The church of Christ is a spiritual kingdom, governed by pastors lawfully appointed, professing a faith which is necessarily one, invariable and immutable as the God from whom it emanates; and connected and held together by the use of the same sacraments. Now the modest reformers withdrew themselves from all lawful authority, made a total alteration of the faith, both in principle and substance, reduced the number of the sacraments, generally from seven to two, and abolished the |