Now after this, "my Catholic friends," you surely will not be so besotted as to say, they will be safe companions on the legislative bench. It must be recollected, that this creed was formed by an assembly of monks, which was convened at Trent in the year 1545, at least that the creed was extracted from the minutes and provisions of the council, by Pope Pius IV. It therefore breathes not only his sentiments, but those of the clergy of the day, as well as the profession generally, laymen, &c. And we are fully authorised to say, in the teeth of all other unfounded assertions to the contrary, that it contains the entire feelings of the priests in Ireland, and the papists generally of this day. For I have in my possession at this moment, a Romish Irish tract, called (as the title-page sets forth), "The Grounds of Catholic Doctrine, contained in the profession of Faith published by Pope Pius IV., and now in use for the reception of converts into the Church. By way of question and answer.' The twelfth edition." Dublin, 1824.

This wretched thing not only justifies all these damnatory articles from XIII. to XXIV., but actually professes to give Scripture proofs to establish their terrible iniquity. Does not this one fact speak more than a thousand volumes. Here, up to the year 1826, this disloyal heretical tract had been disseminated, in twelve editions, throughout that wretched, ruined, pope-ridden country, Ireland; and yet are people wondering why they, the Papists, never will be quiet! Think you that if, reposing in your bed, some one should thrust in under you a firebrand, it would not

make you move and smart, and that you could in pain and writhing find your ease again. No, my good friends, we have too long hugged the viper to our breasts; and whilst we are wondering at the pain we suffer, we pat it on its nasty head, and say, "Oh, poor thing, it's changed! I am sure it did not mean to do me any harm. Vipers, it is true, used to be vipers; but time has changed them into something else." No, my friends, emancipation or no emancipation, Ireland will be for ever what it is, as long as the curse of GOD stalks up and down the land, holding the sway in proud defiance.

No more, then, if you please, of serving the Royal George, as long as true obedience to the bishop of Rome disgraces their tracts and prayer-books. (See "Manna of the Soul." Sweet manna for the soul, truly!)

Recollect, "Catholic" legislators, that you cannot say this is taken out of an old almanack; this is not like the accounts of many hundred thousand Protestants burned alive, killed by sword, pikes, fire, and drowning, during the space of eight hundred years;no, my friends, this is no old almanack account; but promulged through Ireland, at this very moment, in Romish tracts and Romish prayer books.

Here it is that they promise and swear true obedience to the bishop of Rome! Ye cannot longer say that ye are ignorant of this one fact, that every Papist and popish convert swears and vows true obedience to the bishop of Rome! But by some it will be urged, "Oh, that obedience that they swear to there is merely 'spiritual,' and that has nothing to do with temporal

obedience to the native prince." Truly not, I grant it; but this I know, that if my royal master ordered me to do that which was contrary to the unerring law of Gon (though, be he who he may, the King has not a more devoted and loyal servant in his kingdom than he who now addresses you), I would as soon think of obeying him, as if he ordered me to cut my throat. But if, by certain revelation from Almighty God, I knew it was right to walk into the ocean, thither would I move at once. And so it is with our poor Romish brethren; and this is the only point in which they are consistent with their creed. They fancy that the bishop of Rome is sovereign pontiff of their fates; that he can bind in hell, and loose the soul from thence to heaven. No matter how absurd we know this faith to be, such is their faith. Such, I repeat it, is their faith!

Think you then, that under such belief, the king's command would have attention? Think you, when at an election a priest could move three hundred voters to leave their promise and their long supporting friend by holding up a cross, and daring them in these words, "will you desert your GOD?"-think you, I say, King George's proclamation would stand against such spiritual arguments as these?! O! no, my friends, it is impossible to think it! Or, if you do think it, you know not what spirituality means. If you think a man believing his GOD to speak to Him, through his priest, could dare deny the summons, it only shows that you yourself do NOT know GOD, and therefore are, what I before alleged, an infidel!! And here my politics end: and of which I should not have at all

made mention, but that they themselves in this most daring article make such vast and arrogant pretension.

Our business now is merely to disprove these brave assertions from the book of God.

In the first place no Christian can swear true allegiance to any bishop, but to Him "who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes we are healed. For we were once as sheep going astray, but now are we returned unto the shepherd and bishop of our souls. 2 Pet. ii. 24, 25. My Romish friends, well will it be for you when you throw off old Rome, and cling alone to our universal bishop!

This woman Rome does claim to be your mother, and says she gets the title from St. Peter, and, marvellous to relate, she claims the right from him to feed you, because the LORD said thrice to him, "Feed my lambs and sheep."

Now have ye all been able to judge in what sort she feeds you. Ye have seen the spiritual food she doles forth with such a noble hand. Ye have seen how that she feeds "the flock that is among you" with spiritual food (!)" taking the oversight thereof not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind. Neither as being a lord over God's heritage, but being an ensample to the flock”—“for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble." Think you that were the bold St. Peter living now, he could, in more express and pointed terms, reprehend the vile usurper who claims authority from his august name?

"Successor of St. Peter, prince of the apostles" (!) The only proof the Romanists have to offer of St. Peter's having ever been at Rome is in ch. v. of his 1st general epistle, 13th verse, which runs thus: "The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you." Now, in taking what they require from this verse, they let us into a thing or two more than they wish themselves. Babylon was a ruin at the time that this epistle was written, and the Douay Bible says the word is "figuratively used for Rome." Why did St. Peter give Rome a name which had been so many years an offence to God and man (to the Jews). Was it not in a prophetic spirit of reprobation? And if we wanted this further proof, does it not identify Rome with the Babylon of St. John in the Revelation? The seven hilled city upon which the woman sitteth? Rev. xvii. 9. Her who has surfeited herself even to drunkenness "with the blood of the saints and the martyrs of Jesus: with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication (the whoredom of idolatry), and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of the same fornication !" and upon whose forehead is this name written, Mystery, Babylon the Great, "the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth ?" It is related that on the pope's tiara, or triple crown, the word "mystery" appears three times, but with a very different intention doubtless to that conveyed by the vision seer.

The other point we learn is, that there was another church "elected together," with that at Babylon.