asylum of the free, and the refuge of the oppressed-if these haughty potentates think that, by casting out our brethren, and thousands more of our countrymen, they are to make us cast forth the refugees their own tyranny has sent to our shores, I can readily tell what the response will be. Every man among us will rise, and say,-No, you may shut us, and all our people, out of your borders-you may be inhospitable as the cold frosty North Pole-you may be tyrannical and oppressive, but England-England ever shall be free! and this great country, proud of her freedom, shall be proud to welcome the friends of freedom, whom tyranny has driven from their homes. We shall not retaliate--we shall not abridge the privileges of foreign residents in this country at the bidding, and after the example, of these foreign despots. We shall not apply to Popery here the measures they apply to Protestantism abroad; but it will be well if our statesmen, and our whole people, by these transactions, have their eyes opened to the real character of Popery, and their consciences and hearts deeply impressed with the duty of being up and doing against this gigantic evil."

I conclude, therefore, as I began, by stating my firm conviction, that nothing but a satanic monomania can account for any rational being, who assumes the name of a Christian, embracing a system which, in all its bearings, is so diametrically opposed to the true gospel of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

III. CELIBACY AND CONVENTS.

THE right assumed by the Pope to sit in judgment upon the Scriptures, and to alter or abrogate ad libitum all the precepts which they enjoin, and all the rules which are laid down for our guidance, is no where more clearly seen than in the arbitrary law, so arrogantly propounded

ex cathedra, during the prevalence of mediæval darkness and superstition, by which all ecclesiastical functionaries are peremptorily "forbidden to marry," under penalty of forfeiture and degradation, although Paul has expressly declared, in his inspired epistles, that marriage is honourable in all, and that both bishops and deacons not only may, but must, be the husbands of one wife. I may add, that, unless my memory deceives me, it is stated by St Ambrose, who flourished about the end of the fourth century, that all the apostles were married, except two. It would have been equally wise, and equally just, and less repugnant to Scripture, (which contains no special intimation, that such persons ought to marry), to have enacted, that no generals, no judges, no physicians, no senators, should ever enter into wedlock. any of these cases, it is evident that the community might have suffered loss," had marriage been an insuperable impediment to the admission of persons, otherwise duly qualified, into any of these useful and respectable professions. And may not the same objection apply to compulsory celibacy in the case of the clergy? May not many conscientious persons, gifted with eloquence, animated by zeal, and pre-eminent in piety, be prevented from undertaking the functions of the ministry, because they cannot consent to forego the comforts and amenities of domestic life, or to be numbered amongst those, for whom

"No busy housewife plies her evening care,

No children run to lisp their sire's return,
Or climb his knee the envied kiss to share;'

In

whilst many, whose other qualifications for the sacred office are in every respect inferior, but whose minds are more unscrupulous, do not hesitate to take upon themselves vows, which they, perhaps, may, ere long, scarcely deem it criminal to infringe? I am aware, that reasons have been assigned by the Papists for this preposterous, unwise, and unnatural law; first, that unmarried priests are most likely to give their undivided

attention to the discharge of their sacred duties; and next, because they will feel less hesitation in exposing themselves to dangers, when visiting the sick or the dying. A similar argument, however, might apply to the case of a judge or a general-the former would be less apt to court the favour of those in authority, if he had no children to provide for; the latter might face more boldly the perils of the field, if he had neither wife nor offspring, to whom his life is unspeakably precious. Many married Protestant ministers of the gospel are instant in season and out of season, and are able and faithful ministers of the New Testament; whilst not a few unmarried Popish priests are careless, ignorant, and immoral. There may be, and undoubtedly have been, a few instances, in which Protestant clergymen have declined to attend a sickbed, in the case of infectious diseases; but such cases are rare in comparison with the multitude of those, who, not counting their lives so dear unto them as their duty, have not only braved, but endured, death in the discharge of their solemn functions on such occasions. Many, who have done so, have been married, and it is probable that some, who "drew back," were single; and it ought, moreover, to be borne in mind, that there is one respect, in which the ministrations of a Popish priest are more important to a sick member of his flock, than those of a Protestant, and especially of a Presbyterian minister, can be, in the case of a dying parishioner. Both the Romanist and the Episcopalian desire to receive the Lord's Supper when their end approaches; and the former places much reliance on the humanly-appointed sacrament of extreme unction-which, because our Lord and one of his apostles have recommended, that the sick should be anointed with oil to promote their recovery, is, by way of contrast rather than of analogy, appointed to be administered, when all hope that the patient shall be sved from death is taken away.

The evils arising from clerical celibacy, and from

pernicious and demoralizing influence of the system of auricular confession, have, by many distinguished authors, been pointed out with unrivalled force and eloquence. I shall content myself with calling your attention to a few extracts taken from the works of Louis Paul Courier, an eminent French writer, who died, I think, about thirty years ago. "What a life," says he," and what a condition is that of our priests-love, and especially marriage, are forbidden to them—and you then hand over to them-women! They may not have one, and they live familiarly with all; or rather, in confidence, intimacy, the knowledge of all their hidden actions, and of all their thoughts. What a young woman would not dare to confide to her mother, or avow to her husband, the priest must know he insists upon it— knows it, and shall not become her lover! You may say, forsooth, how can that be, since he is tonsured? he hears in a whisper from the lips of a young woman, her faults, her passions, her desires listens to her sighs without experiencing any emotion, and his age is twentyfive! . . . . . The village curate feels a regard for all the young women of his vicarage; but he prefers one, who seems to him, if not handsomer than the rest, more modest and more sage, and he would marry her, he would make her a virtuous, pious woman, were it not for the Pope. This scene takes place as I describe it, and, in every part of France, is renewed every day by 40,000 young priests, with as many young girls whom they love, because they are men, confess, converse with tête-à-tête, visit, because they are priests, and do not marry, because the Pope prevents them. The Pope will pardon them every thing, except marriage, preferring an adulterous, immodest, debauched assassin, like Mingrat, to one who is married. Mingrat murders his mistresses. He is defended in the pulpit-in one place he is preached for, in another he is canonized. Had he married one of them, what a monster! He would nowhere find an asylum. Can any two things

more incompatible with each other be united in the same person, than the employment of confessor and the vow of chastity? . . . . . But why, you will say, become a priest if you are susceptible of such impressions? Ah, sir, do they make themselves what they are? Brought up from infancy by the Papal militia, they are seduced and enrolled. They pronounce the abominable, impious vow, never to have a wife, a family, or a home. Scarcely are they aware what they are doing-novices, youths— and therefore excusable; for as to a vow of this sort, the man who would make it with the full knowledge of its responsibilities, should be seized, imprisoned, or banished to some desert island. When this vow is made, they are anointed, and cannot retract. If the engagement were entered into for a term of years, the number of those who would renew it, would be small indeed. . . . If you have a daughter, send her to the soldier, to the hussar, who can marry her, rather than to the man who has come under a vow of chastity.

And without even speaking of crimes, what sources of impurities, of disorders, of corruptions, have these two inventions of the Pope proved themselves to be, viz., the celibacy of the priests, and the confession termed auricular! What mischief they do! What good they prevent! If you wish to see a spectacle calculated to excite your admiration, go where the family of the priest is the model of all the others-where the pastor teaches nothing which he cannot show in himself, and, when speaking to fathers and to husbands, gives the example with the precept. There, women have not the effrontery to tell a man their sins,-the clergy is not placed beyond the pale of the temple, of the state, and of the law, all which abuses were established amongst us during ages of the most stupid barbarism, and of the most credulous ignorance-abuses, which it is difficult to maintain now-a-days, when the world reasons, and every one is able to count his fingers."

In immediate juxtaposition with the tyranny and tur