ject? Clear the exposition is,..but as for its truth,.. is it the whole truth, Sir? Dr. Phillpotts has answered * that question; and I cannot but say with him, "why is it that you will not be more guarded? Why is it, too, that you always mistake on one side? That you never by any chance exceed, but constantly fall short of, the real extent of the doctrine, which you undertake to exhibit?" You know, Sir, what is meant by diminuto in the language of the Holy Office ! .

First, however, let me dispose of Martin Luther and the several distinguished divines. Luther's works are not within my reach and I happen to know that your references to them, in other instances, are not so explicit as to render the task of verifying them easy, or always practicable. This is easily accounted for, if, as I have no doubt, you have taken them from some of those authorities on which you frequently rely. with more confidence than caution. It is very possible that Luther may have written thus in some of his earlier works, before he had proceeded far in his inquiries into the corruptions of the Papal Church, and before

* Letters to Charles Butler, Esq. on the Theological Part of his Book of the Roman-Catholic Church, p. 67.

his own views were completely developed. But will you affirm, Sir, that it was the mature and deliberate opinion of Martin Luther that his followers ought to call upon the Virgin and the Saints to intercede for them at the hour of death? That great and magnanimous man practised what he preached. His life was con formed to his doctrine, and the "comfortable prayer" which he made at his latter end, has been transmitted to us. "Almighty, everlasting, merciful Lord God, Father of our loving Lord Jesus Christ, I certainly know that all which thou hast said the same thou art able to keep and perform. Thou canst not lie thy word is true! In the beginning thou promisedst me thy only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: the same is come, and hath delivered me from the Devil, Death, Hell, and Sin. And for more security, out of thy gracious will there are presented unto me the holy sacraments, baptism, and the Lord's supper. I have made use of them and have received them, and stedfastly in faith I have relied upon thy word. Wherefore I make no doubt at all but that I am secured and delivered from the Devil, Death, Hell, and Sin. Is this my hour and thy divine will and pleasure? So am I willing to depart from hence in joy and peace, according to thy

word, and will go into thy bosom !"*... This, Sir, was the dying prayer of Martin Luther, and it is such a prayer as might have been expected from him,..a man who had so valiantly fought the good fight, and was entering into his reward.

Who the "several distinguished divines" may be to whom you allude as teaching that we ought to address our prayers to the Virgin and the Saints, I cannot even guess. Nor can I believe, without the fullest proof, that any divines of the English Church could have so taught, in direct contradiction to that article t which declares the Romish doctrine concerning the invocation of Saints to be "a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warrantry of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God."

We must now return to Mr. Gother, and the curse which he imprecates upon those who hold the Virgin Mary to be any thing more than a creature, or who believe that she can in any thing command her Son. Greater authorities, Dr. Challoner have

Sir, than Mr. Gother and

told the Roman Catholics that they ought to do both. If I prove this, you must allow me to

* Luther's Colloquia Mensalia, p. 502.

+ Art. xxii.

call those opinions superstitious which you yourself have not hesitated to pronounce accursed. And if I prove also that miracles and revelations have been pretended for confirming those opinions, all of which supposititious proofs have been licensed for publication by the official censors of your Church, and some of them sanctioned by a General Council, you must admit that this is a case in which imposture also has been made out. I can hardly persuade myself that you know so little of your own Church history as not to know what abundant evidence might be adduced.

According to what you present as a true and clear statement of the doctrine of the Romish Church, the Virgin Mary is nothing more than a creature. According to your Breviary, Sir, she is exalted above every creature, and stiled the Mistress of all creatures; she is the Queen of Angels, and "the summit of her merits is exalted above all the choirs of Angels, even to the throne of the Godhead." You tell us, on the credit of Mr. Gother, that the Romish Church holds her to be only a creature; but the Venerable* Abbot Engelbert tells us that she holds an undivided empire with her Son;..

* Pezii Thesaurus Anecdotorum, t. i. p. i. 305.

FF

but St. Bernard tells us that all Scripture was given concerning her, and because of her, and that for her sake this whole world was made; .. but the Romish Church in its offices applies to her the attributes of the Divine Wisdom,† as given by the son of Sirach, and those words of Solomon which are often used as proving the eternal generation of the Son of God. Cursed, according to your exposition, are those who believe that the Blessed Virgin can in any thing command her Son. Why, Sir, the Venerable Abbot Engelbert, who surely is not less venerable than Dr. Challoner, or Mr. Gother, tells us that her Son cannot deny any thing that she asks; and applies to this the text in Kings,‡ "Ask on, my mother, for I will not say thee nay."§... Why, Sir, it has been preached in your Church, and sanctioned for publication after it was preached, that all things || are subject to the command of the Virgin, even God himself! that "considering the Blessed Virgin

*Super Salve Regina. 1740.

+ Dr. Phillpotts' Letters, p. 43-47.

i. ii. 20. Pezii Thes. ut supra.

§ The text is stronger in the Latin. Pete, Mater mea; neque enim fas est ut avertam faciem tuam.

Imperio Virginis omnia famulantur, et Deus.-Bernardinus de Busto. Ussher, 481.