this question is, "Were Mass to be celebrated in a language commonly understood, in course of time a common cow-boy would learn to say it!" But this is a poor apology; for if the Mass is good, so much the better if all knew it; and if it is otherwise, the world would be better without it. But if we ask St. Paul, he will soon decide the dispute in this matter; for he says, in the 14th chapter of his First Epistle to the Corinthians, that "he that speaketh in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto men, but unto God, for no man understandeth him. Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophecy, or by doctrine? And even things without lifegiving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for

ye shall speak into the air." Here the Apostle condemns this mode of worship, and shews the speaker and hearers of such to be barbarians; for, says he, "There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. Therefore, if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me." He also tells us of the discord and confusion of such proceedings, saying,"I

will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also. Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?" Hence those who call themselves the successors of the apostles, are condemned by him who was not a whit behind the greatest apostle; who, instead of giving sanction to this procedure of the Mass, proves it to be false and absurd. What now shall be done to support this tottering fabric, as reason and scripture have left it without a prop?

Although strange miracles and falsehood, which are the last refuge of its votaries, should be resorted to, they cannot support it, and down it must fall before the face of truth, like Dagon before the Ark. Where now is the Romanist's atonement for sin, since he has rejected Christ as a Saviour, although he will not acknowledge it, and the substitutes he has chosen in his stead are proved to be ineffectual?

But before this point is concluded, it may be observed, that whatever vain subterfuge the Romish Clergy may fly to, in order to vindicate their conduct in performing their public worship in an unknown tongue; it is obvious that their motive is to keep the laity from a knowledge of the scriptures, and this great evil also they endeavour to justify by saying "it is dangerous to permit the laity to read the scriptures, because of their liability to take a wrong meaning from them." But although they have attempted to prove that St. Peter speaks against the reading of them, there

is not a single passage in all the sacred writings. that prohibits any from doing so, but many to the contrary. It is said in one part, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy." Rev. i, 3. And again, we read that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim. iii, 16–17. Here is both the authority for reading the sacred volume, and the utility of doing so set forth; and it is not only our privilege to read God's word, but also our duty; for Christ commands us so to do, saying, "Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me." John v, 39. Here is a command given to the world indiscriminately, by Christ himself; and how can feeble man presume to oppose him?

It is therefore evident that the laity are not prohibited by divine authority from reading the scriptures, but that they are, on the contrary, commended for their attention to them; for of the Jews at Berea, who attended to the preaching of Paul and Silas, it is said, "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily whether these things were so." Acts xvii, 11. Here the reading of the scriptures by the laity, as the rule of faith and practice under private judgment, is commended by the apostles; which yet is condemned by the Church of Rome! St. Paul also commends the

practice of knowing the scriptures, even in childhood, a time when holy orders are out of the question; for he said to Timothy, "From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus." 2 Tim. iii, 15. And if we even had no divine authority for reading the sacred scriptures, general experience shews, that where one is lost by taking a wrong meaning from what he reads, wresting the scriptures to his own destruction, hundreds are lost for the want of reading them. And to prevent the laity from reading God's word, because some have abused it, would be like forbidding the use of wine, because some have abused themselves and it by intoxication; or like prohibiting the use of razors, because some have terminated their existence with them. If the general use of things were prohibited in order to prevent the abuse of them, we should soon be deprived not only of all the necessaries of life, but even of life itself; for what is it that has not been abused, that has ever been within reach of fallen man? But although our Lord has given the scriptures to mankind in general, as the rule and guide of their lives; yet they are now monopolized by the Romish Clergy, who claim it as an ecclesiastical prerogative to dispense to the laity, as they please, this sacred treasure; for if any of their people dares to be so bold as to obey his Lord by reading the bible, and, in the interim, be struck with the awe of popish prohibition,-though eternal life were in the next page, he must shut the book; and a rigid

course of penance alone can wash out the stain of the great transgression. But some deny this when they are put to the test about it, and therefore add one evil to another.

I was both grieved and astonished at the late controversy at Bradford, to hear appeals and positive assertions made diametrically opposed to truth and matters of fact, by the Rev. Mr. Macdonald, Roman Catholic Priest, of Birmingham; whose proceedings, in opposition to indubitable facts, were, as I conceive, unbecoming the character of a gentleman and a professed minister of the gospel of Christ: for he stated that "they did not prevent their people from reading the scriptures, and appealed to such of them as were then present, if ever they' knew themselves to be the subjects of restriction in such a case." I would have contradicted him on the spot, only for the sake of order, and expecting to be called upon before the conclusion of the meeting.gada

When I first began to read the scriptures, the. parish priest where I then lived was informed of it, and he called me to an account about it; and when I had acknowledged it, he threatened me most severely with the strictest penitential punishment, saying, "Did you not know that the Church forbids the laity to read the scriptures, after having so often heard me declare it from the altar?" I answered, “Yes, sir, I have often heard you do so; but I thought there could be no harm in reading them." He then wanted me to make a promise to God and him, that I would never open the bible again. My reply was, Sir, this I cannot do with safety; as

66