and dictated to them the penance they were to undergo or perform. They then descended the rock by another path, but in the same manner and posture, equally careful to be cut by the flints, and to suffer as much as possible: this was, perhaps, more painful travelling than the ascent had been the suffering knees were rubbed another way-every step threatened a tumble; and if any thing could have been lively there, the ridiculous attitudes of these descenders would have made us so. When they gained the foot of the hill, they (most of them) bestowed a small donation of charity on some miserable groups of supplicants who were stationed there. One beggar, a cripple, sat on the ground, at one moment addressing the crowd behind him, and swearing that all the Protestants ought to be burnt out of the country, and, in the same breath, begging the penitents to give him one halfpenny for the love of 'swate blessed Jasus.' The penitents now returned to the use of their feet, and commenced a running sort of Irish jiggish walk round several cairns, or heaps of stones, erected at different spaces this lasted for some time. Suddenly they would prostrate themselves before the cairn, and ejaculate some hasty prayers; as suddenly they would rise, and resume their mill-horse circumrotation. Their eyes were fixed; their looks spoke anxiety, almost despair; and the operations of their faculties seemed totally suspended. They then proceeded to one end of the old chapel, and seemed to believe that there was a virtue, unknown to us heretics, in one particular stone of the building, which every one was careful to touch with the right hand; those who were tall did it easily; those who were less left no mode of jumping unpractised to accomplish it. But the most remarkable, and doubtless the most efficient of the ceremonies, was reserved for the last; and surely nothing was ever devised by man, which more forcibly evinced how low our nature can descend. Around the largest of the wells, which was in a building very much, to common eyes, like a stable, all those who had performed their penances were assembled, some dressing, some undressing, many stark naked. A certain number of them were admitted at a time into this holy well, and there men and women, of every age, bathed promiscuously, without any covering. They undressed before bathing, and performed the whole business of the toilet afterwards in the open air, in the midst of the crowd, without appearing sensible of the observations of lookers-on, perfectly regardless of decency, perfectly dead to all natural sensations. This was a strange sight, but so nearly resembling the feast of lunatics, that even the voluptuary would have beheld it without any emotions but those of dejection. The penance having terminated in this marvellous ablution, the penitents then adjourned, either to booths and tents to drink, or join their friends. The air then rang with musical monotonous singing, which became louder with every glass of whiskey, finishing in frolicsome debauch, and laying, in all probability, the foundation for future penances and more thorough ablutions. No pen can describe all the confusion; no description can give a just idea of the noise and disorder which filled this hallowed square, this theatre of fanaticism, this temple of superstition, of which the rites rival all that we are told of in the east. The minor parts of the spectacle were filled up with credulous mothers half drowning their poor children to cure their sore eyes; with cripples, who exhibited every thing that has yet been discovered in deformity, expecting to be washed straight, and to walk away nimble and comely. The experience of years had not shaken their faith; and, though nobody was cured, nobody went away doubting. Shouting and howling, and swearing and carousings, filled up every pause, and 'threw o'er this spot of earth the air of hell.' "I was never more shocked and struck with horror; and perceiving many of them intoxicated with religious fervour and all-potent whiskey, and warming into violence, before midnight, at which time the distraction was at its climax, I left this scene of human degradation, in a state of mind not easily to be described. The whole road from the wells to the neighbouring town was crowded with such supplicants as preferred mortal halfpence to holy penance. The country around was illuminated with watch-fires; the demons of discord and fear were abroad in the air; the pursuits of the world, and occupations of the peaceful, appeared put a stop to, by the performance of ceremonies, disgraceful when applied to propitiate an all-compassionate Divinity, whom these religionists were determined, and taught, to consider jealous rather than merciful. "I wish it were in my power, without insincerity, to pay a compliment to the Irish Catholic clergy, whom Mr. Plunkett lately designated, to the astonishment of every body, as 'that most respectable fraternity.' I wish I could bear witness to their mildness and purity of character; their admonitory attentions to their illiterate flocks; their liberality, and their disposition to conciliate. So greatly the contrary is the truth, that I have only the alternative of passing them over in silence, or of stigmatizing them, with a few exceptions, as a low-lived, intriguing, violent set of men, whose power is almost unlimited; whose unrestrained abuse of that power, and shameless want of dignity in the performance of their functions, do more towards inflaming the minds of the lower orders than any other causes: they are altogether a lower order of beings than the clergymen of the same persuasion in England. On this occasion, they were the mad priests of these Bacchanalian orgies; the fomenters of fury; the setters-on to strife; the mischievous ministers of the debasement of their people, lending their aid to plunge their credulous congregations in ceremonious horrors; perhaps the better to secure to themselves the undisputed enjoyment of the exercise of that tyranny, which is so generally practised in other Catholic countries, and which has embryo admiring inquisitors enough in Ireland to pray for its establishment. "I have trespassed much longer on your attention than I designed when I began this letter. This is but a single page of a book of enormities; it will, I doubt not, supply you with various reflections and interesting speculations on a people so energetic, yet so lost; so determined, yet so mistaken; so capable of the grandest impressions, such sad victims of the tyranny of superstition. Perhaps, hereafter, if your publication of this may be considered as an intimation that you think an exposition of such things useful, I may transmit some further particulars concerning that unfortunate country. VOLERO." CHAPTER LV. ANECDOTE OF LORD DERWENTWATER. ANECDOTE OF A PAPIST. SUBJECT OF TRANSUB- HOCUS-POCUS." IS MY BODY." DOCTRINE OF THE FRENCH CATECHISM. SATURDAY, July 31st, 1819. It is a common trick of popish writers to represent the reading of the Bible as the fruitful source of sedition and treason. Yet it so happens, that in Scotland, the most Bible reading country in the world, there have been only two instances of rebellion since the happy revolution of 1688; and both of these were headed and promoted by Papists, who are hostile to the general reading of the Bible. It is well known that the rising in 1715, and also that in 1745, had nothing less for their object than the restoration of the popish house of Stuart, and with them the popish religion itself. One of the great instigators of the former insurrection was the earl of Derwentwater, who, as a reward of his treason, was beheaded in London, in the year 1716. This nobleman was so zealous a Papist, that when the absurdities of some things which are held sacred by the church of Rome were mentioned to him, he replied, "That for every tenet of that church, repugnant to reason, in which she requires an implicit belief, he wished there were twenty, that he might thereby have a nobler opportunity of exercising and displaying his faith." Without stopping to expose the impiety of wishing any thing to be a matter of faith, or more things to be matters of faith, than God has been pleased to reveal, I refer to this anecdote merely to introduce the subject of this paper, and to show how tenacious Papists are of things repugnant to reason; and how much they even prefer such things before those which are plain and indisputable. It is reasonable to believe what God has said, though we cannot comprehend it, or understand how it should be; but it is certain that he has not called us to believe any thing that is unreasonable or impossible, for no such things are contained in the revelation which he has given us; and yet the very impossibility and unreasonableness of a thing is, with such Papists as the nobleman above mentioned, a reason for his believing Do you believe in transubstantiation?" said a Protestant to a Papist. Yes, I do," was the reply. "Why," said the other, "the thing is impossible." "And I," said the Papist, "believe it, because it. it is impossible!" I am now about to enter upon that branch of the idolatry of the church of Rome, which consists in their sacrifice of the mass, adoration of the host, &c. ; but as this is connected with the monstrous absurdity of transubstantiation, I must be allowed to bestow some attention upon this doctrine, which is one of the main pillars of their idolatrous temple. I merely touched upon it in my fourth number; but I shall now present the subject more fully to the view of the reader. That very night in which Christ was betrayed, he instituted an ordinance, which he appointed to be observed by his disciples to the end of the world. It is of the nature of a feast; and, from the hour of the day in which it was first observed, it is called "The Lord's supper." It is called, by some, a sacrament, which signifies an oath, or sacred pledge; by others the eucharist, or thanksgiving. Without entering upon a discussion with regard to the propriety of these terms, I think I shall proceed upon the most sure ground, when I use the language of the Apostle Paul, who gave it no other name than the Lord's supper, 1 Cor. xi. 20. The materials of the feast are simply bread and wine; but these are used to represent spiritual blessings: hence the same apostle says, 1 Cor. x. 16, The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" From this it is evident, that the symbols which were used by the apostles, in order to represent the spiritual blessings which are derived from the breaking of the body, and the shedding of the blood, of Christ, were plain bread and wine, and nothing else. By eating the bread, and drinking the wine, his people, in their social capacity, according to his appointment, show forth his death; and in the exercise of faith over the symbols of his broken body and shed blood, they really enjoy the benefit of his death, in the assurance of pardon, and the enjoyment of peace of mind and heart, imparted by the Holy Spirit, as the fruit of Christ's atoning sacrifice. But this doctrine was too simple and too spiritual for the church of Rome, when she began to give heed to seducing spirits, and when she became herself the great seductress of the world called Christian. Having lost sight of the design of representing the death of Christ by the elements of bread and wine, nothing less would satisfy her than the turning of the elements into the very body and blood of Christ himself; nor did she stop here: by degrees she rose to the climax of absurdity, and maintained that the whole substance of the bread, after the priest had pronounced the words of consecration, was converted, not only into the body and blood, but also into the soul and divinity, of Jesus Christ; and the same with regard to the wine. This is the doctrine of the council of Trent, of the Douay Catechism, and of all the popish catechisms in Latin, French, and English, which have come in my way; and these are not few. As the authors of these catechisms rest the doctrine upon the supreme authority of the council of Trent, I shall state here what the said holy council have authentically decreed upon the subject: Since Christ, our Redeemer, has said that that was truly his own body which he offered under the appearance of bread, it has therefore been always believed in the church of God, and it is now again declared by this holy council-that, by the consecration of the bread and wine, there is effected a conversion of the whole substance of the bread, into the substance of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine, into the substance of his blood: which conversion is fitly and properly termed, by the holy Catholic church, transubstantiation." Concil. Trid. Less. xiii. cap. iv. 66 If any one shall deny that, in the most holy sacrament of the eucharist, there are contained, truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore the whole Christ; or say that he is in it only as a sign, or figure, or by his influence, he is accursed. "If any one shall say that, in the sacrament of the eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, (this is the consubstantiation of the Lutheran church,) and shall deny the wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into his body, and the whole substance of the wine into his blood, the appearances only of bread and wine remaining, which conversion the Catholic church most properly terms transubstantiation,-he is accursed. "If any one shall deny that, in the adorable sacrament of the eucharist, a separation being made, the whole Christ is contained in each element or species, in the separate parts of each element or species,— he is accursed!" Ibid. cap. viii. Fletcher's Lectures, pp. 142-144. I think it unnecessary to give the Latin original, which the author gives in a note, and it may easily be seen and consulted by any person who understands the language. Every genuine Papist firmly believes, at least professes to believe, the doctrine of transubstantiation, as laid down by the council of Trent; and every popish priest not only professes, but swears to the belief of it. Yet I believe our Glasgow Papists are heartily ashamed of it and blush to avow it. In the Glasgow Chronicle, more than a year ago, Mr. PAX, alias St. Ange Simeon, declared as follows:-"Had your correspondent taxed the Catholics with one principle which they profess, I would gladly have acknowledged it." I have taxed them again and again, with professing and maintaining this monstrous absurdity; but there is no acknowledgment forthcoming from Mr. PAX. There is no more truth in his promises than in his assertions; and I hope to show, by and by, that it would be absurd to expect to find truth in any man who really believes in transubstantiation. The doctrine of the holy council of Trent, which every popish priest is sworn to believe, and which every man must believe, or be held as accursed, (anathema,) is simply this:-that what are seen to be bread and wine upon the altar, after the priest has pronounced these words, Hoc est corpus meum, &c., (This is my body, &c.,) are no longer bread and wine, but the real body and blood, soul and divinity, of Jesus Christ. The priest is understood to possess the miraculous power, by the use of the above words, to convert a piece of bread, in the form of a wafer, into the real body of Jesus Christ, which was born of Mary, which was crucified, was buried, rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven; and to convert this piece of bread, not only into the body and blood, but also into the soul and divinity, of Jesus Christ. This wonderful conversion is produced by the use of these words, Hoc est corpus meum; and this, as Archbishop Tillotson has shown, led certain jugglers to call their sleight-of-hand tricks hocus-pocus, which is nothing but a corruption of the priest's hoc est corpus, by means of which he commands the whole substance of bread to be gone, and the real body of Christ to assume its place. Among Protestants, and I may say among persons of common sense, it is not generally reckoned necessary to oppose the absurdity of transubstantiation by serious argument. The bare statement of it is enough to refute it, to the satisfaction of every person whose senses have any authority with his understanding; but Papists are multiplying among us: they are as tenacious as ever of their favourite dogma, that what |