A Disavowal of Persecuting Papists I HAvE read a Tract lately sent me, and will now give my free thoughts upon the subject. I set out early in life with an utter abhorrence of persecu tion in every form, and a full conviction that every man has a right to worship God according to his own conscience. Accordingly, more than fifty years ago, I preached on those words, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of: For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." And I preached on the same text, in London, the 5th of last November. And this I extend to members of the Church of Rome, as well as to all other men. I agree not only that many of these in former ages were good men, (as Thomas à Kempis, Francis Sales, and the Mar quis de Renty,) but that many of them are so at this day. I believe, I know some Roman Catholics who sincerely love both God and their neighbour, and who steadily endeavour to do unto every one as they wish him to do unto them. But I cannot say this is a general case; nay, I am fully convinced it is not. The generality of Roman Catholics, wherever I have been, are of the same principles, and the same spirit, with their forefathers. And, indeed, if they had the same principles, it could not be doubted but they would be of the same practice too, if opportunity should serve. These principles openly avowed by their forefathers of priestly absolution, Papal indulgences, and no faith to be kept with heretics, have never been openly and authoritatively disavowed even unto this day. And until they are, a Roman Catholic, consistent with his principles, cannot be trusted by a Protestant. For the same principles naturally tend to produce the same spirit and the same practice. Very lately, a person seeing many flocking to a place, which she did not know was a Romish chapel, innocently said, "What do all these people want?" and was answered by one of them, with great vehe mence, "We want your blood.

Very lately, a person seeing many flocking to a place, which she did not know was a Romish chapel, innocently said, "What do all these people want?" and was answered by one of them, with great vehe mence, "We want your blood. And we will have it soon." On Friday last, I dined with a gentlewoman, whose father, living in Dublin, was very intimate with a Roman Catholic gentleman. Having invited him to dinner one day, in the course of conversation, Mrs. Grattan asked him, "Sir, would you really cut my husband's throat, if your Priest commanded you?" He answered honestly, "Madam, Mr. Grattan is my friend; and I love him well; but I must obey the Church." "Sir," said she, "I beg I may never more see you within my doors." But still, be their principles what they will, I would not persecute them. So persecution is utterly out of the ques tion. I know no one that pleads for it. Therefore the writing or talking against it is time lost; it is proving what no one denies. And the Romanists never have been persecuted in England since I remember. They have enjoyed a full toleration. I wish them to enjoy the same toleration still; neither more nor less. I would not hurt a hair of their head. Meantime, I would not put it into their power to hurt me, or anv other persons whom they believe to be heretics. I steer the middle way. I would neither kill nor be killed. I would not use the sword against them, nor put it into their hands, lest they should use it against me; I wish them well, but I dare not trust them. But still I say, persecution is out of the question. And I look on all vague declamations upon it, which have been lately poured out, as either mere flourishes of persons who think they talk prettily, or artful endeavours to puzzle the cause, and to throw dust into the eyes of honest Englishmen. BRIsToL, March 18, 1782.