Page images
PDF
EPUB

we are no friends to an indiscriminate study of the Bible without note or comment by illiterate people; although we admire the good old church of England fashion of putting a Bible into the hands of the learner, accompanied by the Prayer-book, and elucidated by the counsel and advice of the minister; yet, for the sake of truth and the extirpation of error, we wish we could see a Bible in every cabin in Ireland. We are persuaded that the cause of Protestantism would thereby be materially strengthened; and with every sort of respect for the Roman Catholic clergy, with every kind and liberal feeling towards them, as far as relates to their comfort and happiness, and the extension of their civil privileges, consistently with the security of the established church,-we are at the same time of opinion that no errors can be more extensively mischievous than those which they now maintain in Ireland by order of the Church and See of Rome.

-

Substance of a Speech delivered in the House of Lords, on Tuesday, May 17th, 1825. By William, Lord Bishop of Llandaff, on a Bill for the removal of certain Disqualifications of the Roman Catholics. Pp. 32. London. Rivingtons. 1825.

THE excellent Prelate who delivered this Speech, is known to possess, in no common degree, the talents of accurate discrimination and sound discretion. If these talents be applied, as they here appear to us to have been, to the very important subject of Catholic disabilities, the result must be well worthy of the attentive consideration of our readers.

Admitting, on the one hand, the right possessed by every government to exclude from places of trust those persons who cannot or will not give security for their being qualified to fill such places; and, on the other hand, the strong claim which persons of rank or talent and good conduct may urge for admission, and the inconvenience which attends their exclusion, we ask, What is the security demanded of the Roman Catholics, and which they cannot give? or, in other words, what is the real cause of their exclusion? This is the question which is asked and answered in the Speech before us. The Bishop states that there" is a direct acknowledgment" on the part of the legislature, “not only that some religious establishment is essential to the constitution, but also that it shall be Protestant and Episcopal." This he deduces from the words of the pre

amble of the Bill, which sets forth, "that the Protestant succession, and the Protestant Episcopal Church of England and Ireland are established permanently and inviolably." Assuming this, then, as the basis of the whole enquiry, he asks, " on what grounds are Roman Catholics excluded from certain privileges and favours granted to other members of the community?" And he answers thus:

"They are not excluded merely on account of their theological tenets: they are not excluded for holding the doctrines of transubstantiation, of the invocation of saints, the worship of images, or any other points in their creed or ritual which we deem to be errors and corruptions of Christianity. These are not, properly speaking, the disqualifications under which they labour, not the true ground of those disabilities which the legislature has thought fit to impose upon them. The real and only ground of their exclusion is this; that they are (what they do not choose to call themselves) PAPISTS." P. 3.

After guarding himself from the imputation of using this term as a term of reproach, the Bishop proceeds to ask, "What is the distinguishing feature of the real Papist?"

"It is (says he) the acknowledgment of the Pope's supremacy,-the acknowledgment that, in certain respects, the Pope has an authority over the whole Christian world; and, consequently, that in whatever country, or under whatever government, the members of the Church of Rome are placed, they owe to him, as their supreme head, a special allegiance, and are bound, by an obligation paramount to all others, to render him homage and obedience." P. 5.

The authority of the Pope has been formerly claimed and exercised, as extending both to spiritual and temporal concerns. In the latter character it has never been disclaimed ; nay, it may still be said to continue in force, under the deeree of the Council of Trent, which recognizes the authority of anterior councils. But leaving untouched the question of the Pope's supremacy in temporal matters, how are we affected by that which he is acknowledged to exercise in spiritual matters? This is the one leading and important point in this speech.

"My lords," says this learned prelate, "of all fallacies none appears to me more palpable, more egregious, than that which regards spiritual authority as altogether unconnected with temporal. Theoretically, indeed, they are distinct, but practically, in most cases, it is hardly possible to disunite them. Like the soul and body, (I am using Bellarmine's illustration, my lords, not my own)—like the soul and body, though each have special qualities and special interests of its own, yet they act one upon the other by mutual co-operation, and affect each other by mutual influence. It may be easy to say, this is a spiritual

right, and that a temporal right; this is an exercise of civil power, and that of ecclesiastical:-but when you come to apply these to individual eases, they will be found so blended together, as to render their separation always difficult, sometimes impracticable. And this is, in reality, the main foundation of that alliance between church and state, which exists in almost every well constituted government, and which sustains the fabric of the British constitution." P. 6.

«

- The Bishop contends, therefore, that the spiritual authority, assuming to itself a supremacy distinct from the state, becomes so far a direct infringement upon the temporal authority of the Sovereign. Going on to enquire into the nature of the spiritual supremacy, he adopts Bishop Horsley's distinction of the power of order" and the "power of jurisdiction;" the former conferring the capability of exercising spiritual functions, the fatter extending to the entire government of the ecclesiastical body-to every thing which, in ecclesiastical no less than in civil polity, it is the duty of the legislative and executive govern ment of the country, to provide for the general benefit of the community." Spiritual functions belong exclusively to the Church; spiritual jurisdiction belongs to the State, as allied to the Church. To show still more clearly and forcibly the nature of the jurisdiction belonging to the Sovereign, he quotes the thirty-seventh Article of the Church and Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions, in which her authority is declared to extend to "all manner of persons born within these her realms, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soever they be; so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them." His Lordship proceeds:

- "My lords, I think it clearly follows from hence, that, according to the fundamental principles of our Protestant constitution, no subject can be considered as paying full and undivided allegiance to the sovereign, whose notions of the regal supremacy do not come up to this standard. If spiritual jurisdiction or authority, in whatever degree, be acknowledged as the right of some other potentate, that, whether it be more or less, is so much subtracted from the supreme authority claimed, and justly claimed, by the head of the state; and the subject who is placed in such a predicament can pay only a divided allegiance to his rightful sovereign; an allegiance which, however sincere and faithful as far as it extends, is avowedly imperfect in this respect, and, consequently, curtails his right to the same favour and privileges, the same degree of trust and power, which others may enjoy who submit: to the state without any such reservations or restrictions." P. 13.

"That the Roman Catholics actually stand in this predicament, cannot surely be denied." And the Bishop quotes from Bellarmine what is given as only a "moderated opinion," that

VOL. II. NO. IV.

A a

the Pope," by reason of the spiritual, has, at least, indirectly, a certain power, and that supreme, in temporals," that "though he has not merely temporal power, yet he has, in ordine ad bonum spirituale, the highest power over temporals:" and once more, that "the spiritual power can, and ought to coerce the temporal, by any way or means which shall seem necessary for its purpose.

We pass over any further remarks tending to show the opinions of the Roman Catholics of the present day on this subject of spiritual supremacy. It is sufficient to observe, that it is proposed by the supporters of Catholic emancipation to alter the oath which is taken by Protestants, in order to accommodate it to the other party; why? but because they deny the supremacy of the Sovereign in spirituals. We cannot, however, forbear to notice the circumstances mentioned by the Bishop of Llandaff with regard to the absolute dominion exercised by the Romish bishops and pastors over their flocks; and more particularly the unbounded influence obtained by the priesthood through the use of auricular confession; more especially when connected with the inviolable secresy imposed on the priest himself, in the discharge of this part of his duty. The point to which this is carried, and the dangers which may arise from it, produced a strong effect on the mind of the noble Lord who is at the head of His Majesty's councils, if his speech on this occasion was truly reported; and may well startle any one who has not made up his mind to go every length, and incur every risk, for the sake of carrying the favourite measure of conciliation towards the Catholics.

[ocr errors]

"Of the possible effect of this upon the interests, nay, the very existence of government, we may form some conception, from the evidence given by Dr. Doyle, in his last examination. Being interrogated with respect to the effect of this obligation to secresy, upon the part of the oath of allegiance, which requires the subject to disclose to the government any treasonable designs or practices which may come to his knowledge, Dr. Doyle replies, The secrets communicated in confession, are such as we are supposed to become acquainted with as ministers of the Sacrament of Penance; and in that capacity we do not consider ourselves bound, by the oath of allegiance which we take, to reveal secrets committed to us in that way; and as our rite of confession is known to the laws, and our doctrines with regard to it universally acknowledged to exist in our Church, the oath which binds us to discover any treason against the State, or against his Majesty, which may come to our knowledge, does not oblige us to reveal any thing with which we may become acquainted in sacramental confession: that is the manner in which we understand the clause of the oath."" P. 25.7

Our readers will perhaps exclaim indignantly at the mental reservation here practised. But let them take a lesson of more just reflection, and more candid interpretation, from the author before us. "This extraordinary instance of ingenuity in the interpretation of an oath," is indeed remarkable, and well worthy of the disciples of a Church which has seldom scrupled the means that were necessary to attain the ends it had in view. It is obvious also to remark the insecurity of any State which must be content to suffer its views to be defeated at the very moment, and in the very objects, in which it is most important to secure them. But let justice be done to the persons who have plainly declared what will be their conduct when these different obligations press upon them. Here is no mental reservation; their intentions are open and avowed; and if the State receives them to its councils, it does it with the full knowledge that it will be betrayed, if ever its welfare and that of the Romish Church come in opposition to each other. The candour and accurate judgment of the Bishop of Llandaff appear, in this instance, to great advantage. He says, he has often felt it an unjust imputation on the Roman Catholics, that they are not to be bound by the obligations of an oath, because they admit of mental reservations. He believes them incapable of tampering with the obligation of an oath, and equally incapable of mental reservation: and therefore he has always conceived that m reconciling the allegiance which they swear to their Sovereign in temporal matters, with that which they conscientiously hold to be due to the Pope in spirituals, they satisfied their minds with some such constructive interpretation as that which Dr. Doyle has here distinctly avowed in the case of Confession. He has supposed that they would argue, that as the State knows their obligation to implicit obedience to the Pope, it knows likewise that it can have only a conditional fidelity and submission from them. "The reservation then is not to be mental, not insidious, not delusive: it is open and avowed." All this is, as we have said, equally creditable to the candour and the discernment of the speaker. Whether the line adopted by the Roman Catholics be calculated to reflect more of credit upon them than what may belong to the praise of ingenuity, may be questionable. We will, like the worthy Prelate, acquit them of mental reservation, supposing them to be equally open in the declaration of their intentions with Dr. Doyle; but how to go further, and give them credit for not tampering with the obligation of an oath, we really know not. They are not bound to subject themselves to that obligation; but if they take the oath, are they not obliged to keep it? To speak more properly, are they not

« PreviousContinue »