"Re-establishment of the Inquisition in Spain.

"An assertion in itself unjust and libellous, as founded in ignorance, bigotry or malice, cannot be too severely reprobated. To pretend that the decree of Ferdinand VII. respecting the re-establishment of the Inquisition in Spain," is the true spirit of the Catholic religion," as some venal prints have of late asserted, is of this description.

"The establishment of the Inquisition cannot form a part of the religion of Catholics; because, though some Catholic princes have judged it an expedient tribunal, others, equally Catholic, would not on any account admit it into their governments any more than the court of High Commission, or the dreaded Star-Chamber, which bore a near resemblance with it, both in its severity and its forms, made part of the religion of Protestants. Catholic means universal, with regard both to time and place. Now the Inquisition was never universal. It did not any where exist till after the death of St. Dominic, (the saint therefore is erroneously stiled either founder or member of this tribunal) nor was it, at any time universally established in Catholic countries. It is also a fact, not sufficiently attended to, that this tribunal was no where established but at the request, or with the concurrence, of the civil powers, and should be viewed by persons of the least discernment, more as an engine of state, than of ecclesiastical policy. No article of faith enjoins it, no decree of any council enforces it. Catholic France never knew it. The Pope admits not the Inquisition in his dominions, and he has no authority to controul the internal affairs, or dictate concerning the local institutions of other countries-no not even of Catholic countries. He is only the spiritual head of the church, and therefore could no more abolish the Inquisition of Spain, than he could establish it in France.

"Rev. J. Nightingale, a dissenting minister, who has given us Portraitures of the Catholic Religion and Methodism, in his former work, page 155, says: "il never was a tenet of the Catholic church to establish her doctrines by fire and sword, nor by any other kind of violence, though some of the Roman Pontiffs encouraged and permitted this dreadful engine of political and religious tyranny. It was also countenanced and supported by some princes, who from their shallow conceptions of the science of government, and their natural imbecility, had recourse to this miserable expedient."

"Page 479, ibid. The same author adds: "The Inquisition is thought to be an indispensable branch of the religion of Catholics. It is, however, no such thing. That religion had existed many centuries before this hellish tribunal was thought of. It was an engine of state persecution, and took cognizance of other matters besides those

immediately connected with religion. And in writing against the faith of Protestants, it would be equally just to refer the diabolical proceedings of the court of High Commission and of the Star-Chamber to the Protestant religion, as in opposing the faith of Catholics, to reproach them with the deeds of the Inquisition." Suffice it to say, "that the Inquisition is now. for the most part abolished; and in fact that many countries never introduced it, but opposed its cruel proceedings, and protested against its very existence." So far Mr. Nightingale.

"Is it then either just or honourable for this enlightened nation to resent the solitary instance of an infatuated monarch, so weak and so illadvised, upon a large body of British subjects, who reprobate all violent measures as much as their Protestant brethren can possibly do? Besides, is there not some shade of difference between a monarch, who, for the sake of peace and unity, exerts the utmost stretch of his power, to prevent the admission of any new reformers, who, like Johanna Southcote and others, might circulate their absurd, not to say blasphemous doctrines among his people, and a British senate, which professes universal toleration, and which is admired for its enlarged and enlightened conceptions, refusing to admit a very considerable body of native born subjects into the pale of the constitution, not for any refractory behaviour or disobedience to the existing laws, but because they keep an inviolable attachment to their religious principles, and this for the best possible reason, be cause they think them instituted by Jesus Christ, and of course unchangeable."

"York, Aug. 12, 1814."

The positive falsehoods contained in this article are, first, the assertion that," the Pope admits not the Inquisition in his dominions, whereas it was there first established, as might be supposed, and there it is now reestablished. The Bulls are almost innumerable which relate to it. The council general of the Inquisition is, we believe, the first in point of rank, as well as the most considerable of those congregations of cardinals without which the Pope can do nothing. Perhaps some of our readers may recollect the notorious Count Cagliostro, and that he actually died in the prisons of the Inquisition at Rome. This we believe was also the case of the archbishop of Toledo, the friend of the Emperor Charles V, persecuted with others, his father's confessors, Philip II, and of poor Molinos with all his adherents, whom even the Pope could not save. It is also false that "the Pope could not abolish the Inquisition in Spain." It is most certain that he could abolish it both there and every where else, whenever he pleased. To introduce it into a country, indeed,

he has found to be in many cases beyond his power: but to take it away would require only a word. True it is, he never has done it; and we are persuaded never will do it. It is false also that it never was a tenet of the Catholic church to establish her doctrines by fire and sword, nor by any other kind of violence. Our pages bear ample testimony to the contrary. The Councils of IIld, and IVth Lateran, established persecution in the most solemn manner, and in the most studied terms. And, from that time to this, Popes, general councils and bishops have uniformly acted upon those decrees. Out of them arose that monstrous superfætation, the Inquisition; which, though not formally established till the days of Innocent IVth, was in embryo, and many of its horrible maxims in full activity in the days of Dominic (Saint Dominic,) whose zeal and skill in the science of persecution, occasioned his order after his death to be specially entrusted with the management of this precious engine of Catholicism. Now whether this system of persecution, of which the Inquisition only forms a feature, though certainly the most bloody and horrible feature, be in the "true spirit of the Catholic religion," (not indeed the true Catholic, which is indeed "universal," but that which pretends to be Catholic, and is only the particular church of Rome), we must rest upon this plain fact, that it has been pursued by every Pope, every Popish general council, and every bishop of that communion for more than six hundred years.* But, we are told repeatedly that infallibility resides in the decrees of Popes, when approved or followed by the episcopal body at large,-here are general councils (of their's) to boot. And what would they have more.

As to the miserable shift of quoting the authority of the Rev. J. Nightin gale, a man, probably, paid by themselves for writing his book, who began by being a Methodist, then turned Socinian, and is now a hack writer for the Papists it is something so contemptible, that it can only expose the desperate weakness of the cause; and redoubles our pity for these un

One bishop only history records, as an exception, Jean Hennuyer, Bishop of Lisieux, at the time of the St. Bartholomew massacre. But he was considered as a prodigy ! When the king's lieutenant waited upon him, with an order to cut off all the Huguenots in his diocese, he not only refused to obey it, but sig ed a formal instrument of refusal, and at last prevailed on the officer to suspend the work of destruction, and thus, by delay, he preserved the lives of all the Protestants both in the city, and in his diocese. This venerable personage died in 1578, about fourscore years of age, having lived during the reigns of Charles VIII., Louis XII., Francis 1., Henry II., Francis II., Charles IX., and Henry III. (See a review of a drama, in three acts, by Voltaire, entituled, "Jean Hennuyer, Eveque de Lisieux." Crit. Review for Jan. 1773, or Vol. 35th, p.62.)

fortunate brethren of our's, who have not resolution to break the net in which they cannot but see that they are entangled.

With respect to the Star-Chamber and High Commission court; it is strange that these should be thrown in our teeth. The first was of great antiquity; and called into action by Henry the VIIth; a Popish king: and the latter was established at a time when Philip the IId was destroying Protestants by thousands and tens of thousands-it owed its origin to a remnant of Popish spirit. But BOTH were abolished by PROTESTANTS, more than a century and a half ago; nor have been heard of since, except when JAMES Ild, a Popish king, revived, in the very teeth of the law, the High Commission court! But the Inquisition still subsists, and the decrees of the IVth Lateran are unrepealed.

Certainly too (to notice now the concluding paragraph) there is a very great" difference" between imprisoning a man in a close dungeon, without fire or candle, or book, or the liberty even of speaking, and putting him to the torture to make him accuse himself, and finally burning him, without even letting him know, not only his accuser, but what he is accused of and merely preventing the admission to political power of those, who cannot administer the government (composed as it is of Church and State) consistently with the principles of the religion which they profess.

RESTRICTIONS OF THE ROMISH CHURCH IN RUSSIA.

To the Editor of the Protestant Advocate.

SIR, Having read in your number for October, p. 30, an important political document, containing the principal restrictions imposed on the Protestants of France, which were judiciously selected from the concordat of the French republican government in 1801, by your well informed correspondent, Chillingworth; shewing, by comparison, the necessity of much stronger securities of our religious establishment against the undermining spirit of Popery, now grasping at political power, than have been hitherto devised by any of those shallow statesmen, among the accommodating and conceding advocates of Popish claims in parliament; I now send you a parallel document still more apposite and important, containing the sage regulations under which the Romish religion was allowed a footing in Russia, by the late Empress Catherine II, one of the most profound politicians that ever swayed a sceptre; and which furnish an admirable model of precautionary wisdom, well worthy of the serious attention, and timely imitation of a British Legislature.

Her decree, on this occasion, dated Jan. 17, 1782, is given by Sir John C. Hippesly, in his printed speech of 1810, Appendix, No XX, and in his speech of 1812, Notes, p. 85. From which, the principal articles relative to this subject have been judiciously selected by Professor Marsh, that able pillar of the established church, in his masterly Comparative View of the Churches of England and Rome, lately published; in which be has concisely and irrefragably proved the essential and irreconcileable difference of their respective rule of faith, and canons of discipline; and impressively warned the public of the baleful influence of the assumed authority, and sinister practices of the see of Rome, in foreign, and more especially, Protestant states. I shall transcribe this most valuable document from his tract, p. 245, &c. with some additional remarks thereon.

"When the partition of Poland between the adjoining states of Rus sia, Austria, and Prussia, had brought under her dominion a considerable population professing the Romish faith, she [the Empress] wisely determined for the supply of their spiritual wants, without prejudice to the states to establish a popedom in her own dominions, by the following articles of her decree :

"I. We now erect the city of Mohilow, the capital of the government of the same name, into an archbishopric of the Roman Catholic re ligion, including within the jurisdiction of its archbishopric, all the churches and convents of the said religion, which are in the governments of Mohilow and of Polotski, as well as those of our two capitals [Moscow and Petersburgh] and in all other parts of the Russian empire. "II. Wв graciously name the bishop Stanislaus Tsches Tschersovisch to the archiepiscopal see of the Roman Catholic church of Mohilow.

"III. To aid the same in his functions, we appoint a coadjutor, and elevate to that dignity the Abbot John Benislasshi, canon of the archiepiscopal church of Mohilow, and superior of Danburg: and we have given orders that measures shall be taken for his elevation to the episcopacy.

"V. The archbishop of the Roman Catholic church of Mohilow, shall not receive any order from any power whatever, besides us and our senate.

"VIII. The appointment of superiors and heads of convents, of curates for the parishes, and of all other promotions to the ecclesiastical degrees of the Roman Catholic religion, shall be dependant in all the extent of the Russian empire, on the will of the archbishop whom we have appointed. And we order him to examine, either personally, or by means of his coadjutor, all the aforesaid superiors and curates; to let those remain who were born our subjects, or are become such, to appoint VOL. III. [Prot. Adv. Dec. 1814.]

R