The National Register. — London, England, 1819-05-23 00:00:00

41iezi,7/,10-ivw‘s4-tt iu - Or Aatio cdt Artilittr Our Sting, onettutton anb itabta. No. IIB3.—VoL. XII.] TH t CATHOLIC QUESTION. 1w a late number of our Paper we expressed our in- tention of again reverting to the Question of the Catho lic Claims, for the purpose of neticis4 a point con nected with Mr. Grattati's motiouupon which, time would not then allow us to enter. ' 7 The circumstance we then alluded to was a short but very animated dis cussion which preceded the Debate, on the propriety and constitutional character of Petitions presrnte4 to Parlia ment on this subject by the Established Clergy, professedly petitioning as a distinct body, an.l calling themselves the the Clmrch. The importance which attaches to this discussion is, that it extorted, even from the boldest and regularly retained advocate of the Rights of the Estab lishment, Mr. Peel, a concession that the Clergy can with no more propriety petition as a distinct lowly upon questions of State policy than the First Regiment of Guards ; that the Intuited title of being themselves the Church, is both presitniptous and absurd ; that they are in fact no more than its paid ministers and servants, and lastly, that any petition coining from them, of the cha racter above-mentioned, can only and simply he consi dered as the prayer of so many private individuals. When we reflect upon the tone and tendency of many of these priestly documents, we cannot help sincerely wishing that this decision of the House of Commons may not be forgotten. The Alarmist says it is but tan apparent, that in the 19th century Papal doctrines and discipline are of as in tolerant a character as they were its 1564, when the Council of Trent proclaimed the power of the Roman See to judge, punish, and anathematise all who were disobedient to its will. Now, PS this is a solemn charge which involves on one hand the best in terests of his country, ❑nd oa the othcr the character and the rights of five mamas of his fellow-subjects, we trust he will either feel the responsibility he is miller of verifying such au assertinit by particularizing some of his notoriotti and inconvertible facts, and by atisweriug she i following questions, or ht. will admit how justly the best apology he can render is due to those, whom, in our pre- su.a state of igoorance, we firmly believe him to lia.ve grossly slandered. In the first 'dace then, where are the buntings of heretics, where are the indulgences, where are the palace bulls which, its those days of darkness he bas mentioned, a;itated, and often contributed to con %ll:Se Europe In the next place, in what temporal coo cents ofuny government its Europe has the present Pope i derfered I what individual. for paying civil allegiance to his lawful riders, has the present Pope punished t What temporal causes, but those of his own temporal dominions, has the present Pope ever presumed to judge ? and lastly, whom has the present Pope anathematized for want of obedience to his will? If these facts are not forthcoming, then we must continue to believe that an assertion ha► been made which cannot be proved, and to hope that though such Hobgoblins may still hold their revels in the brain of the foreseer of evil, yet that they are all, in reality, past away like the dew of the epornitig, and are stow contemplated with as much abhorrence and disgust by Catholics as they are 1 by the adherents of the Church, to which we ourselves belong. But again, indignation is alive, because the word Catholic boancipation is still used, after so many mressioss, as they are called, have been already made. About words and names it is idle and ab surd to cavil; but one thing is quite clear, viz. that if ever there was any justice it) the claim to she civil SUNDAY, MAY, Ra 1819• IRights, on the part of the Catholics, and that justice has surely been too often recognized to be now den.ed, then it may be safely urged that the term coacessiele is at least as inappropriate on one hand. as emancipation can be on the other. Whatever right is withheld, is, pro iatt o, aultiugation, but the restdiatim of Right is nd emaseess f ' she vreoritieb "mita were once talked of, are now no longer mentioned. Upon this point we are happy to assert that alarms are entirely groundless. Securities are neither forgotten by 1 the advocates of Catholic Claims among Protestants, nor are they refused by Catholics themselves. Every secu rity than can be either framed ordeinanded, as connected with civil allegiance, the Catholic is quite ready to give. Even the Veto itself, though necessarily in souse cases connected with their spiritual concerns, the great body of the Catholics would not have refused, and the Pope, without hesitation, expressed his perfect readiness tome tion such an arrangement. Dr. Mailer, though one of the original proposers of that measure did indeed afterwards succeed but too well in exciting that sort of clamour to which Protestants themselves are no strangers, of their Church king in danger, and prevailed with a few indivi duals, calling themselves the Catholic Board, to delegate a person, not unlike himself, named Ilayes, to remon strate with the See of Rome upon the conciliatory ten dency of its conduct—and let us observe the issue of this mission—Hayes was forcibly banished from the Papal States for the tnischievions office he had under taken, and the Pope immediately addressed a letter to those who hail sent him, beginning with these words —" With what pain do we find it expressly declared in your letter that the expedient for satisfying the goVern ment of the loyalty of those to br elected Bishops, did not only not meet your approbation, but appeared to threaten destruction to the Catholic religion of Iceland. It islounded on a principle laid down by one of our most 'Bust:lions pre decessors, St. Leo the Great, that atone be ordained Bishop without the consent and postulation of the flock, lest an unwelcome intruder incur its contempt and hatred. Now this principle, altholigh literally applica ble to the people only, must rightfully be extended to Princes also, even to those who are not it, communion with us, who, from the very nature of their power in temporal affairs have so easily the means of preventing a Bithap, seal may to the dita of their ditlike or suspicion, from the care of the flock committed to his charge." And he concludes in the following words of feeling, gratitude and respect to this country, both for its general course of liberality toward. the Catholics, arid particu larly for its services towards himself. " Remember that the Government which you are accusing of designs , hostile to our faith, is the same, which by laws, and especially those of t 773, 1788, and 1793 repealed a great part of those penal statutes by which you were grievimisly oppressed : remember how George 111. and his illustrious Son have extended their protection to Catholics, and that the British Government was among the chief of our supporters in procuring our return to' the Pontifical Chair, and our restoration to our ancient independence in the exercise of those spiritual rights which the hand of violence had wrested from us." Such was the language and such the sentiments of a power, whose doctrine and discipline we are nevertheless now to he toll arc just as intolerant 55 alley were in the days of ('rancher, and Ridley, and Latimer, and Bonner. But the plain history of the Veto is, that a more mature consideration of the sub; set has led all our ablest States men to view it as a thing not worth demanding on cur part, and an agree with one mind that the whole ques tion is one not of rehg,...us br.: purely of civil policy. But pima 94d. let us just consider this question of securities in another vie.v. One of the best and noblest maxims of British in dependence is, that every mall be held intiocent till lie is proved guilty! Now in what has the Doke . of Norfolk. or Lord Pere, or Sir G. Jerningham offended, that they are to he hotted uses to keep the peace Wore they ems be admitted to . thecomsoon privilege of thteonstitutiets ler which they live, and in the support and protection of which they hold sn valuable a stake? In what has the %hole body of Catholics offended to merit the ex clusions to which they are exposed? Do we talk of securities to the Presbyterians, to the followers of Wesley or of Whitfield, did we demand them ever from the mad and deluded followers of Johanna Southcote? Ao4l yet are these, or any of them, more friendly to Protestant ascendancy than Members of the Church of Rome. No, and if any of them were asked whether their own pecu liar faith had not their first and dearest wishes for its prevalence, must they not answer, " Yes Yet who thinks of subjecting them to civil incapacities on such grounds as these? In short, to legislate for thought and conscience is a system of which experience has abundantly shewn us both the inutility and folly. But then" the Order of the Jesuits," says the Alarmist "Ike Pope's lvst bulwark," has been re-established," and yet in the very same sentence we are told that in 1773 the Pope himself suppressed it; and o hy, " for their mischievous interference in temporal concerns." This objection might assuredly be safely left to its own answer, but we will further inform this trembling Alarmist, that considerable numbers of these very Jesuits have fot years and years been living in this country without any detri ment either to its cis il policy or its religion, that the Catholic youth of England have been very generally educated under their care, that the establishment Stonyhurst, an establishment under the immediate patronage and protection of Goiertimetit, is chiefly, if we are correctly informed, in their hands, and that it is therefore now too late to begin to hold up these " inde fatigable Papagantlists" as objects of terror and dismay- Again, we are told that 4000 souls have within a few years been added to the Romish faith ; where this won derful scene of conversion to Popery has occurred, ue arc not informed ; but if it embraces the whole scope of Europe it is hardly as a grain of sand in the Wane.. and even if it he intended for our own Empire it is but as WOO to five millions and totally inadequate even to the increase of the population. But can it be for gotten that persecution is of itself not only the firmest bond of union, but the strongest instrument of conver sion also, and that the maxim of Sariguis Mai-tyro". sirens Ecclesica, is coetal with Christianity itself? But as the last asserted fact which we shall nosier. the Pope is an enemy le Bilk .Sorielirs, and therefore the Catholics should not be admitted to their civil rights. How many of the high and mined I)i 6 . nitaries of the Church cf England are eitentiis to to Bible Societies likewise ? How many more of those who ate loud in cryitig the watch-word of Protestant ascendancy? Bin granting even that it is so, has his Holiness prevented the limitation of these Societies, either iu France or Holland ? I lave not the monarchs of both these Catholic coon:siesta.' only permitted their establishment, but thenisels es become their patrons? And are not smile of the leading Catholics in this coun try atnonest the swami and eager supporters of these be nevolent Institutions ? Whither can the zeal and blinds mess of a new conversion carry us? In short, if there be any impartial man who may do us the favour to read these remarks, to hint we may safely appeal whether such ohjvctions as have been scraped together, do not sat oar of the last days of a falling control tray, and that if such be the strongest arguments which can be al. leged for continiiiiigupoit the necks of die Catholics the yoke of their bootlace, wheiner every friend of justice, and every lover of his country still not devoutly wish and liras that sitch a stain may be soop wiped hum opt coil policy. and that they may speedily be restored to the fire enjovnrent of that inheritance which their fa. Chess tiinglit and bled to eatrbl•sh, and i t ic I,l„,ing, of whit - ut they have themseltes done teery thins II) ilesme. .4 •Nrer r % , '..