# The Works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift/Volume 5/Reasons Humbly Offered to the Parliament of Ireland For Repealing the Sacramental Test in Favour of the Catholicks

REASONS
HUMBLY OFFERED
TO THE PARLIAMENT OF IRELAND
FOR REPEALING
THE SACRAMENTAL TEST
IN
FAVOUR OF THE CATHOLICKS,
OTHERWISE CALLED ROMAN CATHOLICKS, AND BY THEIR ILL WILLERS, PAPISTS.
WRITTEN IN 1732.
DRAWN PARTLY FROM ARGUMENTS AS THEY ARE CATHOLICKS, AND PARTLY FROM ARGUMENTS COMMON TO THEM WITH THEIR BRETHREN THE DISSENTERS.
IT is well known, that the first conquerors of this kingdom were English catholicks, subjects to English catholick kings, from whom by their valour and success they obtained large portions of land, given them as a reward for their many victories over the Irish: to which merit, our brethren the dissenters, of any denomination whatsoever, have not the least pretensions.
It is confessed, that the posterity of those first ​victorious catholicks, were often forced to rise in their own defence, against new colonies from England, who treated them like mere native Irish with innumerable oppressions, depriving them of their lands, and driving them by force of arms into the most desolate parts of the kingdom; till, in the next generation, the children of these tyrants were used in the same manner, by new English adventurers; which practice continued for many centuries. But it is agreed on all hands, that no insurrections were ever made, except after great oppressions by fresh invaders; whereas all the rebellions of puritans, presbyterians, independents, and other sectaries, constantly began before any provocations were given, except that they were not suffered to change the government in church and state, and seize both into their own hands; which, however, at last they did, with the murder of their king, and of many thousands of his best subjects.
The catholicks were always defenders of monarchy, as constituted in these kingdoms; whereas, our brethren the dissenters, were always republicans both in principle and practice.
It is well known, that all the catholicks of these kingdoms, both priests and laity, are true whigs, in the best and most proper sense of the word; bearing as well in their hearts, as in their outward profession, an entire loyalty to the royal house of Hanover, in the person and posterity of George II, against the pretender and all his adherents; to which they think themselves bound in gratitude, as well as conscience, by the lenity wherewith they have been treated since the death of queen Anne, so different from what they suffered in the four last years of that princess, ​during the administration of that wicked minister the earl of Oxford.
The catholicks of this kingdom humbly hope, that they have at least as fair a title, as any of their brother dissenters, to the appellation of protestants. They have always protested against the selling, dethroning, or murdering their kings; against the usurpations and avarice of the court of Rome; against deism, atheism, socinianism, quakerism, muggletonianism, fanaticism, brownism, as well as against all Jews, Turks, infidels, and hereticks. Whereas the title of protestants assumed by the whole herd of dissenters (except ourselves) depends entirely upon their protesting against archbishops, bishops, deans and chapters, with their revenues; and the whole hierarchy; which are the very expressions used in the solemn league and covenant, where the word popery is only mentioned ad invidiam; because the catholicks agree with the episcopal church in those fundamentals.
Although the catholicks cannot deny, that in the great rebellion against king Charles I, more soldiers of their religion were in the parliament army, than in his majesty's troops; and that many Jesuits and friars went about, in the disguise of presbyterian and independent ministers, to preach up rebellion, as the best historians of those times inform us; yet ​the bulk of catholicks in both kingdoms preserved their loyalty entire.
The catholicks have some reason to think it a little hard, when their enemies will not please to distinguish between the rebellious riot committed by that brutal ruffian sir Phelim O'Neal, with his tumultuous crew of rabble, and the forces raised afterward by the catholick lords and gentlemen of the English pale, in defence of the king, after the English rebellion began. It is well known, that his majesty's affairs were in great distraction some time before, by an invasion of the covenanting Scottish kirk rebels, and by the base terms the king was forced to accept, that they might be kept in quiet, at a juncture when he was every hour threatened at home by that fanatick party, which soon after set all in aflame. And if the catholick army in Ireland, fought for their king, against the forces sent over by the parliament then in actual rebellion against him, what person of loyal principles can be so partial as to deny that they did their duty, by joining with the marquis of Ormond and other commanders, who bore their commissions from the king? for which, great numbers of them lost their lives, and forfeited their estates; a great part of the latter being now possessed by many descendants from those very men, who had drawn their swords in the service of that rebellious parliament, which cut off his head, and destroyed monarchy. And what is more amazing, although the same persons, when the Irish were intirely subdued, continued in power under the rump, were chief confidents and faithful subjects to Cromwell, yet, being wise enough to foresee a ​restoration, they seized the forts and castles here out of the hands of their brethren in rebellion, for the service of the king; just saving the tide, and putting in a stock of merit sufficient not only to preserve the land which the catholicks lost by their loyalty, but likewise to preserve their civil and military employments, or be higher advanced.
Those insurrections wherewith the catholicks are charged, from the beginning of the seventeenth century to the great English rebellion, were occasioned by many oppressions they lay under. They had no intention to introduce a new religion, but to enjoy the liberty of preserving the old; the very same which their ancestors professed from the time that Christianity was first introduced into this island, which was by catholicks; but whether mingled with corruptions, as some pretend, does not belong to the question. They had no design to change the government; they never attempted to fight against, to imprison, to betray, to sell, to bring to a trial, or to murder their king. The schismaticks acted by a spirit directly contrary; they united in a solemn league and covenant to alter the whole system of spiritual government, established in all christian nations, and of apostolick institution; concluding the tragedy with the murder of the king, in cold blood, and upon mature deliberation; at the same time changing the monarchy into a commonwealth.
The catholicks of Ireland, in the great rebellion, lost their estates for fighting in defence of their king. The schismaticks, who cut off the father's head, forced the son to fly for his life, and overturned the whole ancient frame of government, religious and civil: obtained grants of those very ​estates which the catholicks lost in defence of the ancient constitution, many of which estates are at this day possessed by the posterity of those schismaticks: and thus they gained by their rebellion, what the catholicks lost by their loyalty.
We allow the catholicks to be brethren of the dissenters; some people indeed (which we cannot allow) would have them to be our children, because we both dissent from the church established, and both agree in abolishing this persecuting sacramental test; by which negative discouragement, we are both rendered incapable of civil and military employments. However, we cannot but wonder at the bold familiarity of these schismaticks, in calling the members of the national church, their brethren and fellow protestants. It is true that all these sects (except the catholicks) are brethren to each other in faction, ignorance, iniquity, perverseness, pride, and (if we except the quakers) in rebellion. But, how the churchmen can be styled their fellow protestants, we cannot comprehend: because, when the whole Babel of sectaries joined against the church, the king and the nobility, for twenty years, in a match at football, where the proverb expressly tells us, that all are fellows; while the three kingdoms were tossed to and fro, the churches and cities and royal palaces shattered to pieces by their balls, their buffets, and their kicks; the victors would allow no more fellows at football; but murdered, sequestered, plundered, deprived, banished to the plantations, or enslaved all their opposers, who had lost the game.
It is said the world is governed by opinion; and politicians assure us, that all power is founded ​thereupon. Wherefore, as all human creatures are fond to distraction of their own opinions, and so much the more, as those opinions are absurd, ridiculous, or of little moment, it must follow, that they are equally fond of power. But no opinions are maintained with so much obstinacy as those in religion, especially by such zealots who never bore the least regard to religion, conscience, honour, justice, truth, mercy, or common morality, farther than in outward appearance, under the mask of hypocrisy, to promote their diabolical designs. And therefore bishop Burnet, one of their oracles, tells us honestly, that the saints of those fanatick times pronounced themselves above morality; which they reckoned among beggarly elements; but the meaning of these two last words, thus applied, we confess to be above our understanding.
Among those kingdoms and states which first embraced the reformation, England appears to have received it in the most regular way; where it was introduced in a peaceable manner, by the supreme power of a king and the three estates in parliament; to which, as the highest legislative authority, all subjects are bound passively to submit. Neither was there much blood shed on so great a change of religion. But a considerable number of lords, and other persons of quality through the kingdom, still continued in their old faith, and were, notwithstanding their difference in religion, employed in offices civil as well as military, more or less in every reign, until the test act in the time of king Charles II. However, from the time of ​the reformation, the number of catholicks gradually and considerably lessened. So that in the reign of king Charles I, England became in a great degree a protestant kingdom, without taking the sectaries into the number; the legality whereof, with respect to human laws, the catholicks never disputed; but the puritans, and other schismaticks, without the least pretence to any such authority, by an open rebellion, destroyed that legal Reformation, as we observed before, murdered their king, and changed the monarchy into a republick. It is therefore not to be wondered at, if the catholicks, in such a Babel of religions, chose to adhere to their own faith left them by their ancestors, rather than seek for a better among a rabble of hypocritical, rebellious, deluding knaves, or deluded enthusiasts.
We repeat once more, that if a national religion be changed by the supreme legislative power, we cannot dispute the human legality of such a change. But we humbly conceive, that if any considerable party of men, which differs from an establishment either old or new, can deserve liberty of conscience, it ought to consist of those, who, for want of conviction, or of right understanding the merits of each cause, conceive themselves bound in conscience to adhere to the religion of their ancestors; because they are, of all others, least likely to be authors of innovations either in church or state.
On the other side; if the reformation of religion be founded upon rebellion against the king, without whose consent by the nature of our constitution no law can pass; if this reformation be introduced by only one of the three estates, I mean the commons, and not by one half even of those commons, ​and this by the assistance of a rebelllous army; again, if this reformation were carried on by the exclusion of nobles both lay and spiritual, (who constitute the other part of the three estates) by the murder of their king, and by abolishing the whole system of government; the catholicks cannot see why the successors of those schismaticks, who are universally accused by all parties, except themselves and a few infamous abettors, for still retaining the same principles in religion and government, under which their predecessors acted, should pretend to a better share of civil or military trust, profit, and power than the catholicks; who, during all that period of twenty years, were continually prosecuted with the utmost severity, merely on account of their loyalty and constant adherence to kingly power.
We now come to those arguments for repealing the sacramental test, which equally affect the catholicks, and their brethren the dissenters.
First, we agree with our fellow dissenters, that persecution merely for conscience sake is against the genius of the Gospel. And so likewise is any law for depriving men of their natural and civil rights which they claim as men. We are also ready enough to allow, that the smallest negative discouragements for uniformity's sake are so many persecutions. Because it cannot be denied, that the scratch of a pin is in some degree a, real wound, as much as a stab through the heart. In like manner, an incapacity by law for any man to be made a judge, a colonel, or justice of the peace, merely on a point of conscience, is a negative discouragement, and consequently a real persecution: for in this case, the author of the pamphlet quotod in the ​margin puts a very pertinent and powerful question: If God be the sole Lord of the conscience, why should the rights of conscience be subject to human jurisdiction? Now to apply this to the catholicks; the belief of transubstantiation is a matter purely of religion and conscience, which does not affect the political interest of society, as such: therefore, why should the rights of conscience whereof God is the sole Lord, be subject to human jurisdiction? And why should God be deprived of this right over a catholick's conscience, any more than over that of any other dissenter?
And whereas another author among our brethren the dissenters, has very justly complained, that by this persecuting test act, great numbers of true protestants have been forced to leave the kingdom, and fly to the plantations, rather than stay here branded with an incapacity for civil and military employments; we do affirm, that the catholicks can bring many more instances of the same kind; some thousands of their religion having been forced by the sacramental test, to retire into other countries, rather than live here under the incapacity of wearing swords, sitting in parliament, and getting that share of power and profit which belongs to them as fellow christians, whereof they are deprived merely upon account of conscience, which would not allow them to take the sacrament after the manner prescribed in the liturgy. Hence it clearly follows, in the words of the same author, That if we catholicks are incapable of employment, we are punished for our ​dissent, that is, for our conscience, which wholly turns upon political considerations.
The catholicks are willing to acknowledge the king's supremacy, whenever their brethren the dissenters shall please to show them an example.
Farther, the catholicks, whenever their religion shall come to be the national established faith, are willing to undergo the same test offered by the author already quoted. His words are these: "To end this debate, by putting it upon a foot, which I hope will appear to every impartial person, a fair and equitable one: we catholicks propose, with submission to the proper judges, that effectual security be taken against persecution, by obliging all who are admitted into places of powxr and trust, whatever their religious profession be, in the most solemn manner to disclaim persecuting principles." It is hoped the publick will take notice of these words, whatever their religious profession be; which plainly include the catholicks; and for which we return thanks to our dissenting brethren.
And whereas it is objected by those of the established church, that if the schismaticks and fanaticks were once put into a capacity of possessing civil and military employments, they would never be at ease, till they had raised their own way of worship into the national religion, through all his majesty's dominions, equal with the true orthodox Scottish kirk; which when they had once brought to pass, they would no more allow liberty of conscience to episcopal dissenters, than they did in the time of the great English rebellion, and in the succeeding fanatick anarchy, till the king was restored. ​There is another very learned schismatical pamphleteer, who, in answer to a malignant libel, called The Presbyterian Plea of Merit, &c. clearly wipes off this aspersion, by assuring all episcopal protestants of the present church, upon his own word, and to his knowledge, that our brethren the dissenters will never offer at such an attempt. In like manner, the catholicks, when legally required, will openly declare, upon their words and honours, that as soon as their negative discouragements, and their persecution shall be removed, by repealing the sacramental test, they will leave it entirely to the merit of the cause, whether the kingdom shall think fit to make their faith the established religion or not.
And again, whereas our presbyterian brethren, in many of their pamphlets, take much offence, that the great rebellion in England, the murder of the king, with the entire change of religion and government, are perpetually objected against them both in and out of season, by our common enemy the present conformists; we do declare, in the defence of our said brethren, that the reproach aforesaid is an old worn out threadbare cant, which they always disdained to answer: and I very well remember, that having once told a certain conformist, how much I wondered to hear him and his tribe dwelling perpetually on so beaten a subject, he was pleased to divert the discourse with a foolish story, which I cannot forbear telling to his disgrace. He said, there was a clergyman in Yorkshire, who, for fifteen years together, preached every Sunday against drunkenness; whereat the parishioners being much offended, ​complained to the archbishop; who having sent for the clergyman, and severely reprimanded him, the minister had no better an answer, than by confessing the fact; adding, that all the parish were drunkards; that he desired to reclaim them from one vice, before he would begin upon another; and since they still continued to be as great drunkards as before, he resolved to go on, except his grace would please to forbid him.
We are very sensible how heavy an accusation lies upon the catholicks of Ireland; that some year's before king Charles II was restored, when theirs and the king's forces were entirely reduced, and the kingdom declared by the rump to be settled; after all his majesty's generals were forced to fly to France, or other countries, the heads of the said catholicks, who remained here in an enslaved condition, joined to send an invitation to the duke of Lorrain; engaging, upon his appearing here with his forces, to deliver up the whole island to his power, and declare him their sovereign; which, after the restoration, was proved against them by dean Boyle, since primate, who produced the very original instrument at the board. The catholicks freely acknowledge the fact to be true; and at the same time appeal to all the world, whether a wiser, a better, a more honourable, or a more justifiable project could have been thought of. They were then reduced to slavery and beggary by the English rebels, many thousands of them murdered, the rest deprived of their estates, and driven to live on a small pittance in the wilds of Connaught; at a time when either the rump, or Cromwell, absolutely governed the three kingdoms. And the question will turn upon this, whether the ​catholicks, deprived of all their possessions, governed with a rod of iron, and in utter despair of ever seeing the monarchy restored, for the preservation of which they had suffered so much, were to be blamed for calling in a foreign prince of their own religion, who had a considerable army to support them, rather than submit to so infamous a usurper as Cromwell, or such a bloody and ignominious conventicle as the rump. And I have often heard not only our friends the dissenters, but even our common enemies the conformists, who are conversant in the history of those times, freely confess, that considering the miserable situation the Irish were then in, they could not have thought of a braver, or more virtuous attempt; by which they might have been instruments of restoring the lawful monarch, at least to the recovery of England and Scotland, from those betrayers, and sellers, and murderers of his royal father.
To conclude, whereas the last quoted author complains very heavily and frequently of a brand that lies upon them, it is a great mistake: for the first original brand has been long taken of; only we confess the scar will probably remain, and be visible for ever to those who know the principles by which they acted, and until those principles shall be openly renounced; else it must continue to all generations, like the mark set upon Cain, which some authors say descended to all his posterity; or like the Roman nose and Austrian lip, or like the long bag of flesh hanging down from the gills of the people in Piedmont. But as for any brands fixed on schismaticks for several years past, they have been all made with cold iron; like thieves, who by the benefit of the clergy are condemned to be only burned in ​the hand; but escape the pain and the mark by being in fee with the jailor. Which advantage the schismatical teachers will never want, who, as we are assured, and of which there is a very fresh, instance, have the souls, and bodies, and purses of their people, a hundred times more at their mercy, than the catholick priests could ever pretend to.
Therefore, upon the whole, the catholicks do humbly petition (without the least insinuation of threatening) that upon this favourable juncture, their incapacity for civil and military employments may be wholly taken off, for the very same reasons (beside others more cogent) that are now offered by their brethren the dissenters.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, &c.
Dublin, Nov. 1733.
* ↑ A solemn league and covenant entered into between the Scots and English fanaticks in the rebellion against king Charles I, 1643, by which they solemnly engaged among other things, "to endeavour the extirpation of prelacy, that is, church government, by archbishops, bishops, deans, archdeacons, and all other episcopal officers depending on that hierarchy."
* ↑ Henry VIII.
* ↑ Reasons for the repealing of the Sacramental Test.
* ↑ See Reasons against the Test.
* ↑ Vindication of the Protestant Dissenters.
* ↑ In this controversy the author was again victorious, for the test was not repealed.