The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-24 00:00:00

THE MA YNOOTH GRANT.

(From the Times. )
Notwithstanding the impracticable character of
the Maynooth difficulty, and the convictions gene-
rallY, though perhaps reluctantly, entertained on
the subject, it is in no degree surprising that the
question should create an annual debate of consi-
derable warmth and prolixity. We believe that
no statesman of distinction either admits or antici-
pates the expediency of reversing that Parlia-
mentary resolution which endowed a Romish se-
minary with 30,0001. a-year ; but the feelings of
many independent members are strongly engaged
to a contrary belief, and the tendency of public
opinion in a like direction was incontestably evinced
at the late elections. The choice, in fact, is a choice
of evils ; but while the greater evil is prospective
and remote, the lesser is ever present and exaspe-
rating.

To comprehend and balance the arguments of
the debate, the reader should bear in mind not only
the historical circumstances of the case, but the
leading principles at issue in the controversy.
After the solemn and deliberate condemnation of
Popery by the English people, first at the Refor-
mation, and next at the Revolution of 1688, the
Roman Catholics of the country were subjected
to oppression and persecution by a Go-
vernment which reflected the opinions of the
nation in suspecting their politics and abhor-
ring their creed. As time wore on, and as
Papists grew less formidable and Parliaments more
tolerant, various measures, first of relief, next of
emancipation, and eventually of support, were suc-
cessively carried, until at length the Maynooth en-
dowment for the education of the Papist priest-
hood was sanctioned by the Legislature. The op-
position which these proceedings encountered was
based on a combination of motives. A great reli-
gious party regarded the Romish faith as idola-
trous, anti-00istian and abominable ; a smaller
political party desired to defend the old Protestant
constitution of the country against this serious en-
croachment ; a more dispassionate class looked
with misgiving (to the practical operation of doc-
trines essentially irreconcileable with civil liberty
and progress, while throughout the country were
diffused certain indefinite traditions of jealousy and
dislike which had never ceased altogether to exist.
In the event, however, the principles of religious
freedom gained the day, and it was to complete
the measure of conciliation.that Maynooth College
was first scantily, and afterwards liberally, en-
dowed by the State. It is now alleged that this
endowment has failed in its purpose, and that it
ought to be revoked.

In perusing the two days' debate upon this ques-
tion the reader will discover the operation of all
the original motives of opposition enumerated
above ; nor can it be denied that experience has
given them considerable additionp,l warrant. Mr.
Spooner is evidently actuated in no small degree
by the antipathy of religious conviction ; but as
the arguments thus suggested are no longer re-
puted tenable, he appeals to the house on the more
popular ground of plain secular expediency, and
endeavours to prove that the doctrines taught at a
college endowed by the State are not only " an-

tagonistic to the Holy Word of God," but " inju-

rious to the State itself, and completely subversive
of the allegiance due to the Sovereign." This ac-

cusation is encountered on the part of Roman Ca-
tholic members by an averment that nothing is
taught at Maynooth but what the college was esta-
blished to teach, that the endowment implied no
favour on one side or obligation on the other,
and that it would be absurd to suppose Roman
Catholics had accepted the means of instruc-
tion on the condition of making this instruc-
tion inefficient or unproductive. It is argued,
in short, on one side, as if disappointment might
naturally be felt at seeing that a well-endowed.
Popish college had. given an impulse to Popery ;
whereas it is retorted with more reason, on the
other, that but for such a result the endowment
would have been no boon to Papists at all. .These
atitittptiinii will be found to comprise the sub-
stance of the speeches respectively delivered.
Both sides, in our opinion, enjoy their own
share of right. We believe entirely that the Popery
of Dr. M'Hale and Mr. Lucas is nothing in the
world but the true Popery of the Romish Church
and the infallible fruit of Popish teaching. We ac-
knowledge also that Popery is naturally encouraged
by a semillarx founded for encouraging it ; but
at the same time,' it cannot be denied that these
prospective deirelopments were carefully concealed
at the time. the endowment was proposed. The
simple truth is that Papists, whilc, struggling
doubtfully against the instinctive Opugnance of
Englishmen' to their tenets and rtctices' - made
large profeisionS of innocence and gc,0.1. intent, dis-
guised their views, reserved their `designs, and
received every instalment of relief Tllth such ex-
_ _

pressions of thankfulness as would lead -,st readily
to another. Then, when the first check "As given
to their ambitious proceedings, they bank d sud-
denly round, and availed themselves of tht-„wijage
ground already gained to exert all their resources'.
of hostility and annoyance. They verified to the
letter every prediction which had been hazarded by
the opponents of the measures for relief. After
gratefully accepting toleration and freedom for
their religion, they pushed its pretensions higher
and higher, till they are now demanding the reduc-
tion of the Established Church to their own level,
and are but one step, in fact, from the assertion of
supremacy. They have kept the Roman Catholic
portions of the empire in greater agitation than
before, have brought into conspicuous prominence
the unnational features of their creed, have re-
vived the most repulsive doctrines of " Popery "
in its worst acceptation, have openly converted
spiritual authority into secular influence, and have
clamorously declared that they will regulate all
their political duties by the interests of an ambi-
tious priesthood. Mr. Lucas and his friends
maintain that this is a very natural and proper
exemplification of their religion. We have no de-
sire to contradict them ; on the contrary, we are of
the same opinion ourselves. We very much doubt
whether in England, or indeed in any free Pro-
testant country, a true Papist can be a good sub-
ject ; but if all this had been avowed some years
ago the opportunities of Popery would never have
been what they are.
And why, then, should such legislation be per-
petuated ? Or why, having discovered our error,
should we not retrace our steps ? Simply because
the error was not in our acts but in our expecta-
tions, and because none of the evils now rampant
could be removed by the revocation proposed.
What we are now witnessing is the operation not
of educated Popery, but of Popery itself ; and, in_
Theef upnsaperuistpul agioustatanmos
or
aldeed, Popery is no antagonistic to education of all
d
results
sorts that even a Maynooth College is better than
t
nt
roe
a 0 collegenabl e
a t all.
audacity
not from the endowment of a seminary, but from
the removal of all control by the progress
ous liberty. Maynooth, indeed, has
of religi-
, has harms been
instituted long enough to affect the working priest-
hood of Ireland ; it is the freedom of
m thought and
speech now prevailing on all sub'
j ects which produces
the difference between 1830 and 1853. As to the
existence of any irreversible "
tween the Romish Church
and
Legislature-
,thcompact" be
how such an
we cannot understand e argument
could be maintained in the face of doc-
trines so plainly avouched to the contrary
on the questionofWe could
the Canada. reserves.
revoke the Ma ynooth endowment without bad faith,
but not, in our opinion, without good reason or
policy. None of the evils which we deplore are
traceable to the fact that .Popish priests are edu-
cated at home, and though the doctrines of the
school are detestable in English eyes, they are
nothing but what we consented to admit when we
sanctioned the establishment. The Popish relion
is certainly a fruitful source of political
difficulty,
o
but it is the religion of a considerable portionoworse
the empire and it can certainly irt be
At the
by the liberal education of
.its
t ministers.
the conclusion
same time, while we are driven
°ince inconsistent with
that Mr. Spooner's argumentsd aned capable only of
the spirit of religiousbfrey t
freedom, and
not merely
practical application
of Maynooth College, but of Popery altogether,
from ourselves that the inera-
we cannot conceal
dicable antipathies of the English nation, exaspe-
rated
to the utmost by the suicidal violence of
the Popish agitators, may some day bring about a
solution of this question in accordance rather with
outraged feeling than with patient and temperate
reflection.

hisrgerioN or BETHLEHEM HosPlTAL.—There is a
bill in the House of Lords, by which it is proposed that
Bethlehem Hospital shall in future be opened to the in-
spection of the Commissioners of Lunacy under h.
8 wad 8 Vict,3 op. 1001