The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-25 00:00:00

THE ADJOURNED DEBATE.

A large number of petitions having been presented
for and against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill,
Mr. W. FAGAN, who, as a professor of the Roman
Catholic religion, which had been so strenuously assailed
by different speakers, claimed to be heard with the same
attention as those who had been its assailants. In re-
ference to the speech of the lion. Member for West
Surrey, he rejoiced that he was not successful in catch-
ing the Speaker's eye after that speech; and approach-
ing the question now in a different spirit, he regretted
that any Member of that House, not alone should use
such language, but that he should suffer such ideas to
enter into his mind. It was hard that any Hon. Mem-
ber could be suffered to address such language to the
religion of Members of that House. It was, however,
only a sample of what took place all through the land.
The legislation of the Noble Lord was productive only
of rancour and bitterness of feeling in England and Ire-
land. He congratulated his countrymen and his con-
stituents upon not placing such men as the Hon. Mem-
ber in the Government. It was not his intention to
repeat the indecent language made use of by the
Honourable Member with respect to those ladies, many
of them belonging to the first families of the country;
and in reference to the convent of which more particular
mention had been made by the Honourable Member
for Dublin, be (Mr. Fagan) had a personal interest
in it, as his daughter was under its roof; and he could
state from competent authority—and be did state it
to Mr. Berkeley on the evening the petition was pre-
sented—that Miss Talbot was not there as a " postu-
lant." There were but two modes of entering into a
convent—that of a boarder or school girl, and that of a
postulant. Miss Talbot having been previously edu-
cated in a convent could not be received as a boarder,
nor did she wish to be placed under the same restric-
tions, and when her relations were leaving the country,
for her stepfather was no relative, she applied to be re-
ceived as a postulant. The nunnery did not desire to
receive her as a postulant because of her large fortuue,
but tbey were undesirous to deny her a temporary resi-
dence. The fact was, therefore, that she was received
as a postulant for the occasion, and at this moment the
Rev. Dr. Doyle, her guardian, was actively engaged in
providing her with a refuge. Leaving that part of the
subject, he (Mr. Fagan) would refer to the general
question under discusion. He agreed with the Hon.
Member for Oldham that the present aggression arose
altogether from an undisguised hatred of Popery, and he
regretted to perceive that many Lion. Members of the
House took part in that passion. Hon. Members had
supported the Bill, because by introducing the canon law
it gave the Pope a power of interfering in the temporal
as well as the spiritual concerns of the people of Eng-
land, but the contrary was the case, and after the Ca-
tholics in the House had denied it it was too hardca.
to
have it thrust upon them by lawyers. The Roman
Ca-
tholics of this country hold with the declarationoftbse
French bishops, or Gallivan u
ean Church, drawn Pby
Boa
suet in 1682, that the Pope had no power•ssiu eGxceeeptlteomveenr
athse.
spiritual concerns of the country. o •
serted that the canon law would give the Pope power
but
over the temporal affairs of the people
_. of England,or-General,
no one had ventured to prove it. The Sol"
it was true, argued that the Roman
Catholic priests had
a civil status, and that as the bishotphebraedfo
are')
sus-
pension over the priests, he
had
al bad argued that the
oawetrereofpera
power; and the Attorney-Gene!
ugh often claimed
laity, though livings was contested by the
against any legislation found, d
oase would be surprised to
power of the Roman Catholic bishops to appoint to
powers of suspending
by them. He protested
on ignorance of facts. The
hundredfold greater than under
hear that under vicars-apostolic
clergymen at will were a hure
He would, in proof, refer to
the authority of bishops. rDonnell, of Birmingham—a
the case of the Rev. Mr.
an, who, without any cause as-
signed,much-respected clergyns
d and "lent somewhere else.
polio the
Another
was remove
case was that of the Rse. Mr. Hearne, who was removed
Roman Catholics
there, that
from Manchester without
were cause assigned ; and such
were the feelings of
for some time to receive spiritual aid from
they refused
his successor. Tbese things could not have taken
place under br.
shoP
He contended that the objections
the establishment of a hierarchy and the canon
law were unto
tenable. The object of a normal system of
e thes rapid increase of Roman Catholics
ecclesiastical
1e siastical discipline was owing to what he had stated
—it was owing to
in England. Their numbers now reached nearly a mil-
lion, and it was necessary to have spiritual teachers in
sufficient number sufficient protection, which
and with •
B:as not given under the vicar-apostolic system,
but which was given by the episcopal system. It was
this reason that had induced the Roman Catholic clergy
to petition the Pope for a hierarchy. He agreed with
the Bishop of Beverley, and thought he was right in
wing, that had matters been left as they were the
clergy' would be in a worse position. But Cardinal
Wiseman, the Archbishop of Westminster, was now
freed from the power of the Pope; before this time be
was the slave of the Pope.—(Bear.) With respect to
synodal action, Cardinal Wiseman had not yet been able
to call the Roman Catholic clergymen together to esta-
blish schools and other institutions, because be was
anxious to avoid giving offence to the people of Eng-
land; but he had no doubt the time would soon arrive
when a canon law suited to this country would bo in-
troduced and established. With respect to the
canon law, he asserted, with the exception of those
canons relating to faith and doctrine, which
were founded on revealed truth, that no layman or priest
was bound by any canon laws which were opposed to
the municipal laws of the country.—(Hear.) All they
had heard about the abominable canons of the olden
time had nothing whatever to do with the Roman Ca-
tholic religion of the present day. In old times the
Popes had assumed temporal authority and powers
which they were not justified in assuming—but those
times had passed, never to return, and the present times
had totally changed. With reference to the alleged un-
changeable character of the Roman Catholic system, he
said that applied to the faith only, but not to the disci-
pline of the Church—that was to be suited to times, cir.
eumstauces, and countries, and, if necessary, to be al-