The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-19 00:00:00

THE

this Papal aggression now, they would have to withstand
it hereafter, when it would have greater power.
They had heard appeals made upon the score of conscience,
with reference to this mat' er. He would ask them whether
the introduction of the word conscience was to be a spell for
which they were to be bound. That might be pleaded in a
very extraordinary sense. It was put forward in the case of
Archbishop Franzoni, in Sardinia, who claimed exemption
for ecclesiastics from the jurisdiction of the civil courts, and
that they should be all subject to the ecclesiastical courts
alone. The Government of that country repudiated this as-
sumption, and maintained it. Yet the resistance presented
in that case to the Government was called a matter of con-
science. In this case, the assumption of territorial titles was
called a matter of conscience. He would ask what had
territorial possessions to do with the domain of the
spirit? The Honourable and Learned Member for Ply-
mouth said that for the exercise of the liberty of conscience,.
they required that they should use these titles, and ob-
served that they were legislating against the natural
use of language. They had on other occasions, how-
ever, legislated against the natural use of language.
They did so after the expulsion of James IL, when they pro-
hibited the assumption of the title of James 111. in his son.
( Hear, hear.) The legislated against the natural use of
language when they found it necessary to repress a moral
wrong committed against any individual or any portion of
the body politic. They called this Bill a persecution, and
also argued that it would be inoperative. He would ask
how could that be called a persecution which confined itself
to forbid a foreign potentate from c mferrin„m territorial titles
within these kingdoms. This was a new plea. It was not
argued that territorial titles were necessary in 1829, when
the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act was passed, which
was received by the Roman Catholic clergy, although it forbid
the use of territorial titles which they used before. It struck
him forcibly that if there was any persecution in the case, it
wss on the part of the Pope against the Roman Catholic laity,
who were forced to adopt ultra-montane opi ions. It was said
it would be inoperative. The Bill, no doubt, disappointed
many. It was weakened in the withdrawal of two clauses,
but the residue was in one respect exceedingly valuable as
a Parliamentary protest against this aggression— (Hear)—by
which it would be proclaimed that it was denounced by the
Queen, by her nobles, and by her people. He thought the
case required some authoritative declaration of this sort.
The Court of R me insidious and worldly wise, used all its
appliances to familiarise the people of this country to a pro-
minent church. They constantly saw advertisements in the
papers of services to be performed in Roman Catholic
churches.—(An ironical " Hear, hear.") He did not wish
to prevent that; he quoted the fact to them, the design on
foot, to familiarise the people with the Church of Rome, and
in order also to put the people on their guard against these
efforts. The same priests, walking through the streets in
their peculiar costume, and soon they would have before
their view the pomp of a gorgeous hierarchy.---( Hear, hear.)
His object was, not to prevent that, but he thought they
were bound in duty to make a declaration that these were
the works, and for the behoof of a power they repudiated
and utterly abhorred.—(Hear, hear.) They should look to
the real peril of the case. They were mistaken if they be-
lieved that Rome was changed, or harmless, or incapable.
Milton had foreshown what was her policy When he said,—
" Then shall they seek to avail themselves of names,
Places, and titles, and with these to join
Secular po er, though feigning still to act
By spiritual . . .
And from that pretence,
Spiritual laws, by, carnal power, shall force
On every conscience."
Rome was not changed.— (Hear, hear.) Those who spoke
of her with contempt were the most likely to become her
victims. " The history of the world," says Ranke, " does
not present a time in which the clergy were more powerful
than at the end of the 16th century. They sat in King's
counpils, and discussed political matters before all the people
from the pulpit; they governed schools, learning,
and the whole domain of letters; the confessional
afforded them opportunity of prying into the se-
cret conflicts of the soul, and of deciding in all
the difficulty and doubtful circumstances of private life."
In France the power she had lost was restored in 1815.
In 1830 she suffered something, but afterwards regained
her power, and in Austria ruled with undiminished power.
The effect in France was perceptible, for the cha-ter
was there revoked as regarded Protestants, and in
fact they were placed in as hard a condition as they were
under Louis the Fourteenth by the revocation of the edict of
Nantes. The condition of the Protestants was worse new in
France than it was under Napoleon or any of the preceding
monarchs of France; in fact, worse than in any former
period, excepting the Dragonades. It could not be required
of them to support such a power as that, or to give facilities
to promote its ends. It was an ecclesiastical power spread
over the whole world, under a perfect system of discipline,
with one heart. The Wesleyan Methodists, Church of Scot-
land, and the Free Church of Scotland, the Free Episcopa-
lian Church of England, need not be denied synodical action
because they were not subject to a foreign power. They
were British in all respects, but because this was projected
by-the Pope of Rome, that was the reason why they abhorred
it, and would never submit to the synodical action
of bishops under the influence of a foreign power, who
would exercise their spiritual influence for political
purposes. It was on these grounds that they offered
it an uncompromising and indignant resistance. Though
he respected the religious opini ns of the ,Noble Earl
(Earl of Arundel and Surrey), yet he should say that
too mach power was assumed by the Pope of Rome, and
that such an extraordinary exercise of power should be
checked. He did not want that any coercive law should be
introduced, but he required that the Protestant Church
should be preserved against the insidious attacks of the
Court of Rome.—( Hear, hear.) When he looked to other
countries which would not allow any innovation on the
rights of their fellow-citizens, he felt at a loss to know why
any trueborn Englishman should submit to the insult and
indignity lately offered to this country by the Papal autho-
rity through its emissaries.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT did not see any danger in the
proceedings of the Roman C:tholic hierarchy in this coun-
try. In his opinion, if it was considered necessary by the
Government to strike out the second and third clauses from
the measure, it was as necessary to strike out the first, for if
those two clauses placed such obstacles as they were said to
do in the way of Roman Catholics holding that faith which
they had a right to hold, the first clause placed as much
restriction upon them as the other two, and therefore it
ought to be struck out also.—(Hear.) What would be the
effect of the first clause? They professed to be great ad-
vocates and admirers of civil and religious liberty, but
the first clause rendered invalid any document signed by a
bishop, and no legal effect could be given to it. Now, that
was a most unjust attack, and would lead to the worst
consequences. For instance, as regarded the ordination of
priests, the bishop who conducted the ordination had to sign
the certificate of ordination of er the name of his see, and
eonseqsently to assume those titles which the clause prohi-
bited. Now, should the clause pass, that would be an
illegal and invalid certificate. The priest whose ordination
it was intended to certify would be considered in law to be
no priest. The marriages celebrated by that priest would
be invaqd, and the children, the issue of such marriages,
would be illegitimate children.—(Hear, hear.) But sup•
posing_that his Hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey
(Mr. H. Drummond) succeeded in restoring those second and
third clauses of the Bill in Committee, which he was bound
to say that Hon. Gentleman had every reason to expect he
would be enabled to do, what would be the consequence
then? Why, the consequence must inevitably be, that Go-
vernment would be obliged to vote against the third reading
of their own .taill.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed that to him
it would be most painful to see things come to such a pass
as that. For some years past signs of peace and harmony
had, to a great extent, prevailed between the Catholics
and Protestants.—(Cheers from the Government benches.)
In regard to what had been said about toleration, he must
say that the sentiments he had heard expressed in reference
to it, did not coincide with his views. One Hon. Member
had said that toleration was limited, that it mus be kept
within bounds, so as that the persons tolerated did not injure
you; and, in that case, the onus probandi lay with that
Hon. Member to prove in what manner the privileges had
been violated by the interference of the Pope. He also heard
the Hon. Baronet, the Member for the University of Oxford,
utter a sentence in favour of toleration—(Laughter)—but his
opinion of the matter was, that the person tolerated must be
of the same opinion as the Hon. Baronet was himself.—'
(Hear, hear, aid laughter.) Now, neither of those con-
structions Le would put on the term toleration. His impres-
sion was, that in this country whether a man held religious
truth or error as the ground of his belief, being an English-
man, he had a right to hold that truth or error, because he
believed such to be'the truth.—(Hear.) No doubt the argu-
ment adduced by those who supported the measure, were
all very good as directed against the Roman Catholic reli-
gion. But he denied the correctness of their mode
of reasoning. Were they prepared to say, that while they
of the Established
thatey would not
were members
tolerate that religion, but hedge round Church with
enactments, as a means of preventing its operation? He
was a sincere member of the Established 'Church himself;
thought
tscuchlh
rseehn,abc yrenderingft
rbautthhere
wcoenakfeesnsetdhat
than hasttr
obnoxious in the eyes of the world. H notion oftole_ a-
ebneg
tion was this - they tolerated all religions, they admitted to
seats in that House Members of all religious denominations
to every
Church, they gave the fullest liberty and ,
who were Christians, and while they had
licensean Established
they ought to
if they thought the voluntary system wrong,_
form of religious faith under the voluntary system. Iruee
vote in favour of the measure; but so far as he was con-
cerned, he did not think it wrong, and his reason for not
doing so was, that he knew the Church of England was
not able to cover the ground. However, that was
the state in which they were placed in this country,
having an Established Church tolerating all religions,
and giving the greatest liberty and license to all.
Because he was a member of the Established Church
was he going to ask a man whether he belonged to this
or that Church, or what were his opinions is regard
to matters of faith and doctrine, and all such, before
be would admit him to the same privileges as a free citizen,
which the members of that Church enjoyed. If they gave
toleration in its proper sense, it was ridiculous to put such
queries; and giving, as they did, that toleration, what right
had they to prevent any of those denominations tolerated to
take all proper means for carrying out their system of religi-
ous belief. And that led him to the question of the aggres-
sion by the Pope, so muchstalked about. So far as that ques-
tion was concerned, it was notorious to all that for a long
period the Pope of. Rome had this country marked out and
divided into districts and dioceses, over which he had placed
vicars apostolic. And he wanted to know in what respect the
changes of late made in the establishment of a hierarchy in
place of that, could affect either their status or their privi-
g; and, in respect to that,
leges, civil or religious? They might talk to him of lan-
guagme,igbuhtt thetaattewatshaantothseenr
Qtdhiinng
words and high he
pre-
tensions on the part of ecclesiastics; who had got a little
power; conferred upon them. was no new thing, and ought
not to astonish them, while, at the same time, he admitted
that the language of the Pope's ball and the manifesto of
the Cardinal was of the most offensive description,— (Hear,
hear.) It was said that one great evil attendant upon the
aggression would be that it would be the means of intro-
ducing the canon law into this country. But the canon law
had existed, more or less, ever since the Reformation.—
(Hear, hear.) It existed under the system of vicars aposto-
lic, or at all events such portions of it as the Pope chose to
enforce, while, at the same time, as he was told, those vicars
apostolic were most offensive to the great majority of the Ro-
man Catholic la ty. And then, again, in Ireland, they had
the whole canon law; but there it did not clash with the
civil law, as it was pretended it would do here, and if the
people of Ireland were enlightened enough to resist the as-
' sumption of that law, who could doubt for a moment but that
the Roman Catholics of England would do the same? In
the next place, as to the synodical action, which the Attor-
ney-General had told them this measure was to prevent, so
far as the Roman Catholics were concerned, he would ask,
I was it seriously intended to prevent that ? It was allowed
in every Church in this country except the Esta-
blished Church, and it was not allowed in it be-
cause that Church being established did not require
it. Perhaps it differed in torm in different denominations,
but in them all it existed in some shape or other,
and why deny it to the Roman Catholics? They talked
of the Synod of Thurles, and they blame the bishops then
assembled for interfering with civil and temporal me ters.
Now, he was an assenting party to the establishment of those
colleges which called forth the strongest expression of their
I opinion and disapproval; and he assented to these establish-