The Sun.
London, England, 1851-01-21 00:00:00

THE BISHOP OF DURHAM.

TO THE VENERABLE THE ARCHDEACON OF LINDH

FARNE.

Dear Mr. Archdeacon,—ln acknowledging the receipt
of an address from yourself and the clergy of your arch-
deaconry, I have the pleasing task of renewing the as-
surance of my entire concurrence in the feeling, almost
universally expressed, of attachment to the real princi-
ples of our happy Reformation, and of loyalty to our
Protestant Sovereign.
In my replies to various other addresses I have endea-
voured to avoid repetition of the same topics; and my
present aim is to supply omissions and to remove ob-
jections.

It has been asserted, then, that the resistance to Papal
aggression is a selfish and bigoted movement on the part
of the clergy. Now, I believe that the question at issue
partakes more of a civil than a religious nature. That
the step taken by Rome is intended as a preliminary to
the undoing of all that our ancestors achieved at the
Reformation, and is to pave the way for imposing, both
upon the clergy and laity of this country, the yoke of
a corrupt and tyrannical religion, I firmly believe; but
the form in which it has presented itself is that of in-
vasion upon the rights of the Crown and the indepen-
dence of our national instutions.

Our clergy would, no doubt, be scandalized and an-
noyed by a perpetual collision of bishop with bishop
and priest with priest, such as the restless and domineer-
ing spirit of Popery would not fad to seize every oppor-
tunity of producing. Otherwise the clergy are not more
interested than the laity in protesting against this usur-
pation; nor am I aware ►hat they have exerted them-
selves in any degree more, even if so much, as their lay
brethren, iu making a firm but temperate remonstrance
against it. Tee whole nation felt the insult at once;
they have risen as one man to express their indignation
upon the plain and hitvlligible ground occupied by our
forefathers at the Reformation. This sense of wrong in-
upon the national dignity disposes at once of the
charge of intolerance or fanaticism.
In any censure which it may have been my duty to
pass upon Roman Catholics, I hope that my censure has
been seen to direct itself against the system, not against
individuals. Moreover, I have always felt that a marked
distinction is to be made between English Roman Catho-
lics and others of that persuasion. The English Roman
Catholics have ever shown themselves loyal and tran-
quil subjects, kind and liberal neighbours; and if any
suspicion has been awakened at any time it should
bo dispelled by the noble and manly part taken
by the Duke of Norfolk and Lords Beaumont and
Camoys. These noblemen throw no doubt upon the
peculiar doctrine of their church, nor do they dispute
the really spiritual claims of its head, but they cannot
become parties to this improper interference with the
privileges of their own Sovereign without forfeiting
that allegiance which they owe in common with all their
fellow-subjects; they, therefore, stand in a far more
honourable position as Christians than their ultramon-
tane brethren and all such as act upon ultramontane
principles.
It has often appeared to me surprising that any per-
son of ordinary understanding, and to whom the scrip-
tures are open, should be induced to wander in the dark-
ness of Itomanism when he might enjoy the pure light of
our Reformation. Nevertheless, when I have considered
the influence exerted upon the human mind by early
habits and associations, and the firm hold which re-
ligious opinions maintain upon more advanced periods of
lite, the surprise has been greatly abated in respect of
such as have imbibed,the doctrines of the Romish Church
from their birth. But I cannot refrain from expressing
the greatest wonder that any who have been nurtured
in the brightness and freedom of Protestantism should
condescend to accept the restrictions put upon the will
and understanding and conscience, and accommedato
themselves to the palpable errors, the gross absurdities,
and the mischievous practices of Rome.
That I may not be supposed to speak without some
inquiry or reflection, or to indulge in a spirit approach-
ing to intolerance, I will shortly specify some of the
points which I have ever considered moat objectionable;
and I would call the attention of our own clergy to them
when they find it their duty to instruct the people upon
the discriminating doctrines and relative merits of
Popery and Protestantism.
1. I first mention the claim of the Pope to universal
empire over the church of Christ. That such a claim is
not supported in the smallest degree by the text usually
brought forward (Matthew xvi. 18, 19), I have endea-
voured to prove in the last two sermons of a volume pub-
lished iu 1822.

Other doctrines, practices, and claims, equally desti-
tute of authority from Holy Writ, are-
2. Transubstantiation, and the refusal of the cup in
holy communion to the laity.
3. Divine honours paid to the Virgin Mary, the in-
vocation of saints, and the worship of images.
4. The doctrines of purgatory, and the power of a
priest to procure relief from its penalties.
5. The grant of indulgences.
6. Restraint upon the use of the 1101 y Scriptures,
amounting to prohibition.
7. The unnatural extent in which celibacy is enforced.
8. The pretence that miracles are even now performed
in the Church of Rome. It may well be doubted if there be
any authentic record of any miracles since the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem; unless the foiling of Julian's purpose
to rebuild it be an exception.

9. The offering up of public prayers in a foreign
tongue, little understood, with a disposition to discourage
all education, except on a most narrow and exclusive
principle.
10. To this catalogue of speculative error and actual
mischief must be added the most dangerous of all. The
confessional has always appeared to me a system preg-
nant with evil—moral and civil, social and domestic,
and too surely calculated to enslave and corrupt, more
especially the young and female mind. 5 will be
As lam not aware that any more appealred more
made to me upon this occasion I have
fully upon the topics which it suggests i:
where, may
,teehnetehope that
the observations I have made, here an. dbut
I shall now
be of use to our younger brethren; but
isapprehension,
conclude with adverting to one othear,
if
of our aggressors.
misapprehension there be, on thsseep
d alarm and raised an
Some of them have P
cilyrintention to have recourse
outcry, as if there were
to vindictive measures and re-enact the penal laws. It
does sound somewhat straugely,
.th.at a Roman Catholic
ie igious liberty and utter
should plead e &meetly tor
piteous complaiaw against persecution and against any
violation of the rights ofcon,scienceE
(dais tulerit Graceh os cc sedition querentes?"
1 believe and :incerely hope they have nothing to fear in
this respect. I
am persuaded that no wish exists gene-
rally for any measure but what self-defence requires.
An outrageous attack has been made upon us, but 1 tru t
adequate menus m•sly he devised for our own security
without disturbing the free exercise of religion by others
or in fringing Olen* rights of conscience. It surely can-
not be necessary to the maintenance of these great ends
that a foreign potentate should be permitted to insult a
great nation, trample ueon the rights of the Sovereign as
secured by law, and disturb the peace and good order of
the Established Church.
In order to prevent such evils it may be necessary to
provide some restrictions upon the introduction and cir-
culation of Pupal bulls in this island, and to prohibit the
assumption of episcopal titles conferred by Rome and de-
riving the name from any place in this country. It may
also be desirable to forbid the existence of monastic in-
stitutips, strictly so called; nor can the residence efiwY