The Sun.
London, England, 1850-11-20 00:00:00

2 1.1. s of the Pope which are absolutely necessary for the
appointment of bishops and paStors belonging to the Ro-
man Catholic Church. It would be quite impossible to
prevent the introduction of such bu 114..
" Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst They tolerated the
Catholic prelates, and they knew that these prelates
could not carry on their Church establishments or con-
duct its discipline without holding communication with
the Pope of Rome. No Roman Catholic bishop could be
created without the authority of a bull from the Pope of
Rome, and many of the observances of their Church re-
quired the same sanction. The moment, therefore, that
they sanctioned the observance of the Roman Catholic
religion hi this country, they by implication allowed the
communication (with the Pope) prohibited by this sta-
tute, and for which it imposed the penalties of high
treason. If the law allowed the doctrines and discipline
of the Roman Catholic Church, it should be per-
mitted to be carried on perfectly and properly; and
that couhi not be without such communication. On
these grounds he proposed to repeal the Act't (13t h
Eliz.). _ _

"These quotations prove that in both Houses of Par-
liament the principle has been clearly laid down, that if
Catholics are to have bishops at all, the Pope, and the
Pope alone, can make them for them. Then it enters
as completely into the principles of religious liberty that
the Pope, should name the hierarchy, as that Catholics
should have the right to possess one—a right as neces-
sary for them as for the Wesleyans that of having con-
ferences with superintendents.
" But it may be said, what induced the Pope to ap-
point this hierarchy now, and in so sudden a manner ?
" For an` answer to this question, I must refer you to
my introduction, in which you will find, I trust, a satis-
factory one.- You will sea that the Pope has finally
granted now to his Catholic children in England, what
they had petitioned for, and obtained three years ago ;
and that if half the attention had been paid to our affairs
then, which they receive now, the public would have
known all about it. I will only repeat what I have there
observed ; that, in what has been done, the Pope has
entirely acted, not only in accordance with the wishes,
but at the earnest petitions of his vicars-apostolic, and has
seconded a warm desire of the great body of Catholics in
England.
" Let me then sum up briefly what I have proved
thus far'.

" 1. Citholies are not bound to obey, or to consider as
their bishops, those appointed by the Crown, under the
royal ecclesiastical supremacy, which legally they are not
bound to hold.

" 2. Catholics belong to a religion fully tolerated, and
enjoying perfeet liberty of conscience, which is episcopal,
and reqUires bishops for its government.
" 3. There is no law that forbids them to have such
bishops, -according to their proper and ordinary form.
" 4. rhat form is, with ordinary jurisdiction, local
sees, and•titles derived from them; that is a hierarchy.
" 5. They are fully justified in employing the only*
means in _their power to obtain this form of ecclesiastical
government—that is, by applying to the Holy See.
" 6. And they have not acted contrary to any law, by
accepting the gracious concession of what they asked.
" But it will be said that though we, the Catholics,
may have kept within the bounds of law, the act of the
Pope is derogatory from, and contrary to, the royal pre-
rogative. • Let us see.

" SECT. IV.-ISOES THE APPOINTMENT OF A CATHOLIC
HIERARCHY TRENCH ON THE PREROGATIVE OF THE

CROWN?

" This ;is indeed a delicate question; and yet it must
be met. Every address and every reply of bishops
and clergy assumes that the royal prerogative has been
assailed..,

" But this is nothing compared with the address to
her Majesty, signed by some hundred members of the
bar, to the- effect that, by this measure, a foreign poten-
tate has interfered with her Majesty's undoubted prero-
gative, and has assumed the right of nominating arch-
bishops and bishops in these realms, and of conferring
on them territorial rank and jurisdiction.'
" One naturally supposes that those who signed this
memoritii, being professionally learned in the law, have
studied the question—have come to a delibtqate conclu-
sion as to the truth of their assertion. On ordinary oc•
casions one would bow to so overwhelming an authority:
on the present, I think we shall not be wrong in de-
murring to its award.

" There is one point w'hich I would beg respectfully
to suggest to the consideration of persons better versed
in law than I am.

" In this document, and in many other similar onc3,
including the Premier's letter, the Pope's acts are
spoken of as real, and taking effect. The Pope has ' as-
sumed a right,' he ' has parcelled out the land;' he ' has
named archbishops and bishops.' If, according to the
oath taken by the non-Catholics, the Pope not only
ought not to have, but really has' not power or juris-
diction, ' spiritual or ecclesiastical' in these realms; it
follows, that, according to them, the Pope's ecclesias-
tical acts with regard to England are mere nullities, and
are reputed to have no existence. It is as though the
Pope had not spoken, and had not issued any document.
To act otherwise is to recognise an efficient act of
power on his part.
" I am confirmed in this view by Lord John Russeli's
explanation of the Protestant oath. The oaths now
taken are not altered. We shall continue to take the
oath, that " the Pope has not," &c.; though at the same
time there is no doubt, in point of fact, that he exercises
a spiritual authority in these realms. I have always in-
terpreted the oath to be, that, in the opinion of the per-
son taking it, the Popo has not any jurisdiction which
can be enforced by law, or ought not to have.'t Accord-
ing to this test, the Pope (permissively, tat least) does
exercise a spiritual jurisdiction in England, and is
within the limits of that toleration, so lung as he (loos
not exercise a jurisdiction which can be enforced by law,
or purporting or claiming to be a jurisdiction enfurcible
by law. Now, no one for a moment imagines that the
Pope, or the Catholics of England, or their bishops
dream that the appointment of the hirearchy can be en-
forced by law.' They believe it to be an act altogether
ignored by law; an act of spiritual jurisdiction, only to
be enforced upon the consciences of those who acknow-
ledge the Papal supremacy, by their conviction and their
faith.

" Has this assumption of titles been within the terms
of the law? Is there any law forbidding the assumption
of the title of bishop? A certain Dr. Dillon assumed it,
and ordained what he called Presbyters, and no one
thought of prosecuting him. The Moravians have bishops
all over England; and so have the Irvingites, or Apos-
tolicals; yet no one taxes them with illegality. Then
our taking the title of bishops merely constitutes no
illegality. Is there any law that forbids our taking the
title from any place not being a see of an Anglican
bishop? No one can say that there is.
" Thcn I ask those more learned in the law than my-
Self, can an act of a subject of her Most Gracious Ma-
jesty, which by law he is perfectly competent to do, be
an infringement of her royal prerogative? If not, then
I trust that we may conclude, that by this new creation
of Catholic bishops that prerogative has not been
violated.

"No one doubts that the bishops so appointed are
'Raman Catholic bishops, to rule over Roman Catholic
flocks. Does the Crown claim the right, under its pre-
rogative, of naming such bishops?
"It will be said that no limitation of jurisd:ction is
made in the Papal document, no restriction of its exer-
cise to Catholics; and hone.) Lord John Russell and
others conclude, that there in this brief, a pretension
to supremacy over the realm of England, and a claim
to sole and undivided sway.' Every official document
has its proper forms; and had those who blame the
tenor of this, taken any pains to examine those of Papal
documents, they would have found nothing new or unu-
sual in this. Whether the Pope appoints a person
Vicar-Apostolic or Bishop in ordinary, iu either case
he assigns him a territorial ecclesiastical jurisdiction,
and gives him no personal limitation?. This is the prac-
tice of every church which believes iu its own truth,
and in its duty of conversion. What has been done in
this brief, has been done in every ono ever issued,
whether to create a hierarchy or to appoint a bishop.

" SEC. ♦.-HAS TILE MODE OF ESTABLISHING THE BIER-

ARCHY BEEN ' INSOLENT AND INSIDIOUS ?'

" The words in this title are extracted from the too
memorable letter of the First Lord of the Treasury. I
am willing to cJosider that production as a private set,
and not ts any manifesto of the intentions of her Ma-
jesty's Government. Unforrunately, it is difficult to ab-
stract one's mind irom the high and responsible situation
of the writer, or conshkr him as unpledged by anything
that he puts forth. There Lre parts of the letter on
whiela v..euld here refrain from commenting, because
they might lead me aside, in sorrow, if not ia auger, from
the drier path of my present duty. I will leave it to
others, therefore, to dwell, upon many portions of that
letter, upon the closing paragraph in particular, which
pronounces a sentence, asi awfully unjust as it was un-
called for, on the religion of many millions of her Ma-
jesty's subjects, nearly all Ireland, and some of our most
flourishing colonies. The charge, uttered in the ear of
that island, in which all guarantees fur genuine and pure
Catholic education will of necessity be considered, in
future, as guarantees for confining the intellect and
enslaving; the soul,' all securities for the Catholio reli-
gion as security for tho mummeries of super-
stition,' in the mind of their giver—guarantees and
securities which can hardly be believed to be heartily
offered—the charge thus made, in a voice that has been
applauded by the Protestantism of England, produces in
the Catholic heart a feeling too sickly and too deadening
for indignation; a dismal despair, at finding that, where
we have honoured, and supported, and followed for
years, We may be spurned and cast off, the first moment
that popularity demands us as its price, or bigotry as its
♦ictim.

" rut to proceed; so little was I, on my part, aware
that such feeling as that letter disclosed existed in the
head of our. Government, ou the subject of the hierarchy,
that havin-, occasion to write to his Lordship on some
I the liberty of continuing my letter as
" ` Vienna, Nov. 3, 1830.
st g My Lord,
,k

" I cannot but tno:it deeply regr.,t the erroneous,papers have and
even distorted Niew which the English
pre-
tented of w hat the Holy See has done in regard to the
spiritual government of the Catholics of England. But
I take the libe:ty of slating that the measure now pro-
rnulgatvd was not only prepared, but printed, three years
ar.o, and a. copy if it was shown to Lord Minto by the
Pope, on occasion of an audience given to his Lordship
by his Ilolinesi. I have no right to intrude upon your
Lordship further in this matter beyond offering to give
any explanations that your Lordship may desire, in full
e elficlen,:e thnt it will be iu my power to remove parti-
cularly the offensive inkrprutatit,n put upon the late act
of the Holy See, that it was suggested by political views,
or by any hostile feelings.
" And with regard to myself, I beg to add, that lam
invested with a purely ecclesiastical dignity—that I have
no secular or temporal delegation whatever—that my

• Hansard, vol. lxxxviii., p. 362.
f Hansard, vol. lxxxv., p. 1,261.
Hansard, vol. lxxxviii. p. 363.