The Sun.
London, England, 1820-04-27 00:00:00

LITERARY REVIEW..

. -
A-SERIES of LETTERS addressed to a FRIEND, upon
ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION. By BRITANNICiII. •

. 1 '

(Continued from the Vitt inst.)

As it is nndeistnmi that very soon in the en.

suing Parliamentary Session, it is the intention of
the PAPISTS of Ireland to renew their claims for a
participation in Legislative nower, it is the dory

ot all Friends to the Constitu►ion in Church and
State to be zealous in defence of it, and to guard
as much as possible against those who most con-

sitter it as necessary to their happiness hi the other
world, to extinguish.the Protestant Religion.—
The work before us illustrates the danger of far-
ther concessions to POPERY, by a refer'ence to the
evidence of important facts, and. by sound argil
We, therefore, feel it to be our duty to
resume our notice of a work so weighty in its ob-.
jerts, and supported by so much ability, and which
is brought forward at a critical period, as it would'
he lamen'able indeed, if, while the people at large.
are still alarmed by the rebellious efforts of Radi•
calism to overturn the Government, the Religion
of the Country should he menaced by the possible
restoration of Papal Bigotry and Despotism.
" 1 perceive you are also one of those who
give Ronnymeade the credit for eery atom of,
English Liberty. Fir he it from me, to slight
or undervalue the glories trophies which were
then .gained. They certainly laid-the fot,ndation
of what we now enjoy hot they did little more.
English 'Liberty, though it dawned at Bunny.
mestle and, was fought for at Cressy, Poictiers„
andiAgincourt, was not established• 'Ton a basis-
stifficiently'Strong to, admit of toleration to con-
flietingreligktis opinions ',mil 1688 lam not
surprizetl at any one who professes Whig Prin-
ciples,'iind 'who_»evertheless supports the Roman-
Catholic Clainis, wishing to draw a veil over %%hat
passe4l-in 1688, and thvilling with rapture nt►on

ments.

the field of Ruonymeade and the exploits of Cres-
sy, :ThiS affords him a 'relents Opportunity of at-
tritinting our Liberties tO the exertions of Roman.
Ciiiholics; and of fanning into an enthusiastic
.ffame the .roriatitic 'ideas which are necessatily•.
Icon'hected with those glorious Leeks. It ii,titte
:the struggles Afere...,.g.reat,. the results-glorions.—T
they however prove nothing as to our present
; they were indeed partly occasioned by
That.Overbearing",religions power, Which•it was
always the duty and. inteiest of Englishmen to re-
sist, but which they' 100 l no means of resisting
untir the ReforMatiou-.--and none .of effectually.
drink so, Until the Revolution ~11'ive look back
to the reigns preceding the Reforination, we shalt
'almost invariably find, that doriog the sway of a
valiant and politic Monarch, the State has been
diffracted With the cabals of the Court of Rome;
and eluting that • of a weak one, that the Papal
See has trampled upon the rights of hoth Prince
and People*. It' was the religious establish.
merit; as settled and protected at the Revolution,
which alone obviated these inconveniences, and
gave to'Eoglish subjects liberty of conscience its
conjunction With petsonal freedom.''
l'• You say however, that The Toleration, as
established at the Revolution, was I,teoulph-te,
and that it was the Commencement, not the corn,
pletion of a system.'—l am at a loss however, to
Isno'w upon what grounds you have been induced
to form this opinion. It has beets Said, that when
the Act of William' was, passed, a 61,1boTic exile
King was liVing, who
.possessed the affections tif
ti great portion 'of his late Subjects, among.whom
were men of the first talents and property, and
that even many of the Bette!' of Bishops were !lieu
Jacohites ; but what' has this to do,with the sub-
jeci all that Were called Jacobites layout.
able to the'Roman Call's:Ate Religion ? Were not ,
.many of th'i'n frOm principle, and who
conceived themselves so bound, by having sworn
:allegiance to Jame's, that they coul I .tot
scientiously take the Oath to William ? What. was
.Archbishop Sancroft, and What were Bishops
Kenn., Lake, White, and Turner ?f--Were they
Roman Catholics No Bis mar tyrzali !—chev
were,theArery men who were imprisoned for re-
sisting the dispensing- power claimed by King
James for releasing the Catholics front the opera-
lion of the Penal Lays and the Test, bin who
,soffered themselves to be deprived of their sees
, rather than take the bath •William. These
were men who stiffen d for eisescietice sake ; suit
is it to be now contended, that they were adro..
ewes :or the Repeal of the Test Laws. who suf.
fere4 imprisonment for opposing that Repeal, tend
that Statutes, which Judge Blackstone calls, r the
Bulwarks of the. Constitution,': are ro be now
abrogated,becanst J icobites have ceased to exist,
and because some political doctrines have been
exploded ?"

(To be Continued:)

*The reigns of John and Henry 11. are rentarliable in-
stanc,s of this. •

-ft, Yid. p. 10. After the accession of‘Witliam and Mary,
Aichhishop .Sancroft witit Bishops Torlietro and some
others retired front PatliAment, from a cmiscientions belief
of-therabiolnte power and divine hereditary indefeasible right
efSOveleigns. 'These Prelates had taketi.evety possible• step
:toth Itetdre and after their memorable to inditee King
.iaines React at, became an:Esiglish.SierCign (iodine- thus •
efforts useless, they t Lea joined the association in favour e f
vie Prince of Orange ; but nevertheless when satte,s aew
C • ,tvned the ell'orts of t hat association, I hey r,fti- t
regoisi'ie •• ......
(as to their prefertnent,) on account of their Principles!

• llhalb. tioibta. Jul. 4. v.