The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-01-25

relnquished the right to exercise such pow
err No doubt, sensible men, in Office or out, in
orr country, who are connected with the Cath
Ollie church, are even honest in their personal
opinion, that the Pope ought not, and perhaps
they believe he does not aim to exert any civil
authority over the Government. Still, that does
not meet the point at Issue. The question is,
what is the genius and the history of the church
itself on the subject? Does it claim pohti-
cal as well as ecclesiastical right of ascenden-
CIV? / take it that irresponsible and ever hon.
est individual testimony of its own, is not to be
taken by Protestants on this point Nay, if we
are to judge from its genius as developed, in
all its history, how could we depend upon an
assertion even of general council, or the Pope
himself, since a fundamental principle of the
church is, that it is right to lie to heretics and
no faith is to be kept with Protestants What
ever may be the professions of irresponsible
and individual members of the great Catholic
corporation, as | think it is aptly STYLED by
DIR. Il. Beecher in his late useful work on Po-
perry; whatever, in their isolated capacity, may
be their really honest convictions what are they,
by their position, while adhering to the church
of Rome, but advocates and sustainers of the
dannable principle, that any means, even
st. Bartholomew massacre are right, if neces-
sary to protect the supremacy of the Pope?
1t is certain that no principle can be more per-
ectly hostile to the dearest interests of our Re
publican Government. And the question -,
how far this Government cam consistently with
its duty of selfdefence, endanger its safety BY
giving the opportunity to any, by clothing them
with political Office and power, who are held
good by their position and allegiance to for
eign despot, for carrying out principle SO abb
horrent to all the principles of our religion and
natural right, whenever they or their superiors
in Office shall judge wise and expedient?
Now, l am not zealot / am not an alarm
list on this question of Popery. have in fact
incurred the censure of some of my Know
Nothing friends, for an alleged indifference to
the encroachments of the Papal power. | agree
with yourself, most heartily, on the inconsist-
ency of those people, and especially clergymen,
who are "inAamed by the raw-head and
bloody-bones of Popery," and "are full of
warnings against deadly Popish plots, but can
see nothing to speak of in the overshadow-
ing slave despotism of the South" / can see
no signs of any immediate danger from Papal
aggression.
Nevertheless, here is, as it seems to me, a.
fair question of principle, calling for calm,
dispassionate, thorough discussion for though
the danger may not be present or Immediate if
a wrong principle is actually adopted, there is
certainly danger ahead. And the wise mari
ner surely looks out for breakers, even when
none can be seen. If we are running in the
wrong direction, even though wide sea be
yet before us, unless our course is changed. we
shall certainly run upon the rocks or shoals at
last. / do not think that we need the "secret
evangelism of Southern tyrants or Northern
demagogues, but the plain and open discussion
of honest minds. Very truly, yours,
j. G. WEBSTER.