The Washington times. (Washington [D.C.]) 1901-1902, 1901-08-18
THE KINGS TEST OATH.
How the Protestant Succession to the
british Throne Is Guarded.


| British Throne Is Guarded
1t would probably be no exaggeration to
say that the frame of mind of nine out OF
! ten Englishmen on the subject OF the SOW
ereign's declaration on transubstantiation
| and certain cognate subjects might be
best represented by Melbourne's classic
question, why can't you lave it alone?'
Unfortunately the tenth man is affected
| by a virulent form of theological rabies.
| for the cure of which no ecclesiastical
| Pasteur has yet arisen, and he will not
| leave the remaining nine in peace
| Earl Grey, in the course of speech OF
| great moderation and excellent sense In
| the House Of Lords yesterday. expressed
| the opinions of most rational men when
| he said that personally, If he were
Roman Catholic-and there was, probably
no member of the House more opposed to
/ their doctrines-he really thought he
would prefer the declaration in its old
unamended form. because he would re-
gard it as an archaic. meaningless form
ula which had come down to us"
| However, our Roman Catholic fellow
! subjects not unreasonably refuse to re-
| gard in that light the Extensively worded
/ reputation of beliefs which they hold sa-
| cred. Something, therefore, has to be
| done, and the question is, What Shall 1t
| be? The very influential and representa-
! tive committee appointed to consider the
| problem reported in favor OF form OF
| declaration which, as Earl Grey said,
might be conscientiously made by the
| Empress of China or the Mahdi. Were 1t
adopted the sovereign would assert that
certain dogrnas are not consistent with
| the Protestant religion, which no one ever
led ND en- IA
| latter part of the declaration is concern
| ed it might be taken without scruple by
| the most conscientious Catholic.
| 1t is a sound principle In examining the
propriety or necessity of maintaining an
ancient form to enquire how 1t came into
existence. Every schooiboy really does
know that the declaration in its present
form was the Test Act of 30 Charles ii,
and was incorporated in the Bill of Rights
adopted to give statutory effect to the
Declaration of Rights which William and
Mary accepted as the condition of their
elevation to the throne from which James
III had been driven. The first section be-
gan by reciting the various acts by which
james did ''endeavor to subvert and ex-
tirpate the Protestant religion and the
laws and liberties of this Kingdom" the
tenth section prescribed that every King
or Queen. on the first day of their first
parliament, shall subscribe and audibly
repeat the declaration mentioned in the
Statute 30 Charles H.
Now. the statute in question. best
known as the Test act, required all per-
sons holding any Office of profit or trust
under the Crown to take the oath Of al
legiance and supremacy, receive the sac
raments according TO the rites of the
Church of England and subscribe the dec
laration against transubstantiation.
This act though aimed at Roman Catho-
lies, was equally operative against dissen-
tiers, and it was not repealed. as Is well
known. till 1898 The declaration, there
fore, was an Incident in an episode of
great Importance, limited, however, to
particular crisis in our history.
We may infer. consequently. that the
original justification OF that special sec
ton of the Bill of Rights was TO exclude
the possibility of Roman Catholic sue
cessor to the throne. 1t might, however,
have been thought that sufficient precau-
ton against such an occurrence was pro-
vided by the ninth section. which we need
hardly say Is, with the rest of the Bill of
Rights. still operative. 1t runs as fol-
lows: las 1t has been found by experience
inconsistent with the safety and welfare
erned by Popish prince. or by any king
CT queen marrying a Papist. 1t Is enacted
that all persons who shall hold commun-
ion with the Church of Rome. or shall
marry a Papst, shall be excluded from
the throne, and the crown shall descend
to the next heir"
Although public opinion in this country
has approved with practical unanimity the
abolition of tests. II may be safely aver
red that there is no appreciable portion of
the population which would approve OF
any interference with the Protestant sue
cession. Therefore the simple issue
mains whether il is not possible to safe
guard all that the Act of Settlement Sc
cured without causing the sovereign to
take declaration the wording of which
gives offence to many millions of his sub
jects. The Lord Chancellor seems to us
to have taken too exclusively lawyers
view of the situation. He demurred to the
view that tests were no longer necessary
and asserted that 1T was not in accord
ance with the Constitution or the practice
of this country"
Lord Grey, however had contended with
admirable justice that before he was
crowned the sovereign was required SOL
EMMY to swear that he would govern ac-
cording to the statutes, maintain the laws
of God and truth, and the Protestant re-
ligion, as established by law, and he was
required to seal his oath with the most
sacred form of conservation that the
church provided" If that assurance be
not considered sufficiently binding, surely
all that Is requisite is supplied by the Act
of Settlement of 1900 which enacts that
whatsoever shall hereafter come to the
possession of this crown shall join in COM
munion with the Church Of England, as
by law established
Fenced in as the throne is with all these
safeguards, the declaration would appear
to be altogether superfluous, especially
when we consider. as Earl Grey pointed
out that no such test is imposed upon
any other sovereign in Europe All rev.
erent persons will agree with Lord Rose
berry that nothing could be less suited for
Parliamentary debate than the awful
mysteries contained in the declaration"
Yesterdays discussion in the House of
Lords will have served very useful pur-
pose if it leads to what seemed the OBJ
vious sense of the House, that the dec
iaration should be dropped altogether
when the bill. based upon the report of
the committee. is brought in
The archbishops made grievance of the
absence of any member of the Episcopal
bench from the committee. but the bish-
ops ought to be thankful that they were
spared a very embarrassing function. The
question as to whether there should or
rather than theological, and an attempt
to draw up a Suitable form of words
might have landed the rulers of the
church In n domestic controversy which
would certainly have brought, not peace,
but n sword into the establishment.-Lon-l
don Telegraph &" ..-lHt-iii-L "