The Sun. — 1851-09-23 (London, England)

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.  Some of the Roman Catholic organs seem very anxious to justify the fears expressed formerly by a minority of Protestants, but now becoming very prevalent—that Roman atholies never sincerely advocated Religious Liberty—that it meant with them liberty to act as their Church told them to do, and the power to punish all who differed from them—that Popery is essentially and unalterably intolerant. In France the Univers regrets that Luther was not burnt, and justifies the burning of John Huss and Jerome of Prague. The rancorous malignity of the ex-Quaker Lucas, in the Tablet, is notorious, and other Romanist organs, heretofore more moderate, are throwing off the mask. The Rambler, the recognised organ of the Roman Catholics in this country, in the last number assails Protestantism, and the great principle on which it is founded—the right of privatejudgment, as follows :—" Believe us not, Protestants of England and Ireland, for an instant, when you see us pouring forth our liberalisms. When you hear a Catholic orator at some public assemblage declaring solemnly that this is the most humiliating day in his life, when he is called upon to defend once more the glorious principle of religious freedom'—(especially if he says anything about the Emancipation Act and the toleration' it conceded to Catholics)—be not too simple in your credulity. These are brave words, but they mean nothing ; no, nothing more than the promises of a Parliamentary candidate to his constituents on the hustings. He is not talking Catholicism, but nonsense and Protestantism; and he will no more act on these notions in different circumstances, than you now act on them yourselves in your treatment of him. You ask, if he were laid in the land, and you were in a minority, if not in numbers yet in power, what would he do to you ? That, we say, would entirely depend upon circumstances. If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you : if expedient, he would imprison you, banish you, fine you ; possibly ' he might even hang you. But be assured of one thing : he would never tolerate you for the sake of the ' glorious principles of civil and religious liberty.' . . . Why are we so anxious to make the Church wear the garb of the world ? Why do we stoop, and bow, and cringe before that enemy whom we are sent to conquer and annihilate ? Why are we ashamed of the deeds of our more consistent forefathers, who did only what they were bound to do by the first principle of Catholicism ? . . • • Shall I foster that damnable doctine, that Socinianism, and Calvinism, and Anglicanism, and Judaism, are not every one of them mortal sins, like murder and adultery ? Shall I lend my countenance to this unhappy persuasion of my brother, that he is not flying in the face of Almighty God every day that he remains a Protestant ? Shall I hold out hops to him that I will not meddle with his creed if he will not meddle with mine ? Shall I lead him to  think that religion is a matter for private opinion, and tempt him to forget that he has no more right to his religious views than he has to my purse, or my house, or my life- blood ? No! Catholicism is the most intolerant of creeds. It is intolerance itself, for it is  truth itself. We might as rationally maintain that a sane man has a right to believe that two and two do not make four, as this theory of religious liberty. Its impiety is only equalled by its ab,,urdity." If this really be Catholicism, it is quite time that all Protestants should be on their guard ' • and if it be not, the Roman Catholics of England, should at once, and in the most emphatic manner, disavow such fiendish malignity.  SEIZURE of