be drawn between them; but the state of religion in that country is understood to be any thing but satisfactory, notwithstanding the endeavours of the present king to introduce a better state of things.

"In France the Roman Catholic church had received such a shock from the events of the Revolution, that its power could not possibly be restored, and a principle of toleration unavoidably took place, notwithstanding the strenuous efforts of the late Pope, who, at great personal risk, opposed Buonaparte's endeavours to introduce religious freedom.

"But the state of France is so far from being one of religious peace and union, that it is easy to see the symptoms of a great religious struggle in that country, which may end in some tremendous convulsion.

"In the kingdom of the Netherlands the analogy with our government completely fails. Ours is a Protestant government, formed by the union ⚫ of two Protestant kingdoms, having an established Protestant church in Ireland as well as in Great Britain, but containing a great number of Roman Catholics and other dissenters.

"The kingdom of the Netherlands, on the contrary, is an union of two parts; in one of which the Protestant, and in the other the Roman Catholic, is the established religion. It was therefore impossible that they should unite upon any other terms than those of religious equality;

and a concordat was, with much difficulty, obtained from the Pope, regulating the religious condition of the Roman Catholics.

"By this concordat the nomination of the Roman Catholic bishops was virtually placed in the hands of the King, though they were to receive the investiture from the Pope.

"The King accordingly proceeded to nominate seven bishops to the vacant sees; but of the seven, the Pope confirmed only the bishop of Namur, and the other sees still remain vacant, We may judge, from this example, of the probability of a concordat for Ireland producing general union and tranquillity, even if it could be obtained on satisfactory terms; but we know that the Irish prelates, in 1825, declared, before the committees of both Houses of Parliament, their resolution to submit to any persecution rather than admit the interference of the government in their ecclesiastical appointments."


CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION may be argued on the ground of expediency, the only ground upon which its advocates can make out the shadow of a case, (and even that ground is not tenable by them); but it comes to a question of religion at last, and “that whale," as Horace Walpole says, "must swallow up all gudgeon questions." We will therefore consider, first, the folly and danger of granting further privileges to Roman Catholics on the ground of Political Expediency; and then devote the remainder of our Text-Book to a brief view of the gradual growth and nature of the papal power; the nature and origin of the tenets peculiar to the Church of Rome; the doctrines inculcated by the Jesuits; and the unchangeable spirit of the Church of Rome, as evinced more especially by the contents of the breviary.

The folly and danger of granting further privileges to Roman Catholics on the ground of Political Expediency, will, I think, sufficiently appear from the following considerations:

1. That concession has not hitherto led to conciliation. 2. That the evils with which Ireland is afflicted do not proceed from the civil disabilities under which Roman Catholics labour, and would not be lessened in the slightest degree by the removal of those disabilities. 3. That the real object of the Catholics is the overthrow of the Protestant religion. 4. That the proceedings of the Catholic Association, and the incendiary speeches of its members, show the folly of expecting that conciliation would follow concession. 5. That the Pope's spiritual authority is inseparably connected with temporal power; and that therefore the allegiance of a Roman Catholic is a divided allegiance. 6. That the duties of a member of Parliament are incompatible with the principles of a Roman Catholic. 7. That the admission of Roman Catholics to Parliament could not but be attended with great danger. 8. That the warmest advocates of the Catholic claims once thought securities necessary to guard against danger to the Protestant religion. 9. That accordingly certain securities were actually proposed, to which the Catholics twice assented, and twice retracted their assent. 10. That all securities however would prove unavailing, from the Pope's acknowledged power to dispense

with the obligation of an oath. 11. That nothing but duplicity and dishonesty can be expected from Catholics where the interest of their church is at stake. 12. That Popery is as intolerant 13. That the tyranny of the Church of Rome over literary productions, is as great as it was in the darkest ages.

as ever.


That Concession does not lead to Conciliation; argued from the altered tone of the Roman Catholics since concessions have been made to them.

The miseries of Ireland, and the fearful disturbances which prevail there, (occasioned mainly by incendiary orators,) are acknowledged on all hands. How, then, are these evils to be remedied?" By conciliation, exclaims the whole host of confederated concessionists: this it is which is called for by the orators-general of the Catholic Association, who breathe out their brazen menaces from throats wide as their consciences; and the cry is echoed by the last new converts who have been cajoled or intimidated into the unholy alliance. But as parliamentary reform had a very different meaning in the

[ocr errors]


« ElőzőTovább »