yt*;; \i.'- _:'::'■■ r _:JAINn-3V\V^ .vin^Avr.r;--. # ^Of CAIIF y:. ^oxa^fmn^ ^xMllBRARYflf ?] irri .oFTAttmrc. .v\MIR!?ARYa- WlEl'N'IV ■?['- ^N\\[UNIVER% ^10SANC[15J> c*^ u^ ^^yEUNIVERS•/4 ^lOSANCEtfj> y ^^^VllBRARYOf^ .vlOSANCElfj-. vMNli-aWv"' \\\FIINIV[- %JI1V3-J0'^ ^TilJDNVSOl^''^ '-/ifl^AiNilJkW- ''>(iOJilVj \INn-3WV' 1^. ■sWEUNivrp it- v>-f,r'irr. -OFrAIlFf" ■in'Mvrt;' ■^ — ^ 5?^ # ^ ;J ? y ILIBRARY-Or 1 ( ,-— - ii ,^W[UNIVERJ/A ^^lOSANCElfj-^ •5 < ■ CO =o 3> -< iNY-SO\-"<^" %aMINllJWV^ ^.!/OJIlV>d > -< ,^OFCALIFO '"^OAdvaan- ■— A. c >- cr. MNfl3\\V^ '■ # %13DNVS0 to-- .^nF-CAI'F^ ^ >&, o A"* C >- r>i U-; .^>^^ 'JV^ ^.♦^' ^''id c^w^t ,vjsW5ANCflfx> v^tllBRARY O Li. I >vOFCAllfr.- 5: ij; ^WEUNIV ■AiNiimv- ^OAHvaaiii^ -T. C — :o =— ^ 1 *, ;lPr.MlFnD, .^ ■(yf.tl'JR'FCr/ .„jAiNn-3y\v m^ \v.TFIfr, 1 ? ^ >- ,, f^F.^.\llrnp,, of rMiFnc,', . -(MFl' -^ CC ^^WE•UN1V ,^lOS/VNCElfjjx .^lllBRARYO/: <^^t llBRARY(?,r^ ^WtUNIVERS/A ^lOSANCFlfj> ^^lllBRARYfi To THE CATHOLICS of England. MY LORDS AND GENTLEMEN. I, W- E have the honor to lay before you, v.fiorl accoiinl of the principal Circumflatica atUndiitg mr attempt, t» procure far the CATHOLICS OF ENGLAND an Exemption from the Laius, enaHed in this Kingdom againfi PAPISTS OR PERSONS PROFESSING THE POPISH RELIGION. It was fet on foot in the beginning of lad Year, — ivhen the Cointnittee, with the Approbation of a Ge- neral Meeting of the Body, prefented a Memorial to Mr. Pitt, Hating briefly, the Grievances, under which the Body of En^ liili Catholics labour, and the principal Grounds, upon which they claim Relief. The Memorial was prefented to him in Februarv. He receivred itfavorabl)-; and £t a Conference between him and fome of the Members of the Committee, deiired to be furnifhed with Authentic Evidence of the Opinion of the Catholic Clergyand Catholic Univerfitiesabroad, with refpeft to the Exiilence and Extent of the Pope's difpenfing Powers. — In Confequence of this requifition, three Qucilions were fent to the Univerfities of Paris, Louvain, Doway, Alcala, Salamanca, and Valladolid, for their Opinions tpon them. Their Opinions were accordingly obtained, and proved very fatisfaftory.~In the mean time, the Seafon was fo far advanced, that it became impoflible to bring the Bufmefs into Parliament with any profpetl of procuring eflential Relief, during that Selfion. It was therefore necelfarv, that it fhould lie over to the follov.ing Year. But that every thing might be in readinefs to proceed immediately upon the opening of the eext Seilion, Directions were given, that, during the Recefs, an Aft of Par- liament fhould be framed, which Itould repeal all the Laws, by which the Englifli Catholics are placed in a worfe fituationthan his Majefty's other dilTentingSubjefts. —Such an Aft was accordingly prepared.— This brought the Bufmefs to the Clofe of the Year 178S. — In the Month of December in that Y^ar, a Perfon of high rank in this Country, fent the Proteftation to the Committee, with a Letter recommending that all the Catholics (hould fignit. To ftate this Matter fully, it may be proper 10 obferve, that tlie Statutes of Nonconformity affeil, (but in a very different Degree,) three different Sets of Perfons, Catholics, Protcftant Dillenters, and Perfons of the cftabliflied Church. All of them were then applying to the Legiflature for Relief againft thefe Statutes, and Earl Stanhope's Bill was pending in Parliament. Tlie particular Objeft of that Bill was to give relief to the Nonconff^rmills of the Eftabliflied Church : but in its ronfequenccs it would liberate Perfons of e\cry Defcri'ptioa from the Penalties ot Nonconformit},— The effefts of his Bill would therefore have extended equally to Catholics, to Proirftant DiiTenters, and to Members of the Eilabliflied Church ; but as there is a prejudice againll Catholics, which does not lie, at leaft in the fame degree, againft any other_ Diffcnters, it was thought neceflary to ufe. with refpeft to them, a Method of Recommendation to the Public, which the others did not appear to want. This was, that they fhould folemnly difclf.im fome of the Tenets imputed to.thcm. For this Purpofe, with lon^ confideration, and after attentively pcrufing the works of fome of_o«x bcft Aj)olog!!h,_ and conferring with Minifters, and fome of the leading Men of all Parties, the Proteftatiou in queftion was framed, and we were called upontoiis^n it. — The very inftant the Committee received it, they tranfmitted it to Mr. Walmency, Mr, James Talbot, Mr. Thomas Talbot, and Mr. Matthew Gibfon. — They all tigncd it. '1 he three firit with their own hands, Mr. Matthev.- Gibfon, by Mr. James Talbot, whom he authorifcd to iign it for him, if he judged r: proper. ' Vv it'.i t-c-rj- ftw cxcejnions, it was figned by all the Clergy, and all the Laity of any llSr. 1 51 I 2 ) note, in the kingdom of England. The Bill then was new modelled. — ^We beg leave to obferve, that the Ad- vantages we fhall derive from its paffing into a Law, will be very confidcrable. — Speaking generally, it will place us on a level with the Proteftarit DilTenters, except as to the rights of votiugat Eletlions, and fitting in Parliament. — The Provifoes in it, you will pleafe to obferve, have not the effcft of enaiJting new Laws. Their onlv eSfert is to prevent, in the particular inftances there enumerated, the operation which the Aft would other- wife have to repeal the Laws now in force. Not one of them impofes any new penalties on the Catholics. They only except the particular cafes there fpecified from the general operati m of the AH. — The length of time it took, to arrange the Bill, to the fatisfaftion of the different parties, with whom it was found neceffary to advife, made it fo late in the Seflion, before it was finally fettled, that it was thought advifeable, the bring- ing of it into the Houfe fliould be poftponed tillthe next Seflion.^-But to put it in a train to proceed wlien bufiuefs (hould be refumcd, and as far as lay in our power to draw the .attention of the Houfe upon it, we requcfted Mr. Mitford to inform the Houfe of his intention to bring it in, — and to apprize them generally of its tendency and operation. — This he obligingly did; — and for the information of the Public, — parti- cularly the perfons chiefly intererted, — the Engliih Catholics, — we printed the Heads of the Bill in the Public Papers. — Thcfe have been the principal circumftances attending the Bill. We fhall -now lay before you the- principles and grounds upon which we ha^e framed it. II. The prominent feature of the Proteftation and the Oath, certainly is, their introducing to the notice of pur Laws, and that, in a very marked and pointed npanner, a defcription of Perfons wholly unknown to them More, THE PROTESTING CATHOLIC Z)/.S^i£.Vr£y?5.— On the propriety of this defcription, and its: pro- bable efficacy, the meritof the plan adopted by us chiefly refts. L With refpeft to /// /™/-r;V/j.- — The defcription, we fubmit to you, mull be proper, if the Perfons,. whom it is intended to characlerize, be defcribed by it accurately and pointedly, — and if thofe perfons have a real cxlllence. — Now that the defcription is both accurate and pointed, and that, by far the greateft part, if net the whole body of Englifh Catholics fall under it, feems unqucftionable. — The defcription is contained in the preamble of the Aft. — It recites, " That, by divers Laws now in force concerning Papills, or •' Perfons profeifing the Popilh Religion, divers penalties and difabilities had been impofed on fuch perfons on " account of certain pernicious doftrincs imputed to them, — and that, divers perfons, who according to the " Laws nov.- in being, are within the defcription of Paplfts, or perfons profeifing the Popilh Religion, do not " I'.old, and haveprotefted againrt, fuch pernicious doftrines, although they continue to dilTent, in certain points " of faith, from the Church of England, and are therefore called Pyolejimg Catholic Diffentcn, and that fuch " perfons are willing folemnly to protell againft, and to declare that they do not hold fuch pernicious doftrines." , Nothing can be more accurately or more pointedly told, than the faft contained in the firft member of the recital, that by divers laws now in force concerning Papiils or perfons profeifing the Popilh Religion, divers penalties and difabilities have been impofed on them, on account of certain pernicious doftrines attributed to tliem. Is any thing more true than that Laws arc now in force againft Papiits ? that thefe Laws impofe penalties and difabilities on them ? and that thefe penalties and difabilities were impofed on them, on account of certain pernicious doftrines attributed to them ? Each of thefe fac'ls is accurately and pointedly mentioned, each of them IS ftriftly and literally true. — Every member of the following fentence, " and that di\ers Perfons, &c." is equally accurate, pointed, and true. — Is it not true, that divers perfons, who according to the laws now in being, are within the defcription of Papills, do not hold the pernicious doftrines attributed to them? — Is it not true, that, divers perfcns, within the dcfcriptLon in queftion, have protefted againll fuch pernicious doftrines, though they ftill continue to dilTent, in certain points of faith, from the Church of England ? Is it not true, that, divers perfons within the defcription of Papilis, and diifenting in certain points of faith, from the Church of England, are willintr folemnly to protell againft, and to declare that they do not hold the pernicious doctrines attributed to them? — Thefe, the Aft fays, are called Protcfting Catholic Diffenters. — The precife meaning to be affixed to each of t'lefe words, is fo clearly exprefled, in the fccond of the two fentences, we have cited from the Aft, as not to admit of any doubt. — From this part of the Aft it clearly appears, th.at, the perfons in qucliion are termed Dijjl-nlers, — because they dtjjliit in certain points of faith from the Church of England, — that they are termed Cath-Jk, — bccaufe they profefs to be members of the Catholic Church, — and that, they are termed Pr-j.-ff.ing, — becaufe they have protefted, and are willing to proteft .againft, and to declare they do. not held the doftrines attributed to them. But it is fald, " That the preamble of the Aft will be confidered as referring to the Proteftation contained in the Oath prefcribed by it, and iknt by the Oath Jome doiiriius are protejicd ugaiKji ■'•jt;hUh are not lieriiiri'MS, and /'-.me v.-hich are eve.i articles of fail h. To ( 3 } Tp this «r beg kare to anf\ve^ that, h certainly muft be admitted, that ti'.e prcamt)!c is to be eohfidere^ as referring to the Protcftation contained in the Oath: — and that, if by the Oath, any dcflrlne be protelied againft, which is not pernicious, or, a fjrtiori, if anv doctrine be protefted againft, which is an article of faith, thf preamble cannot be acqiiiefced in, by any Catholic:, with a fafe confcience. Whether the doftrincs protefled againft by the Oath, be or be not pernicious, and whether any of them be matters of faith will be afterwards examined. — All that is contended for at prefent, is, that, if the doctrines prot?ftcd againft by the Oath be pernicious, and be falfely attributed to Catholics, — the propriety of the expredion, protcfting Catholic Diflenters, is unqueftionable. In t'^at cafe all the Catholics who v. ill take the Cath prefcribcd b) the Aift will fall under it. Having taken it, — as they continue to diftent in certain points or faith from the Church of Kngland, the Aft ftyles them DiiTenters; — As they continue members of the Catholic Church, the Aft ftvles them Catholics; — and as they have protefted againft certain pernicious doflrines attributed to them, the Ad^ ftyles them Prcujfing Cath-ilir Dvpuh-rs. — This explanation does not reft upon inferehce or itiiplication : It ij given in exprefs words by the Aft itfelf. Anothir objection made to the defcription in queftion, is, " That it imflifs in a very marked and pointed manner, that, th'jugh the doBrines in quijiiou are not held bj' Jams Catholics, thrj are held by cthas.' But admitting this to be the cafe. We beg to obferv to you, — that, among the doflrines intended to be protefted againft by the Cath, are: — I. That, Princes excommunicated by the Pope rnay be depofed by their Subjects : — II. That, the Pope can abfolveSubjefls from their Allegiance: — III. That, the Pope hath a Civil lu- rifdiflion within the P^ealms of other Princes : — IV. That the Pope is infallible : — V. And that a breach of faith with a perfon may bejuftified, under the pretence that fuch perfon is an Heretic or an Infidel. Ot thcfe tenets the laft was never a prevailing opinion among Catholics, .and the contrary doftiine has been maintained by Catholic writers of every age and every country. — The dodrine of the Po/f V Infallihiliij, in matters of Faith by fome other Catholics. — If therefore the Aift, either exprefs or imply, the exiftence of the diftinfticn in quef- tion, it does not, in this refpeft at leaft, exprefs or imply what does not exift. — With refpeft to the other doctrines againft which the Oaih protefts, viz. — That P/vwew excommunicated hv the Tope amy be depofed by their Jub'ci-ls ■ . That th.e Pope can itbjhhe StihjeSls from their Oathof A'.leginnce; — And thnt the Pope hath a civil J.-irifdidiyri 'n-ithin the Realms of other Prince; — thefe, certainly were never articles of our Faith. — Eut the doftrine, that the Pope was poflefTed of all tliofe powers by divine right, was once a very prevailing opinion. It .was afl'ertcd in exurefs terms, and attempted to be carried into execution by Pope Gregory ^l^. by Paul IV. Pius V. Grcory XIIL Si.xtus V. and fome other Popes. Has any Pope ever difclaimed them, or permitted his rio-ht to them to lie queftioned in his own dominions ? Cardinal Bellarmine wrote fcveral Treatife? icr the fole purpofe of proving the Pope's power in Temporals. In fupport of his Theiis, he cites the authority of many provincial Councils and nnmberlefs writers of great name. — But to confine ourfclves to the hiftorv of our own nation - In the year 1602, Mr. M'illiam Bidioji, then the Bilhcp of Calcedon, and Twelve ether Priefts finned' a Proteftation of Allegiance. See Dod's Church Hiftory, 1 1 vol. p. 292. The faculty of Loiivain cenfured it in the ftrongeft terms. " In ea," (this is their language,) " videntur fupponcre pontifcem non habere *' indireclam faltem poteftatem in temporalibus, five principem per nullam eccleliafticnm poteftatem regno fuo " pofte privari vel abfolvi fubditos a juramento, fidelitatis quo eianteparere tenebantur, hoc autcm fine dubio •' falfum eft." " The Remonftrants," (fay the Faculty) " fuppofk; that the Pope has not even an indircft " power in Temporals, — and that Princes cannot be depofed by their fubjefls, nor their fub- " jefts abfolved from their Allegiance to them, by any ecclefiaftical power, which witliout a dcubt is " abfolutely falfe." — (See P.emonftrantia Hibernorum contra Lo^anienfcs ultra-mcntanafque cenfuras, aiiflore Mr. Carte fays, they were on the point of ftarving in their own cotuitrv. — When the Oath of Allei;i.-!nce was yropofed to the Catholics, in the reign of James I. Cardinal Bellarmine compofed fe\eral Trcatifcs to lhew,that it -was not lawful for them to take it, becaufe, among other grounds, it contained an exprefs deniil of the Pope's power in Temporals. — He treats the contrary ojMnion, almoft as heretical, leonardus Lcflius, Grety.er, ,Sua- ■rez, and Becanus, publilhed Treatifes upon the fame occaHon to enforce the fame doftrines. — It is reinarkal)Ie that, Bellarmine only contended for the Pope's having an indirect power in Temporals, and that fome very ref))eftable writers of his life fay, that, by not admitting him to hav c a dircfl power in Temporals, he incurred ihe difpleafure of the See of Rome, — There are frequent inrtanccs v. hicrc tlie Clergy and Parliament of France -^ ^ luve ( 4 ) iitre had occafion to cenftire publications, nhere the Pope's power Jn Temporals has been maintained, but is there any inftance where thefe publications have been checked by the See of Rome? — Some time^ even, asin the cafes of Bellarraine and Suarez, the Pope has given diilinguilbed marks of his approbation of Treatifes in which thefe dottrines were held. The Declaration of the Clergy of France in 16S2 was profcribcd by Pope Innocent XI.. — Till Ganganelli was eleifled to the Tiara, the Bull /« Cff«ium mciim non eft de hoc Miindo — What iA the v.ords fignifv, what ca>i thev imply— but a rejeftion of the right of tempioral Legifiation, and the right of enforcing his fpiritual Legillation by temporal means? Wlien St. Auftin parap>hrafing this paflTage, fays, Audite reges tcnu , non Impt-dio Dominatimem t'ejiram. Is not the word, Impedh, fynonimous with the words nfftiJ <,r interfere ? Dees any one pretend to fay that the Pope •or the Church has a right to affcft or interfere with the Civil Independence, the Civil Sovereignty, the Civil Conftiti.tion, or the Ci\il Covernment of this P^ealm ? — No Divine on this fde the .Alps would alfert it^ Yet, if by the words " Afteifting or interfering" is underltood, aifefting or interfering by the fpiritual Right of preaching and teaching, it is unqueftionably true, that the Church has a right to interfere with the Civil Independence, the Civil Sovereignty, the Civil Ccnftitution, and the Civil Government of this Realm, for, permit us to obferve, — If. one Province of a Kingdom, were without jullice or reafon, to rebel againft the Slate, and claim to he independent oi hex — If one ftate were to exercife undue 5«.-f)r/j«/v over another, — It intC'»/ftit!itio>t of a State were elTentially wicked ; — If the GoTrj/.vnf?// of a State were to be tyrannical and iinji.ft^are not thefe as much fins in the eye of God, as thev are crimes in the eve of man? As fuch are they net iubjeft to the fpiritual power of the Church, to her teaching, preaching, and cenfures ? Yet that the Churdt has no jurifdidlion or authority, that, can direftlv or indireftly, afFeft or interfere with th>c Civil indepen- dence, fovereignty, conftitution or government of a Sovereign ftate, is acknowledged by our befl writers. But unlefs the words atfeft or interfere are underftood in the fenfe in which we fay thev ought to be undef- ftood, the propodtion is falfc — Therefore, the words alfeft or interfere muft be t.aken in the fenfe in which we underftand them; fo underftood tliei- are perfeftlv free from objection- A.NOTHER objeftion made to the Oath, we underftand, is, that, the party affcrts in it" //v7/ neither the Pope ■" 7ior any Prelate, nw any Prieji, nor any Affembly of Prelates or Prirjis, nor any Ecelifcfical ponx-er ivha.fie-vtr can *' at anytime difpeiife tvith, or abfolie him fvm the obligations of this Oalh, Of of any Oalh , or of any other Compail *' -jjhatfcie-ver,' To this, v.e beg to fav in anfwer, what fome of the ableft Divines of this Kingdom h.ave mentioned to lis, that, when in confequence of an Oath taken to, or a compaft entered into, with any perfon, the party taking the Oath, or entering into the Compadl, has contrafted any obligations to the perfon, to whom the Oath is taken, or with whom" tlie Compnifl is made: in that cafe, neither the Pope nor any Prelate, nor any Prleft, nor any Afiem'blv of Prelates or Pricfts, can have any power to abfolve, or free the party from the obligations fo contrafted by him. It is true that, an Oath may be taken, and a Compaft rriade under fi.ch circumftancesj as to be abfoUitely void; the confequence is, that an Oath fo taken, and a compact fo made, fubjcfts the party to no obligation. Such is the cafe ufually put, of a promife on Oath, to pav a fum of monev, extorted from the partv bvgrcat perfonal violence, or by the threats of immediate death. In thefe and in other cafes, of the like nature, it m.ay be a queftion whether the obli^.->tions exi'l, but if they do exift, no pcwer can difpenfe from them. — We muft alfo add, that, by the Oaths and Compacts here referred to, the BiU C 7 ] Bill does not refer to vows, or other promifes made to God, and which do not affedl the Right* of third Perfons. Another objeftion made to the Oath, we underiland is, that b}' it /A? Dofirwf " thni Priiieft exeommwiicdted " by the Pope, or by the authority of the See of Rot/te, rnay be depojed ot murdered by their Juhjeds or any other fer/oit" is called heretical. To this it is anfwered, that, among the many Epithets expreflive of abhorrence, which the Engli(h language furniiTies, and none of which are tooftrongto exprefs the abhorrence which Englifli Catholics have of theDodrine referred to in thiselavife, the Epithet here inferted is one of the hift which would liave occurred to us. The fact is, that, the whole of thisclaufe was inferted upon the fuggeftion of one of the firft perfonages in this Kingdom. He obferved, that, an uniformity of Oaths throughout the Kingdom was greatly to be defired; that, the religious fcruples of the Catholics made them refufe one part of the Oath of Supremacy, but that they had no religious obje^ions, either to the other parts of the Oath of Supremacy, or to any part of the Oath -of Allegiance, or the Oath of Abjuration. He, therefore recommended, that, the whole of the Oaths of Alle- giance and Abjuration, and as much of the Oath of Supremacy, as Catholics do not think contrary to faith, fhiould be inferted in the Oath to be taken by them. — To this eircumftance the infertion of the word Heretical is owing. With refpeft to its propriety, — We beg to fubmit to you, that, the propofition, " It is our duty to give to Cxfar, what is C^far's," is a precept of the Gofpel, and that all Divines interpret this precept to extend, a^ much to the obligation of not difturbing Caefar, in the polTeifion of what belongs to him, as to the obligatioji of reftoring to him, that, which is unlawfully taken from him. — Excommunication does not deprive a Prince of his right to the Throne, nor make him forfeit his life — Ca-far's throne and Csfar's life belong to Cafar, as much alter, as before Excommunication. It follows, that, to fav a Prince excomravmicated, may be depofedor murdered, is to aflert that his being excommunicated, gives his fubjeftsa right to depiive him of his throne or his life; or in other words to difturb Cafar in the poiTelTion of what belongsto him. This doftrine is direflJy contrary to the doC"trine of the Gofpel. With refpeft to its being Heretical, V"e beg to call your attention to the dirtin(ftion in the fchools between, a material 2iT\d. &fr.rmal Herefy. A Doiftrine contrary to the word of God, if it have not been cxprefslv condemned as fuch, by the authority of the Church, is faid to be Traterially heretical. — M hen it has been exprefsly condemned as fuch by authority of the Church, it is faid to he /srw.?//)- heretical. — In the Oath of Allegiance prefcribed by the ftatute of James the I. is the following claufc. " And I do further fucar. That I do from my heart abhor, detcft and abjure as impious and heretical- " this damnable dottrinc and pofition, — That Princes which he excommunicated, or deprived by the Pope, " may be dcpofed or murdered by their fubjecls, or any other whatfoevcr." Pope Paul the Vth. by three briefs reprobated this Oath. Tlie Divines of the Univerfity of Paris being confulted upon it, fifty-nine ot them were of opinion that the Catholics of England might take it with a fate confcicnce, without re- nouncing their faith. " The propofiion, fo far as it affcrts, that princes may be depofed, being materially, that " is in fubftance, heretical : and fo far as it alTcrts that they may be murdered, being firmally, that is exprefsly " pronounced by the Church, heretical. " See Dr. Hooke's Religionis Naturalis, et Kevelats Principia, 3 yol. p. ;8i. — In tlie Oath propofed to the Catholics of Ireland, in 1 7-5;, the jd Article runs as follows :" I fur- " therprofefs, that it is no part of my belief; nay, that I rejeA the opinion, that princes excommunicated by " the Pope, or by the Pope and Council, or by any authority of the See of Rome, or by any authority what- " foeyer, may be depofed, or put to death by their fubjecls, or by any other perfon Whatfcever : and " therefore I promife that I will not hold, maintain, or countenance that, or any other opinion contrary to the " words of this Declaration.' The Sorbonne being confulted upon this Oath, gave their opinion, dated the 6th Noy. 1775, figned by all theDoftors. Upon the Article in queftion, they thus" exprefs thcmfehes ; " We- " likewife think, that the 3d Article. may, and when occafion oners, ought to be Avorn by the Catholics of Ireland : " Let not, however, the word OpiiMii, whereby this Article denominaies the King-killing and depofmg Doc- ". trine, be underftood as implying any degree of kindnefs or indulgence for it. Oiiuion is the name generally " giv en' to thofe doftrines which Civilians, Philofophers, and Divines rank among the aflertions merely pro- " bable, and that have no evidence to militate either for or againft them. Butthe King-killin" and depofing " Dc(!trine is not of this kind. It is evidently bad ; heretical, hecanfc contrary to the U'„rd of God: and " heretical in bothjhtfescftheiuord; that is to fay, materially and frmally : Materially, in as mucli as it fupciadds " the lawfulnefs of putting them to death, agreeab;e to what was obfened iri tVc year 1680, bv fiftv-nine- " Doctors of the Faculty of Paris, who gave their opinion as above-mentioned, concerning a form ofcath for- " merly prefcribed in England by James the Firft." See the Titular Archbifhop of Cathell's J unification of the Tenets of tlie Catholic Religion, Coghlan, 1787, page 145. We cite his Grace's tranllaticn.. We r 8 ] Vv'e alfoim<'.erftand,thatlt isobjefled, "ThattheOatli of 1778 isa complete Declaration of Allegiance; " that Government ought to be fatisfied with it; and that no further Declaration of our principles " fliould be required of us." To this wc beg leave to anfwer. That the nation at large feemed to think that a more explicit Declaration of ■our Principles was on this occafion required from us, and our friends advifed us to make it. Thete we have the honour to inform you are the objcftions to the oath (fo far as we have been able to colleifl them) and the anAvcrsto them. Did it contain any thingcontrary to faith, or the word of God, there cannot be a'queftion but it fliould be altered in every particular in wliich, upon this account, it were objectionable. But we beg leave to repc-ac.lt contains nothing but a promife of that allegiance which every government has a right to claim from its fubjci'ts, and every fiibjeft owes the ftate under which he lives. Did it even contain any thing ambiguous, all its ambiguities fhould be fet clear. But we find it contains no ambiguity. Every word has been Tq)eatedl)' fcrutinized by the firft perfons of this country. The confequence is, that in its prefent form it is uni- verfally acknowledged to be a complete and unequivocal Declaration of Allegiance, and a complete and un- equivocal Proteftation againft th.« temporal power of the Church, againft the Pope's temporal fupremacy, and the ri^ht, either of the Pope, or of the Church, to abfolve fubjefts from their allegiance, or to difpenfe with the civil or focial duties of Man. But here, in the opinion of all public men, it ends. la their apprehenfion, it does int contain one fyllable which, conftrued in the plain and obvious fenfe of the words, denies the fpiritnal au- thority of the Church, or the fpiritual fupremacy ot the Pope. They do not think it varies in any refpeft from the Oath of 1778, except that in fome inllanccs, it exprefi-s what, in their opinion, that Oath implies. Thus ir IS KOTCONSIDERED BT THEM .IS A PROFESSION OF FAITH; THEY CONSIDER IT MERELY AS A PROFESSION OF ALLEGIANCE AND A REJECTION OF OPINIONS IMPUTED TO US, WHICH IN THEIR POLITICAL OPERATION HATE A TENDENCY TO INJURE THE STATE. Againll thefe we proteft. But the partition between us and the eftabliflied church, remains, and by them is known to lemain as before. At all events, this much is effefted, thatthe nation will no longer confider us as dangerous or doubtful fub- ^efts. Our religious principles they may confider as erroneous, but our political opinions will no longer give ■them alarm. We know they are difpofed to ferve us. Our affairs have long engaged the attention of the public. Had there been any where a wifh to injure us, it muft have manifelled itfelf long before the prefent day. But no fymptom of this nature has appeared. On the contrary, we hive received from every quarter the warmeil promifes of affiftance and fupport. Under thefe aufpiciouscircumftances, our bufmefshas been brought forward. Our Petition (a tranfcript from •the Declaration) is in both Houfes of Parliament. We have delivered up the bill to the gentleman, who has un- dertaken to introduce it into the Houfe. It muft now be confuiered as in the hands of the Legiflature. On their juftice-and humanity we reft our caufe, and truft for its fuccefs. — We fubjoin, after the heads of the intcndeci iaill, a Copy of fl Letier we ha\ e written to the four Vicars Apoftolic. With the greateft refpeft, London. My Lords and Gentlemen, tl'l. November, 1789. We have the honor to be Your moft obedient humble Servants, CHARLES BERINGTON. PETRK. JOS- WILKS. JOHN THROCKMORTON. WILLLAM FERMOR. JOHN TOWNELEY. THOMAS HORNYOLD. [ 9 1 HEADS OF A BILL To relieve upon Conditions, and under Reftriftions, Perfons called Protesting Catholic Dissenters, from certain Penalties and Difabiliiies, to which Papifts, or Perfons profcfTmg the PopiQi Religion, are by Law fubjeft. XT recites, That by diverfe laws now in force concerning Papifts, or perfons profefTing the Popifh Religion, 4iverfe penalties and difabilities have been impofed on fuch perfons on account of certain pernicious doftrinei attributed to them. And that diverfe perfons who, according to the laws now in being, are within the defcription of Papifts, or perfons profefling the Popifh Religion, do not hold and have protefted againft fuch pernicious doftrines' although they continue to diffent in certain points of faith from the Church of England, and are therefore called Protefting Catholick Diffenters, and fuch perfons are wLlling folemnly to proteft againft and to declare, that they do not hold fuch pernicious doftrines. And that it is expedient that fuch perfons as (hall fo folemnly proteft and declare againft their holding fuch pernicious doftrines, although they ftiall continue to dilTent in certain points of faith from the Church of England, (hall be relieved from the penalties and difabilities to which Papifts, or perfons profeiTtno the Popilh Religion, or their children, or perfons educated in the Popilh Religion, are by law fubject, except as therein after excepted. It is therefore enafted. That, from and after the making and paffing of the Aft, the Oath of Allegiance and Ab- juration, and of Proteftation and Declaration therein after exprefted, may acd (hall beadmicifteied by anv of the fame Courts, and may and ftiall be regiftered in the fame manner, and ftiall give the fame benefi is and advantages, and ftiall be, and operate to and for the fame intents and purpofes whatf^ever, as in and bv the Aft made and pafled in the iSth year of his prefent Majefty isenat^d, concerning the Dath thereb) prefcribed. And that lifts of the perfons taking the Oath, ftiall be returned annually to the Clerk of the Privy Council. It is then enafted, that the Oath of Allegiance and Abjuration, and of Pwteftation arul Declaration, ftiall be :in the words following : " I, A. B. do fincerely promife and fwcar, that I will be faithful, and bear true alleguincc to Majefty " _ _ And I do truly and fincerel) acknowledge, profefs, teftify, and declare, " in my confcience, before God and tlie world, that our Sovereign is lawful and rightful of this realm, and all other Majeftv's dominions " thereunto belonging : and I do folemnly and fincerely declare, that I do believe in mv con- " fcience, that not any of the defcendants of the perfon who pretnidcd to be Prince of " Wales, during the life of the late King James the Second, and after his deceafe pretended to-be, " and took upon hirafelf the ftyle and title of King of En;;land by the name of James the Third, or '• of Scotland by the name of James the Eighth, orthe ftylc and title of Klngcf Circat Britain, hath ■" any right or title whatfocver to the Crown of this Realm, or any Dominions thereunto belonging; " and I renounce, refufc, and abjure, any Allegiance or Obedience to any of them ; and I do fv. car, " that, I w ill bear Faith and true Allegiance to Majefty and will defend to the r.tmoft of my power, againft all traiterous confpiracics and attenijits whatfoevcr, -" which ftiall be made againft Perfon, Crown, or Dignit) ; and 1 will do my utmofc " endeavour to difclofe and make known to Majefty ' and " ijucccftors, " all Treafons and traiterous Confpiracics, which 1 fnall know to be againft and I do •B " fjlthfull/ r 10 J •* faithfully and fully promife.to the utmoft of my power, to fupport, maintain, and defend the fuccefTioii •• of the Crown againft the defcendants of the faid James, and again'.l all other pcrfons whalfoever ; " which fucceffion by an Aft, intituled, A/i Ad for the farther li-nitatim of the Cniur/, and better " fecitring the rights and liberties of the jubjefl, is, andftands limited to the Princefs Sophia, Eleftrefs, " and Duchefs Dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body being Proteftants: And I do fwear, " that I do, from my heart, abhor, deteft and abjure, as impious and heretical, that damnable doftrine " and pofition, that Princes excommimicated or deprived by the Pope, or any authority of the See of " Rome, may be depofed or murdered by their fubjefts, or any other perfons whomfoever; and I do " proteft and declare, and do foleranly fwear it to be my moft firm and fincere opinion, belief, and per- " hiafion. That neither the Pope, nor any General Council, nor any Prieft, nor anyEcclefiaftical Power " whatfoever, can abfoh e the fubjefts of this Realm, or any of them, from their Allegiance to " faid Majeft)' ; and that no foreign Prince, Perfon, Prelate, State, or Potentate, hath, or ought to " have, any Civil Jurifdiiftion or Authority whatfoever within this Realm, or any Spiritual Authority, " Power, or Jurifdiftion whatfoever within this Realm, that can, direftly or indireftly, affeft or " interfere with, the Independence, Sovereignty, Laws or Conftitution of this Kingdom, or with *' the Civil or Ecclefiaftical Government thereof, as by Law ellablifhed, or with the Rights, " Liberties, Perfons, or Properties of the Suhjefts thereof; And that no perfon can be abfolved from " anyfm, nor anv fin whatever be forgiven at the pleafure of any Pope, or of any Prieft, or of any " Perfon whomfoever; And that no breach of faith with, or injury to, or hoftility againft, any " Perfon whomfoever, can ever be juftitied, by Reafon, or under pretence that fuch Perfon is ao. " Heretic or an Infidel; And that neither the Pope, nor any Prelate, nor any Prieft, nor any " Aflembly of Prelates or Pricfts, nor any Ecclefiaftical Power whatever, can, at any time, difpenfe " with, or abfolve me from tlie obligations of this Oath, or of any other Oath, or of any " Compaft whatfoever; And I do alfo in my confcience declare and folemnly fwear, that I acknow'-' " ledge no infallibility in the Pope; and all thefe things I do plainly and fincerely declare, acknow- " ledge, and fwear, according to thefe exprefs words by me fpoken, and according to the plain and " ordinary fenfe of the fame words, without any equivocation, mental evafion, or fecret refervation " whatfoever; and I do make the aforefaid Proteftation, Declaration, Recognition, Acknowledgment, " Abjuration, Renunciation, Promife and Oath, heartily, willingly and truly, upon the true faith of " a Chriftian. So help me God,' And it is then enafted. That every Perfon who (hall take and fubfcribe the Oath of Allegiance and Abju- Tation, and of Proteftation and Declaration, therein before appointed to be taken and fubfcribed, ftiall thenceforth be deemed and taken in law to be a " Protefting Catholic- Difli^nter ;" And that, none of the Laws now in force againft or concerning Papifts, or Perfons profeiling the Popifti Religion; - Or againft or concerning Popifn Recufants : — Or againft or concerning Popilli Recufants Convift; — Or againft or concerning Perfons edu- cated in the Popifh Religion ;- Or againft or concerning Perfons reconciled to, or holding Communion with the See of Rome; —Or againft or concerning Popifti Biftiops, Priefts or Deacons; or Perfons entering into or belonging to any Ecclefiaftical Order or Community of the Church of Rome ; — Or againft or concerning Perfons hearing or faying Mafs; or being prefent at, or conforming to, or performing any Kite, Ceremon}-, Practice or Obfervance.of the Church of Rome ; — Or againft or concerning perfons not reforting or repairing to his or het Parifn Church or Chapel, or fume other ufual place of Common- Prayer, to hear divine fervice,and join in publick worftiip, according to the forms and rites of the Church of England, as by law eftabliflied; — Or againft or concerning Perfons keeping or having any fenant, or other Perfon, being a Papift or reputed Papift, or Perfon profeffing the Popifti Religion, who Ihall not fo rcfort, or repair to his or her Parifh Church or Chapel, or foirie ftich other ufual place of Common Prayer as aforefaid ; — Cr againft or concerning Perfons not taking and fub- fcribing the Oath commonly called the Oath of Supremacy, or the Declaration commonlv called the Decla- ration againft Tranfiibftantiaticn; or the Declaration, commonly called the Declaration againft Tranfubftantiation and Invocation of Saints;— Nor any Law requiring the Regiftryofthe Names and real Eftates, or Enrolment of the Deeds and Wills of Popilh Recufants or Papifts, or Perfons educated in the Popifh Religion, or whofe Parent or Parents ftiall be a Papift or Papifts, or who Ihall ufe or profefs the Popifti Religion; — Shall extend, or be conftrued to extend, to any fuch Protefting Catholick Diflentcr, who fliailliave taken and fubfcribed fuch Oath of Allegiance and Abjuration, and of Proteftation and Declaration, as aforefeid; and in all caies where Perfons are required to take and fubfcribe the Oaths commonly called the Oath of Allegiance, the Oath of Abjuration, and the Oath of Supremacy;— Or the Declaration commonly called the Declaration againft Tniifubftantiaiion, or tlie Declaration commonly called the Declaration againft Tranfubftantiation and In- vocation of Saints; —Any fuch Protefting Catholick Fiiffenter as aforefaid ihall and mav, at his or !.er election, lake and fubfcribe, in place of the fame, the Oath of Allegiance and Abjuration, and of Proteftation and De- claration herein before mentioned and appointed to be taktn as aforefaiJ; And fucli la.l-mentioned Cath of Allegiance and Abjuration, and of Proteftation and Declaration, may and Ihall alfo be adminiftered and taken }'ef -re the fltme pcrfcns, a.td in the fame manrirr, and iha'.l give the fame Benefits and Advantages, and Iha'! operate to and for jiP. the fame Intents and Pvirpofcs whatfoever, (fave as is herein after excepted and ■ffovided) as the aforefaid Caths commonly caUc-d the Oaihs of Allegiance^ .Abjuraticn and Supremacy, or i\\e^ aforefaii aforefaid Declaration againft Tranfubftantiation, or the aforefaid Declaration againft Tranfubftantiation anit Invocation of Saints, in the room of which it is intended to be hereby fubftituted. Provifo, for certifying and regiftexing the Places of WorAiip and Miniftersof ProteftingCatholIck Diflcnters. Provifo, that no Afiembly for religious Worfiiip of Protcfting Catholick Dilfenters (hall be had with the Doors locked, barred or bolted. Provifo^ for enabling Protefting Catholick Diflenters to cxercife Parochial or Ward Offices, by Deputy. Provifo, to exempt Protefting Catholick Priefts from ferving upon Juries and on Parochial or Ward Offices. Provifo, to enaWe Juftic«s of Peace to tender the Oath prefcrrbed by the Afl to any Perfon going to any Place of Aflembly licenfed by the Aft.' Provifo, that the Laws in Force for frequenting of Divine Service on the Lord's Dav, OwU continue in Force againft Otienders, unlcfs they come to fome Congregation or Aflembly perraitted by the AA, or by ike Aft of Toleration. Provifo, that the Aft (hall not extend to Perfons writing againft the Trinity- Provifo, that no Benefit in the Aft fhall extend to any Diflenting Catholick Ecclefiaftick officiating in any place of Congregation with a Steeple or Bell, or w!-o fhal! excrcile any of the Ceremonies of his P.eligion, or wear the Habits of his Order, except within fome Place of Congregation licenfed by the Aft, or in a private Houfe. Provifo, That nothing therein contained fhall be conftrued to exempt any fuch Protefting Catholick DifTcn- " ter, as aforefaid, from paying Tythes or other parochial Duties, or any other Duties to the Church or Miniftcr; or from any Profecution, in any Ecclefiaftical Court, or el fe where, for the fame; or to repeal any part of the Statute made in the 26th Year of the Reign of his late Majefty King George the Second, intituled " An Aft ■" fcr the betterpreventing of Clandeftine Marriages" or any parts of any other Statute concerning Marriages ; or to give any Ea'e, Benefit, or Advantage to any Perfon, who lliall b)- preaching, teaching, or writing, deny x)i gainfay the Oath o.f Allegiance and Ab^urstion, and of Proteftation and Declaration, therein before men- tioned, and appointed to be taken as aforefaid, or the Declarations or Doftrines therein contained, or any of them ; or to repeal or affeft any Law now in Force concerning tKe Right, or SucceiTion to, or the Limitation of the Crown; or concerning the Elcftion of any Member or Members to ferve in Parliament, gr to enable any Perfon to fit in cither Houfe of Parliament, or to be of his Majefty 's moft honourable Privy Council; or to hold, enjoy, or exercife any Cffice, Cixi! or Mililarv', unlcfs duly qualilied in the manner nov/ required bv Law; or to educate any Cl>ild a Papift, or any Child of Proteftant Parents, a Protefting Catholick Diffenter. Provifo, That nothing in the Aft contained fhall make it lawful to found, endow, oreftablifh, any religious Order or Society of Perfons, bound by monaftic or religious Vows, within t'.iis Realm, or the Dominions tiiereunto belonging; and that all Ufc3, Trufts and Difpofitions, whether of real or perfonal Property, which immediately before the palling of the Aft fliall have been deemed to b,e fuperftitious or unlawful, fhall continue to be fo deemed and taken. JProvifo, That nothing in the Aft contained fhall extendj or be conflrued to extend, to that jjart of Gjcitt Britain, called Scotland. A COPY J it 1 A Copy of a Letter, written by the Committee of English Catholics to the Four Apostolic Vicars. My Lords, xVt aMeetlngof the Catholic CoMMrTTEE, held on the 19th of November 1789, We took into Confideri- tion an Encyclical Letter, which you have been pleafed to addrefs to us and to all the Faithful in your four diftrifts, and we now offer, with the greateft deference, to your Lordlhips the refult of our deliberations. CoKSClotJS, that we never had any other objeft in view than to procure for the Englilh Catholics, who have honored us with their truft, a releafe from the numberlefs grievances, under which they have fo long and fo unjuftly laboured. We cannot but lament our misfortune in having incurred the difapprobation of them, who from their Itation in this country are the natural Guardians of the Catholic Religion. Some mifconception, we apprehend, muft have taken place; and, this mifconception once reftified, we ftill entertain the flattering hope, that your Lordlhips, far from raifing any impediment to obflrufl, will heartily grant us your concurrence to accelerate, the fuccefs of our well meant endeavours in ferving the common interefts of the Catholic body. We doubt not, but that your Lordfhips liave ufcd mature delileration and pre-Tjiou! difcuj/ions: — ^We cannot however forbear exprelhng our regret, that none of thofe perfons, who have been concerned in promoting and conducing tliis bufincfs of general utility, were called in by your Lordfhips to explain their fentiraents, and give that information, w hich probably would have prevented any neceflity of iflfuing a public cenfurc. Your Lordfhiv)s have unanimoufly condemned the form of an Oath intended for the Catholic?, — yet we beg leave to reprefent, that this very form was, not many months fince, fanftioned with the approbation of one of the four Apoftolical Vicars, who, as a Member of the Committee, has all along beenconfulted, and without whofe concurrence not one ftep has ever been taken. In condemning the form of the Oath, your Lordlhips have tiot condefcended to point-out what particular parts you judge to be reprchenfible, — and as the Oath contains no formula of faith, or declaration of religious doftrines, \ve are at a lofs to difcover what can make it an objeft of ecclefialUcal cenfure. You have declared the form of the Oath unlawful to be taken : — but as your Lordfhips decline to fpecify, for what reafons or through what motives it is unlawful, we are bewildered in conjefturing why we Ihould be rellrained from giving to our country a folemn pledge of our principles as men and as citizens. For, my Lords, what is the form of the intended Oath ? It is no profeflion of the peculiar doflrines, which the Catholic Church teaches in oppofition to thofe Churches, who have fcparated from her Communion; it is only a declaration of the innocence of our principles in fecial and civil concerns. Our taith is not brought forward in this Oath; theri-hts of confcienceare not evenconfuicicd; religion is not mingled with concerns ot a mere temporal nature: all we are required to fwear, is, that we maintain no tenets, which can hinder us from faithfully difcharging the duties of honefl men and of peaceable fubjeds. In the beginning of the prefent year, we followed the example of your Lorduiips, in fubfcribing a public renun- x'.ation of thofe odious and pernicious doftrines, which the injuftice of pre>idice has fo long imputed to us with equal- violence ▼iolenceandfalfehooci: doi5\nnes, which, if we really heid them, woul J render us, (as our mifinformed Adverfaries ha\e conftantly reprefented us to be,) — unworthy of civil liberty and t' e protection of the (late. — We rejoiced in an opportunity to remove efFeflually every inveterate prejudice, and to place our integrity beyond tl-.e reach of obloquy and fufpicion. The body of the Englifh Catholics concurred ; an inftrument v.as generallv figned, and prefented to both Houfes of Parliament, as the pledge of our honor, and the public monument of our uprightnefs. From this we cannot recede without pre\ arication. The folemnity of an official Oath can add nothing to the obligation of a deliberate and public proteftation; and the only utility in fubfcribing a proteftation againft imputed errors was obviouflv to ferve as a bafis for a future plan to procure redrefs from thofe gr',e\ ances, which nothing but the accufation of holding pernicious doftrines had Drought upon our body. The oath therefore followed the proteftation as a thing of courfe, and fince it does not in any one particular deviate effentially from the proteftation, it confequenth' forms one and the fame inftrument, — and as this inftrument has been publickly delivered before the eyes of the nation into the hands of the Legiflature, anv appearance of departing from it might be jufth- conftrued as a proof of unfair dealing, and would, of courfe, confirm tnoie prejudices, we have fo long and fo anxioufly ftudied to remove from the minds of our Countrvmen. Englilli Catho.ics would labour more than ever under national odium, and our late proceedings would be held out as a deuion- llration, that Catholics cannot in tmth give fecurity to a Pioteftant Government. My Lords, in the concerns of falvation we reverence the Epifcopal authoritv, and we have not the prefuraption to intrude ourfelves into thedetifion of religious controverfies : but while we refpeft that Authoritv, which the gofpel. of Heaven has empowered its Minifters to exercife, vve cannot but recoUeft, that we are men and citizens, and as fuch have rights to claim and duties to perform. If we facriSced our faith to our temporal interefts, we (hould be unworthy of the Communion of Chrift's Church ; but we conceive it to be a duty incumbent upon us to renounce all thofe pernicious doftrines, vvhich are falfely imputed to us, which make our Religion odious, which prejudice our fame, and w hich debar us from the enjoyment of our temporal rights. As often as unjuft charges are brought againft QS, we owe it to truth, to candour, to ourfelves, to the public, to difa\ ow and repel thofe charges. If the Govern- ment of our Countrv call upon us to ratify our difavowal by an Oath, we efteem ourfelves authorifed, and indeed- bound, to give this moft fclemn atteftation of our fin'cerity. IN SJ7ISF]V.\G THE MINDS OF THE PREJUDICED,— IS PROriXG OUR UPRIGHTNESS TO THE LEGISLATURE,— IN CLEARING OUR RELIGION FROM DISGRACEFUL ASPERSIONS, IN ATTEMPTING, BY HONEST MEANS, TO RECOVER THOSE TEMPORAL ADVANTAGES, FROM WHICH NOTHING BUT MISREPRESENTATION HAS EX- CLUDED US; -IN DOING THIS, Mi' LORDS, IVE ARE PERSUADED THERE CAN BE NO ENCROACH- MENT UPON THE PASTORAL AUTHORITY, AND AS OFTEN AS OPPORTUNITIES OFFER OF DOING IT WITH SUCCESS, WE CANNOT REFRAIN BELIEVING YOUR LORDSHIPS JITLL COUNTENANCE ;(;>/fy!/« /J «(j.' ^ //'« xuor//,— and, uhile he directed the views of his followers tow.irds an evcriaitin;{ fettlement, he left them under tlie obligation of difcharging every duty, which their focial and political combina- tions m.iglit impofe. BoR.v to fulfill all righteou^'nefs, ]efus Chrift, befidcs performing the work of his Father in the falvaticnof fo'iI», fet an example of complete obedience to the eftablifhed (jovernment cf his country. As a'J'iu, he complied « irh the law of Mofes; a/ « /^w/.y;,v, he complied with the edicts of the Emperor. He ftrongly marked the line, which divides civil from reii;;ious duties, and bade his followers _j/'iv to Caj<:r -what belongs to Co-Jar, and to God luhnt bAongs to God. His religion foon fpread, and theftate adopted it. From this alliance temporal and fpiritual concerns were infenfibly mingled; a perplexing confuficn often enfued ; and in many cafes, when the two powers ftood in Oj^jf:- tion, it became difficult, and to umple minds, impodible, to reconcile their duty to Ciefar with their duty to God. One memorable inftance our prefenl circumliances prompt us to bring to your Lordftiips recollection. After the infernal horrors of the Gun-powder treafon, James L was ftrongly excited, by the cla-meurs cf a terrified nation, to exterminate the race cf EngliiT Catholics, But Ja-ncs was tolerant and juft. He dci;ared, he would never confound the innocent multitude with the guilty few; and in order to pacify an enraged |>eaplc, and ihelter from deftruaion the devoted viftims, he drew up himfelf a teft, by which he mi^bt dircpminate the ieial and confcicntious Cati:olic from the dangerous bigot, who wr.s a(;tuated by fanatic zeal, ordrienfrom his duty by the predominancy of foreign pcliiics. fie projofed an Oaili of Allegiance, and with elaborate care, and the nicei exaflneftjfeparated fpiritual fro.Ti temporal concerns. He left to toa.''cie:ice all its rights in ni.-vtters oi" lalv2ti:n. and ppd onU' reguived a folemn proteftation of fidelity to the Government of the (late. His C^tholre fubjefts prefented themfelres with ardor to give their pledge of fealty, exulting in an opportunity to reconcile at length their political and their rel'gious obligations. Their j oy w'asfliort. Paul V. who then fat in t^e Papal Chair, fulminated a condemnation of this political Oath. He doclai'ed it inconfiilcnt with faith and hoflile to falvation. The extravagance of Paul's condemnation raifed amazcnent, and his brief was treated by the Englifli Catholics as fpurious. But they were not long permitted to ind.iUe their error. Another, and another brief fucceeded to confirm ihe firll ; and, by feme unaccountable blun- der, the'jiUulrious Bellarmine, employed to judify by his writings the decifion of the Pope, confounded an Oath of. political Allegiance, with the Oath againft acknowledging any fpiritual primacy in the bucceflbr of St. Peter. We need mt rc-trsce to yonr Lordfhips the difmal confequences of this precipitate condemnation. It fcanda- llzed foreign Catholics, it fomented divifions among the Catholics at home, it frightened from their loyalty the fcru- pulcus and un-informed, it ccnvertcd dytifulnefs to the ftate into refraftorinefs againft the Church, — And, what we Encliln Catholics have tlill, at this very day, to lament, it has left an almoll indelible iniprefiion on the minds of Pro- teftants, that it is a meritorious and neccffary part of a Catholic's fubmiilion to be guided implicitly by his ecclefiafti- .cal Superiors, even in concerns avowedly of a temporal nature. Mv Lords, to this imprudent interference of Paul V. Engllfli Catholics may afcribe in a great meafure, all the odium and all thecppred^on under which they have fmce groaned. We beg leave to recite the words of condemna- tion. No particular parts in the Oath are fingled out as excqitionable, the whole is reprobated in the following terms. " Satis vobis ex verbis ipfis perfpicuum efl'e debet, quod hujufmodi juramentum, falva fide Catholica & faUite ani- •" marum veftrarum pra?ftari non poteft, cum mr/ta contineat qua: fidei atque faluti aperte adverfantur. Propterea mo- ■" nemus vos, utab hoc & fimilibusjuramentis prajftandis omnino caveatis." The laft words are remarkable. It was not enough for the vehemence of Paul V. to deter the Englilh Catholici from giving tbe particular pledge required, he would bind them down from ever giving an equivalent one. And yet, -my Lords, what avail the commands of authority, when itmiftak.es its objeft and exceeds its juft limitation? A fiipreme Pontiff", at a period when the rag« of controverfy confounded earthly with heavenly things, menaced to fliut the eates of Heaven againft thofe, wh.o ftudied to promote good order upon earth: — but in a calmer age Apoftolical Vicars difavowed, by their exemplary condud, the violence of former times, and grafped witli eagernefs an opportu- nity of takinf that very oath, vi'hich had been reprobated as openly adverfe to faith and falvation. The Oath con- d^m:t:;d by Pai-.l /'.. ivith the exception of the luord heretical, has been taken by your Lordjhip!, and this very Oath, once the csufe of fo many dilTenfions, and fo'much unhappinefs, is now recommended by your Lordlhips as the ground- work oi" our future proceedings. This brings us, my Lords, to a confideiation of the Letter, which the fenior Apoftolical 'Vicar fent in your name to four members of the Catholic Committee. Your Lordfhips ad:, •" May it mt be mare prudent to drop at prcfent any " further purfuit of the meafure!, 'which have been begun?" For numberlefs reafons, my Lords, that purfuit cannot be dropped. Our biifinefs has proceeded too far, it has been laid before the Public, it has already engaged the attention cf the Legiflature, every circumflance feems to prcmife it fuccefs, andif the Catholics of England lofe the opportu- nity of recovering their civil and religious rights, it is probable they will ever after look in vain for their emanci- pation. THAT the Oath of 1 778 is a very fnfficient teji of our Ailegianc to the King, and Fidelity to Government, we entirely agree with your Lordlhips ; but tl.at it avillfatisjy at prefent, when a more ample toleration is applied for, we have not the llighteft reafon to expeiff. Wh^en a partial Indulgence was granted in 1778, your Lordfhips recoUeff what clamours and difturbanccs it raifed. Deluded by hereditary prejudices, and Icng habituated to miftaUe and execrate our principles, the moll violent among our Proteftant fcUow-fubjefls fet no bounds to their hatred. They repc'ated ancient accufations, they jnfifted upon our holding pcrni-cious doftrines, they defied us to difprove the charge by a public difavowal of tlx iniruted tenets, they held us out as dangerous enemies to every Proteftant Government, and branded us with holding principles irreconcilable with fecial honeft) and civil freedom. If at prefent the Legiflature Ihould extend its indul- gcnce, unlefs thefe inveterate prejudices are removed, might we not dread a return of that uproar and confufion, which convulfed the nation in 1780? The animofities therefore of a numerous party were to be previoufly allayed. Eor this purpofe the Proteftation and the fubfequent Oath were framed. Already they appc.ir to ha\e anfwered the intended puipofe ; many, who avowed themfelves our adverfaries, are become cordial in our fupport; we are rein- ftatcd in their good opinion as Men and Citizens; .jhey behold our Relicjion without deteftation; and they will fee us with pleafure admitted into the participation of rights^ from which nothing has excluded us, but the national per- fuafion, that we held thele pernicious dodrines. Tiif The Protedation and fubfequent Oath were therefore an jndifpcnfible addition to the Oath of 1778. This ProtclLition, my Loriis, is the only inftrument to give fuccefs to our application, and if it is fo faliitary in itseffefts, what objertion can Catholics have to receive trom the Legillature a name grounded upon it, and cxprefllve of tlicir fitiiationin this country? The preamble of the Bill fo unequivocally determines for what reafons we are to be called Protfjiing Catholic Diffi-aters, that It is inipoffible any miftake (hould be committed, or any offence betaken. Can foreign Catholics be dif-edified, becaiife we proteft againfl: pernicious do(ftrines falfely imputed to the Catholic Church? But foreign Catholics themfelves abhor thefe pernicious doctrines; Catholic Univerfities condemn them with zeal and feverity ; and as to the words /ro/9? and P?»/£/i^tllBRAP ^OfCAllFO/?,^^ ^.OFCAlll V- ^^v It iuii\,cnr . I 1^1 m "J 13 Jit » .^L' I ^/5a3Al^ ^'^MIBR'l University of California SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 Return tfiis material to the library from whicfi it was borrowed. .H;OFCAllFn^(;. ^-^OF-CAIIFOP,(> ^\\^F (INIVfpy//^^ ^OAHv«aivi^ ^ ^(J( Ti ^■lOSANCElfx> o ,^OFCAIIFO% OfCA ^/ia3AIN(13UV^ \0f^ ^vM-llBRARYQ^ ^-^: ■^i'iij'j.w^ui^ ■ "^/iaaAiNn ]v\v^ -;,.OFCAllF0ff^.> <;;OFCA ■^CAavaani^ '^OAavi vlllBRARYc lIBRARYQr ..s:lOSA'(Cfl£r.> .N\r >\M1RRARY^ \«FlJfJIV[Ry/A .v\OSAl .:; !i: .;. , :. „ : 1 D 000 000 806 wWijrMmM- ■ %^. l^K. ^ ft