« ZurückWeiter »
obtained peace for his house, unless his son and the wheat, I shall read their commenAbsolom had been put to death in the war tary in this class-book, which every student which he had excited against his father. So must have. the Catholic Church, if she collects together “Lest haply you injure the good, when some, by the destruction of others, heals the you endeavour to remove the bad from the grief of her maternal heart by the liberation midst of them, besides that those that are of so many souls.” Here is the sweetness bad 'sometimes become good;" and when of evangelical love,” never separated from they do, you know the church rejoices to “the salutary severity, which is peculiar to receive them into her bosom. If you would the Christian institution."
only conform to the Church of Rome, she Now here is Reiffenstuel on canon law. would embrace you with the most tender “ The conclusion stands also in a case, in maternal affection. “Christ does not forbid which any person is bound by an obligation heretics to be taken away and put to death, to him who is lapsed into heresy; so the by this: on which subject you must consult doctors afore cited with the gloss commonly Maldonatus on this point.” received. For the doctors commonly infer, Here you perceive the class-book which that the Pope can, for the sake of religion, the student must buy, refers him for instrucabsolve the laity from an oath of fidelity, and tion here to the more perfect standard of his from any other obligation, though confirmed College. Now here is the commentary of by an oath which they held beforehand to the Maldonatus, on Matt. xiii. 29:-" There are delinquent ; both as well, because in every some who abuse this place, by trying to prove promise the cause of religion' is considered that heretics are not to be punished or put excepted; as because, in such an obligation to death, which they who do, seem to be and Oath it is tacitly understood, if he con- anxious about themselves. First, indeed, it tinues such a person with whom I may law- does not refer only to heretics, but to men fully communicate, or if he does not render who are children of the devil, as opposed to himself justly unworthy to receive it accord- the children of the kingdom, among whom ing to law." It is asserted, in another heretics are the chief species, but not the passage, “ that servants and vassals are, ipso only kind. Therefore, they who deny that jure (that is, from the law itself), liberated heretics are to be put to death, ought much from service and fidelity to a heretic, as also rather to deny that thieves, much rather that man-servants and maid-servants from obedi- murderers, ought to be put to death; for ence to the same.” This is from the canon heretics are so much the more pernicious law of Reiffenstuel, published at Rome by than thieves and murderers, as it is a greater the present Pope, the year after he came to crime to steal and slay the souls of men the popedom, and returned as a standard in than their bodies. Also, all the ancient authe College of Maynooth. Now we come to thors, as Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augusanother (the last I shall trouble you with on tine, interpret this of heretics, not because this subject)—the Scriptures.
they are the only tares, but because they are There are two classes of books returned more especially so. Besides, though here. | in this parliamentary document. There is tics only are understood, nevertheless, the one list of books, which the students are Father of the family does not rashly prohibit all obliged to purchase at their own ex- such to be rooted out, but only lest the pense, and which they must have when they wheat be rooted out with them; for then, come into the College. There is another according to his opinion and will, they are list of works recommended by the professors not to be rooted out, when there is any of the Roman Catholic College of May. danger lest the wheat be plucked out with nooth, for their perusal, or referred to by them, as the divine Augustine and the divine them in the course of their lectures. Now Thomas, that greatest of all theologians, has I shall take one of each class. This is a observed :" under which “ masters and commentary on the Scriptures, which the guides ” the trustees of Maynooth are Roman Catholic students of Maynooth are pledged to direct the consciences and underobliged to purchase at their own expense: standings of their students. “When, there the commentary of Menochius, which was fore, there is no danger that the wheat be printed for the College of Maynooth. Here rooted out along with them, but there is is a beautiful vignette of this celebrated rather danger lest, if they be not plucked up College in the front, and the words, “ The they may injure the wheat, what need is Roman Catholic College of Maynooth. there to wait for the harvest ? They are Founded 1795.” Now, on this favourite immediately to be plucked up, they are imtext of theirs, upon which you have heard mediately to be burned.” the opinion of Augustine, namely, the tares In a time of peace, when England is at
rest, it would be a most dangerous thing to send to the Pope, and to request that he attempt the eradication of the tares in Ire- would favour the College of Maynooth with land; but if the sound of foreign cannon be a set of books, which might correspond with heard across the channel, and England's the amiability of the professors ? hands are filled at home, and those foreign But does Mr. Wyse imagine that such a foes often invited, are received upon the statement can be imposed upon the common shore, then, when there is no danger that the sense of any man out of the House of Comwheat be rooted out with the tares, “ imme- mons? If this be the case, what was the diately they are to be rooted out, immediately reason why it is proved to demonstration, they are to be burned.” “ Besides, why is that as soon as the priests leave that Colthere danger that the wheat will be rooted up lege, from the year 1808, Dens's Theology with the tares? or why does the Father of was adopted by the whole body of Romish the family order to wait for the harvest, unless bishops assembled in Synod, as the best that before the harvest they cannot be dis- “guide and master” of all the priests in tinguished or separated from the wheat ? their dioceses? When therefore they can be separated, un- What is the reason why those bishops, doubtedly they are to be separated-un- since the year 1810, have circulated secretly doubtedly they are to be burned.”
under their patronage, through the length I shall now just make one or two remarks and breadth of Ireland, a fuller commentary upon the parliamentary debate on the second on the Scriptures, distributed by proper perof the present month. The hon. member sons to subscribers in every town, breathing for Waterford, Mr. Wyse, says, “ With res- out threatenings and slaughter more full of pect to the charge that had been frequently sedition and murder than than of Maldomade, that a book entitled Dens's Theology natus? was read at Maynooth, he begged to say that What is the reason why, in the year 1831, that work was not read at Maynooth, and it is demonstrated by the secret statutes of never had been read there, and that, more. Dr. Murray, though he said to Lord Melover, many of the doctrines which were sup- bourne, this month ten years-"I did not posed to be inculcated in that college, par- make Dens a conference book; in fact we ticularly the doctrine of the power of the have no such book;"--what is the reason Pope over temporal princes, his power of why his own secret statutes, detected the deposition, and the power of breaking oaths next year, demonstrate that he not only with heretics, were not taught, but were made it a conference book, but that he made most studiously inculcated by the statutes it a conference book that he might train his and every one of the professors of theology priests in it; that by that book, as their not to be taught in that college.” With standard, they might direct the consciences respect to Dens being used in the College of all the Roman Catholics committed to of Maynooth, I never said it was, for the their charge? simple reason, that I never could prove it. What is the reason why, in 1831, those But, indeed, I know not what is the use of bishops dared to publish a code of canon Dens being read in the College of Maynooth, laws, some of which they had denied on their when Dens's master, Thomas Aquinas, is oaths before the Commissioners of Educathe standard appointed for the college. With tion, and before the Committees of Parliarespect to these doctrines being “studiously ment in 1825 and 1826, to have any existence inculcated, not to be taught” in Maynooth, in Ireland; but which they admitted, if pubI really do not know, but in all our colleges, lished, would overturn the government, and our professors and our tutors“ studiously “drench our streets and fields in blood ?” inculcate,” that the books put into our hands Why did they dare to publish this code of should be learned and taught; but May- canon law in 1831, immediately after they nooth, it seems, on the testimony of Mr. had got emancipation? Why is it, that at Wyse, presents a most marvellous exception this moment, in the midst of peace, we are in the history of all literature and education, suffering, in Ireland, the apprehensions of because in these the professors “ studiously war? What is the reason why the Sovereign inculcate” that the doctrines in their books of this country is threatened by her subjects are not to be learned! What a pity that in Ireland, that the moment there is war, the time of these amiable professors should they will break out and disinember her embe so lost in endeavouring to preserve the pire ? pupils from the information of their books! With respect to principles contained in Would it not be well, for the Right Hon. books, I confess, I know not how the House the Prime Minister, before he carries out of Commons, or any human being can form his intention of endowing this College, to a judgment of the doctrines taught in the College, unless from the books of that Col- Peel, to prove that the principles on oaths lege, except indeed it be that the Right in Maynooth are the same as those held by Hon. Baronet adopts the principle of Mr. our professors of moral theology! Wyse, that the superiors “ studiously incul. But now we shall refer to the authorities cate that the doctrines of the books are not of Maynooth, to examine this subject a little to be learned.” But what are we to do? more closely. are we to take the doctrines of the profes. I open Reiffenstuel, the standard of May. sors? The Right Hon. Baronet has sup- nooth, printed, as I have said, under the plied us with this test, too; so let us try authority of the present Pope. I find here, Maynooth on evidence as cited by Sir in a chapter on the obligation of promissory Robert Peel.
oaths :He refers us to the evidence of two pro. “Question. What conditions may be fessors; we shall go to the first. I refer to considered to be tacitly implied in a prothe passage cited by the Right Hon. Baronet, missory oath ? page 180, of the evidence in this report, “We answer, First, in every promissory from which he quotes the professor's answer oath, however absolutely made, certain tacit as to Paley.
conditions are understood .. .. Among conI am perfectly sure, that the Right Hon. ditions of this sort which are tacitly, and Baronet did not arm himself with this quo- justly indeed, in a promissory oath, the first tation from the parliamentary evidence, as is, if I should be able,' because no one is an apology for Maynooth, to mislead the bound to an impossibility; and this proceeds house or the public mind upon the subject; from any impossibility, whether it be imI am sure there is no one that hears me, possible de jure, (namely, that could not be who would not indignantly acquit him of done honestly and on sound principles,) or such a charge if it were made against him. whether it be impossible de facto, (namely, But I deeply regret, that both for his own that could not be done physically, or at sake and that of truth, he did not a little least without the greatest difficulty.)....10 more closely study the evidence from which this may be referred this condition, fi he made this extract; so as to furnish his shall please God, if I can do it laufully; beown mind with sound information on such a cause an oath is not the bond of iniquity; momentous subject. For if he had read the for those things which are unlawful or disevidence of this same man in the very page please the Lord God, are justly considered preceding his own quotation, he would have impossible. seen the vital difference between the doc- “ The second condition is, saving the right trines of Popery, and those of any sound and authority of my superior." Christian moralist on the subject of oaths. These authorities are quoted on this subThis very professor is there asked, whether ject: Reiffenstuel, Jus. C. Lib. II.; Decret. he had read a treatise of Bishop Sanderson fol. 24. on the Obligation of Oaths ? (these treatises . Now what does the Church of Rome call were in my opinion brought in to throw a impossible? what does she mean by unmystified confusion over the whole matter, lawful? who is this superior, whose right and confound the doctrines of Paley and over the conscience is to be reserved as a Sanderson with theirs,) and he answers, “I tacit condition in the mind of him who takes have seen it to-day, and I read some of it; the oath ? I find it differs almost in nothing from ours We turn to the next chapter, on the obin its divisions and subdivisions, only just ligation of a promissory oath, and there we that it does not admit the dispensing power find, in the eighty-second section, the sixof the Pope in respect of Catholics!" Mark! teenth canon of the third Lateran Council, “ ONLY JUST!” That is, “ only just that it quoted, “those are not to be called oaths but does not admit the dispensing power of the rather perjuries, which are taken contrary to Pope!” Why, herein lies the whole vital Ecclesiastical utility." difference between Popery and Protestantism Again, we find, in the eighty-fourth secon the question. The Protestant believes tion, that an oath of keeping “the statutes, that he is responsible to God, and only to ordinances, or customs of places, when in God, for the obligation of his oath; while them are contained any things unlawful, Popery teaches, that the Pope or a bishop impossible, injurious, or obstructive of can assume God's prerogative over the con- ecclesiastical liberty, is unlawful, and by no science, and nullify any promise or oath means to be taken.” which a man can make, whenever he pleases. But the Right Hon. Baronet goes on :And this is the professor, whose evidence is “ As another proof of the danger of trusting quoted, no doubt by mistake, by Sir Robert to such indications, he might state, that, during the same inquiry, the following ques- Prime Minister of England cites from the tion was put to another professor at May- treasury bench in the house of Commons, as nooth:- In the third Council of Lateran is a model of the sanctity of an oath, and of the it not understood that amongst the punish- loyalty of a subject, and of the value of the ments decreed against the Albigenses, this College of Maynooth ? Who is this man, was determined, -Illorum subditi et vassalli whose authority he cites, for denying the relaxatos se noverint a debito fidelitatis doctrine of the third Lateran Council, that dominii et totius obsequii donec in tanta subjects could be absolved from their oath of iniquitate permanserint? This appeared to fidelity to their Sovereign ? He is a man, imply, that, in certain cases, a spiritual whose whole existence gives a long, loud, authority might release the subjects of a living lie to every word of this statement. sovereign from their allegiance; but what The meeting will hardly believe-the nation was the reply of the professor of dogmatic will hardly believe that the man whose theology? He said, “ If it be supposed authority is thus cited by Sir Robert Peel, that a Council or Pope, or any authority in support of this bill in the house of Comwhatever, assumed the right of absolving mons, is the Popish Bishop of Ardaghsubjects from their allegiance to their Sove- Dr. Higgins! I have the report in my reign, I would disregard their decision, and hand; I turn to the passage quoted; and consider the subject by no means freed from here is the name-Dr. WILLIAM HIGGINS ! the obligations of fidelity. Not only would This is the man who in 1830 signed, with I despise and disregard such a decree, but, the other bishops, a pastoral to all the people if a subject of the Sovereign in question, I of Ireland, declaring that having obtained the would consider it my religious duty to openly object of their desire in Catholic emanciparesist it, and advise such of the people as tion, they withdrew from all further political might be committed to my care, to remain agitation, and hoped it never would be reunshaken in their allegiance. Now let newed. This is the man who, with the them place that practical statement against other bishops, signed a declaration published the doctrine of the Council of Lateran; and in the Directory of 1835, and in all the because certain doctrines were contained in papers in Ireland, expressly forbidding that some books used at the College of Maynooth, the clergy should in future use their chapels let them not suppose that the instruction for any political meeting, or any political given at that institution was inconsistent agitation. And this is the man, who placed with their duty to God, to their neighbour, himself at the head of the repeal movement and to their Sovereign.”
in Ireland, who at once organized the whole My first reply to this statement shall be body of his clergy, seventy-four in number, this. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, and sent in their adhesion to it—the man, that in the latter times some shall depart who at the time of the monster meetings, from the faith, giving heed to seducing when the government threatened to put them spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies down, threatened the government, that if in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared they dared to put down the meetings in the with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and fields, the chapels throughout the country commanding to abstain from meats, which should be used as the rallying places for the God hath created to be received with thanks- people. And this is the man, whose subgiving of them which believe and know the scription, and that of all his priests, to the truth. Those whom God marks as apostates repeal fund, amounting to £ 74, is anfrom the faith, “ forbidding to marry, and nounced in the Freeman's Journal of the 3rd commanding to abstain from meats,” are of May—the very same date with the Times branded also with this mark upon their brow newspaper, containing the Prime Minister's —“speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their citation of his authority in the House to conscience seared with a hot iron." But justify his bill. But this subscription is I answer, secondly, without any reference accompanied with a letter to Mr. O'Connell whatsoever to the man who gave that answer in which he says, “Much has been said on his oath, give me that answer from any about the gratitude we owe for the grant to man who is "a professor at Maynooth," and Maynooth, but I confess that I for one, (and I say he is a public perjurer. He is bound I am joined in that sentiment by the priests by an oath to his Church to receive indubi- and people of this diocese,) feel no gratitude tably that Council ; if he is true in his oath whatever : in the first place, our own enerto his Church, he is perjured in that oath to gies and determination wrung that paltry the commissioners; if he is true in his oath sum from a bigoted and anti-Irish cabinet, to the commissioners, he is perjured in his nor shall we ever thank the rich glutton oath to his Church.
when he disdainfully flings us the crumbs But who is the man, whose authority the from his table ; secondly, the grant is so miserable in amount, that it can be looked misinformed, most awfully ignorant of the upon in no other light than as a sheer system that is taught; but they are gentlemen, mockery and an insult.”
many of them with a high feeling of honour. The Right Hon. Baronet has been pleased And if the Prime Minister can indeed get to inform us, that “ he has read with great them to commit themselves, and commit attention this report of 1827.” I am per- their character, in thus supporting the third fectly satisfied, that he never opened the reading, will he venture to send the bill up book to take that passage to quote in the to the House of Lords under the protection House of Commons, because the name of Dr. Higgins ? “ William Higgins" stands on the margin, Which of the Lords will he venture to and it is wholly impossible that Sir Robert ask to move it? I am afraid, my Lord, he Peel could have taken such an authority. would have a very bad chance with your Some sycophantic flatterer, some Papal trai- Lordship. tor, some Jesuitical knave, has abused his Will he call upon the prelates of England confidence; has furnished him with this in- --men who are bound by their solemn ordiformation to arm him for the objection nation vows, and bound still more by the against the grant, but to mock him for solemn vows of consecration, under which making it; and he has unsuspectingly taken they hold their high and holy office, to "use it, and committed himself by quoting it in the all faithful diligence to banish and drive House of Commons. But what now, let me away" these iniquitous and abominable docask, will the Right Hon. Baronet do under trines ?-Will he call upon them to violate the high sanction which he has adopted ? their vows and oaths, by identifying their
Will the Right Hon. Baronet convene his principles with, or surrendering them to, this Cabinet Council and discuss with them the dignified prelate of the papacy, Dr. Higgins ? propriety of proposing the third reading of If the Prime Minister would dare to do this bill on Monday, and introducing it into so, oh! for the mighty, the indignant thunthe house under the sanction of Dr. Higgins ? derbolt of a Chatham's voice in the Com· Will the Right Hon. Bart. propose the mons, to rend in pieces the hollow-hearted, third reading of his bill on Monday, as sup- cowardly, spiritless legislation of these base, ported by the authority of Dr. Higgins ? degenerate days! Oh! for the electric fire How will he meet the smooth, bland smile of his eloquence to thrill round the House of Mr. Wyse, how the sardonic grin of Mr. of Lords, to evoke the genius of the ConSheil, when he moves it under the sanction stitution to come to the rescue of his country, of their venerable bishop, Dr. Higgins—an to call the ancestors of the nobles of Engadmirable scholar, and an admirable illus- land to frown from the tapestried walls, on tration of the system taught in Maynooth ? such an insult upon the honour and dignity
Will the Right Hon. Bart. say to his ma- of this illustrious branch of the legislature; jority—“Gentlemen, I hope I shall be sup- to invoke the judges to interpose the purity ported by all your voices in the third reading, of their ermine, and the bishops the sanctity reinforced as we are by the excellent and of their lawn, against such a monstrous vio. right reverend Dr. Higgins ?" How will that lation and desecration of the laws, the libermajority ever face their constituents again? ties, and the religion of their country! To what city, to what town, to what village, But vain is the help of man. O Lord! to what honest Englishman can one of them “raise up thy power, and come among us, apply, and say—“My good friend, I hope I and with great might succour us." O God! shall have the honour of your support at the raise up men of truth, of principle, of virtue, next election ?” “Why,” John Bull will an- of religion, of honour; men who are not swer, no, that you sha'nt; you have given my ashamed, or afraid, to profess themselves the vote to Maynooth and Dr. Higgins.” Will servants of their God, and then, and not till not the whole body of the majority be known then, they will not be afraid to be the faithby the name of " Messrs. Higgins and Com- ful servants of their Sovereign and their pany?” They are mistaken, lamentably country!”
the direction of THE PROTESTANT
PROTESTANT DEPOSITORY 124, Oxford-street;
at 11, Exeter Hall; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL & Co.
And R. GROOMBRIDGE.