rious Revolution determined them to refcue the Church from fuch peril, and they caused to be expunged from the oath of fupremacy the words-" that the King is the only fupreme governor of this realm, as well in fpiritual or "ecclefiaftical caufes as temporal"-so that the fubject is now bound by the oath of fupremacy only to fwear to the independence of this empire upon any foreign power, It is merely an oath of allegiance; it always was fo-and fuch as no fubject, not actually a traitor, can confcientiously decline, for it is purged of all reasonable and plausible objection. It never was an oath of exclufion, neither of reftriction, except to traitors, and is, in every fenfe, strictly conformable to the antient law of the realm as recognized in the preamble of the statute of præmunire in the 16th of Richard II. which recites" that the Crown of England ever hath been free, and subject to none but God, and that the laws and ftatutes of this realm ought not to be submitted to the bishop of Rome to be defeated at his pleasure, to the destruction of the King, his Crown and Regalia.” And this was the voice of the people of England in open parliament. See Carte's Ormond, vol. i. page: 36 to 43. and Davis's Reports, Cafe Præmunire. The Romanists of this day and all their abettors (among whom, on this point, they recruit all the Jacobins of the country) defire to have this oath repealed-thus acting in the fpirit of traitors to their country from motives of conscience, maintaining its fubjection to a foreign power, and professing to support that power in all possible ways, by arms or other means to bend their country to its authority; they therefore demand a repeal of the law which requires an oath of allegiance to the conftitutional government, and which must be an acknowledgment of its subjection to a foreign tribunal. “It will enable us," argue they," to obtain feats in the great national council, and procure for us power to betray the independence of our country. The Pope and our divines affure us, we are bound in confcience to do so whenever we can. Doctor, Troy of Dublin, that eminent Dignitary of our Church, in his Paftoral Letter of 1793, has told us that the Pope of Rome is fucceffor to St. Peter, and prince of the apoftles-that he enjoys, by divine right, a fpiritual and ecclefiaftical primacy in honour and rank—and also of real jurisdiction and authority in the Universal Churchthat we cannot confcientiously abjure his authority. That Henry VIII was the first Chriflian prince who affumed ecclefiaftical fupremacy, and commanded an Jenslaved parJiament: to enact it as a law of State; and the Catholics confider it as an ufurpation from which we will by every means in our power endeavour to free qurselves; and we

N

pray

pray you, good, kind, liberal Proteftant ufurpers! to affift us in our purpose, and enable us to betray our common country to dependence and flavery." To fhow the true fpirit of the Romanifts with respect to temporal governments, it is neceffary to inquire whether thofe I have ftated have ever been difavowed, and whether and at what time any material change has been effected in them? All the Roman bishops réfident in the British dominions (and who affume their titles in direct violation of law) at their refpective confecrations do fwear an oath of allegiance to the Pope and among other claufes, that they will from that hour forward be faithful sand obedient to St. Peter, and to the Holy Church of Rome, and to their Lord the Pope and his Succeffors canonically entering: that the papacy of Rome, the rules of the Holy Fathers, and the regality of St. Peter, they will keep, maintain, and defend, against all men; the rights, privileges, and authorities of the Church of Rome, and of the Pope and his Succeffors, they will caufe to be conferved, defended, augmented, and promoted Another claufe in the oath is, That heretics, fchifmatics, and rebels to the Holy Father and his Succeffors, they will refift and perfecute to their power.' This laft claufe Dr. Troy states to be now omitted in the oath of the Romish bishops, in countries not in communion with the See of Rome, at the reprefentation of the late Empress of Ruffa, on condition of fuffering a Papist bishop to Teide within her dominions; and if fuch be the fact, the oath wears fufficient hoftility to a Proteftant State even without it. A fimilar oath is taken by the priests at their ordination, to the Pope and the Council of Trent, binding themselves to condemn, reject, and anathematize, all opinions fo condemned by the Pope or that Council. The Council of Lateran in 1215, under Pope Innocent the IIId, confisting of 400 bifhops and 800 fathers, acknowledge the power of the Church (that is of the Pope) to difpofe of the dominions of Kings and Princes, to command temporal Lords, to purge their dominions of herefy, under pain of excommunication; to abfolve fubjects from their allegiance; to denounce against kings, rulers and fubjects, guilty, or even fufpected, of herefy or inactivity in detecting and punishing heretics-the most terrible punishments, fuch as banithment, confifcation,' torture and death: declaring that no faith is to be kept with' hereties, nor contentions nor agreements; or, if made, that they were nullities; and that no communication of any kind is to be held with them. The Council of Conftance in 1415 the fubfequent Council of Bafil, and of latter years the Council of Trent, in the 16th century, all confirm the decrees of the Lateran Council, particularly in respect to he

refy;

of

refy; and upon a breach of faith fo fanctioned by the Council of Conftance, in its 12th feffion, in the 15th century, was John Hufs condemned for herefy and burned alive. Agree ably to the decrees of the Lateran Council, Queen Elizabeth was excommunicated by Pope Pius the Vth, and her fubjects abfolved from their allegiance. His bull was afterwards renewed by his fucceffor Gregory XIII. Pope Clement IX., conformably to the fame decrees, iffued a bull, enjoining the English Romanifts to keep out the Scottish heretic (meaning James I.) from the kingdom of England, unless he would reconcile himself to Rome, and hold his crown of the Pope, (fee Carte's Ormond, vol. i. p. 33.) and conform himself and all his fubje&ts to popery. All these, not from the private ambition of the Popes, or the Court of Rome, by the injunctions and decisions of their Ecclefiafti cal Councils. In like manner was Charles VI. emperor Germany, commanded by the letter of Pope Clement XI, dated June 4th, 1712, to annul the treaty of Alt' Raftadt, by which he granted certain privileges to his Proteftant subjects, and formed fome covenants with the Proteftant Princes of the Empire, and declaring the fame for ever null and void, though the fame have been repeatedly ratified and fecured by oath. The Pope's Legate at Bruffels, when it was in contemplation to propose an oath of allegiance to the Catholics of Ireland, in the year 1768, writes to Ireland that the abhorrence and deteftation of the doctrine, that faith is not to be kept with heretics, and that princes deprived by the Pope may be depofed or murdered by their fubjects, as expreffed in that oath, are abfolutely intolerable-because, as he states, thofe doctrines are defended and maintained by the most Catholic nations, and the See of Rome has often followed them practically; and he adds, that as the oath is in its whole extent unlawful, fo it is in its nature invalid, null, and of no effect, infomuch that it can by no means bind or oblige consciences. But to come down to authorities ftill more recentDr. Troy, the Romish archbishop of Dublin (who, openly affumes the archiepifcopal arms furmounted with a Cardinal's cap, from which I prefume he must be a Cardinal-in his Pastoral Letter of 1793, afferts, "that all Catholics confider the express decifions of their general councils to be in: fallible authority in point of doctrine;"-and Dr. Huffey, another Catholic bishop, appointed by the Pope to the fee of Waterford, in his Paftoral Letter of 1797, maintains the fame. doctrine, and forbids, under pain of excommunication, all Romanifts from fending their children to Proteftant schools, and exhorts all the Romish foldiery not to obey their officers; in any orders relative to spiritual concerns, referving the explanation

explanation of that term to himself and the Romish Priefthood; and adding, that any officer who fhould enforce obedience to orders relating to fpiritual concerns, might feel the effect on the day of battle; or, in plain English, that the Romish foldier might then turn upon and affaffinate him, or defert to the enemy. This fame Dr. Huffey was fent over to Ireland by the British Miniftry, under the protection of the British Secretary of State in Ireland, and made President of the magnificent Popish College at Maynooth, upon a foundation infinitely more grand and expensive than any Proteftant College in the Empire, then founded and endowed for the exclufive education of Romish Priests, by the express defire of the British Miniftry, for the perpetuation of popery and difaffection in fo principal a member of the British Empire.

Dr. Troy was a great favourite at the Irifh Court during the administration of Marquis Cornwallis; and another Romish priest, of the name of Milner, one of the four apoftolic vicars in England, in a very late publication, has taken great pains to inform his Sovereign, or future fovereigns, of his own conftruction of the Coronation oath, and fays, "that every human law, promife, or other engagement, however confirmed by oath, muft neceffarily turn upon the cardinal virtue of prudence;" thus implying that the obligation of fulfilling an oath turns upon expediency. There is no great occafion, however, to apprehend that his present Majefty will confult this cafuiftical Romish divine on points of confcience. The Romish Church has never difavowed those principles; and their rejection of the oath of supremacy, a fimple oath of allegiance, proves that they never have changed their principles. To allow the fupreme control over thefe realms in cafes of wills, of marriages, of legitimacy, of divorces, of fucceffion to property, of dowries, and various concerns purely of a temporal nature, to the Pope, must be obviously attended with the worst confequences. The power of excommunication, too, is a matter of fpiritual jurifdiction, which, as well as other inftances of power tyrannically exercifed by the Romish priests in Ireland, over the property and other temporal concerns of the laity, is terrible in the extreme; while auricular confeffion and absolution confer upon them a vast power over the temporal concerns of their flock. Even Bonaparte himself, a fierce unprincipled tyrant and ufurper, was fo well convinced that the fupremacy in fpiritual affairs. would fo powerfully contribute to establish and support his own temporal power, that he procured his own coronation by the hand of the Pope, as fupreme head of the church. That Romanifts have been admitted to places of power in Proteftant

H

Proteftant defpotic monarchies or oligarchies, where they may be difmiffed at pleasure, and the great mafs of the people are excluded from any political power, is no argu ment whatever for admitting them to fuch power in the popular government of this realm. For in Proteftant States, where the people or their elective reprefentatives have any fbare in the government, Romanifts were always excluded from political power, previous to the deftructive progress of the French Revolution. This was the cafe in the Proteftant cantons of Swifferland, in the United Provinces, and in Holland. So far therefore as the example of other Pro teftant States goes, their exclufion is juftified in the British Empire; and our conftitution is such as renders that exclufion not only expedient, but imperiously neceffary, they being perfons who are the avowed enemies of the Protestant State. An honourable and able member of this house (Mr. Fox) has more than once afferted, that the exclufion of Romanifts from feats in parliament is an unjuft invasion of their natural rights; but I repeat, 'tis they who exclude themselves, by their refufal to take the test proposed for all others. The honourable member fupports his pofition by arguing, that no man should be curtailed of his privileges for any private opinion he may hold or promulge, however traitorous or hoftile to the Constitution, unless he attempts by fome overt act to carry them into effect; for that actions, and not opinions, are the objects of the law. But, though this be admitted, are not the diffemination of opinions traitorous and hoftile to the Conftitution, and the attempt to convert others to fuch opinions, overt acts, and the juft objects of penal and restrictive laws in the British Empire? A man may certainly keep deftructive poifons in his private clofet; but if he publicly vend or administer them, will not the laws reftrain and punish him? Preventive laws, which are the wifeft of all others in this empire, do make opinions their objects, and impofe difqualifications, not only on the holders of certain opinions, but on those who may be reasonably fufpected of holding them. Thus, revenue officers are difqualified from voting at elections; placemen obliged to refign their feats in parliament upon accepting offices; and all perfons prevented from fitting for boroughs, who have not 300l. a year, and for counties, who have not 6ccl. a year, landed property, on the fufpicion that, otherwife, their particular interefts might bias them to opinions, and confequently votes, hoftile to the interefts of the State. There is, befide, no natural right detached from focial rights, and no man can poffefs any right injurious to the ftate and laws of that society in which he lives. Away then with the claims of

Romanifts