FOOTNOTES:

"Convince a man against his will,He'll hold the same opinion still,"

you will be convinced, from what I shall advance, that the above objection, is another chimera of your own imaginations.

True and genuine religion, must be founded on the free, and spontaneous consent of the heart. If therefore, you Protestants ever allow the Pope, to extend his spiritual power over you,withouthavingfirstsincerely, and deliberately considered therealgrounds of the Catholic Faith, and of the Pope's title to spiritual supremacy, and without your havingfirstgiven yourfree, andspontaneousconsent to them, I hope you will forgive me, if I politely tell you, I should consider you as a set of religious donkeys, and that you ought not to be allowed tobrayin this free country.

But you will object, it will beyouCatholics headed by the Pope, that will make us renounce theProtestant, and embrace theCatholicfaith. To this objection I answer. First, the Catholics of England have promised to maintain, support, and defend, to the utmost of their power, the succession to the crown. Now, this succession, by an act entitled, "an act for the further limitation of the crown", is, and stands limited to the Princess Sophia, Electress, Duchess Dowager of Hanover, and to the heirs of her Body,being Protestants. Such are the very terms of the oath, which we Catholics have taken; as long therefore, as the Established Church is secure of having a Protestant Sovereign, it cannot be in any danger of subversion.

Secondly. The Irish Catholics have gone still further, and to silence even the predictions of their enemies, have disclaimed, disavowed, and solemnly abjured every intention, to subvert the present Church Establishment, for the purpose of substituting a Catholic Establishment in its stead, and have solemnly sworn, that they will not exercise any privilege, to which they are, or may be entitled, to disturb, or weaken the Protestant religion in that kingdom.

Thirdly. But I will suppose for a moment, that the Catholics were at last to determine to perjure themselves, and to violate thepromises, to which they are so solemnly pledged, let us see the obstacles, they would have to surmount. First, there would be the Sovereign, the head of the Protestant Church, with the immense patronage of the Crown at her (or his) disposal; secondly, there would be all the spiritual Peers, and with the exception of a few Catholics, all the temporal Peers; thirdly, there would be the great majority in the House of Commons, in proportion to at least, ten Protestants to one Catholic. Now, by what spirit of magic, are afewCatholic Peers, to become themajorityof the House of Lords, or isoneCatholic Commoner, to outvotetenProtestants. By what miracle, is the Queen (or King) to abandon the defence ofthatChurch, of which she (or he) is by conviction a member, and by law, supreme head? By what manœuvres, are the Catholics so to blind the confidence of the Sovereign, as to worm themselves into the possession of all places, of power, and trust? Before the Catholics can aid the Pope to extend his temporal or spiritual power over you Protestants, they will have to surmount all the above obstacles. But by what human power can they ever surmount the above obstacles? Really, gentlemen, is it not childish to talk either about Catholics forcing you to become Catholics, or their wishing to aid the Pope, to extend his spiritual or temporal domination over you Protestants, with all the above obstacles staring you in the face.

But, gentlemen, if on the other hand, you should think proper to seriously, and conscientiously, examine therealgrounds of the Catholic religion, and if you should think proper, to examineseriously, andconscientiously, whether the Pope, is therealsuccessor of Saint Peter, and of course in that case, therealspiritual head of Christ's Church, if you should ask yourselves the reason, why the Catholic Faith, has been the belief of the most extensive, and enlightened nations of Europe, and of the most illustrious characters, that ever did honour to the name of man,[F]if upon carefulinvestigation, you should find that the Catholic Faith, was the faith of those, who built our Cathedrals, who erected our Universities, who laid the foundation of our envied Constitution, and who secured the great charter of our rights at Runnymede, in short, if you should find that the members of this creed, have in every age, stood forth the champions of liberty, and at the same time remained faithful worshippers of God, if after the most careful, and impartial investigation, you should find all these things to be real, and undeniable facts,thenI would address you in the words, with which St. Paul addressed King Agrippa, "I would to God, that both in little, and in much, not only thou, but also, all that hear me this day, should become such as I also am, except these bonds." (Acts, ch. xxvi., v. 28.) Yes, gentlemen, I repeat it, if after the most serious, and minute investigation, you should find the above thingsreal, andundeniablefacts,then, gentlemen, the sincere wish of my heart would be, that you might all become Catholics, and thespiritualchildren of the head of our Church, but,mind, without our bonds, that is, without having to suffer, what our Catholic ancestors had to suffer for their faith,[G]a faith, which they conscientiously held as their best inheritance, and which, they held more dear, than life itself.

I would also address you in the words, in which Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, addressed the Jewish Council respecting the Apostles, who were unjustly cast into prison. "And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel, or this work, be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps, even you be found to fight against God." (Acts, ch. 5, v. 38, 39.) Gentlemen, if the Catholic Faith, be an invention ofhumancounsel, and a work ofhumanpolicy, rest assured, it will ofitselfcrumble into nought, but if it beof God, and if it be thewill of God, that England should return to her ancient faith, you cannot overthrow it, and you cannot fight against God, for as the wise man says, "there is no wisdom, there is no prudence, there is no counsel against the Lord." (Prov. ch. xxi., v. 30.)

Gentlemen, I think you must acknowledge, that I have answered, shortly indeed, but I hope satisfactorily, your objection, as to the Pope's gradually extending hisspiritual, and temporal domination over you Protestants. Gentlemen, I am not aware, that any one at your meeting, was so uncourteous as to throw in the face of Catholics, either the Gunpowder, or Oates' plots. Still, you are aware, that it has been done atmanyof the late meetings, and in many places of England, to the injustice of Catholics. Allow me, to solicit your attention, whilst I say a few words respecting each of these plots, and whilst I show you, it is most unjust to throw those diabolical plots in the face of Catholics, either of the present, or of former ages.

The Guy Fawkes plot, or as it is usually termed, the Gunpowder Plot, is often sneeringly, and insultingly thrown in the face of Catholics. Now let it be remembered, that the original conspirators were only eight in number, that they were also of the most abandoned character, and that some of them, years before, had abjured the Catholic faith, and let it also be remembered, that this plot was disclosed even by a Catholic, Lord Monteagle, and that the Pope in a letter expressed his detestation of it, and ordered the Catholic clergy, to prevent by all means in their power, all similar conspiracies, and to exhort the people to patience and obedience. Now I ask, is it reasonable, that the wicked deeds of these few and abandoned conspirators, should be thrown in the face of the whole body of Catholics; as well might you upbraid our Saviour with the crimes of Judas. The plot was unknown to all good Catholics, theyhad nothing whatever to do with it, and it, and all other plotting whatever, were condemned and forbidden in the most severe manner, by the Clergy and the Pope. What could Catholics do more? Why, therefore, are the Catholics of the present times to be condemned for a plot with which they had no more to do, than the Protestants of the present day? But I will suppose for a moment, this diabolical plot was concocted by real Catholics. Can it be unreasonably urged, against the Catholics of the present day? If you answer, yes, I will then prove that the Ministers who attended your meeting, were cursers, murderers, and deserters of Christ. For if you ask each of them, if he is a minister of Christ, he will answer, certainly. Well, then, one of the Apostles betrayed our Saviour, another by oaths and curses, denied him, and all deserted him on the night of his passion. Now, if the above line of argumentation, against Catholics be valid, then I may conclude, that the Ministers who attended your meeting, were murderers, cursers, deniers, and deserters of Christ. Really, if I were to adopt this mode of argumentation against them, you would think, and justly, theupper storiesof my intellect were of a very strange structure. How can persons, therefore, have the barefacedness to apply such reasoning to the Catholics of the present day, respecting the Gunpowder Plot.

Whoever will read the history of Titus Oates's Plot, will find that it was concocted against the Catholics, by some of the brightest characters for rascality, and perjury, and infamy, and cruelty, that the world ever beheld. Oates' plot consisted in this, that he accused the Catholics, and Jesuits in particular, of a plot, to murder King Charles the II., (1678), to transfer the sovereignty of the realm to the Pope, and to extirpate the Protestant religion from the land. But was not Titus Oates himself aJesuit, or at least, aCatholic? You shall hear who Titus Oates was, from thepenofProtestantHistorians.

"Oates, the former of this dreadful plot, was himself the most infamous of mankind. He was the son of an Anabaptist preacher, took orders in the Church of England, became chaplain on board the fleet, and was dismissed for some unnatural practices, not fit to be named." (See Hume's History.) You shall hear too, who hisaccomplices were; "Bedloe, a man, ifpossible, more infamous than Oates himself;" (See Hume's History.) And these were soon backed by others. "A wretch, named Carstairs led the way, and soon, from all the brothels, gambling houses, and spunging houses of London,false witnessespoured in, to swear away the lives of Roman Catholics." (See Macaulay's History of England.) And yet, on the barefaced testimony, of these abandoned, and infamous wretches, the Catholic Noblemen and Gentlemen, were, with the exception of the Duke of York, expelled from their seats in Parliament. Some of them, (although as innocent of the crimes of which they were accused, as the new-born babe), were tried, and executed on the false, and contradictory evidence, of these base wretches. All of them, died protesting their innocence; and many of them, embraced the opportunity to declare their abhorrence, of the doctrines so commonly, but so unjustly, attributed to Catholics. Their speeches at the place of execution, are still on record. (See "A Remonstrance of Piety and Innocence," 1683. Dodd's History, vol. iii., p. 356.) And if ever a man, may be believed to speak with sincerity, it is when, in the full possession of his senses, he stands on the brink of eternity, and expects the next moment, to be presented before an Omniscient Judge. One of them, Lord Stafford, referred the Peers, at his trial, for an account of his religious creed, to a small tract, entitled "Catholic Principles." This small tract has often been printed, and was then, and is still, considered to convey an accurate notion of the Catholic faith. Well may Hume say, that "this Popish plot, is an incident, which, for the credit of the nation, it were better to bury in eternal oblivion, but which it is necessary to perpetuate, both for the truth of history, and to warn, if possible, their posterity, and all mankind, never again to fall into soshameful, sobarbarousadelusion." (See Hume's History.) And yet Oates was rewarded with appointments in the Royal Palace, and had £1200 a year assigned him, as the wages of his iniquity, and Bedloe £500: and Oates was called "the Saviour of the nation."

But how did these wretches come off at last? You shall hear again, from Mr. Macaulay. About seven years later, when the madness, and the delusion of the people, had passed away, it wasresolved, to bring these wretches, who had spilled so much blood, to theirowntrial. "Some of the wretches," (says Macaulay) "were already beyond the reach of justice. Bedloe had died in his wickedness, without one sign of remorse or shame. Dugdale had followed him to the grave, driven mad by the furies of an evil conscience, and with loud shrieks, imploring those, who stood around his bed, to take away Lord Stafford. (A Catholic Lord, whose life he had sworn away, seven years ago.) Carstairs, too, was gone. His end, was all horror, and despair, and with his last breath, he told his attendants to throw him into a ditch, like a dog, for that he was not fit, to sleep in Christian burial ground." Mr. Macaulay thus describes Oates' appearance, athistrial. "A few years earlier, his short neck, his legs uneven, as those of a badger, his forehead low, as that of a baboon, his purple cheeks, and monstrous length of chin, had been familiar to all, who frequented the courts of law. He had been the idol of the nation—men had uncovered their heads to him, and called him, the deliverer of his country. Theynow shudderedat the sight of thehideousfeatures, on whichvillanyseemed to be written, by thehand of God." (See Macaulay's History of England.) Horrible as were the sufferings of Oates, they did not equal his crimes. Such, gentlemen, is a short, but true account of Titus Oates's Plot, and of his abandoned, and perjured accomplices. And yet, some have the audacity to throw this infamous plot, in the face of the Catholics, even at the present day. To such I would say, "you are either ignorant of history, or not; if you are ignorant of history, it is the part of a simpleton, to talk on subjects which he does not understand." But if you are acquainted with history, I beg to address you in the words of the poet—

"A moral, sensible, and well bred man,Will not offend me, and no other can."

Gentlemen, I now appeal to you, if it is not evident from what I have advanced in the preceding pages, that the late crusade against Catholics, has been most unjust, and most cruel. If you will seriously, and coolly, and impartially consider what has been advanced, you must be convinced, that all your alarms, and those of many other Englishmen, are mere chimeras of your own imaginations. But if, to some of you, the above reasoning does not appear satisfactory, I am sure it will to every sensible and unbiased Englishman. Englishmen, indeed, like all other nations, havetheir faults, andtheir perfections. In times of general excitement, and of public panic, nothing is too absurd, for their credulity. In the hour of excitement, and of public panic,pigmies, appeargiantsto them, andmole-hills, swell intomountains. Witness the late railway mania. This mania, spread like wildfire, through the higher, the middle, and even the lower classes, and threw the whole nation, into a fever of excitement. Before their excited imaginations, rose the golden dreams of theirsix, andeight, andtenper cent., of railways, as thebestandsurestinvestment for their property, in short, as the easiest and most direct means, of turning their mole-hills of money into mountains of gold.In vain, were Englishmen warned, and cautioned bysensible, andthinkingpersons,againstthesegoldenprospects of their excited imaginations. Convinced, they eitherwould not, orcould notbe. But lo! the mighty bubble burst, and then, to their loss, and sorrow, they bothsaw, andacknowledgedthefollyof their former excitement, of theirrailway golden dreams.

Again, I say, when Englishmen return to theircoolermoments, andseriouslyreflect, on all thelate hubbub, aboutPope's Bulls, andGuy Fawkes, andGunpowder Plots, andCatholic Mummeries and Superstitions, I feel confident, they will verify the words of Dr. Hughes, the Catholic Prelate of New York, who lately preached in London, on his way to Rome. "I am sure (says this distinguished Prelate,) that this great, and liberal nation, (England)will, after thistemporaryexcitement isover,be ashamedof theirpresentconduct, and will beastonished, how they couldever think, of proposing any steps, which tended toabridge, thelibertyofanyportion, of their countrymen, and violate that freedom in religion, whichis their boast. The (English) Ministrycannotgoonestep back, upon the track ofpersecutions, if they make butonestep, inthatdirection, they will becondemned, byevery liberalmindedman, and will be looked upon, withcontemptby therestof the nations of theworld." (Dr. Hughes' Sermon. London, December 1st, 1850.)

Hence we find, thatmost, of thegreatandenlightenedstatesmen ofEngland, alwaysboldly, andfreely, advocated the freedom, and liberties of theCatholics.As long, as we retainanyrespect for genius, and discernment, for Parliamentary eloquence, and political wisdom, the names of Pitt, and of Fox, of Burke, and of Windham, of Canning, and of Peel, will standforemost, in thepublicestimation. These eminent statesmen, however they mightdifferonothersubjects, concurred in supporting thecauseof theCatholics.Their'swas the conviction ofliberal, andenlightenedminds, who forgot the distinctions ofparty, in theirzeal, to serve the cause ofjustice, and offreedom. Yes, theywell knew, that theBritishConstitution, wasnota constitution ofrestraints, andpenalties, that it wasframedto preserve the rights offreemen, that it was formed, for thewhole, not for apart, and that it was destined, like the sun, to shed its benign influenceupon all. Andhence, they knew, that they could notbetterconsult itsprosperityandstability, than by fearlessly, and manfully battling, forequalrights, andequaljusticeto all.

Gentlemen, I must now beg leave to retire, as my presence is required, in amore augustassembly. You know, your address to the Magistrates for calling a meeting, &c., washeadedby certain Protestant Ministers, and you know also, that most of their fellow labourers in the vineyard, of the Protestant Church, have been mostactive, andzealousin thelatecrusade against theCatholics. Now, to pass over these reverend gentlemen withsilentcontempt, would be, in my humble opinion, an act of greatincivility, anddisrespectonmypart; and which,theymight perhaps consider,a most extraordinary, andpresumptuous movement, onmypart; I beg leave, gentlemen, therefore, to adjourn to thisaugustassembly, and as I shall have to show these reverend gentlemen, what "an extraordinary and presumptuous movement,"their ProtestantChurch, has been making,for a long time, on thepockets, and on theintellectsof Englishmen, I shall be very glad, ifyou will accompany me, and see verified the poetical words of my two texts, annexed to my firstlittleaddress to you—

"I would you had been there to seeHow the light blazed up so gloriously.""And then in naked majesty,With brow serene, and beaming placid light,Came truth."

"I would you had been there to seeHow the light blazed up so gloriously."

"And then in naked majesty,With brow serene, and beaming placid light,Came truth."

FOOTNOTES:[A]Lingard's Anglo-Saxon, vol. 1, p. 189, 190.[B]Macaulay, tells us, that the number of Roman Catholics is not fewer than 150,000,000, and that it would be difficult to shew that all the other Christian sects united, amount, to 120,000,000. I quite agree with his words, "not fewer," and "it would be difficult to shew;" for upon an accurate calculation, it would be found that the Catholics amount nearer to 200,000,000, than to 150,000,000, and that all the other Christian sects, united into one body, are nearer 100,000,000, than 120,000,000. However, Macaulay's statement is quite sufficient to prove what we have cited it for, viz:—that the Roman Catholics are the greatest body of Christians, and therefore have the best title to the ancient and honourable name of Catholic.[C]In the Apostle's Creed,we allprofess to believe in theHoly CatholicChurch. Now, if this is notourChurch, I would ask, what Churchis it? Is it the collection of sects which have sprung from the Reformation? But, then, it would not beCatholic, for as they are the smaller number, they cannot claim universality. Is it the Theological hodge-podge, the farrago of all the religions, which believe in the Gospel? Then it cannot beHoly, for we should form theprincipalpart of it, and you know, the immaculate Church of England tells us, our doctrines are idolatrous. I really think, people had better leave us in thequietpossession of our old inheritance, the honourable and ancient name of Catholic, andthenthey would avoid the above ridiculous consequences.[D]I have sometimes been asked, and the question has sometimes been slyly popped to me, and to others, by certain limbs of the law, if I was aJesuit? I answer first, that I have not the honour to belong to that learned, and much calumniated body, the Jesuits. I answer secondly, I perfectly understood theslydrift of thesequestions, andinuendoes. It was as good as to say, "Jesuitism is a strange compound of all kinds of tricks and quirks, and of mental reservations, and deceptions. Now this little spectacle fellow, is one of them, and therefore, he is up to all the Jesuitical trade, and is a perfect specimen of it. Nay, I believe, that he could slyly board us with his Jesuitical tricks,evenwhile we were looking on." Well, one good turn certainly deserves another. And now, I must as politely as I can, tell these limbs of the law, that if I am to judge of the law from the little, that I have really seen, and know aboutthem, and that if Jesuitism bereally, what theyimagineit is, and if the whole of England ever became Catholic, and then, from Catholicism jumped to Jesuitism, in this case, I certainly think that these limbs of the law, will not have to study, the celestial arts of Jesuitism, as pourtrayed in their own imagination; for they will bealready, perfectly dubbed masters of Israel in that art, and they will certainly occupy distinguished places, in the various departments ofmental reservations, pious frauds, and charitable tricks and quirks upon their neighbour's pockets. Really this reminds me of Paddy, who had just arrived from Ireland, and wassneeringlyasked by abusyEnglishman, what kind of a crop of Murphies, they had had in Ireland? Pat had a shillalah in his hand, he up with it, knocked down the Englishman, and said; "And sure your honour, we have had a very good crop of Murphies, and you may know it by the feel, for that is the stalk of one." Now, I hope these limbs of the law, will not be offended at me for taking up my spectacle shillalah, and just politely flooring them, for theirJesuitical inuendoesandmental reservationsin my regard. I hope they will not be offended, at my defending myself, for their own profession will teach them, that every one is allowed fair play, whether he be a metamorphosed calumniated Jesuit, or a limb of the law in the body of a man's pocket. But far be it from me to adopt their extensive, and sweeping mode of argumentation, viz., the law of the land is a heap of deceptions, and tricks, now such a man is a lawyer, therefore he must be a sleight-of-hand gentleman in that art. Before I make this sweeping conclusion, I oughtfirst, to examine seriously, and carefully, if the lawreally is, this strange compound of deceptions, and I ought then, to examine and really know, that this lawyer has really acted according to this deception, I ought to do this, before I condemn him personally, or open the flood-gates of condemnation on the whole respectable body of lawyers. This is the argumentation which reason and justice tell me I ought to adopt. Now just let these limbs of the law, adopt this line of argumentation with regard to Jesuitism and Jesuits, and then, they will be both limbs of the law, and limbs of fair play.[E]But some one will perhaps inquire, does the Protestant Church consideryourCatholic Ministersreallyordained? I reply she does, for were any Catholic Priest to go over to the Protestant Church, she would not ordain him. And why? Because the Protestant Church got her ordinations (if she has any) from us, and to questionourordination, would be to strike at the foundation ofher own.[F]"Catholicity, which has been this night, the subject of so much abuse, has been the belief of the most extensive, and enlightened nations in Europe, and of the most illustrious characters, that ever did honour to the name of man."—(Speech of Lord Hutchinson in the House of Lords, May 10th, 1805.)[G]The following are the words of Mr. Cobbett, a protestant, writer respecting the introduction of the Protestant religion into these realms. "The Queen (Elizabeth) reigned for forty five years, and these forty-five years, were spent in deeds of such cruelty, as the world had never heard of, or read of before; and all for the purpose of compelling her people, to submit to this established (Protestant) Church. With regard to the cruelties of this monster, in woman's shape, her butcherings, her rippings up, her tearing out of the bowels of her subjects, her torments of every description, in which she was always cordially supported, by the lawgiving makers of the (Protestant) prayer book, I must refer the reader, to my history of the Protestant reformation; suffice it to say (here), that in these forty-five years, which were employed in the establishing of this Church, there were more cruelty, more bloodshed, more suffering, than ever were witnessed in the world, in any other country in a like period of time." (Cobbett's Legacy to Parsons, p. 38.)

[A]Lingard's Anglo-Saxon, vol. 1, p. 189, 190.

[B]Macaulay, tells us, that the number of Roman Catholics is not fewer than 150,000,000, and that it would be difficult to shew that all the other Christian sects united, amount, to 120,000,000. I quite agree with his words, "not fewer," and "it would be difficult to shew;" for upon an accurate calculation, it would be found that the Catholics amount nearer to 200,000,000, than to 150,000,000, and that all the other Christian sects, united into one body, are nearer 100,000,000, than 120,000,000. However, Macaulay's statement is quite sufficient to prove what we have cited it for, viz:—that the Roman Catholics are the greatest body of Christians, and therefore have the best title to the ancient and honourable name of Catholic.

[C]In the Apostle's Creed,we allprofess to believe in theHoly CatholicChurch. Now, if this is notourChurch, I would ask, what Churchis it? Is it the collection of sects which have sprung from the Reformation? But, then, it would not beCatholic, for as they are the smaller number, they cannot claim universality. Is it the Theological hodge-podge, the farrago of all the religions, which believe in the Gospel? Then it cannot beHoly, for we should form theprincipalpart of it, and you know, the immaculate Church of England tells us, our doctrines are idolatrous. I really think, people had better leave us in thequietpossession of our old inheritance, the honourable and ancient name of Catholic, andthenthey would avoid the above ridiculous consequences.

[D]I have sometimes been asked, and the question has sometimes been slyly popped to me, and to others, by certain limbs of the law, if I was aJesuit? I answer first, that I have not the honour to belong to that learned, and much calumniated body, the Jesuits. I answer secondly, I perfectly understood theslydrift of thesequestions, andinuendoes. It was as good as to say, "Jesuitism is a strange compound of all kinds of tricks and quirks, and of mental reservations, and deceptions. Now this little spectacle fellow, is one of them, and therefore, he is up to all the Jesuitical trade, and is a perfect specimen of it. Nay, I believe, that he could slyly board us with his Jesuitical tricks,evenwhile we were looking on." Well, one good turn certainly deserves another. And now, I must as politely as I can, tell these limbs of the law, that if I am to judge of the law from the little, that I have really seen, and know aboutthem, and that if Jesuitism bereally, what theyimagineit is, and if the whole of England ever became Catholic, and then, from Catholicism jumped to Jesuitism, in this case, I certainly think that these limbs of the law, will not have to study, the celestial arts of Jesuitism, as pourtrayed in their own imagination; for they will bealready, perfectly dubbed masters of Israel in that art, and they will certainly occupy distinguished places, in the various departments ofmental reservations, pious frauds, and charitable tricks and quirks upon their neighbour's pockets. Really this reminds me of Paddy, who had just arrived from Ireland, and wassneeringlyasked by abusyEnglishman, what kind of a crop of Murphies, they had had in Ireland? Pat had a shillalah in his hand, he up with it, knocked down the Englishman, and said; "And sure your honour, we have had a very good crop of Murphies, and you may know it by the feel, for that is the stalk of one." Now, I hope these limbs of the law, will not be offended at me for taking up my spectacle shillalah, and just politely flooring them, for theirJesuitical inuendoesandmental reservationsin my regard. I hope they will not be offended, at my defending myself, for their own profession will teach them, that every one is allowed fair play, whether he be a metamorphosed calumniated Jesuit, or a limb of the law in the body of a man's pocket. But far be it from me to adopt their extensive, and sweeping mode of argumentation, viz., the law of the land is a heap of deceptions, and tricks, now such a man is a lawyer, therefore he must be a sleight-of-hand gentleman in that art. Before I make this sweeping conclusion, I oughtfirst, to examine seriously, and carefully, if the lawreally is, this strange compound of deceptions, and I ought then, to examine and really know, that this lawyer has really acted according to this deception, I ought to do this, before I condemn him personally, or open the flood-gates of condemnation on the whole respectable body of lawyers. This is the argumentation which reason and justice tell me I ought to adopt. Now just let these limbs of the law, adopt this line of argumentation with regard to Jesuitism and Jesuits, and then, they will be both limbs of the law, and limbs of fair play.

[E]But some one will perhaps inquire, does the Protestant Church consideryourCatholic Ministersreallyordained? I reply she does, for were any Catholic Priest to go over to the Protestant Church, she would not ordain him. And why? Because the Protestant Church got her ordinations (if she has any) from us, and to questionourordination, would be to strike at the foundation ofher own.

[F]"Catholicity, which has been this night, the subject of so much abuse, has been the belief of the most extensive, and enlightened nations in Europe, and of the most illustrious characters, that ever did honour to the name of man."—(Speech of Lord Hutchinson in the House of Lords, May 10th, 1805.)

[G]The following are the words of Mr. Cobbett, a protestant, writer respecting the introduction of the Protestant religion into these realms. "The Queen (Elizabeth) reigned for forty five years, and these forty-five years, were spent in deeds of such cruelty, as the world had never heard of, or read of before; and all for the purpose of compelling her people, to submit to this established (Protestant) Church. With regard to the cruelties of this monster, in woman's shape, her butcherings, her rippings up, her tearing out of the bowels of her subjects, her torments of every description, in which she was always cordially supported, by the lawgiving makers of the (Protestant) prayer book, I must refer the reader, to my history of the Protestant reformation; suffice it to say (here), that in these forty-five years, which were employed in the establishing of this Church, there were more cruelty, more bloodshed, more suffering, than ever were witnessed in the world, in any other country in a like period of time." (Cobbett's Legacy to Parsons, p. 38.)

"A marvellous project, (is) i'faith, and a merry jest withal!"

Most Reverend Gentlemen,

You cannot besurprised, that I havenottaken my text from theScripture, for many of you tell the people, that weCatholicClergymen wish to conceal from the people that sacred volume. To have, therefore, taken my text from theScripturefor thesakeof thepeople, would be like falsifying your words, and to have quoted it for your instructions, would have been most presumptuous on my part, as every one knows you are masters of Israel, both in word and deed, in the knowledge of that sacred volume. Had I, therefore, been so presumptuous as to have quoted Scripture foryourinformation, you might have perhaps addressed me in the words of the Poet—

"Ye Popish blockheads, mitred Cambridge cries,Begone; I and my friends alone are wise,Rich with the spoils of Babylon, 'tis fitThatweshould claim monopoly of wit."

Well, among the great diffusion of biblical knowledge, which has been sogloriouslyspread among the people by your Scriptural Church, as by Law established, I happened one dayfortunatelyto hear, that you Reverends often told the people, that there was a golden and heavenly rule in the Scriptures, viz.:—that they were never to do unto others, what they would not wish others to do unto them. Now we cannot for a moment suppose, that like spiritual guide-posts,youwould wish to inculcate this golden rule toothers, and not follow ityourselves. Well then, you have beenlatelytrying to arouse the indignation of the people, by informing them in the mostdignifiedmanner, that the Pope of Rome has just made a most "extraordinary, and presumptuous movement" on the Protestants of England. Now what shall we say, if it turn out, that you andyour ReverendProtestant ancestors, have for a long time been making a "most extraordinary, and presumptuous movement" on thepockets, and on theintellectsof Englishmen?

Let us then proceed to examinecoolly, andcalmly, the above points. I will endeavour, most Reverend Gentlemen, to discuss these points with as much temper, and forbearance as I possibly can. But, you must remember, thatyouand many ofyourReverend body, have been endeavouring to convict,without ceremony, thenumerousandrespectableCatholic body of England, of the crimes of wishing to extend theirpopish spiritualandtemporaldomination over the Protestants of England. For this purpose, your zealous and Reverend body have, with pious industry, raked together the filth of ancient controversy, and poured itwithout mercyon the heads of Catholics, and on that Church, of which it is my pride to be a minister. Now, Reverend Gentlemen,you, who deal so copiously in hard words, certainly ought not to complain, if you should happen sometimes, to meet with them in return. Ifyoudemand respect fromothers, you ought certainly to respect amore numerous bodyof Christians, (I mean the Catholic Christian world,) who have no reason to think themselves, your inferiors in talent, learning, or judgment. Well then, let us now proceed to the discussion of the above two points.

Most Reverend Gentlemen, in a book (butmindnot theScripture) called theextraordinaryBlack Book, published in London in the year 1831, by Effingham Wilson, RoyalExchange, I find the following statement of the income of the Church of England as by Law established. Of course, I am aware, that certain changes have been made by Government (since the publication of the above book) as to the amount of individual incomes, but theaggregatesum is still absorbed by the Protestant Church, as by Law established. Well then, in the above-mentioned, extraordinary Black Book, I find the various incomes of the Church of England there stated, and would you believe it! they form a sum of money,TO THE TUNEof nine millions, four hundred and fifty-two thousands, five hundred and sixty-five pounds per annum.

Now let us see, how well the Bishops, and Archbishops of the Reformation, have thriven on the abovespiritualfood. The following is an extract from the probate duty returns, and of course, must berealtestimony as to theworthof thesepoor in spiritchildren, when they awoke "in that undiscovered country, from whose bourne no traveller returns."

EXTRACT FROM PROBATE OF WILLS.

Now just add up the above items, and then, you will see that theseProtestantBishops and Archbishops,aftermaintaining themselves, their wives and families, leftbehindthem, according to the probate duty returns,no less than the enormous sum of two millions and seventy-five thousand pounds sterling. Really, when thesemammon-godlysouls entered the gates of heaven, with all these paraphernalia of gold, how amazed must the celestial inmates have been! They would wonder whence thesegoldenspirits came, but of this they would be convinced, that they must have come from the land of theliving, and had certainlypiouslyreformed the words of the Scripture, "Blessed are the poor in spirit," and really verified the words of my text, "What amarvellousproject is faith, and amerryjest withal!"

So far, Reverend Gentlemen, I think the people will begin to conclude, that your Reverend body has, for some time, been making a most "extraordinary and presumptuous movement" on thepocketsof Englishmen, and would to heaven! I could stop here. But I mustnowshow the people of England, thatyour ProtestantChurch as by Law established, is receiving more money byfour hundred and fifty-three thousands, five hundred and sixty-five pounds, than all the other Christian churches in thewholeworld. The aboveextraordinaryBlack Book, gives a scale of thecomparativeexpenses of the Church ofEngland, and of all the otherChristianchurches in thewholeworld. Now by this scale, it is shown that thetotalincome of all the Christian churches in the various parts of the world, is eight millions nine hundred and ninety-nine thousand pounds; and the above scale shows, that the income of the Church ofEngland, is nine millions, four hundred and fifty-two thousands, five hundred and sixty-five pounds. Now, if you will just place thesmallerof these under thelargernumber, and subtract the one from the other, you will see that theincomeof the Protestant Churchin England, exceeds the total income ofallthe otherChristianchurches in the whole world, byfour hundred and fifty-three thousands, five hundred and sixty-five pounds. Oh, mighty England! thou boastest,and justly, that thy majestic fleet rides on the waves, the triumphant mistress of the seas; and thou mayest alsoas truly, but notso justly, boast, that thyScripturalChurch, as by Lawestablished, rides triumphant on thegoldenwaves ofmammon, and that she isreally mistressof the world,in point of mammon; she istrulythegrandandgoldenemporium ofclericalincomes. Oh, how justly may the ministers of this Church, address her, as their golden calf, in these words of the Scripture,"Wherethougoest,Iwill go; and wherethoulodgest,Iwill lodge; andthypeople shall bemypeople." (Ruth i. 16.) "Yea! and we will kill the fatted calf, and slay the rams, and makemerry." (Prov. v. 9.)

But you will reply, we got all this money fromyou papists. Yes, courteous clerks, to thehonourof the Catholic Church be it said, that all this money was left by ourcharitableancestors; and I will now judge you fromyour ownmouths.Mindandmark it well, that in theCatholictimes of old England, the above sums of money were divided intothreeparts:onefor the maintenance of the clergy, thesecondfor the repair of the churches, and thethirdfor the support of thepoor. In those good oldCatholictimes, there were no church-rates, nor poor-rates. But yourgod-likechurch as by law established, thought it more just, or at leastconvenient, to pocketherselfthewholeof the above sum, and to leave to thepublicthe charitable office, of providing for the othertwopurposes. Really, Most Reverend Gentlemen, I candidly appeal to you, if this was not "a most extraordinary and presumptuous movement" of your clerical ancestors on thepocketsof the people; andreally, must not people of thepresentday think it "a most extraordinary and presumptuous movement" on the part of you Reverend Gentlemen, to continue thesepiousfrauds, andgodlypractices of your ancestors? Inthis, at least, youfullyobserve the commands of theScripture, "Remove not the landmark of thy forefathers." Oh ye poor! (whom I sincerely love for the sake of my Saviour,) when I enter your hovels, where sickness, misery, and want meet together, and witness the scenes of distress that are passing there;—when I see a few handfuls of dying embers, that are calculated rather to starve you, than afford you the necessary comforts of warmth;—when I see the bed of wretchedness, on which you cast your wearied limbs;—when I view the tattered clothes, which scarcely cover you decently, much less protect you from the inclemency of the weather;—when I behold your pale and sickly countenances, that bespeak the poorness and scarcity of your food;—when I view your poor little children, begging in vain, with tears ofartless innocence, a morsel of bread to satisfy the cravings of hunger;—when I witness scenes of this heart-rending description, (scenes which are not very uncommon now-a-days), thecharityof ourCatholicancestors, and theinhumanityofyourChurch as by law established, rush vividly on my mind, and call to my recollection the words of our Saviour, "Come, ye blessed of My Father, possess ye the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink. I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you covered me; sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me. Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil, and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink. I was a stranger, and you took me not in; naked, and you covered me not; sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. Then they also shall answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee? Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least," (namely the poor), "neither did you do it to me." (St. Matt. xxv. 34 to 45.) Oh howstrikinglydoes thefirstpart of this sacred passage apply toour charitableCatholic ancestors? But shall I apply the second part toyou, oryourProtestant ancestors? Oh! heaven forbid I should! I say with the great St. Paul, I judge no man; but charity for you, and the poor, induce me to entreat of you, and to ask of God to give you His grace, to commence a real reform in yourchurch property, for thesakeof thepoor, and to restore to thepoor, what your Protestant ancestors sounjustlytook from them.

But you will perhaps reply, that all this church property, has beenjustlygiven to your Protestant Church, by thelawof theland; for as the law of the land,justlysecuresto the landlord, his rents, so the law of the land,justlysecures toyour church, the tithes. I answer, in the first place, that by no law, eitherhuman, or divine, can property bejustlyapplied to anyotherpurpose, than tothatfor which theintentionof the testator left it. Now one-third of this church property, was left by ourCatholicancestors, for the support of thepoor; andas longas this property, was in the hands of theCatholic Church, the poor always receivedtheir justshare. Hence, amongallthe calumnies against theCatholicChurch, even herbasestenemies, couldneveraccuse her ofinjustice to the poor. I answer secondly, the law of the land, as tolandlords, is agoodlaw, because the landlord gives to his tenantvalue(viz., the use of the land) for what he (the landlord) receives; whereas the law of tithes is abadlaw, because it often exacts tithes, where the payer has never received,one farthingof value from theparson. Now in this case, it does appear to me (and I am sure it must to many others) most unjust to demand itfrom persons, who never received apin's-worthof good, fromyourministry in their lives. Nay, perhaps theonly returnthey got, for the payment of their tithes was, to hear their religionabused, and to be held up before the public, as guilty of thoseverycrimes, whichthesereverendsthemselveswerereallycommitting, either by their robbing the poor of their just share, or by unjustly exacting fromothersmoney, for which thepayershad never received one farthing of value.[H]

And now, most Reverend Gentlemen, I must just let the people see, how you contrive to blind them, by throwingpopishdust into their eyes. All the noise, which you make,about the pope's bulls, and about popish spiritual and temporal domination, is a mereruse de guerreofmanyof you, (some of you indeed, I believe, are sincere in your motives, and actions,) to divertpublicattention, from thegreat temporalitiesof the established Church. You call, and hold your public and glorious meetings. With upturned hands and eyes, with high-souledstrains ofdevotionaleloquence, with cordial community of feeling, got up between theestablishedChurch, andthosewhom you indeed honourwith your lipsby the title of reverends, but whom,in your hearts, you deemmere phantomsof ministers, with silvery tones, and well-turned periods, ofrag-tagandbob-tailinspirations; you excite the breathless attention of your audience, and profess themost sanctifiedattachment to yourgodlyChurch, and to your glorious Constitution, under the protection of whose wing,youareslylybasking in the sunshine ofgodlymammon, andworldlywealth. Should any poorCatholic, orcharitable dissenter, (who wishesyoutodotoothersasyouwould bedoneby,) obtrude himself on the notice of your meeting, a thundering philippic isinstantlyraised againstpopery, and gaining strength and speed, and loudness in its progress, rumbles onward, until at last, it bursts forth into atremendouselemental roar, increased by the zealous acclamations of an enraptured and fanatical audience. Oh, most Reverend Gentlemen, this is really aglorious, andvery profitablehumbug.As longasyoucan manage, to keep the people inthis feverish state of excitement, the gulls will think more ofdiscussing pope'sbulls,Guy Fawkes's, andGunpowder Plots, than ofquestioningthemoralbasis of the law, which entitlesyouto take fromthe poor, theirjustshare ofChurchproperty, left byour charitableancestors, and of exacting tithes and Church-rates fromthose, who do not belong toyourflock, andfor whom you do nothing in return. Thus, yousuccessfullystave off thediscussion of Churchproperty, professing all the while, the mostdevotionalconcern for thespiritualwelfare ofthe gulls, on whosepockets, you are making a most 'extraordinary, and presumptuous movement.' Thusyoureap theprofits, andlaughat thefools, who arecajoledbyyour granddisplays. Really, most Reverend Gentlemen, this extraordinary and presumptuous conduct, does, in my humble opinion,beat all the powers of impudence.[I]

Most Reverend Gentlemen, I have now proved "the extraordinary and presumptuous movement," whichyour scripturalChurch as by law established, has been making for a long time on thepocketsof Englishmen. I must now proceed to show, what "a most extraordinary and presumptuous movement" she has been making for a long time, on theintellectsof Englishmen. Would to God that occasion had never been given to me to touch onthissubject! But remember, thatmanyof yourreverendbody, have beenpubliclyadvancing the mostpretty, andpolitethings againstus Catholics. The newspapers, will bear ample testimony to thestrange, andhorridthings, whichmanyof yourreverends, havelatelyuttered against the Catholic Church. Now, what they have in general uttered against us, is,unfortunately,notfounded ontruth; but mind, what I shall advance isreally true, althoughmost awful, nayalmostincredible, had not yourProtestanttestimonies borneamplewitnessto it. Remember, also, that although Our Saviour was themostmeek, and kind creature that the worldeverbeheld,still, when thehonourof His Heavenly Father wasinsultedandoutraged, He cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple. Now, some of your reverend body, have, in my ideas, lately used all their endeavours to insult, and outrage the Catholic Church, which, I consider, the Temple of God. Pardon me, therefore, if I should with the spiritual arms oftruth, (and I hope ofcharity,) castthemout of that temple, and show the world, they hadbetterhave been intheir owntemple, and have tried to havereformedit,beforethey had endeavoured to turn masters of Israel, in theirneighbours'temple.

Butthis, Reverend Gentlemen, I must say, that if the Catholic Church, hadno betterfoundation thandeclamationagainst theProtestantChurch, I would not be either aminister, or amemberof it for asingleday. But mind, the Catholic Church has both agoodfoundation, and can also show theflimsytexture of theProtestantChurch, when Protestant ministers are soimprudentas to attack her.

Most Reverend Gentlemen, I can only say, hadyouremained quiet,Ishould have beeninnocentof the disagreeable task, of having to state the followingawfulfacts. But asyouhave not, I can only add, I aminnocentof the consequences, lookyouto them. I will not indeed exclaim, with the Scripture, "Its blood be upon you, and upon your children;" but I will rather say, in the spirit of charity, may it bring you, and your followers, to a serious consideration, and to a sense of duty. But some of you reverends willperhapsinfer, from the awful truths which I shall advance, that I must believe that all, who are not ofourcommunion, must go to hell.Appalling sentence!Christ certainlyhas said, that he that will not hear the Church, is to be to us as a heathen and a publican (that is, excluded from our spiritual communion.) But Christ does not say, he willgo to hell, much less, therefore, oughtItorashlycondemn him. St. Paul, also, warns us to judgeno man, for this good reason, becausewe, alsoshall have to stand before the tribunal of Christ. Far, therefore, be it from me to open the flood-gates of damnation, even on asingleindividual, much less on thewholebody of our Protestant brethren. Although, therefore, I shall shortly advance truths, most awful, and almost incredible, still, let no one imagine, I mean anythingPERSONAL. Oh, no, I will say with the poet—

Back to Index Next