CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES.

WHOEVER takes the pains to investigate, with impartiality, the principles of the catholic church relative to the duty of allegiance, will find, that her doctrine upon that fubject has been delineated by fome of her adverfaries, in colours wholly foreign from its natural complexion. If he take a view of her most eminent writers, whether upon political or religious fubjects; or examine into the decrees of her general and provincial councils, he will every where meet with the strongest instances of attachment, fubmiffion, and obedience to ruling powers. No feature of Machiavellian principles can be discovered in any part of her political or religious creed. No opinions are there advanced which tend to undermine the throne, or which militate in the most distant manner against the prerogatives of fovereign power. They all unani

f

mously agree in declaring loyalty to be, not only a civil duty, but also a divine precept, and effentially neceffary to falvation.

But though the catholic church, from the earliest ages, has ever invariably maintained this doctrine, and never ceased upon all occafions to inftil it into the minds of all her members; yet fhe has not always been able to control the exasperated and outrageous populace, or to prevent it from breaking forth into open acts of rebellion. When the paffions of the multitude are once roused and agitated by the incendiaries of fedition, they foon become ungovernable, and bid defiance to all laws both divine and human. Popular commotions, it is well known, are common to all states, whatever may be their religion: they are not the growth of any particular foil, nor peculiar to any defcription of men; but happen in every age and in every nation they have happened in France, an absolute and catholic government; they have happened in England, a free and proteftant ftate. Hence to charge the accidental rebellion of any particular catholic province or kingdom, upon the whole body, and to contend, that the principles of their religion are fubverfive of civil government, because fome of that perfuafion have been rebellious, is highly unjuft and inconclufive.

In every widely extended form of religious worfhip, there are always men, who, forgetful of

their duty both to God and fociety, and regardless of the impending judgments of futurity, fear not to break through the most facred laws both of religion and the state; and thus render themselves, by their crimes, the difgrace of chriftianity. But to impute the wickedness of these men to the principles of that religion, whether proteftant or catholic, of which they happen to make the outward profeffion, would be an evident mark of a weak and prejudiced mind; to maintain fuch a pofition, would lead to the condemnation of christianity itself, fince we daily behold christians convicted of the most atrocious crimes. But however unphilofophical and infulting to common fenfe an inference of this description may appear, it is generally brought forward with peculiar parade, by the adverfaries of the Roman catholics, as conclufive against them. For instance, they describe in the strongest language, every rebellion of former ages, in which catholics have ever been engaged; and then conclude, with feeming triumph, that the principles of their religion are inconteftibly proved to be dangerous, and inconfiftent with the peace and fafety of the state. I shall leave the reader, after what has been faid, to form his own opinion refpecting the validity of fuch a mode of argmentation; but cannot help applying to fuch misguided reafoners the words of the poet :

Impedit ira animum, nec poteft cernere verum.

If any danger is to be apprehended from the members of our religion, it must arise from their ignorance or neglect of the duties which it impofes upon them for while they continue to follow its injunctions, and to pursue the line of life pointed out to them by their pastors, they will never be furpaffed by any of his majesty's fubjects, in fincere attachment to his perfon and government. Of this the most respectable part of the nation appears to be very well convinced. We now find few amongst them, comparatively with former times, who feem inclined to impeach our loyalty. This change of opinion has arisen chiefly from that general spirit of difpaffionate enquiry, which is now much diffused, and which is the peculiar characteriftic of the prefent age. Men now no longer receive old tales or opinions upon the credit of their ancestors, unless they be well fupported: they investigate truth with cool deliberation; and when discovered, are not afraid to pay tribute to it. Whenever any dispute arose amongst the disciples of Socrates, if either of the parties could prove him to be in their favour, the contest was immediately ended: the autos qα, was confidered as fufficient proof, and none ever ventured to oppose it. But widely different is now the temper of the human mind. At the present day men confider, not fo much the eminence of the person who decides upon an important question, as the arguments by which his decifion is fupported.

1

Encouraged by this favourable difpofition of the age, and relying upon the juftice of their caufe, the Roman catholics have, in various publications, fubmitted to the judgment of the public, the principles of their religion relative to political concerns. They have exhibited them in their genuine and native character; they fear not a fair expofition of their doctrine; they fear nothing but ignorance and mifrepresentation. Studious to counteract the effects of these two evils, and ardently wishing to ob tain the confidence of their king and country, they have repeatedly difclaimed, in the most public and folemn manner, any tenets inconfiftent with the duty of faithful fubjects. Their representations have been attended to, and already has the nation acquitted them of many calumnies, which invidious malice had circulated against them. Time and information will at length remove every remaining fhade of diffatisfaction; and experience will reftore unbounded confidence. If the minds of the British people had always been open to cool and difpaffionate inquiry, as they are at present, the fufpicions of difaffection to government which attached to our ancestors, could not long have maintained their ground. Investigation would foon have difcovered that such suspicions were the mere offspring of religious difcord; the baleful, but prolific parent of innumerable errors and exceffes.

C