THE VATICAN DECREES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4341, 17 February 1875, Page 2

THE VATICAN DECREES.

ARCHBISHOP MANNING’S REPLY TO MR. GLADSTONE’S PAMPHLET. To the Editor of the London Times. “ Sir, —The gravity of the subject on which I address you,. affecting as it must every Catholic in the British Empire, will, I hope, obtain from the courtesy that you have always shown to me the publication of this letter. “ This morning I received a copy of a pamphlet entitled ‘ The Vatican Decrees in their hearing gn Civil Allegiance.’ I find it a direct appeal to myself, both for the office I hold and for the writings I have published. I gladly acknowledge the, duty that lies upon me for both those reasons. lam bound by the office I hear not to suffer a day to pass without repelling from the Catholics of this country the lightest imputation, upon their loyalty ; and, for my teaching, X am ready to show that the principles I have ever taught are beyond hiv » peachment upon that score. *- '-tr “It is true, indeed, that, in page 57 of the pamphlet, Mr. Gladstone expresses his belief ‘ that many of his Roman Catholic friends ancfisj. fellow-countrymen ’ are, ‘to say the least of it, * as good citizens as himself.’ But as the whole pamphlet is an elaborate argument to prove that the teaching of the Vatican Council renders it impossible for them to be so, I cannot accept* this graceful acknowledgment, which implies that they are good citizens because they are at variance with the Catholic Church. “I should he wanting in duty to the Catholics of this country and to myself if I did' not give a prompt contradiction to this statement, and if I did not -with equal promptness affirm that the loyalty of our .civil allegiance is not in spite of the teaching of the Catholic Church, hut because of it. “ The sum of argument in the pamphlet just published to the world is this ;—That by the Vatican Decrees such a change has been made in the relations of Catholics to the civil power of States that it is no longer possible for them to render the same undivided civil allegiance as it was possible for Catholics to render before the promulgation of those decrees. “In answer to this, it is for the present sufficient to affirm ? “ 1. That the Vatican Decress have in nojot or tittle changed either the obligations or the conditions of civil allegiance. “ 2. That the civil allegiance of Catholics is as undivided as that of all Christians and of all men who recognise a divine or natural moral law. “3. That the civil allegiance of no man is unlimited, and therefore the civil allegiance of all men who believe in God, or are governed by conscience, is in that sense divided. “In this sense, and in no other-, can it besaid with truth that the civil ■ allegiance of Catholics is divided. The civil allegiance of every Christian man in England is limited by conscience and the law of God, and the civil allegiance of Catholics is limited neither less nor more. “ The public peace of the British Empire has been consolidated in the last half-century by the elimination of religious conflicts and inequalities from our laws. The Empire of Germany might have'been equally peaceful and stable if its statesman had - not been tempted in an evil hour to rake up the old fires of religious disunion. The hand of one man more than any other threw, this torch of discord into the .German Empire. The history of Germany will record the name of Dr. Ignatius Yon,Dellinger.as-the author of this national evil 1 lament not only to read the name, but to trace the arguments of Dr. Von-. •Dgllinger in the pamphlet before me. May God preserve these kingdoms from the public and private calamities which are Visibly impending over Germany. The author of the pamphlet 1 , ,iu- his -first line, assures us that his

‘purpose is not polemical, But pacific; *' X am sorry that so good an intention should have so widely erred in the selection of the means. • “ But my purpose is neither to criticise nor to controvert. My desire and my duty as an Englishman, as a Catholic, and as a pastor is to claim for my flock and for myself a civil allegiance as pure, as true, and as loyal as is rendered by the distinguished author of the pamphlet, - or by any subject of the British Empire.—l remain, &c., “t Henry Edward, “ Archbishop of Westminster. ■ “ November 7." . ; . ■ The same journal published immediately afterwards a letter to .Mr. Gladstone, ft™ l Lord Acton, a well-known Roman Catholic nobleman, who dated from the Athenaeum, Novembers. This nobleman does, not object, to the discussion per se. He says : “ Speaking in the open daylight, from my own point of view, as a Homan Catholic born in the 19th century, I cannot object that facts which are of a nature to influence the belief of men should be brought completely to their knowledge. Concealment is unworthy. of those things that are Divine and holy in religion, and in those things which are humane and profane publicity has value as a check. After reciting Mr. Gladstone’s argument that the Catholics obtained emancipation by professions which are now repudiated, he says : . ■ “ This is a question that may be fairly asked, and it was long since made familiar to. the Catholics by the language of their own Bishops. One of them has put it in the following terms ;—‘How shall we persuade the Protestants that we are not acting in defiance of honor and good faith, if,, having declared that Infallibility was not an article of our faith while we were contending for our rights, we should, now that, we have got what we wanted, withdraw from onr public declaration and affirm the contrary ?’ The case is, primd facie, a strong one, and it would be still more serious if the whole structure of our liberties and onr tolex-ation was founded on the declarations given by the English and Irish bishops some years before the Eelief Act.” He then goes on to argue that these documents are unknown to the Constitution —that what was known to the Constitution was the oath in which the political essence of those declarations was concentrated ; and that the security and pledge were abolished by - the Lerislature some years before the abolition of the° Irish Church, whereby all special bonds for the . loyalty of Catholics was done away

with. He then goes on to argue that there is really nothing new in the Decrees. He says : “The doctrines against which you are con-' tending did not begin with the Vatican Council. At the time.when the Catholic oath was repealed, the Pope had the same right and power to excommunicate those who denied - his authority to depose Princes that he possesses now. The writers most esteemed at Rome held that doctrine as an article of faith. A modern Pontiff had affirmed that it cannot be abandoned without taint of heresy, and that those who questioned and restricted his authority in temporal matters were worse than those who rejected it in spirituals ; and accordingly men suffered death for this cause as others did for blasphemy and atheism. The recent. decrees have neither increased the penalty nor made it more easy to inflict.” He adds that, on the ground he has chosen, Mr. Gladstone might have made out even a worse case, but contends that Catholics cannot fairly be called on to account for every particle of a system which has, never come before : them in its integrity,, or for opinions whoso existence among divines they would be exceedingly reluctant; to believe. He says ; “ I will explain my meaning by an example: —A Pope who lived in Catholic times,-and who is.famous in history as the author of the third crusade, decided that it is no murder to kill excommunicated persons. This ride was incorporated in the canon law. It has been for 700 years, and continues to be, part of the ecclesiastical law. Par from having beeu a dead letter, it obtained a new application in the days of the Inquisition, and one of the later Popes has declared that the murder of a

Protestant is so good a deed that it atones, and more than atones, for the murder of a Catholic. Again, the greatest legislator of the Medieval Church laid down this proposition, that allegiance must not be kept with heretical Princes —cum ei qwi Deo jldem non sermt fides sen-auda non sit. This principal was adopted by a celebrated Council, and is confirmed by St. Thomas Aquinas, the oracle of the schools. The syllabus which yon cite has assuredly not acquired greater authority in the Church than the canon law and the Laterah Decrees, than Innocent the Third and St. Thomas. Yet these things were as well known when the oath was repealed as they are now.- But it was felt that, whatever might be the letter of canons and the spirit of ecclesiastical laws, the Catholic people of this country might be honorably trusted. ■ ~ ' “But I will pass from the letter to the spirit which is moving men of the present day. It belongs peculiarly to the character of a genuine Ultramontane, not only to guide his life by the example of canonised saints, but to receive with reverence and submission the words of the Popes. Now Pius V., the only Pope who has been proclaimed a saint for many centuries, having deprived Elizabeth, commissioned an assassin to take her life \ and his next successor, on learning that the Protestants were being massacred in France, pronounced the action glorious and holy, but comparatively barren of results ; and implored the King during two months, by his Nuncio and his Legate, to carry the work on to the bitter end until every Huguenot bad recanted or perished. It is hard to believe that these things can excite in the bosom of the most, fervent Ultramontane that sort o[ admiration or assent that displays itself in action. If they do not, then it cannot be truly said that Catholics forfeit their moral freedom, or place their the mercy of another,” . ■ * He then goes on to argue that men exaggerate the agreement in thought and the agreement in deed, which authority can acHe points out fch&t tlic astronomical doctrines of Galilee were condemned as strongly as possible, yet distinguished Jesuits have also been distinguished . astronomers. He also quotes historical facts to show that Catholics have fought against Popes, and against the side espoused by Popes, and concludes by

“That opinions likely to injure ourppsition as loyal subjects of a Protestant Sovereign, as citizens of a free state, as members of a community divided in religion, have flourished at various times, and in various degrees, that they can claim high sanction, that they are often uttered in the exasperation of controversy, and are most strongly urged at a time when, there is no possibility of putting them into practice -—thin all men must concede. But I ararm that in the fiercest conflict of the Reformation’ when the rulers of the Church had almost lost heart in the struggle' for existence, and exhausted every resource of their authority, both political and spiritual, the bulk ol the English Catholics retained the spirit of a better time. You do not, I am glad to say, deny that this continues to be true. But you think that we ought to be compelled to demonstrate one of two things-that the Pope cannot, by virtue of powers asserted by the late Council, make a claim which he was perfectly able to make by virtue of powers asserted for him before ; or, that he would be resisted if he did. The first The second is not capable of receiving a written demonstration. Therefore, neither of the alternatives you propose to the of this country opens to us a way of escaping from the reproach we have incurred. Whether there is more truth in your misgivings or m my confidence the event will show, I hope, at no distant time.”

the; arrest of mr. leggett. (Prom the Auckland Star, Feb. 3.) ' We learn with sincere regret that Mr. F. 0. Ee""ett, who has for nearly four yearn past filled the office of Clerk to the Provincial Council, was to-day arrested on a charge of embezzling £BO. the property of the Provincial Government. The facts of the case are very simple. ■ Some ■- twelve months ago, a cheque for the amount mentioned was given to Mr. Leggett by G. M. O’Rorke, Esq., Speaker, to be applied in terms of a vote of- the Council, to the purchase of books for the library. Mr. Leggett was instructed to 'purchase a draft' in favor: of a London bookseller, and forward it with instructions regarding the books that were to be procured for' the library. - Months passed on, and no intelligence was received regarding either draft or books, and a letter was, we believe, written regarding the non-completion, of the order. To this a reply tf’aa received by the Mikado, disclaiming all knowledge of the matter; and inquiries were, therefore, ■ made 'at the Bank of New Zealand, where the Government account is kept. It was here ascertained that Mr. Leggett had cashed the cheque, but it did not appear that lie had purchased any draft with the proceeds. Mr. O’Korke was consequently driven to the performanceof the painful duty of swearing an information for embezzlement against bis clerk. When Mr. Leggett was informed that matters had culminated in police proceedings, he walked down to the guard-room, High-street, to-day, voluntarily with Messrs. O’Rorke and Tonks, and was there given into custody. The announcement will cause a general feeling of surprise and sorrow, especially on account of the family of the accused. During their residence in Auckland Mr. Leggett and family have made many friends, to whom the announcement of his arrest will be a great shock, ns he was generally esteemed as a straightforward man, painstaking and assiduous in the discharge of his duties in connection with our Provincial Legislature, The case will come before the Police Court, when the evidence will be very simple, consisting wholly of the testimony of Mr. O’Rorke relative' to the drawing of the cheque, and the purposes for which it was given to Mr. Leggett, of the officers of the Bank of New Zealand, regarding the cashing of it; and of Mr. Tonks, Provincial Treasurer, in proof that it had not .been devoted to the purposes intended.