A ROMAN CATHOLIC EXPLANATION OF THE PAPAL AGGRESSION.

New Zealander, Volume 7, Issue 516, 26 March 1851, Page 4

A ROMAN CATHOLIC EXPLANATION OF THE PAPAL AGGRESSION.

To the Editor of the Times, Sir,— l am no admirer, and certainly no apologist, of Cardinal Wiseman. He ii known to be a tain man, an ambitious man, a man with litde prudence, but large ideai of hii own personal aggrandizement. He lovet dominion. To poiseis power is his great delight, to misuse it his comtant characteristic. Like hii ideal, his language is full of aspiring pride and pompous assumption. If he wish to make a regulation, he iisues a "statute;" if he propound a scheme of finance, he assumes the style of the Supreme Pastor, snd calli it a " Proprio Motu." So in the pompous and vain-glorious pastoral which has given so much offence to our fellow-subjects. He speaks of his dignity and his pallium as if these were all that religion deiired; he talks rather as if the nation were at his feet, than as if a work < f charity, and humility, and meekness, and long-suffering were to be accom. plished. It is the nature of the man, the tone and temper of his mind. Nor is this all. Born a fo» reigner, educated a foreigner, and domiciled during the greater part of his life in a foreign land, he knows nothing of English feeling, and has no, sympathy with English notions. Yet he aspires to be the leader ! of a numerous party in the country, pretends to talk of English predilections and English antipathies, and would fain persuade the world, ai he hat doubtless persuaded the Pope, that he, and he alone, is to be the saviour of his adopted country, the light that ihall lead her back to the troth, and the meani by which her spiritual regeneration is to be effected. I repeat it, Sir, 1 am no admirer of Cardinal Wueman. But let us be just, nevertheless to others. The Catholics of England are not to be condemned because Dr. Wiseman, a foreigner, is ambitious •, nor are they whose lives have been spent in respectful submission to the laws to be branded as disloyal because he has choien to do an innocent act in a very offensive and reprehensive manner. 1 call it an innocent act — innocent, I mean, ri regards the laws and people of this country—for in itielf, and a«. an act of ecclesiastical polity, the restoration of cnnonical discipline in their own body can be regarded by Catholics only as a wise and necesiary measure. Its wiidom, however, or its necessity, is not the concern of the nation. The people can look only at the manner in which it affects themselves and their institutions ; and if I succeed in showing that neither in it« object nor in its working ii it calculated to offend »gaimt eilher, I tbink that I shall have done something towards allaying that bitterness of feeling which it now so widely ipreading through the laud. Let us look at the factt. By the canons of the Church, as well as by the appointment of iti Divine Founder, bishops poises* an independent authority to govern the people committed j to their spiritual charge. Their power is original, ! not delegated. They derive it from their office, they ; hold it subject to no power of revocation, and they exercise it, not only in a general care and supervision of their subject!, but also in framing luch laws and regulations as may tend to their spiritual advantage. They are elected by the clergy ; and the clergy, in°turn, are governed and presided over by them ; but at the same time, these are invested with such an appiopriate share of independence as effectually secures them against any arbitrary or oppressive measures on tbe part of their superiors. Of iuch bishops, of such a clergy, th« Catholics were deprived by the change of religion under Elizabeth. At the lame time, deceived by the intrigues and the misrepresentations of certain members of the Catholic body, the Pope, when applied

to, hesitated to restore what had thus been loit : he assumed to himself, the character and the office of their immediate bishop, and by means of hii own yicari, men selected 1 by himself, revocable at will, amenable to him for every act, and compelled to have recourse to him in every emergency, continued to direct the spiritual concern! of the Catholics in this kingdom. To the inconveniences of such a system the vicars themielves could icarcely have been insensible. But the clergy, had the strongest ground of complaint. Holding no acknowledged position, possessing no canonical rights, they had no appeal if they were injured, no remedy if they were unjustly deprived. Their superior was a man in whose selection they had had no voice, with whose person they were perhaps unacquainted. As he was not bound to provide them with employment r so neither was he bound to retain them in the service to which they bad dedicated their lives. He might discard them without a reason ; he might deprive them of their incumbencies without a cause ; he might arbitrarily, and at a moment's notice, remove them from place to place, break up the growing association between themselves and their flocks, and effectually destroy whatever interest they might feel in the improvement or preservation of their missions. So common and bo well understood was this last proceeding, that one of the best and most venerated of those spiritual delegates used commonly to say that the clergy should regard themselves as soldiers under marching orders, ready to move, and prepared to obey the command of their general, at any moment. Here, then, we behold the real oiigin and object of the recent measure at Rome. Wearied by the inconveniences, and disgusted by the oppressive anomalies, of their position, the clergy had again and again prtitioned to be placed on it canonical footing. For a time the vicars themselves steadily resisted the application, and foiled every effort that was made to insure its success. Dr. "Wiseman resolutely opposed it ; he even wrote against it in the Dublin Review, and, so long as it suited his purpose, employed every art and artifice to defeat it. Still the clergy persevered. From the north and from the south petitions went up to Rome, stating their grievances* complaining of- the hardr shipsof their condition, and implored the Supreme Pastor to place them once more in the rank of a canonical body. A better time seemed to approach. Better councils began to prevail, and more enlightened views to be taken by the vicars. Those prelates were at last induced to espouse the cause, and it was at length understood that they had engaged to negotiate the matter with Rome. This wai in 1846. In 1847 the negotiation was believed to have succeeded for Dr. Wiseman in that year assured the clergy th*t Dr; Welsh, was actually appointed to the see of Westminster, and himself to that of Biimingham. This, however, we know was not the fact. "Another bishop," says Dr. Ullathorne, " was delegated in 1848 with still more earnest petitions" for the establishment of a canonical form of government. The bishop was Dr. Ullathorne himself. He brought the matter to a prosperous issue ; and if the arrangement was not then carried out, it was not only because " the trouble* which befel the Roman States put a temporary bar to iti completion." What was then, however, suspended has now been perfected. The vicars have been converted into bishops, the agents and delegates into independent principals. The Pope, a foreigner, and of all foreigners the. most dreaded in this country, has resigned the office of our bishop, nnd 13 prelates, men selected from amongst ourselves, and chosen by the voices of Englishmen, are destined henceforth to preside over us. They are no longer the ministers of a foreign see. Their revocable character has been annulled, their original jurisdiction established. The powers of the Roman Pontiff are reduced within the strict limits of the canous ; while the clergy, it is to be hoped, will share the privileges thus extended to their superiors, and be placed on a footing of rational aod canonical independence. Such, then, is the simple history, the cavie, the origin, the object, and the nature of a measure which, however misunderstood by the people of this country, is assuredly as innocent in its intention as it is useful to the body for whose spiritual benefit it hat been contrived. To the nation generally it has no reference. It neither meditates aggression noi conceal* a plot. There is no mystery behind. It is a simple remedy to acknowledged evils, a tardy concession to, complainti of ancient date, a relief from grievance! which have long and fatally weighed upon the clergy. Had it been adopted in 1847, it would never have been heard of beyond the precincts of Catholics ; had it been brought silently into operation its effects and its existence, as far as Protestant! were concerned, would have been alike unknown. After wbat I have said of the nature and object of the late meamre it may icarcely seem necessary to speak of what has been called the •• territorial division" of the kingdom, or to explain the pompom hyperboles of Cardinal Wiaemati's inflated pastoral. Of the latter, however, it may be observed that, as it it addressed exclusively to Catholics, so it contemplates Catholic objects and Catholic purposes only; and, consequently, that the power of government which it claims has no more to do with the Protestants of England than with the subjects of the Emperor of China. As to the former—the territorial division of the kingdon — what is it when divested of I the mysterious garb in which it has been exhibited to ; the world t There is no novelty in the proceeding, and if no novelty, certainly no danger. The country was so divided in 1688 ; it was again divided in 1840. The separate parti were then called " vicariates," their rulers " vicars." The former arc now denominated " bishoprics,'* and the latter " bishops." As regards the Protestant portion of the kingdom, I there has been a change of name, and aotbing more— a change which affecti exclusively the spiritual subjects of our own Church. Nor let it be argued that by thui assuming a local designation for our bishops, insult is either offered or implied to the ecclesiastical establishment of the country. An English Catholic is surely not less free in the exercise and enjoyment of his religion than his Irish brethren. In Ireland, a •< territorial hierarchy," as it is called, has ever existed side by side with the bishoprics of the Established Church. It has been acknowledged by the country ; it has been recognized by the laws; it has been honoured by the Sovereign. With this example before them muit English Catholics be charged with •• insolence" and " insuH" for claiming a similar privilege within the law ? I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A Catholic. November 15.

[Tbe following is from a Corrcipondent of the Times, Not. 12:] It may be interesting to many of your Protestant readers to be informed, that on the 4th of November in&t. nine cases were imported into London in the steam boat. City of Boulogne, containing 21,000 cruci* fixes of different sizes, from one inch to two feet, several thousand figures of the Virgin Mary, and a large quantity of prints of bleeding hearts, &c, besides an immense number of rosaries and charms, probably in anticipation ofa large conversion of our jiopulation to Romanism.