網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

M. A. Fellow of Oriel College. 8vo. Jies, being chiefly adapted to the gospels js. 6d.

of several Suudays in the year. By A Defence of the Wesleyan Methodist Thomas Baker, M.A. Rector of StanmerMissions in the West Indies; including cum-Palmer, in the county of Sussex, a refutation of the charges_in Mr. and Domestic Chaplain to the Rt. Hon. Marryat's pamphlet, entitled " Thoughts the Earl of Chicbester. Svo. Is. boards. on the Abolition of the Slave Trade, A Second Lay Sermon; addressed to &c." and in other publications; with the higher and middle classes, on the Facts and Anecdotes illustrative of the existing distresses and discontents. By moral state of the slaves, and of the S. T. Coleridge, Esq. 5s. sewed, operation of missions. By Richard A Reply to certain Observations on the Watson, one of the Secretaries to the Bampton Lectures for 1815, contained Committee for the management of the the British Critic for Dec, 1816 and Wesleyaa Methodist Missions. 3s. 6d. Jan. 1817, in a Letter to the Head of a

The Retrospect, or Review of Provi- College. By Reginald Heber, A.M. dentia Mercies, &c. By Aliquis. Se. The Introductory Discourse, by the cond edition, 58.

Rev. Thomas Scales, of Wolverhampton; The Village Observer, or an attempt and the Charge, by the Rev. Joha to prove that poor people may be happy; Styles, D.D. of Brighton ; delivered ou containing anecdotes and remarks on Wednesday March 19, 1817, at the orpassing scenes, from personal observa- dination of the Rev. Ridgeway William tion. By the Author of the Retrospect. Newland, Hanley, Staffordshire. 8vo. 18mo. Is. 6d, balf-bound.

1s. 6d. The Duty and Advantages of Church

TOPOGRAPHY AND TRAVELS. Members. By the Rev. Samuel Hackett. 18mo. 8d.

The Hythe, Sandgate, and Folkestone The Duty of Contentment under pre

Guide: containing an account of their sent Circumstances: a Sermon preached

ancient and present state, and a descripat St. John's Chapel, Bedford Row, on

of the principal objects worthy of at. Sundays, March 9 aod, 16, 1817. By

tention in the neiglıbourhood. To wbich Daniel Wilson, M.A. Minister of the

is subjoined a brief history of the Cinque above Chapel. ls. 60.

Ports, with a view of Sandgate, and a Oweniana, or Select Passages from vignetle of Hythe church, fcap. 8vo. the Works of John Owen, D.D. By

4s. 6d. hds. Arthur Young, Esq. F.R.S. Editor of

A Narrative of the Briton's Voyage Baxteriana. 12mo.

to Pitcairn's Island. By Lieut. ShilliSermous, extracted from the Lectures beer, R. M, with sisteen etchings by the of Bp. Porteus, and intended for the Author, from drawings on the spot. Svo. use of the younger clergy, and for fami

8s. 6d, boards.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

ART. I. An Historical Inquiry into the Ancient Ecclesiastical Juris

tliction of the Crown : commencing with the Period in which Great Britain formed a Part of the Roman Empire. By James Baldwin Brown, Esq. Vol. I. Part I. The_Reign of the Emperor Constantine the Great. pp. xliv. 192. Price 7s. Underwood. Lon.

don. 1815. THE THE Catholic Question has again occupied the deliberations

of the British Parliament, and still the triumph of success nn the part of the Roman Catholics is deferred. We

say

deferred, because there can scarcely exist any doubt that the advocates of their claims will at no distant period carry their point. Even the opponents of the measure begin to yield to this conviction, and to deem the evils of a perpetuated disoussion, scarcely inferior to those which are apprehended from the concession itself. Political danger is the only ground on which the boon is withheld, for there appears to be no question that the measure, if consistent with safety, is desirable; but they who still resist the demands of the Catholics, wish to have the merit of yielding to necessity, forgetting that the safety of coneession is diminished by the circumstances which render it unavoidable, and that the measure becomes less politic, as it becomes more necessary.

That no danger would attend the adınission of the Roman Catholics to a participation of secular power, no reasonable man can, we apprehend, be found sincerely to maintain. The Roman Catholic tenets, it is more and more evident, are unchanged, and unchangeable. In that intolerance wbich constitutes an essential article in the Komish creed, it is impossible to deny that there are the elements of political danger to a Protestant establishment. And it must be allowed that the State, as the responsible guardian of the interests of the community, is bound to take cognizance of political danger. It is not for • the quality of their faith,' or 'the modes of their worship,' in respect of which they are, as religious beings, accountable to God alone, but it is their political tenets which form their disqualification for official station and legislative authority. It is Vol. VII. N. S.

2 T

[ocr errors]

their avowed subjection to a foreign potentate as their ecclesiastical head, their avowed intolerance of all heretical churches, and their belief in the dispensing power of the Chureh, which render it a matter of doubtful policy, whether they, shall be admitted to the full privileges of British subjects. In this respeet "they differ from all other classes of Dissenters, who are excluded from their common rights as citizens, solely on account of their religious character.

The Catholic Question appears to us to rest entirely upon political expediency: only, since the exclusion of any class of subjects from their natural rights must be considered as in itself an evil, the moment the concession can be made to appear compatible with safety, to withhold it not only becomes inexpedient, but begins to be unjust, for its justice is involved in its expediency. The social rights of individuals can suffer no legitimate abridgement, except in consideration of the public good, or the public safety. Expediency, though it cannot be the rule of moral'duty, is the adequate basis of social law, and in this instance we conceive that the question can be determined only by the dictates of enlightened policy.

It is not our intention at present to go into all the bearings of this highly interesting and momentous subject. We are aware that different grounds have often been assumed by the opponents of the Catholic claims, and that notions equally at variance with the religious rights of all men, and with every sound principle of government, have been mixed up by intolerance and bigotry, in the discussion. The work before us, although not obnoxious to a charge of this nature, is one which appears to us to be of a pernicious tendency. Without going more at large, therefore, into the general question, we shall confine ourselves to a simple refutation of the false principles and irrelevant arguments brought forward by the present Author.

Mr. Brown appears to have composed this Inquiry expressly for the use of the Members of the British Parliament. A copy

of the first chapter, embracing the history of the proceedings

on the Donatist Schism, during the reign of the Emperor . Constantine, was some time since transmitted to Viscount ' Sidmouth, bis Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the

Home Department, with a view to its being printed by order

of the House of Commons, on the motion of an honourable . and learned Member, at whose suggestion the work was

originally undertaken.' Such is the Author's own account of his present production. The non-official character of the Re port having precluded its introduction into the House, Mr. Brown sends it forth to the world on his own responsibility, having previously deposited the original document in the office of the Home Secretary.

It may perhaps have already excited the surprise of our readers, that the 'Donatist Schism, and the acts of the

Emperor Constantine,' should be offered to the attention of the British Legislature, in connexion with any of its anticipated deliberations in the Nineteenth Century. They may be disposed to ask what are the modern cases to which detailed accounts of the proceedings in Africa, relative to the Donatists in the Fourth Century, are intended to apply. The answer is, To the demand of a negative voice, or veto, in the Crown of these realms, in the appointment of Roman Catholic bishups, as a condition of removing from persons professing the Romish faith, the civil disabilities and pains to which they are now liable: a case which surely might be settler without either Constantine or the Donatists, or Mr. Brown's laborious conclusions and deductions from the ancient records of their acts and deeds.

It is possibly in the recollection of our readers, that Lord Grenville, in his letter to Lord Fingal, maintains, that the measure of communicating to our fellow-subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion, the full enjoyment of our civil constitution, accompanied with suitable arrangements maturely prepared and deliberately adopted, would be an act of undeniable wisdom and justice. These suitable arrangements have been generally understood to include the concession on the part of the Catholics, of the veto, that is, the transferring of the negative possessed by the Pope in the nomination of the Roman Catholic bishops and vicars apostolic, into the hands of the British Government. The concession of the veto has been al-. ways hitherto resisted by the Catholics, who have declared in very strong terms, that they never can consent to any dominion or control whatsoever over the appointment of their prelates on the part of the Crown, or of the servants of the Crown ; while the prelates themselves have avowed their determination to bear the heaviest trials, and to die as victims, rather than to concede power or influence in any part of the Catholic Church to a non-catholic sovereign. On this point of concession there exists a radical difference between the Catholics and

many

of the ablest and most zealous supporters of their claims.

In relation to this question, and the circumstances which have become associated with it, Mr. Brown brings forward this 'historical Inquiry, the subject of which he represents as possessing at the present moment a peculiar interest and daily increasing importance; and the object of which is to persuade the Catholics into a surrender of the veto. Favourable to their claims, he asserts the question of the veto to be inseparably connected with the propriety of granting to the Roman Catholies the prayer of their petition. The exercise of a spirit of mutual concession, is, in bis opinion, indispensable to the ob

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

taining of the desired object. In accordance with these sentiments, he has employed bimself in collecting such evidence as to him seems best calculated to convince the Catholics, that the security required of them is neither an unprecedented, nor an improper demand. His object is to shew that the reserving

to the crown a veto on the appointment of their bishops, and

a proper control over their communications with the Papal " See, in matters of external regulation, is quite consistent with ' the interference of the Supreme secular Magistrate, in the

concerns of the Church, from the period at which it was first ' united with the State, under their favourite Emperor Constan

tine the Great, to the moment when the Roman Catholic « Faith ceased to be the established religion of the country.'

Adverting to the opinion that the question which the claim of the veto has originated, might receive elucidation from the practice of other*

Roman Catholic states in the appointment of bishops, he remarks, that “the fullest exposition of this prac' tice could only tend to agitate another and a much more

important question, which sooner or later must be distinctly met.'

• To what extent was the supreme secular power of the state accustomed to interfere in the government of the church, since any thing like an union between these once opposing powers was first effected; and by that means was that interference maintained, in opposition to the encroaching and reiterated claims of the spiritual head of, at one period, every country in Europe, to an exclusive jurisdiction over its external regulation, as well as its internal discipline?'

This is the question which Mr. Brown represents to be so important, and to provide an answer to it is the object of his present undertaking.

If the value of a work is to be estimated by the temper, the talents, and the assiduity of which it furnishes evidence, in the Author, Mr. Brown's performance must then be highly rated. On these grounds we cannot hesitate in making a very favourable report of his character as a writer. But if the merit of a work consists in its utility, in its tendencies to enlighten mankind, and to accomplish great and worthy purposes subservient to their welfare; then, it seems to us, that the labour which has been employed in the composition of this inquiry, has been exerted in vain, and that ihe talents of the writer have been altogether misdirected. To read numerous and learned works, and

to write a book for the purpose of establishing the conclu

* Mr. Brown does not explain in what sense he uses this word, which evidently imports that England is a Roman Catholic State.

« 上一頁繼續 »