72 PERILS. — ROMANISM. 



dinal Manning ^ we read: "That neither the church nor 

 the state, whensoever they are united on the tnae basis 



of divine right, have any cognizance of tolerance 



The Church (of course the Eoman Church) has the right 

 in virtue of her divine commission, to require of every 

 one to accept her doctrine. Whosoever obstinately 

 refuses, or obstinately insists upon the election out of it 

 of what is pleasing to himself is against her. But were 

 the Church to tolerate such an opponent, she must 

 tolerate another. If she tolerate one sect, she must toler- 

 ate every sect, and thereby give herself up." For the 

 Roman Church to grant liberty of conscience would be, 

 as is here said, to "give herself up." What that high 

 American Roman Catholic authority. Dr. O. A. Brown- 

 son, says is quite too true; viz.: "Protestantism of 

 every form has not, and never can have any right where 

 Catholicity is triumphant. " ^ (An odd kind of catho- 

 licity, isn't it?) Again he says: "Heresy (that is, any 

 doctrine in conflict with Romanism) and infidelity have 

 not, and never had, and never can have, any right, 

 being, as they undeniably are, contrary to the law of 

 God." 3 



In the Pontificale Romanum^ is the bishop's oath, in 

 which occur these words: "Heretics, schismatics and 

 rebels against our said Lord or his successors I will tc 

 my utmost persecute (persequar) and oppose. " What it 



» Longmans, 1867, p. 403. 



2 Brownson's Catholic Eevien\ June, 1857. 



3 Brownson's Quarterly, January, 1852. 



* This is a book on rites and ceremonies, issued by order of Clement VIIL 

 and Urban VIII. This form of the bishop's oath is quoted from the edition 

 printed in Mechlin, 1845. In it we find this Papal utterance: "We com- 

 mand this our Pontifical, so restored and reformed, to be received and 

 observed in all churches of the whole world; decreeing that the aforesaid 

 Pontifical must never, at any time, he altered in whole or in part, nor 

 anything at all he added to, or detracted from, the same.'" Bishop Kain of 

 Wheeling, if correctly reported by the press, states that the word persequar, 

 is now omitted by American bishops when taking the oath. How much 

 weight should be allowed to this statement when we set over against it the 

 above "infallible" and irr«vocable command of a Supreme Pontiff, the 

 reader can judge as well as I. 



