LIBERTY of CONSCIENCE. 
590 
the utmoft liberty which can be compatible with the ex¬ 
clusion of neathenifm, with the obfervance of pure mo¬ 
rality, with the prefervation of focial order, with perfeft 
fecurity to the conftitution in all its branches civil and 
ecclefiaftical. A mind imprefled with this opinion mult 
experience regret on being compelled to feleft, for parti¬ 
cular consideration, the proceedings and fentiments of 
any one collective body, which is lincereiy and confefledly 
Christian. When however a clals of our own countrymen, 
reprefenting itlelf to be numerous, has thought proper to 
ftand forth in public view', for the exprefs pirrpofe of en¬ 
gaging attention; when from an adjacent part of the 
united empire a Similar clafs, with appearance of co-opera¬ 
tion, has ptirfued the fame line of conduct; feelings of re¬ 
luctance muft. be Sacrificed to a fenfe of duty. For it 
would be deemed a mark of criminal indifference, if with 
unconcern we could hear, and with filence difregard, 
complaints unreafonable, reproaches unmerited, claims in¬ 
admissible, principles untrue; all directed againft Statutes 
of the realm in the continuance of which we are deeply 
interested ; all fraught with confequences pernicious to 
institutions for the Spiritual and temporal welfare of which 
we are bound to be folicitous; all calculated to injure 
our brethren in the protellant caufe, with whom, in mat¬ 
ters of the highelf moment, we are infeparably connected. 
I. We (hall, therefore, in the firft place, extraft a few 
paragraphs from the Petition of the English Roman Ca¬ 
tholics, Feb. 1810. and comment upon them as we pro¬ 
ceed. 
1. “The Roman catholics form more than one fourth 
of the whole mafs of the united empire. Their creed is 
the actual creed of four-fifths of Ireland, and of much 
the greater part of Europe.” What Should be the infer¬ 
ence from thefe Statements ? Not furely that vve Should 
be intimidated, and concede power which ultimately may 
be employed for our own Subversion; but that all proteft- 
anrs Should unite in fupport of reformed religion. If the 
Spiritual light, which illumines this empire, be indeed fo 
threatened with a return of mental darknefs, from the 
catholics of England, from the catholics of Ireland, from 
■much the greater part of Europe; proteftants., awake to 
a fenfe of your danger! As catholics make it a common 
caufe to Itrive for the predominance of Romanift Christia¬ 
nity ; proteftants likewife, resigning to a higher concern 
the fubordinate confideration of left or party, Should make 
it a common caufe to labour for the afcendancy of Proteft- 
ant Christianity. And, warned by the examples which 
history prefents to them, may our proteftant brethren of 
every denomination learn, before it is too late, that en¬ 
deavours to erect the church of Rome on the ruins of the 
church of England cannot poftibly tend either to enlarge 
the bounds or Strengthen the fecurity of religious freedom 
to thofe, whofe doftrines and discipline can never coin¬ 
cide with the doftrines and difeipline of Romaniits, on 
many effential points of faith and pra&ice. 
2. It is affirmed by the petitioners, that “'none of the 
principles which occasion their refufal (of tells, oaths, 
and declarations) afteft their moral, civil, o t political, in¬ 
tegrity.” The moral and civil integrity of the catho¬ 
lics, in difeharging the duties of private life, we admit 
with unqualified approbation. But that their political in¬ 
tegrity is unimpaired, we cannot fo unrefervedly and un- 
exceptionably grant. Political integrity unimpaired, in 
the full fenfe of thofe words. Should mean entire accept¬ 
ance and complete obfervance of the conftitution. Our 
conftitution embraces polity ecclefiaftical as well as civil; 
and, in the Supreme government conligned to the king, 
it combines Spiritual with temporal power. The propriety 
of the law's, which inveft the Sovereign with authority in 
external circumstances relative to the church, the Roman¬ 
ists difallow in principle; and, as far as they can venture, 
oppofe in practice. Adting therefore, as they do, on opi¬ 
nions which prohibit entire obedience to our constitutional 
polity, they can Scarcely be Said to maintain their politi¬ 
cal integrity unimpaired. On the ecclefiaftical polity of 
the conftitution, their avowed fentiments and their opera 
conduct infringe; their political integrity therefore*we 
muft confider as defective. 
3. We are next to meet the abftrraft pofition, that “ No 
principle, which leaves moral or political integrity unim¬ 
paired, is a proper object of religious perfection.” Hav¬ 
ing previously begged the question on the Subject of then- 
political integrity; they now mean to aiTume, that, be- 
caufe they are excluded from power, they are consequently 
perfected; as if exclusion from pow'er and religious per¬ 
fection were convertible terms. But they are not con¬ 
vertible ; they dilfer in their proceedings and characters,. 
Perfection would attain the end propoSed by positive 
infliction of punishment: exclusion from power would 
effeCt its purpofe by the operation of discouragement: 
only. Persecution compels men to adopt certain opinions : 
exclufion from power leaves all perfons free to follow- 
their own opinions. Perfection is an evil in itfelf, and 
always : exclufion from power may be an evil; but it is 
not Such in itfelf, and under all circumstances : it is 
therefore only a contingent and occasional evil. When 
we have thus diferiminated between exclufion from power 
and religious perfection; and when we have objected 
to the propriety of tolerating either heathenism which 
leads to vicious practices, or atbeil'm which is the bane of 
human Society; then, in the true Spirit of proteftantifm, we 
Shall glory in maintaining, that, if public decency, public 
morality, and public laws, are duly regarded ; confiftently 
with the unalienable right^which belongs to every man,, 
and which empowers him to adore almighty God in fitch 
a manner as in the belt of his judgment he conceives molt 
exprellive of real devotion, no fet of religious opinions, 
no forms of religious worlhip, can be proper objeCts of 
religious perfecution. The very word persecution is detect¬ 
ed ; the exercife of it in aCts of violence is abhorred by a 
genuine proteftant. But after this avowal; in duty to 
ourfelves we muft confidently maintain, that, unlels tbe. 
catholics can prove they experience either direCt injury 
done to their property, or direCt force applied to their 
perfons, on account of their faith and discipline, whilft 
they remain in the relations and intercourse of ordinary 
life; they are not warranted in complaints of fuffering- 
persecution, and vve deny the fact that they are perse¬ 
cuted. The true Slate of the cafe is this: The law does' 
indeed withhold from them rewards, which it would be- 
flow on them if they would fupport the establishment 5 
but it does not puniSh them for refusing to give that fup¬ 
port. Punifhment for refufal would jultify their charge; 
but withholding rewards for Services not rendered, is nei¬ 
ther an act of oppreftion in civil cafes, nor of persecution 
in religious concerns. 
4. “ The creed of your petitioners w>as the creed of thofe 
who founded British liberty at Runnymeade ; who conquer¬ 
ed at CreSTy, PoiFtiers, and Agincourt.” The mention of 
Runnymeade, Crclfy, Poictiers, and Agincourt, will always 
excite the moft lively fenfations in the hearts of English¬ 
men. It was not therefore without good judgment, that; 
the petitioners brought thofe places to our recolleFtien. 
We Shall never ceafe to honour the memory of thofe ii- 
luftrious perfons, who there Signalized themfelves. Nor- 
can we ceafe to venerate their creed, fo far as vve acknow¬ 
ledge it to be founded on Scripture. Beyond that, vve 
cannot, we dare not, hold it in veneration. And it is 
Scarcely poffible for any one, who is acquainted with the 
liillory of the church of Rome,, to confider the Romanift 
creed, and at the Same time detach from his mind all re¬ 
membrance of opinions and proceedings connected with 
that creed. The creed profeifed by the catholics petiti¬ 
oning, was indeed that of their forefathers, who in the 
thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth, centuries, afted nobly 
at Runnymeade, Crefty, Poiftiers, and Agincourt. But 
vve cannot forget that it was alfo. the creed of thofe, who 
maflacred the proteftants on. the day of St. Bartholomew, 
ft was the creed of Mary, who on principles of con¬ 
science devoted Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, and Bradford, 
to 
