REVIVAL OF PAPAL POWER.

OUR Concessions to Rome have not purchased her good will. They were not voluntarily made, but given as the price of peace, extorted by violence, or obtained by artifice, from a people who owed their all to Protestantism, and ought not to have been found amongst the worshippers at the shrine of Romanism.

When, years ago, we pointed out the idolatrous nature of Papal worship, there were not wanting those who could accuse us of uncharitableness in supposing that any body of professing Christians could really deserve that so harsh a term should be applied to their system. It is now seen that the rites and ceremonies, the prayers and services of the Church of Rome involve direct appeals to other beings than God, and that departed men and women are the object of their devotions.

When it was pointed out, with the clearness almost of mathematical demonstration, that the principles of intolerance and persecution which

VOL. XX. May, 1858.

F

had characterised the Papacy in bygone years still formed an inherent portion of that vast conspiracy against the rights and liberties of mankind, the answer-the stereotyped answer-was, No, Rome has changed. The age in which we live is too liberal and enlightened, if not for the existence, yet certainly for the development of such monstrous principles and tenets.

Yet have we lived to see the day when men in this country, and in foreign countries, can advocate and defend such once repudiated principles, and approve the consequences which naturally resulted from them. They rejoice at the burning of Huss, and lament that the Reformation was not crushed in its infancy by the burning of Martin Luther.

But the claims of the Papacy to interfere in the affairs of nations, to control and regulate the policy and conduct of Governments and princes, were also pointed out as rendering it a matter of danger to a free State to put power into the hands of Romanists.

New Series, No. 221.

The same scornful mockery and derision was poured out on those who gave utterance to such sentiments as was vented against those who spoke of the idolatrous and cruel principles and practices of the Papacy.

A quarter of a century has altered the position, though it has not changed the nature of things.

The Papacy with its success has become bold and elated. Taking advantage of disturb ances in various Continental nations, it has from their internal weakness wrought out the element of fresh power and influence, and sought once again to mould empires and Cabinets to its will.

Austria succumbed, and has felt the bitter effects of the Concordat with the Pope-but may be too spell-bound to break the chain without such political and social concussions as to render it inexpedient, if not dangerous, for her just now to attempt doing so. Our own Governments have for a long time too much yielded to Papal influence and policy, and sought to govern Ireland through the intervention of the Papacy and its priesthood. In France the Emperor governs by the combined power of the army and the Church. What may be his career and policy, and how far it may be shaped and controlled by events, is too obscure for our penetration. It is the talk of Europe. Some intimate that war or revolution must, ere long, be the lot of France. Some think that Austria and Italy, others

that England, will be the quarter to which in case of war the vast military and naval power of France will be first directed. Shall we then find help and sympathy from Rome or Romanists? May we not have to lament when possibly too late. that we have embarrassed our movements, and complicated our relationship, by an unprotestant policy, a policy alike destitute of true patriotism, as of true Christian principle?

Be this as it may, with the past before us for our guide as to the future, it behoves us as a nation to be in a state of readiness and preparation for the worst which France or the Papacy can design or attempt against us.

MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.

MR. SPOONER is resolved not to abandon the post of duty, or give up the subject of Maynooth. We honour him for his bold and consistent course. No doubt it is very disagreeable to be continually agitating a question without attaining the end in view. Yet, such oftentimes is the lot of many, whether as regards public or private enterprise, whose labours are ultimately crowned with success. It may be so in this case. But, in the present instance, what is the alternative between abandonment of duty, and perseverance in the discharge of it? Simply this, that Maynooth College shall possess for ever the endowment which it now enjoys, and 520 young men be always un

Still the duty of persevering is clear, and we believe that in due season we shall reap if we faint not. Indeed, we may point out cases where perseverance, and that, too, apparently under circumstances the most adverse, has been ultimately rewarded with success. The present position of the Romanists themselves affords an apt and practical illustration! How often were their claims put forward modestly, humbly, but in vain. How long, how patiently, year after did they go on-not intimidated by danger, not daunted by opposition, not dispirited by disaster, not induced by want of success to cease their efforts, or withdraw their claims.

year,

Earl of Cavan, Admiral Vernon Harcourt, Sir Brook Bridges, M.P., Mr. Cowan, M.P., Mr. Maxwell Close, M.P., the Hon. H. Cole, M.P., Mr. G. Dunlop, M.P., Mr. Gard, M.P., Mr. T. B. Horsfall, M.P., Mr. Kendall, M.P., the Hon. A. Kinnaird, M.P., Mr. J. Bramley Moore, M.P., Mr. C. N. Newdegate, M.P., Mr. R. Spooner, M.P., Major Sibthorp, M.P., Mr. Stapleton, Sir Harry Verney, M.P., Sir W. Verner, M.P., Captain the Honourable Francis Maude, the Rev. Dr. Wylie (Edinburgh), Rev. Dr. Rule, Rev. Dr. Gregg, the Rev. Messrs. C. R. Alford, J. Brock, W. Brock (Bishop's Waltham), W. Bunting, J. Dobson, A. Durdin (Norwich), E.Hollond, S. Jenner, J. E. Keane, S. Minton, J. F. Moreton, H. Paddon (High Wycombe), H. S. Patteson (Norwich), G. S. Potter (Dublin), J. Parker (Dorsetshire), W. W. Robinson, A. S. Thelwall, M. Vine, and H. Ward; Messrs. J. Bateman, J. Bridges, E. Crowley, J. C. Colquhoun, J. F. Harding, G. Hoare, Knott, W. Long, J. Lord, W. Leach, W. H. Peters, T. Thompson, Wilbraham Taylor, J. Verner, M. White, and F. G. West; Dr. Cowan, &c.

The following sent letters regretting their inability to attend-Sir J. Matheson, Bart., M.P.; the Right Hon. G. R. Mowbray, M.P.; Mr. Moody, M.P.; Mr. J. P. Willoughby, M.P.; and Mr. G. Greenall, M.P.

Mr. SPOONER, M.P., in introducing the Deputation, said that the question of the Maynooth grant would never be settled as long as Parliament continued to vote money in support of this idolatrous Church. The arguments in this controversy were so well known that it was wholly unnecessary for him to enter at any

length upon the discussion of the subject; suffice it to say that they had received communications, not only from Ireland and Scotland, but from all parts of England, in which a unanimous opinion was expressed that some steps must forthwith be taken to rid themselves of this national disgrace. He would call upon Dr. Wylie, from Edinburgh, who would place before his Lordship the state of feeling in that capital.

The Rev. Dr. WYLIE said that upon the subject of Maynooth there was cherished in Scotland generally a strong feeling of antagonism. Opposition to Popery had existed ever since the dawn of the Reformation; it was not now abated, and it was not likely to go down. It must not be supposed that the gentlemen who formed the Deputation were all averse to the possession of civil and religious privileges on the ground of religious opinions. Though a Church might be an idolatrous one, still its adherents were entitled to the undisputed possession of those privileges. It was on different grounds they opposed this grant. Roman Catholics could not be supposed to be subjects of the Queen of Britain; they were the subjects of a foreign prince, who was as really a temporal sovereign as he was a spiritual sovereign; whose temporal sovereignty was founded upon his infallible spiritual sovereignty, and who exacted both spiritual and temporal obedience on the part of every member of that Church. (Hear, hear.) It was, then, the opinion of Protestants that the members of the Church of Rome in Britain were the subjects of a foreign State and of a foreign prince; and the Deputation, therefore, felt that

everything given to them or to the Church of Rome was just so much treason (hear, hear)—he hoped his Lordship would excuse the strength of the expressionagainst the realm of Great Britain, and against the Queen of Great Britain, and that by that act they were directly permitting the sovereignty of the Queen to slip from under them. (Hear, hear.) It was on this ground, and with this object, that he begged, in the name of Scotland-the better portion of its population-most solemnly to protest against the policy which the rulers of this country had been pursuing. They might not see it, but they had been aiding the enemies of the liberties of Britain and of the human race.

The Rev. G. S. POTTER (Dublin), reiterated similar sentiments, and spoke to the unanimous feeling which pervaded the Protestants of Ireland upon the subject.

The Rev. Dr. RULE spoke on behalf of the Wesleyan body, and assured his Lordship that in any measures which might be taken for the repudiation of this national grievance, he might firmly calculate on the support of the body which he represented.

Mr. STAPLETON followed, and enforced the point that the Maynooth grant was no national bargain whatever.

Mr. W. H. PETERS thought it would be a boon to the Catholics if the grant were withdrawn, inasmuch as it would mitigate the despotic power at present exercised by the priesthood.

Mr. J. LORD stated that one object of the Deputation was to express the feeling entertained by Protestants generally, without reference to sect or party, that the Maynooth question should be