66 among other oaths, to permit no man to live in "his kingdom, who is not a Catholic: and if "after he has taken the reins of government, he "shall violate this promise, let him be anathema "maranatha in the sight of the eternal God and "become fuel of the eternal fire.”*

The Council of Lateran, under Pope Innocent III. decreed, that "all heresy, and heretics should "be anathematised, and these being condemned, "must be left to the secular power to be punished." By the same council, magistrates and princes and all civil authorities are commanded to swear, that "they will endeavour, bona fide, and with all their

66

might, to exterminate from every part of their "dominion, all heretical subjects, universally, that "are marked out by the Church." And if this engagement be not fulfilled, the council proceeds to absolve the subjects of such non-complying governments, from their allegiance.† The sanguinary codes of Justinian and Theodosius inflicted capital punishment on heretics, through the influence and instigation of the Roman priesthood. The writ for burning heretics, among the ancient precedents of our own law, and thought by some to be as old as the common law itself, may be traced to the general prevalence of the maxim, that heresy was a crime, which it was the province of the spiritual court to prove, and for which the secular power punished. The history of the Church of Rome, after its adulterous connection with the kingdoms of this world, affords one continued series of illustrations on this melancholy subject.

Hence I observe, sixthly, that Persecution has been practised in the Roman Church in every age. After the decree of the Lateran council, the Albi

* Caranza. Sum. Concil. p. 404.

+ Ibid. p. 602. Cited by Dr. Grosvenor, in the Sermon referred to-p. 12—14.

+ See Blackstone's Commentaries. Vol. iv. B. 4, C. 4.

genses were murdered by thousands for no other reason but because they were heretics. They are represented by their adversaries as traitors and as seditious in their principles; but separation from the Church was their treason and defending themselves against legalised and consecrated murderers was the only proof of their sedition. In the reign of our Henry IV. the popish clergy obtained an act of parliament, by which a bishop, without the intervention of a synod, could convict of heresy, and "unless the convict abjured his opinions, or "if after abjuration he relapsed, the sheriff was "bound ex officio, if required by the bishop to "commit the unhappy victim to the flames, with"out waiting for the consent of the crown."* The reigns of Mary in England, of Charles V. in Ger- many, and of Louis XIV. in France; the massacre of the Irish Protestants--the fatal Bartholomew Day in Paris-the revocation of the edict of Nantz, in consequence of which thousands fled to other countries, and thousands were murdered at home -the recent atrocities in the south of that unhappy country-the official declaration of the Belgian bishops against the tolerating principles of their new sovereign-and the conduct of the present pontiff, since his restoration to the See of Rome all these authentic and undisputed facts " "speak volumes" on the subject. Above all, pre-eminent in atrocity and crime-an eternal infamy to the nation that bears upon its bosom the infernal burden, and groans on under the oppression, is THE INQUISITION! This is not the place for detailing its history and its operations. That history is written in CHARACTERS OF BLOOD, and those operations are marked by every thing that is savage, unrelenting, treacherous, malignant, and diabolical! The present pontiff has sanctioned the re-establish

Ibid. p. 27. (Burns' Edition.)

ment of this engine of priestly and prelatical intolerance, under the reign of the despot who is now the King of Spain; and has condescended to maderate the severity of its operation. I know that there are intelligent and candid members of the Papal Church who deplore these evils, and condemn the intolerance out of which they arise; but such protestations are of no avail, and affect not the general argument supported by these facts, that persicution is cherished and sanctioned by the prinepius of their system. Let those in authority in their Church, their bishops and dignitaries, and seruar powers wize in promoting the convention EL & LUMEPIÙ Cacti z let that council under the presidency of their pound revoke, cancel and annul all the acts of former comvels, which directly or JAČIPOLY SEEDBACt the pracipies of force and coerCRUM DE TULICAs matters; let them recognise the ngles e conscience and destroy the Inquisition; let them, oarcema ali mterference of the civil with the ecclesiastical power, and limit the jurisdiction of the clergy to the spiritual duties of their office; let them promulgate the healing principles of con

tion and employ in the support of their system, only the weapons of persuasion and reasoningand then, I will venture to predict, Popery will be karmless. But as soon may the "Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots," as this revolution be effected in the principle and tendencies of the papal religion.

It has been often retorted on Protestants, by the advocates of Popery, that they have been guilty of the crime of persecution; and they will not unfrequently present their martyrology of those who suffered in the reigns of Elizabeth and her immediate successors as proofs of the fact. I have already confessed that the first reformers did not

rm at once and immediately, the dreadful he

of persecution. Too long the Protestant

Churches, retained a portion of this unscriptural leaven; and to this day, the latent principle of persecution is preserved in the unrevoked though virtually obsolete statutes which disgrace some parts of our penal code, and in the civil disqualifications which result from a consistent and conscientious non-conformity to the national establishment. But adinitting while we lament the evils which have arisen from the spirit of persecution, displayed by Protestants toward Catholics, or against one another, I observe, that to the Church of Rome may this spirit be traced, as to its primary source. Thence they derived it-and there they found it sanctioned-justified-and commanded! That the first reformers did not abandon all the errors of the papal system, only proves that they were imperfect and short-sighted men. But do their principles as Protestants support persecution? Has there not been a progressive illumination on this important subject, necessarily arising from the prevalence of Protestantism? Have not the Protestant states of Europe exhibited that degree and extent of toleration, which never yet existed in Roman Catholic countries? Do not Catholics themselves trace the diversities of sects amongst us, and which they specify as a proof of the evil of Protestantism to the principle of toleration, and with few exceptions confess that if their church were restored to its pristine grandeur and influence, these distinctions and diversities would be abolished? And while Protestants have been acquiring more enlarged and comprehensive views of the nature of religious liberty, has there been a corresponding progress in the views and feelings of their Catholic neighbours? As to the fact of persecution in former times, there is no parallel whatever, between the conduct of Protestants, towards Papists, and of Papists towards Protestants. When the Priests and Jesuits in the reign of Eliza

ment of this engine of priestly and prelatical intolerance, under the reign of the despot who is now the King of Spain; and has condescended to maderate the severity of its operation. I know that there are intelligent and candid members of the Papal Church who deplore these evils, and condemn the intolerance out of which they arise; but such protestations are of no avail, and affect not the general argument supported by these facts, that persecution is cherished and sanctioned by the principles of their system. Let those in authority in their Church, their bishops and dignitaries, and secular powers unite in promoting the convention of a general council; let that council under the presidency of their pontiff revoke, cancel and annul all the acts of former councils, which directly or indirectly support the principles of force and coercion in religious matters; let them recognise the rights of conscience and destroy the Inquisition; let them condemn all interference of the civil with the ecclesiastical power, and limit the jurisdiction of the clergy to the spiritual duties of their office; let them promulgate the healing principles of conciliation and employ in the support of their system, only the weapons of persuasion and reasoningand then, I will venture to predict, Popery will be harmless. But as soon may the "Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots," as this revolution be effected in the principle and tendencies of the papal religion.

It has been often retorted on Protestants, by the advocates of Popery, that they have been guilty of the crime of persecution; and they will not unfrequently present their martyrology of those wh suffered in the reigns of

diate successors as ready confessed

reform at onc resy of per