ART. VI. Religion and Policy, and the Countenance and Assistance each should give to the other. With a Survey of the Power and Jurisdiction of the Pope in the Dominions of other Princes. By Edward Earl of Clarendon, Lord High Chancellor of England, and Chancellor of the University of Oxford. 2 Vols. large 8vo. Printed at the Clarendon Press, Oxford. Price 11. 6s. in Sheets. THE CHE authenticity of this posthumous publication is ascertained by the following advertisement:

Henry Viscount Cornbury, who was called up to the House of Peers by the title of Lord Hyde, in the life-time of his father, Henry Earl of Rochester, by a codicil to his will, dated Aug. 10. 1751, left divers MSS. of his great grandfather, Edward Earl of Clarendon, to trustees, with a direction that the money to arise from the sale or publication thereof should be employed "as a beginning of a Fund for supporting a Manage or Academy for riding and other useful exercises in Oxford;" a plan of this sort having been also recommended by Lord Clarendon in his Dialogue on Education.

Lord Cornbury dying before his father, this bequest did not take effect. But Catharine, one of the daughters of Henry Earl of Rochester, and late Duchess Dowager of Queensberry, whose property these MSS. became, afterwards by deed gave them, together with all the monies which had arisen or might arise from the sale or publication of them, to Dr. Robert Drummond, then Archbishop of York, William then Earl of Mansfield, and Dr. William Markham, then Bishop of Chester, upon trust for the like purposes as those expressed by Lord Hyde in his codicil.

The present trustees, William Earl of Mansfield, John Lord Bishop of London, The Right Hon. Charles Abbot, Speaker of the House of Commons, and the Rev. Dr. Cyril Jackson, (late Dean of Christ Church, Oxford,) having found the following unpublished Work amongst these MSS. have proceeded in the execution of their trust to publish it: and it is presumed that the following information may be sufficient to establish its authenticity.

The Manuscript is comprised in 407 folio pages fairly written, and bears date on the last page, Moulins, 12th Feb. 167. Laurence Earl of Rochester, son of Edward the first Earl of Clarendon, in a letter to the Rev. Dr. Turner, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, dated Nov. 30. 1710, speaking of this work, calls it a MS. of his father's, intitled Religion and Policy; and says, "It is in the same hand-writing that most of the History was in." And the Earl of Rochester's grandson, Henry Viscount Cornbury, in a memorandum, of the 7th June 1729, prefixed to the MS., describes it in the state in which it is now found, and as the work of the Lord Chancellor Clarendon.

In committing this work to the press, no alteration from the copy has been made, except in the orthography, and where grammatical or verbal inaccuracies have appeared to require it. The work itself has been divided into chapters, according to the author's division of his subject; and a table of contents and an index have been added.'

Though this treatise was penned many years ago, it is very applicable to the question now in debate between Catholics and Government; and, as the noble author appears to have studied the subject with much assiduity, to have taken into his survey all the evidence of history which applies to the case, and to have built his reflections on a series of undeniable facts, his opinion is of great importance. Lord C. was certainly well disposed towards the Catholics, and desirous of their admission to all the privileges of British subjects: but, in consequence of the undefined extent of the Pope's spiritual authority, to which they refer the ultimate direction of their consciences, he conceives that their fidelity can be no longer depended on than the Pope will permit them to be loyal, which is a very loose and insecure title for kings to the duty and loyalty of their subjects.' To remove all doubt of the danger of Catholicism, considered in a political point of view, and to render it no more alarming to civil governors than any other religious sect, his Lordship endeavours to convince the members of this church that a slavish submission to the Pope is no essential part of their religion; that the history of pontifical usurpations and tyranny reflects no credit on it; that several Catholic countries disclaim his authority; and that it behoves the Catholic British church to make itself independent of the Papal chair, and to govern itself completely by a general council of its own. Advice similar in substance we have ventured to offer to the Catholics of Ireland; because, though in the present aspect of affairs, and with the existing general diffusion of knowlege throughout Europe, little fear can be entertained of the repetition of those times in which kings trembled at the frown of the pretended successors of St. Peter, yet to allow of such an anomaly in government as an appeal to an extraneous jurisdiction, whether at Rome or any where else, whether on a civil or a religious account, would be weakness which could effect no good, though it might never do any harm. Catholics do not seem to be sufficiently impressed with the singularity of their case, which, in this respect, differs from that of all other religionists: but, when the state is disposed to concede to them all the privileges of the constitution, they should strive to obviate this difficulty.

Lord Clarendon's present tract, written abroad during his banishment, though full of long sentences, contains no irritating declamation; being intended, by a patient examination of the history of the Popes from their origin to his own time, to convince the Catholic body that their exorbitant affectation of superiority and sovereignty has operated more to the scandal and injury of religion than to its profit. Facts are stubborn things; and with facts in great abundance we are supplied as a basis on

which Lord C. builds his reasoning. The detail presents us, indeed, with a series of transactions which, though indisputable, appear now to be almost incredible; and which shew us that, notwithstanding our Saviour declared his kingdom not to be of this world, his pretended vicars have sought to domineer over all the potentates of the earth. *

It is interesting to inquire into the origin of the pretensions of the See of Rome, into the several stages of its progress in usurpation, and into the consequences which have hence resulted. The pages before us furnish abundant documents on each of these points. Nothing will be found in the New Testament to justify the Bishop of Rome in claiming precedence over other Christian bishops, and nothing which renders it probable that St. Peter was ever Bishop of Rome. It is even very doubtful whether this poor fisherman of the Galilean lake ever saw the capital of the Roman world: but, supposing him to have visited it, he could never have been appointed its bishop. In the apostolic age, the head of the Christian sect there could never have assumed so imposing a title; and Peter in particular would not have done it in a Gentile city; for he was expressly sent to the Circumcision, or to his countrymen the Jews t. If any of the apostles had assumed the title of Bishop of Rome, it would have been St. Paul. Even supposing, however, that Peter was appointed its bishop, we have no evidence of his having named a successor; nor was any notice taken of a series of Popes from him as the first Pope, till the time of Constantine the Great, A. D. 320; and the very uncertainty of the names of the bishops in the series is sufficient to induce a suspicion that the whole account is fabulous. Lord C. places the matter in another point of view :

Though Rome was for some time the seat of the empire and so the place to which men were obliged to resort upon several occasions, yet the place and city itself never appeared to be chosen by God with any peculiar privilege or title for his worship; but on the contrary hath borne the deep marks of his displeasure in being exposed to

*The reader will compare this article with Mr. Eustace's representation of the pontifical character, in p. 39-41. of this Number, and observe the difference between the opinion of a Protestant English nobleman and a Catholic English clergyman.

Lardner, in his notice of Theophilus Bishop of Antioch, quotes a passage from Jerom, in which this father reckons Theophilus as the seventh Bishop of Antioch from St. Peter. Now, if Peter was the first Bishop of Antioch, he could scarcely have been the first Bishop of Rome.

more affronts, more sackings and devastations than any other great city in Europe hath been. And therefore, that after the glory of the empire is departed from it, it should still retain a power to give to all the empires and kingdoms of the world a supreme magistrate to whom they are bound to submit and obey in all those things which concern the salvation of their souls and their hopes in the next world, is so very irrational, that less than the most clear evidence that it is the will of God it shall be so can never convince mankind that they ought to consent thereunto. From the time that the manner of elections was taken notice of, sometimes the Pope was chosen by the clergy and people of Rome, and sometimes by the clergy alone: and when there were scandalous elections made upon which schisms ensued, sometimes the Emperor, sometimes the Kings of Italy, and sometimes the Exarch, regulated those consentions, and settled such a Pope as they thought fit; sometimes appointing them to choose such a man, and sometimes that none should be admitted to be Pope until, upon notice given to the Emperor, his election should be confirmed or approved by him. Nor was there any form prescribed or accustomed for those elections till the year one thousand and sixty, when Pope Nicholas the Second (whose own election might well have been questioned, he being chosen upon a schism when Benedict the Tenth pretended to be Pope and continued so nine months, and then waved the contest and returned to his bishopric of Velitri,) made a decree that from thenceforth the election of the Pope should be only in the Cardinals.'

When Constantine made profession of Christianity, the Popes began to assume some importance: but a long pericd elapsed before they obtained that universal domination which they afterward arrogated; and it is worthy of remark that they did not arrive at full power till Pepin, King of France, had given the exarchat of Ravenna to the church. By this donation, which was confirmed by Charlemagne with other privileges, the Popes became temporal sovereigns: but, in lieu of these benefits, the right of approving, and consequently of disapproving, the election of the Bishops of Rome was conceded to the Emperor; which shews the state of the Papal power at that period. Every thing, however, was in train to favour its usurpations. The ignorance and dissentions which prevailed in Europe gave to the clergy great privileges; they became a third estate; and the Roman Pontiff wished to be considered as their supreme head. Yet it is evident that universal submission to the Pope was not for ages a doctrine of the Catholic church. Even in the reign of William the Conqueror, ecclesiastical laws (says Lord C., p. 100,101.) were altered or changed without any reference to the Pope; and Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, then took upon him,' without authority from Rome, to canonize Adelmus.

Appeals

Appeals to the supposed successors of St. Peter having grown into practice on the Continent, the Popes, on the slightest occasions, fulminated their thunders against Emperors and Kings, and placed whole kingdoms under their interdicts. Offended that he was not consulted on a royal marriage, John XIX. put all France under an interdiction; and such were the superstitious alarms of the multitude, that the people generally submitted themselves with that humility, that all the domestic servants of the King (excepting two or three) abandoned him, and they cast whatever was taken from his table to the dogs; there being no man, however poor, who would eat any of the meat which he had touched.' (P. 105.)

We are next called to notice the excommunication of the Emperor, by Gregory VII., (Hildebrand,) who ascended the Papal chair A. D. 1075; the affair of Thomas à Becket, the Crusades, &c.; and to shew how lofty were the pretensions of the see of Rome, Lord C. copies parts of two bulls issued by Innocent III., one of which contains these words; " Ad bonorem et gloriam Apostolica sedis, quam constitutam super gentes et regna;" and the other has expressions still more pointed: "Sic ad firmamentum universalis ecclesia, qua cœli nomine nuncupatur, duas magnas instituit dignitates, majorem quæ quasi diebus animabus præesset, et minorem que quasi noctibus præesset corporibus, quæ sunt Pontificialis authoritas et Regalis potestas."

If the history of our King John makes a shabby figure in this review of Papal usurpations, the remarks of Lord Clarendon will serve to rescue the credit of the nobles:

Indeed the Popes found not so much tameness any where as in England, nor exercised their jurisdiction any where so wantonly, as in the reign of those two Kings Henry the Second and King John; of which their successors quickly shewed disdain enough, and by degrees freed themselves from a power that knew not how to be moderate. Nor can it be much wondered at, that the Pope should obtain any thing from King John, who had no title to the crown but usurpation, and had so many enemies to contend with in England and in France. To shew that the subjection to the Pope was not of the religion of that time, the most popular ground which the nobility alleged to justify their taking arms against the King was, the concessions he had made to the Pope. And the King himself in his greatest agonies afterwards, and when he was most perplexed, with much passion said, (as Matthew Paris, who is the best author of that time, reports,)" Since the time I subjected myself and my kingdom to the Church of Rome, nothing hath happened prosperously, but all things contrary to me." So that whatever the Pope got then in England is to be imputed to the guilt and weakness of the King, not to the consent of the time.'

We cannot specify all the instances quoted by this noble author, of sovereigns being deprived of their kingdoms or

E 4

released