A CHARGE DELIVERED TO THE CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE OF LANDAFF, IN JUNE 1805. BY RICHARD WATSON, D.D. LORD BISHOP OF LANDAFF. ADVERTISEMENT. A NUMEROUS and respectable part of the Clergy of my Diocese requested me, at the time it was delivered, to publish the Charge which is now submitted to the world. I excused myself from complying with their request, because I considered the Catholic Question to have been then settled, at least for a time; and I was unwilling to revive the discussion of a subject, on which I had the misfortune to differ in Opinion from a Majority in each House of Parliament. I have still that misfortune-but looking upon the situation of the Empire to be abundantly more hazardous now than it was three years ago, I have thought it a duty to declare publicly my approbation of a measure, calculated, I sincerely believe, above all other measures, to support the Independence of the Country-to secure the Stability of the Throne-to promote Peace among fellow-subjects, and Charity among fellow-christians,—and in no probable degree dangerous to the Constitution, either in Church or State. R. L. Calgarth Park, A CHARGE DELIVERED IN JUNE 1805. REVEREND BRETHREN, HE attention of the Public, as well THE as of the Legislature, has been lately much occupied in discussing the merits of a Petition, presented to both Houses of Parliament, by a numerous and respectable class of our fellow-subjectsThe Roman Catholics of Ireland. Though the matter seems to be settled (and I am far from saying improperly settled) for the present, yet it will not, I hope, be deemed unsuitable to the relation in which I stand to yourselves, if I state to you such sentiments as have occurred to me, on each side of this important subject: and, that I may do this with the utmost impartiality, it will be proper to begin with the consideration of two abstract questions connected with it. The first question is this-Are Men justly excluded from the participation of Civil Rights on account of their Religious Opinions? This question was ably discussed, near a century ago, by Hoadly on the one hand, and by Sherlock on the other; it has frequently, since their time, been brought before the Public; but it is still undecided. For my own part, I freely own that I have ever been disposed to answer this question, thus generally propounded, in the negative. Why then, it may be said to me, do you hesitate about granting to the Irish Catholics a removal of all the Civil Disabilities of which they complain? They differ from ourselves in Religious Opinions, but you grant that Religious Opinions are not a just cause for excluding Men from the participation of Civil Rights; there may be Policy, but there cannot be, according to your own concession, 1 concession, any Justice in such exclusion —You may, perhaps, think it expedient to exclude the Catholics of Ireland and of England from the Houses of Parliament, but, according to your own Principles, the justice of the measure cannot be maintained. To this I would reply-My Principles will never suffer me to admit that there can be, either in public or private life, any Expedience, solid, lasting Expedience, where there is no Justice. I never can allow that either national or individual Justice can be founded in temporary utility—as well might it be contended, that Gain is Godliness. But, notwithstanding the admission of the truth of the abstract propositionThat Men are not justly excluded from Civil Rights on account of their Religious Opinions,--a man may reasonably hesitate about the Justice as well as the Policy of granting to Irish Catholics all they petition for: and the ground of hesitation is this that the Religious Opinions B S |