« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
Mr. Ross's Reply to Mr. Squire,
POPULATION OF NORFOLK.
South Eynesford Flerg, East Flegg, West Foielice Pitebridges
Lynn Freebridge. ?
2 Norili Greenhoe,
1,41,633 51 12 1,323
711 3,939 4,018 7,957 121 3,227 3,489 6,716 401 3,871 4,283 8,154
1,514 1,059| 11
0:15 1,025 s
84.1 1,36213 1,9711 inci 0 201 1,050 1,333 8 1,061 1,360 5
821 1,0621 1,61.1,8031 675 7:56 1 830 1,091 11
281 1,169 377
208 650 181 521 1,061 4-18
630 1:49 1991,4181 370
113 3,830 4,011 7,841 110 2,483 2,569 5,052 103 2,816 2,879 5,695 40 2,545 2,665 5,210 56 1,968 2,101 4,069 228 3,591 4,180 7,771
47 1,968 2,108 4,076 150 4,701/ 4,895 9,596
83 2,797 2,888 5,685 107 4,235 1,715 3,950 74 3,233 3,442 6,675 1725,053 3,228 6,281
75 2,5341 2,826 5,360 199 4,013}. 4,406 8,419 38; 1,802 1,851 3,603 51 2,620 2,794 5,414
To the Editor of the Monthly Diagnzine. be his motive for reviving this matter afSIR,
ter a seven years' silence, I am at a loss I
WAS very much surprised at seeing to imagine; unless it is manifest that he
in your valuable miscellany for Janu- wants me condemned on my first paper, ary last, p. 15, a letter from Mr. Squire, wherein the rays of incidence and refiece of Epping, containing an extract from tion are not properly considered; though my paper on the subject of Reflec- reconciled in the second by the discovery lions on Water, published in another of the two plaves. I think he had beta Magazine for August 1806. What can ter bave left it to sleep in that oblivion
into which I assuredly thought the cona her, and November, 1806.) Whoever troversy was fallen. When I first read troubles himself to do this will find that his letter of October 1806, sneeringly after having demonstrated that the
is endeavouring to controvert my hypothe- the certain and only vanishing point of sis, I wondered who and what he could reflections, beyond the possibility of a be that could attack me in so uncandid a doubt of its truth, my argument goes to manner; for an air of sarcasm runs prove that where two or mföre objects in through his whole paper. That he was a picture are reflected perpendicularly, a scientific man I had no doubt, for his they are out of nature; because they do catoptrical remarks had great merit, if not both, or all, tend to the eye, fixed in they had been given with candour. I a certain point; and that the eye must certainly thought myself entitled to bet- be fixed in a certain point in viewing a ter treatment, as wliat I offered with the picture, no one of any scientific taste, I best intention was, at least, an amuse presume, will deny; for if it is moved ever meat to the picturesque observer, if it so little from the original point it makes could be rendered of no use; and a new picture; and for the truth of this therefore ought not to have been made I appeal to the members of the Royal a subject of derision, however deficient Academy. But having in my second in. mathematical precision. I have paper observed that most of the objects heretofore shown that Mr. S. himself of nature are seen in two planes; if two is not infallible; for he asserted that or more oljects are reflected as tending the situation of the eye is not material in or inclining to the eye, they are equally refiections, when every one must be con out of nature, because the rays of incivinced it is the only essential point. As dence and reflection are not in the same he has thought it proper to revive the plane. And therefore it follows of course controversy after so many years have that there never was a true representation elapsed, I will now endeavour to return of the reflections of two or more objects the compliment he paid to me; and in in a picture; because a picture inust the first place will say that his shift ever consist of one plane only. Of the ing the scene from another Magazine two therefore, seeing both are out of nato your miscellany, in the seemingly ture--for if one has not the perpendicular, undermining manner he has done, with the other has not the inclination---pers out even binting at my second paper, haps the latter ought, in strictness, to wherein I have cleared away all the am be preferred; because reflections are albiguities of my first, must be reprobated ways so seen on the water, and the ray by every candid mind. If he had any of incidence is not so very perceptible; thing further to say, why did he not an but customi has established the former. I swer my second paper, and fight the bat- have said that I set reilections on water tlé out at the time? The answer is ob in the first class of the picturesque beauvious-because he could not. I freelyties of nature, and I hope Mr. S. will not confess there are some things unguarded- pretend to controvert that. Let us now ly said in my first paper, and which I see what he wants to know, that he might now regret; but they are trifles, and no not have gathered from my second paper, way derogatory to the principal aim of that which he seems assiduously to keep in paper, namely, to assert that the eye is the dark. He says, “ I am particularly the certain and only vanishing point of desirous of seeing the reflections on wea reflections, and which I still maintain. ter (as far as regards particular objects) Though I have great deference for mathe- the picture and the vanishing point, fully matical disquisitions as far as I understand elucidated by some of your mathematical them, yet I am convinced they cannot do correspondents ; for I must confess my away the common sense he speaks of; and faith is not suficient to subscribe to the what I have said on the subject in my opinions of this artist, while they are at second paper is so much in point, that variance with science, common sense, Mr. S. will have hard work to overthrow and every day's observation." Very well, it. I shall not offend the tender con Mr. Squire !' And I also should be glad science of Mr. S. by endeavouring to to see what a mathematical man may force his faith to accept what must be make of them; and further-o see Mr. obvious to every picturesque observer Squire's definition of the terms, science, that is not wilfully blind; who has seen, common sense, and every day's observaor may wish to see, the controversy be- tion: for if they are not all of them fully tween us, Audi alterum parten. (Vide elucidated in my second paper, which he Gentleman's Magazine for August, Octo. scems studiously to avoid noticing, I con. 1
Remarks on Catholic Emancipation. [May 17 fess I do not know their meaning. It expressed their bigh and unreserved apa Mr. Squire has no other motive for raising probation. this controversy from ihe dead, perhaps In the year 1791, the Catholic bishops more than myself may think he is now of Ireland requested from the See of sufficiently answered.
Rome, an authentic explanation of cerWorcester,
JABES Ross. tain words in the pontifical oath which March 1, 1814.
had been industriously perverted as giving
countenance to persecution. The conTo the Editor of the lionthly Magazine. gregation of Cardinals de Propaganda SIR,
being convened, not only did the official HE late minister, Mr. Pitt, with the document transmitted upon this occa
view of satisfying not his own sion, and sanctioned by the then. Pope doubts, but those of many respectable Pius VI. disclain the obnoxious meanpersons, conceived the happy idea of ing attached to the words, “hæreticos applying, A.D. 1788, to six of the most persequar et impugnubo," but it allowed celebrated foreign Catholic Universities, the words themselves to be in future Louvaine, Douay, Alcala, Salamanca, omitted: moreover, reprobating in auValladolid, and the Sorbonne, for the thoritative and pointed language the depurpose of solving the followieg questions: testable maximis, “ that faith is not to
1. Has 'the Pope or Cardinals, or any be kept with the heterodox; that an oath body of men, or any individual of the to Kings separated from the Catholic church of Rome, any civil authority, communion can be violated; or that it is power, jurisdiction, or pre-eminence lawful for the Bishop of Rome to invade whatsoever within the realm of England ? their temporal rights and dominions."
2. Can the Pope or Cardinals, or any In the Class-book used in the Catho ic body of men, or any individual of the College of Maynooth, it is expressly church of Rome, absolve or dispense stated, “that subjects cannot be abwith his Majesty's subjects from their solved from their allegiance to their reoath of allegiance upon any pretext what spective sovereigns by any power or jusoever?
risdiction granted by Christ to the Pope, 3. Is there any principle in the tenets or church; acknowledging, nevertheless, of the Catholic faith, by which Catholics the high pretensions of the Papal See are justified in not keeping faith with during the dark ages, and accounting for heretics, or other persons differing from the occasional acquiescence of Kings and them in religious opinions, in any trans Princes in these claims, from the necesactions either of a public or private sity they were ofien under of courting mature?
the aid of the Roman Pontiffs. In fine, To the above queries it is well known the oath imposed on Catholics by the that these learned bodies answered, not 18th of George III, which disavows all merely by a decided, but indignant nee temporal power and jurisdiction on the gative: * and to the answers thus re- part of the Pope, has been taken with turned, the Irish Catholic Prelates in a an emulation of loyalty throughout the Synod, held November 1812, formally kingdom. Stranye, however, as it may
seem, some there still are who, in defiance
of this phalanx of authorities, hesitate * The University of Salamanca observes,
not to brand the Catholics as incapacies that Christ invariably denied that he had deceived any temporal power; declaring tated by their religious principles, from that his kmgdom was riot of this world. giving satisfactory proof of their allegiance find they argue, that no other power than
to the government; and the reasons asthat which Christ himself possessed, could signed in justification of the perpetual be given by him to St. Peter, or vested in exclusion of this large portion of the the universal church.” To the same purpose, a learned and most respectable Ca. having received from his master nothing Thohc divine, in an excellent Tract puh. more than spiritual jurisdiction, theseZished some years since, entitled, cannot pretend to inherit, from their aposquiry into the Moral and Political Ten- tolical predecessor, those powers which he dency of the Religion stiled Roman Ca- never possessed.” This is justly regarded tholic,' says, “.The author of christianity by all Catholics of the present age, as a neither exercised himself, nor imparted to decisive argument against the temporal his followers any degree of earthly domi- authority of the Papal See, in opposition mion. The Apostle, therefore, from whom to the antiquated and exploded claims of the Bishops of Rome claim their supremacy, the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
community from the pale of the con triumph of Philip Le Bel over Boniface stitution, are substantially as follow: VIII. who in terms of unparalleled are
1. Because about six hundred years rogance had, in a letter addressed to the ago, the Fourth Council of Lateran pub- King, in an early stage of that meiolished a false and wicked canon, autho- rahle quarrel (A.D. 1301,) said, “We rizing the deposition by the Pope of all give you to know that you are our subHeretical princes.
ject both in spirituals and temporals.” 2. Because, at a still more recent pe- To which Philip replied, “We give your riod, four centuries only distant, the foolship to know, Sciat fatuitas vesira, Council of Constance passed an impious that in temporals we are subject to ne and detestable decree--that faith was not personn." to be kept with heretics.
A peremptory requisition from the To these charges of political and polemi. same Pontiff, so conspicuous in history, cal malevolence, the liberal of both com, to our own renowned Edward I. to desist munions thus reply : The Fourth Council from his expedition against Scotland, of Lateran was convened at a period of which the Pope affirined to be a fief of the deepest mental darkness, by one of the the church, was referred by the King to most ambitious Pontiffs that ever filled the Barons, who, with true baronial spithe Papal chair, Innocent III. And it rit, thus replied:- Our Lord the King is true, that by the third canon of this shall not plead before you, nor submit to council, the depos power of the Pope any trial or enquiry, or send any ines. was affirmed. But it is equally true, sengers to your court, especially as such that this famous canon was rejected by proceedings would be in manifest disinevery state in Europe, in the very zenith herison of the rights of the crown of of the Papal authority. A radical dis- England, and the prejudice of the liber. tinction has always been made by the ties, customs, and laws, which we have ecclesiastical jurists between canons of inherited from our fathers, and with the doctrinal decision, and such as relate to assistance of God will defend." Tlie En. matters of discipline and government, glish statutes of Provisors and Præmuwhich require the formal acceptation of nire, evince how undauntedly these rights national churches and states to give thein were defended by the same watchful validity; and it is allowed that the two guardians against papal encroachments; first canons only of this council are of and bow vast is the interval between a the former description. “ Non docent recognition of spiritual authority, and a Catholici,” says the great Bossuet, que transfer of civil allegiance, cunque gesta sunt in conciliis, eu ad Louis IX. of France, stiled St. Louis, ecclesiæ fidem pertinere--Multa sunt
who flourished in the same century, was decreta que non pertinent ad invaria. deeply imbued with all the superstitions bilem fidei regulam--sed sunt accommo of the age in which he lived; but he was datu temporibus atque negotiis.” Doubt a great man and a great nionarch, and less some individual Pontiffs, as Gre- he it was who first promulgated (A.D. gory VII. Innocent III. and Boniface 1268) that famous pragmatic sanction VIII., not merely asserted in the ab. which established on a basis, never to be stract, but attempted to realize this shaken, the liberties of the Gallican monstrous pretension; and some scholastic church. easuists, obsequiously attached to the The council of Constance, convened court of Rome, have daringly defended at the commenceinent of the fifteenth them; but the Roman Catholic church, century, expressly decreed, " that Kings as such, is no more responsible for the and Princes, by God's ordinance, are pernicinus maxims of Aquinas, or Bellar not subject in temporals to any ecclesimine, than the church of Scotland for the astical powers; neither can their subjects fanaticism of Knox, or that of England be ireed from fealty and obedience;" and for the barbarities of Laud. Without this was confirmed by the subsequent question, the Catholics have largely par- council of Basil. ticipated in the general illumination of Towards the close of that century, the the times in which we live, but these pragmatic sanction of St. Louis, which maxims were resolutely opposed even in seemed from the lapse of time somewhat the most benighted ages. The perse. obsolete, was revived and enforced by vering resistance of the Emperors of the Louis XII., a náme still held in the House of Swabia to the Papal claims, fills highest veneration. “ The Gallican many interesting pages of history which church,” says the learned Jortin, speak. also records the more successful conflicts ing of this transaction, " adhering to the of the Galļiq monarchs, and the final decrees of the councils of Constance and
Ricoris 012 Catholic Emancipation. [May 1, Basil, suffered not the Postiis to pro- maxim, " that faith was not to be kept ceedd beyond the bounds fixed by those with beretics;" and they insinuate that fäzise:se"
it still remains a tenet of the Ca. The barbarous bigotry of Louis XIV. tholic church, that oathis and promises stands recorded in characters of blood. so taken are not binding upon che conYet under the authority of this roval sciencc. persecutor, was convened, A.D. 1982,
Why then do not the Catholics take that national synod, whence issued the every Gath which the exhaustiess ingecelebrated declaration, drawn by the nuity of suspicion can devise? Either pen of Bossuet; and containing a sum they are at present excluded by these mary of the liberties of the Gullican, a..d kul precautions froin the full particivirtuaily of all other national churches. Ha'ion of the Constitution, or they are
The first arcicle, registure in the several If they are not, we concede no. parliaments and whersities of the thing by acceding to the Catholic claims; hidon, pronounces, that the power if they are, the imputation is a gross wliich Jesus Christ has given to St. Peter and groundless calumny, and the refu. and his successors, vicars of Christ, tation may be thought superfluous of a relates only to spiritual things, and chose charge, which even those who make it which concern salvation, and not to cannot believe; but truth requires the things civil and temporał: so that in tem statement of the historical fact. porals, Kings and Princes are not subject Unquestionably the violation of the to the ecclesiastical power, and cavinot safe conduct granted by the Emperor directly or indirectly be deposeri by the Sigismond, to the renowned confessor, power of the keys; or their subjects dis- John Huss, will remain to future ages an charged by it from the obedience which indelible suizina on the name of the they owe to their sovereigns, or froin Council of Constance. But even in this their oaths of all-giance.” Throughout extraordinary instance, that assembly, far the whole extent of Catholic christen- from acting upon any general rule that dom, this principle is received as in- faith was not to be kept with heretics, dubitable.
merely contended that the Emperor, The fourth council of Lateran, by the havinig exceeded the limits of his proconcurrent testimonies of history, was vince in granting a safe-conduct to a per: held in abject subjection by the Pope. son charged with heresy, and summoned M. Paris informs us, that Innocent before the council, it was in its own having caused seventy articles to be read nature null and void. And in their before the council, commanded the nineteenth session, the famous decree fathers to receive them withont entering passed, “That though a protection were into any examination. Dupin remarks, granted by the Emperor to heretics, such that the authority of divers canons grant cught not to be deemed a reason passed in this council has been much why the Ecclesiastical Court should not questioned. Innocent is accused by take cognizance of their opinions, and Platina of having producent decrecs in punish them if they appeared to persist the council which were never ratified; in them. And because, by granting safeand the candid Fleury observes, " that conducts, the Prince migbt impede the this Pope, by extending his authority course of canonical proceedings, he shall beyond its just limits, made it odious. not be held by any promise made to Let us pot (savs lie) pretend to justisy screen beretical convicts from ecclesi. excesses of which we see both the causes astical jurisdiction. And the Prince, and wretched eifects.” The power of from whom the safe conduct had been the Papacy was at the height, obtained, having done all he could on Kings and Councils were equally con his part to observe his engagement, was temned by the Roman Pontiffs. But under no farther obligation." The counfrom the ara of the exile and death of cil, therefore, as an abstract truth, acBoniface VIII., the tide of public opic knowledged that faith ought to be kept nion began to turn; and the council of with heretics; and that the Emperor Constance, so formidable to the Holy having pledged his faith, was personally See, and so hostile to its pretensions, bound to maintain it inviolate; but the avenged the quarrel of the council of council not being a party to the engage. Lateran.
ment, disclaimed all participation in the Driven by the irresistible evidence obligation. Ilad the safe-conduct been of facts from this post, the enemies granted with the concurrence of that of the Catholics entrench themselves assembly, thirsting as it appears to have in another position, viz, that the council done for innocent blood, its validity of
. Constance maintained as a general would not have been impeached,