that their allegiance is divided ?—I do not think it does, in any way; we are bound to obey the Pope in those things that I have already mentioned; but our obedience to the law and the allegiance which we owe the sovereign, are complete and full, and perfect and undivided, inasmuch as they extend to all political, legal, and civil rights of the King, or of his subjects. I think the allegiance due to the King, and that due to the Pope, are as distinct and as divided in their nature, as any two things can possibly be.

Is the claim that some Popes have set up to Temporal Authority, opposed to Scripture and Tradition ?—In my opinion, it is opposed to both.

What is your opinion respecting the conduct of those Popes who have interfered with states, and extended their pretensions to the civil business of men?-I do not like to speak harshly of men who have already passed out of this world; but I think that the Popes who so acted have done much mischief, and very often have acted upon a power, or upon an authority, which they had no right to exercise; however, when Popes did interfere with the civil business of men, or with the temporal rights of princes, I find that in almost every instance in which such interference occurred, that they professed to act upon rights which they had acquired by compact or cession, or some act upon the part of those sovereigns, or those countries, with which they so interfered; and I do not find that that interference was grounded in almost any case upon their spiritual authority only.

Are those rights you allude to temporal rights?—The rights to which I allude are temporal rights, which were acquired by the Popes from time to time, chiefly during the feudal times.

Do you mean, by princes transferring to Popes their kingdoms, or parts of their kingdoms ?-Yes, by kings and princes making their states tributary to the holy see, or resigning them into the hands of the Pope, and then accepting of them back again, as fiefs of the holy see; thus the Pope was considered by them as the lord paramount of the kingdom, or dukedom, or principality; and he, acting upon this supposed right thus acquired, sometimes attempted to depose the princes, or to absolve the vassals of such kingdoms from the allegiance which they owed to their immediate lord.

Were those claims of the Popes opposed in Europe?-Opposed they were; and the consequence of such opposition were many and very bloody wars; the kings of France contended against the Popes; the sovereigns, properly so called, I cannot call them emperors of Germany, for they were the

emperors of the Roman empire, contended with the Popes; the kings of Naples have had, from time immemorial, disputes upon those grounds with the Popes; and there was scarcely a Catholic sovereign in Europe, who at one time or other, did not contend with his contemporary Pope, upon this very ground.

Did every Pope justify his claim to temporal interference, upon some previous right conferred upon him by a prince of some European country?-As far as I am acquainted with the history of such claims, put forward by the Popes, they rested them upon such temporal rights, previously acquired by themselves or their predecessors, with the single exception of, I think, Boniface the Eighth; and he in a contest, as I recollect, with some king of France, includes in a brief, which he issued, a declaration that he did so by an authority vested in him from above. The terms of this declaration were vague and general, and seemed to me, when I read it, to imply that it was not in virtue of the temporal authority' he had acquired, but in virtue of his spiritual authority, that he attempted to act as he then did. This is the only instance. of the kind which has occurred to me in my reading.

Does the Pope at present dispose in any way of temporal affairs within the kingdoms of any princes on the Continent? -The Pope at present does not interfere, or attempt to interfere, with the temporal concerns of any kingdom in Europe; to this, perhaps, there is an exception with regard to the kingdom of Naples; but I believe a concordat has been entered into in the time of the late Pope, between the then government of Naples and the Pope's minister Cardinal Gonsalin, wherein the ancient claim or claims of the Roman see to the kingdom of Naples, as a fief, were laid aside, and some equivalent for it accepted. It was customary for the king of Naples, as a mark of his holding that kingdom as a fief of the holy see, to send, amongst other things, a white pony or palfrey once a year to Rome; whether that custom is still continued I cannot say ; but I know an arrangement has been entered into, which has settled differences which subsisted very long, and troubled both courts very much. Let me repeat, that the case of Naples is the one in which the Popes of Rome have, for the last three centuries nearly, interfered in any way, directly or indirectly, with the temporal concerns of any state in Europe; and I add, that if they were to attempt so to interfere at present, the interference would not only be disregarded, but scoffed at by every person of sense.

Do the Catholic clergy insist, that all the bulls of the Pope are entitled to obedience ?-By no means, the Pope we consider as the executive authority in the Catholic church; and

when he issues a bull, enforcing a discipline already settled by a general council, such bull is entitled to respect; but he may issue bulls which would regard local discipline, or other matters not already defined, and in that case his bull would be treated by us in such manner as it might seem good to us. For instance, did it trench upon our local discipline, we might treat it as we did the rescript of Quarrantoti, about which I was questioned here the other day; did we find that it was unreasonable, we would refuse to accept of it; I have already spoken of his authority in matters of a purely spiritual nature.

In the creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, there are the following words: "I promise and swear obedience to the Roman bishop, the successor of St. Peter;" what is the proper mean ing of those words? Of course, that we would obey him in those things to which his authority extends; namely, spiritual matters, or the execution of decrees regularly defined by general councils and accepted of by us, for they are not all the decrees of even general councils which are received in each kingdom; for instance, the decrees of the Council of Trent, regarding discipline, are not received in the kingdom of France; the decree of the Council of Trent, regarding a particular discipline, is not received in the province of Dublin in Leinster, though it is received in the other parts of Ire land; all the decrees then even of general councils, much less all decrees of the Pope, cannot have force unless they are received formally by the nation which they regard, or whose discipline is affected by them; each church has its rights, and those rights cannot be subverted or affected by any proceeding on the part of the Pope, without the concurrence of the hierarchy of such church.

If the Pope were to intermeddle with the rights of the King, or with the allegiance which Catholics owe to the King; what would be the consequence so far as the Catholic clergy were concerned? The consequence would be, that we should oppose him by every means in our power, even by the exercise of our spiritual authority.

In what manner could you exercise that spiritual authority? -By preaching to the people, that their duty to God as Catholics, required of them to oppose every person who would interfere in any way with that right, which the law of Nature, and the positive law of God, established in their prince, a prince whom we as subjects were bound to support; we would therefore exercise our spiritual authority, by preaching the gospel to the people, and by teaching them to oppose the Pope, if he interfered with the temporal rights of our king.

Is it well known, what the things are in which the Pope cannot interfere ?-Unquestionably; in all things of a political or civil nature he cannot interfere; there are some matters of a mixed nature wherein he may be considered as having some power, such for instance as marriage; this we consider as a sacrament, and also as a civil contract; the power of the Pope, or of the bishop, extends to the spiritual qualities and effects of that union, notwithstanding the temporal character of it; but the temporal effects which flow from it are subjects of the civil law. If the Pope then, or any person connected with him, were to interfere in those temporal matters which are closely connected with spiritual things, in the contract of marriage, they would be outstepping their proper boundary, and no regard should be paid to what they would do, or say or ordain; their authority can affect only the spiritual rights which would result from such marriage.

With respect to Marriage, the Committee believe that, according to the doctrine or the rule of your church, certain marriages might be held as forbidden by the degrees of consanguinity, which, according to the doctrine of our law, are not so? Yes.

-

In a case of that kind, the marriage being valid according to the law of the land, you might hold the party living in a state of sin, if he cohabited under such circumstances ?-I should indeed.

Under those circumstances the issue of the marriage would be legitimate by our law, though the cohabitation would be sinful according to your doctrine; would you conceive that in consequence of your church holding the cohabitation sinful, the civil rights of the issue could in any degree be affected?I hold that they could not.

Does this state of the case in regard to marriage, produce any notable inconvenience ?-I do not find that it does; we have an experience here of two centuries and upwards; I mean in Ireland, where the ecclesiastical law differs from the law of the country, yet I have not in any one instance known or even heard of a case wherein any notable inconvenience resulted from the present state of things.

Could the matter be arranged without difficulty, so as to get rid of this discrepancy ?-I should think so, with great ease; in fact the Pope, by my stating to him for instance, that a marriage was contracted within the prohibited degrees of kindred, but which marriage was reputed valid by the established law, would immediately grant power to dispense in that case to marry the parties, and so render the marriage

lawful in the eye of the church as well as in the eye of the law; this is done sometimes.

Do Roman Catholics pray to Saints?-We pray that the Saints would pray for us to God; we address ourselves to the Saints, and beg that they would pray to God for us; but we do not pray to them so as to ask of them any favour or grace, because we know they have no power of themselves to grant us such favour or grace; and that there is only one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

In what sense do Catholics pray to the Virgin Mary ?—In the same sense as they pray to other Saints.

Do Roman Catholics believe there is any divinity in images and relics? They believe that there is not any divinity or virtue whatsoever in images; as to relics, they reverence them more than they do mere images.

What is the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church respecting Absolution ?-The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church respecting Absolution, is precisely the same as that of the Established Church in this kingdom; so much so, that the words of absolution which we use are precisely those put down in the visitation of the sick in the Common Prayer-book, to be used by a clergyman of the Established Church, when he visits a person who wishes to confess his sins. Our doctrine then is, that the sinner, feeling that he may in his lifetime have transgressed the law of God, and being penitent for it, acknowledges his fault to a priest as to a minister of religion, and being sincerely sorry within him for having so offended God, by transgressing his law, the priest by a power derived from God, gives him absolution or pardon; always requiring of him that he do every thing in his power by amendment of life to satisfy for his past offences, and if he should have injured his neighbour in person, character or property, that he repair such injury to the full extent of his power.

Is there any difference between the doctrine of the Catholic church and that of the Protestant church, with respect to absolution?—I really know of none; I am sure the Established church requires, as we do, that the person making a confession of his sin be sorry or contrite for it; the words of the absolution, which the priest of the Established church uses, are precisely those which we use; so I see no difference between the one and the other.

What is the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, with respect to Indulgences ?-Our doctrine, with regard to Indulgences is, that a person who may have offended against God, or his neighbour, having done every thing in his power to satisfy