Page images
PDF
EPUB

have given us a great degree of power over them; they have appointed a president, who is at the same time administrator of them, an Irishman, a person recommended by us.

Necessarily in the administration of them, as they are at present constituted, there must be some intercourse with respect to them, kept up between Ireland and France?---This administrator must of course return his accounts to the French ministry.

They allow the persons to receive the benefit of the fund, to be selected at home?--They have no claim whatever with reference to the selection; there are certain families, who originally formed the fund, and the representatives of those families, in some instances, retain still the right; and in other instances the right is devolved upon the bishops; and when once a person goes regularly presented from the competent authority here, he is admitted on the fund without any further hindrance.

Then all that they claim is, that the fund should continue in France?---Should continue, and be administered, of course, under their control; till latterly, they exercised a very tyrannical power over these funds; they appointed a bureau gratuit; and this bureau managed, or rather mismanaged, those funds very much ; but at present there seems a better disposition, and they seem more inclined to do justice.

If it should be thought expedient for the public safety, that that fund should be put an end to, and that an equivalent fund, entirely domestic, should be given for the same object; you think there would be no objection to give an assurance on the part of the Roman Catholic clergy, that the persons hereafter to be appointed, should be educated exclusively out of domestic funds?-I cannot see the least ground for refusing to give such

an assurance.

The Catholic priests are now paid by voluntary monies raised amongst their flocks?—Yes.

If a stipend was regularly paid them by the government, under certain regulations, in case of the question of Catholic Emancipation being granted, are you of opinion, that the Catholic priesthood would give up their claim to those fees now paid by their flocks?—I think there are certain fees, established by long usage, that they would feel a reluctance to give up, which are received by the ministers of almost every church, on marriages and burial services, and christenings; but the other voluntary offerings which are given, they certainly would give up without any hesitation.

Easter and Christmas offerings ?---Easter and Christmas of ferings.

Are there not fees called confessional fees, paid to the priests? They are not, properly speaking, confessional fees; but some

times when the people assemble at what is called a station in the country, for the purpose of making confession, they take the opportunity which is afforded by that, to contribute their offerings.

Are those part of the fees which you think would be given up by the Catholic clergy?---Certainly.

The fees on baptism, marriage, and burial, do not come within the description of fees that you think the clergy would be willing to give up?--I think not.

Do you know what the proportion of fees arising from baptism, marriage and burial may be, in respect to the proportion of fees arising from other sources ?--I really cannot form a judgment; but they are considerably inferior to the other fees.

Would those fees upon baptism, marriage, and burial, be decreased, if a general stipend was paid to the clergy?--It is very likely that they would be much decreased.

Are you of opinion, that there would be any objection in principle, to the priesthood giving up the receipt of those particular fees; or do you think the amount of those fees is the greater object of consideration?--I think the principle being so long established, and such a universal usage, would not be relinquished without some feeling.

It is the principle then, and not the amount of fees paid for those particular purposes, that would be the object?—Yes; because the amount is less than those which they would be willing to give up.

Supposing a Roman Catholic priest refused to perform the ceremony of baptism or burial, because the fee was not paid, should he not be subject to some penalty?--He would undoubtedly be punished, and very justly, by his own superior, by the bishop of the diocese, if a complaint were lodged against him.

Do not you think that a Roman Catholic priest should be bound to perform those ceremonies, without the payment of those fees?--He is conscientiously bound to perform them.

You would leave the payment of fees to the feeling of gratitude, and the feeling of good will that exists between the clergyman and his parishioners?---Just so.

Do different classes of persons, according to their circumstances, pay a different amount of fees?—They do.

Is there any class from whom no fees at all are expected ?--The poorer classes are attended without any fee, when they have not wherewith to make that usual offering which is expected.

Will you state the amount of the different classes of fees paid by different persons?---It would not be possible; it varies according to places and circumstances, and according to the disposition of the people; and that is matter of feeling.

In the case of a stipend being given to the Catholic clergy, would that class which pays no fees at all now, be extended much further ?--I think it would; and I think those that do pay, would pay a much smaller sum.

What power have the Catholic clergy to enforce the payment of those fees?-No power but public opinion, and a claim upon the gratitude of the people, which is generally met.

Have they any ecclesiastical power?---No; they have no ecclesiastical power; they cannot inflict a censure without the authority of the bishop, and the bishop would never give his authority for purposes of that kind.

You stated, that in your opinion, it would not be proper for the Crown to have any direct or indirect interference in the appointment of the Catholic clergy ?---I think it would not be useful either to the Crown or to us. I apprehend, that we could serve the Crown much better by being left independent of it, excepting indeed that necessary dependence which all authorities of the state have.

Does this objection depend upon your religious opinions, or upon political feeling?-Upon both; upon religious opinions principally. I say, as far as I am concerned, wholly religious opinions, because it is our duty to serve the people, and to serve government; I think we could do that more effectually, by being left as much as possible to ourselves, without the interference of

government.

Do you consider there is any thing contrary to the discipline of the Catholic church, in such an interference of the government? ---I think it would be injurious to the discipline of the Catholic church; and I do not know that it is recognised in a Protestant government any where.

Supposing that by a treaty with the Pope, he was to admit of such an interference, in your opinion would the Catholic bishops in Ireland submit to it?--I think they would object to it, if that interference were to be in a material degree.

Would they think that the Pope exceeded his power, in making such an agreement?---Not his power certainly; but they would consider him as outstepping the limits of prudence and wisdom, and discretion.

Would they feel themselves justified, in consequence of that, in objecting to such a treaty ?---They certainly would.

Would there be any objection in your mind, to the government naming a commission, consisting of prelates of the Roman Catholic church, through whom the loyalty and the domestic nomination and education of the several functionaries should be certified to them?--Not the least objection; we should be most anxious to have an opportunity of certifying to government, the

loyalty of every one who is employed as a functionary of our church.

Allowing the government to name the commission through whom that should be certified?---Certainly.

Would it be necessary for the Catholic prelates to obtain the consent of the Pope, previous to their engaging their co-operation in such an arrangement as to domestic nomination?No, it would not; because the Pope has already signified his readiness to acquiesce in it.

When did the Pope signify his readiness to acquiesce in it ?---About ten years ago.

Supposing the Pope was to agree to any thing, which in the opinion of the Catholic prelates in Ireland exceeded his authority, what would be the conduct of the Catholic prelates, in such a case?--If we thought he exceeded his authority, we would of course deem ourselves at liberty not to acquiesce in his decisions.

Is the authority of the Pope defined in such a manner, that it would be easy for the Catholic prelates to decide, whether he exceeded his authority or not?--I think it would.

Would there be any objection on the part of the Roman Catholic clergy, to submit their bulls and briefs, and other documents from the Pope, to the inspection of government, before they were transmitted to the authorities to which they were directed?--If we look at the substance of those communications, I do not find there would be any great difficulty; but I would find a great difficulty in submitting the private communication of any gentleman to another, without his consent; I think it would not be authorized.

Are those private communications the subject of briefs or rescripts from the Pope?-Every brief or rescript is of course a private communication, a communication from one gentleman to another; and I would not think myself authorized to show any gentleman's letter to another, without his consent.

Supposing the Pope consented to such an arrangement, should you see any objection to it then?—Not the least.

Your objection is rather on the principle of good manners, than of any religious feeling?-The communications with the Pope, are wholly of a spiritual nature; there are some confidential communications regarding the consciences of individuals, and it would not perhaps be right, that those communications should pass into other hands than those immediately concerned.

You would make an objection to submit those spiritual communications to any lay tribunal?-Yes.

Or perhaps to any tribunal that was not of your own persuasion?-Certainly.

Could there be any objection to submitting this communication

to a commission of your own bishops, to be named by the Crown, in the manner before-mentioned? I do not see that there could be any objection to it, provided the Pope consented that his communications should be so submitted; and I think, even with respect to the objection founded on the rights of individuals, it might be done in such a way, as that the particular person should not be marked out; A. B. or C. D. would be a sufficient mark to distinguish the individual for whom the matter was intended, without communicating his name.

Would the prelates of your church object, that the spiritual communications that are made from the Pope to these countries, should, in the first instance, pass through the hands of that commission of your own prelates, and that they should exercise their discretion upon them?-I think there might be instances where one might feel an objection to allow a communication on a confessional case, to go into any other hands than those of the parties concerned; at the same time, I think it might be so regulated, as to conceal the name of the person by letters, or something of that sort.

Does not that restriction exist in Protestant kingdoms, for instance, in the kingdom of Prussia, and in the kingdom of the Netherlands?-It does, and in Catholic kingdoms too; sometimes by virtue of a concordat with the Pope himself; then he abandons his own right, and we cannot object to it; if he chooses to do it, we should most readily acquiesce in it.

You have stated, that you think there would be no objection on the part of the Roman Catholic prelates, to preventing foreigners being appointed to benefices and dignities in the Roman Catholic church in Ireland?-There is not the least likelihood that such an attempt would be made; and we should be glad that a law were enacted, to prevent the introduction of such persons; it is merely a case that we contemplate as barely possible.

Could a law of that kind be passed, without an agreement with the Pope, before-hand?-Certainly; the law can exclude any one whom it considers dangerous to the country; as it excludes aliens, it could exclude those foreign persons from exercising any function within this realm; and such a law would excite no kind of feeling of dissatisfaction in the Catholic population.

What would be the situation of the country, if such a law were passed, and the Pope were to institute such a person?—He never would institute such a person; he would not be so unwise as to enter into collision with the law of the country.

Is the present Pope bound by the opinions of the last ?—He considers himself bound by the decisions of the last.

Is the willingness which the late Pope expressed to come into an arrangement for domestic nomination such a decision as you have mentioned?-It is such a decision as I have mentioned.

« PreviousContinue »