"Vandois (or Waldenses) were condemned and declared heretics. It "thereby appears (continues Bousset,) that the Vandois, though con"demned, had not as yet broken all measures with the church of Rome, "in that they had agreed to the umpirage of a Catholic and a priest." It also appears that the Waldenses were not then objects of persecution seeing that the church, acting on the principle of charity and moderation, sought to convince these mislead men of their errors by persuasion, and to bring about a reconciliation in an amicable manner. That the erasing walled towns and destroying gentlemen's seats are fictions we have not the least doubt, as is also that of driving the reformers into Flanders and Germany; for if the reader will only take a glance at the geographical situation of the respective countries, he will find the two last mentioned places on the north side of France, while the Waldenses infested the southern provinces. Had Fox said they were driven into Spain and Italy he would have been less liable to objection.

66

Having carried destruction among the ranks of the Waldenses, which only made them, he says, fructify, Fox next assures us, that the pope at length accused them of heresy, and the monks of immorality. "These slanders (he asserts) they, however, refuted; but the pope, "incensed at their increase, used all means for their extirpation; such

but

as excommunications, anathemas, canons, constitutions, decrees, &c. "by which they were rendered incapable of holding places of trust, "honour, or profit," &c. Let us here ask the sensible reader if such an account as this carries with it the semblance of truth? From what Fox here states, the persecution was commenced by military execution, and ended by spiritual censures. And why did not the defender of the Waldenses give us a specimen or two of their refutation of the charge of immorality brought against them by the monks? To say that these slanders, as Fox calls them, were refuted, is saying just nothing. Any one may deny a fact; but to deny a fact and to prove it false, are very different things. Any of the unfortunate women that prowl the streets of the metropolis for hire may assert that she is a virtuous woman; if she can be proved to have been guilty of incontinence by unimpeachable witnesses and her own declaration, what becomes of her assertion of innocence? So it was with the Waldenses; they stood condemned by their own tenets and conduct, and it is for those who call truth slander to prove the injustice of the charge. But this Fox has not done, nor can he or his modern editors do so, because the evidence of real history is against him. From the manner in which Fox speaks of excommunications, &c. and the deprivation of places, &c. we might be led to suppose, that the pope was all powerful and the state of the Waldenses very pitiful; but observe, reader, there were very few places in those days of profit, office being then considered more of honour than of gain; (would to heaven such feelings prevailed nowa-days in this Protestant country,) and the Waldenses renounced all such things, for which they were also called The Poor Men of Lyons. Of the edict of Aldephonsus, of which we have before spoken, it does not appear to have been one of persecution, since measures of conciliation were resorted to after its promulgation.

We come now to Fox's account of the "origin of the inquisition,” which he gives in these words: "These proceedings of Waldo, and

66

66

"his reformed companions, occasioned the origin of inquisitors; for, pope Innocent III. authorized certain monks inquisitors, to find and "deliver over the reformed to the secular power. The monks upon "the least surmise or information, gave up the reformed to the magistrate, who delivered them to the executioner; for the process was "short, as accusation supplied the place of evidence, and a fair trial. was NEVER GRANTED to the accused."-If this account be true, though we are inclined to believe that there is not a man of sense capable of giving credit to it, the Catholics in those days must have been the most inhuman of all oppressors, and influenced by the most diabolical spirit. But, reader, is not this account over-coloured? Can you believe that a country but lately rescued from a state of barbarism by the benign influence of the Catholic religion; for, take notice, France was converted to Christianity by Catholic missionaries acting in obedience to the pope; can you believe, we ask, that the ministers of that religion which had civilized barbarians, and taught them the principles of charity and justice, would all at once become so corrupt and lost to every sense of tenderness and compassion, as they are here described to have been? We cannot think it. We feel convinced that you will put this account to the credit of bigotry and shameless assertion, and not to a plain statement of facts.-" Accusation supplied the place of " evidence; and a fair trial was NEVER granted to the accused !"God of heaven! that men calling themselves Christians, and professing to be influenced with a desire of diffusing "a love and knowledge of the "genuine principles of Christianity," should, in these enlightened days, put forth so palpable a falsehood. But let us try this account by the test of dates and history.-Waldo, as we have before stated, began to dogmatize about the year 1160; Innocent succeeded to the popedom in 1198, which makes a space of thirty-eight years between the appearance of the one as a preacher of "gospel-truths according to their pri"mitive purity," to use John Fox's words, and of the other as the establisher of the inquisition. Now the inquisition was not established till two years after Innocent had been elected to the papal chair, and then not in consequence of the "proceedings of Waldo and his reformed companions," but in consequence of the immoralities and outrages of another sect of heretics, called Albigenses, whose proceedings threatened destruction to civilized society, and called upon every well-wisher to decency and rectitude of conduct to oppose the pernicious designs of those disturbers of the public peace. We are not the defender of the inquisition, because as an Englishman and a Catholic we have nothing to do with it. It never was an establishment in this country, when the king and people and parliament were Catholic, though tribunals similar, if not worse and more oppressive, such as high commission courts and star-chambers, were instituted as soon as the nation became, as it was called, reformed, in the reigns of Henry the Sth, Edward 6th, Elizabeth, and the Stuarts. Nay, at the very moment we are writing; at the very time when the "few plain Christians" are circulating this mass of calumny and lies to "excite hatred and abhorrence of the pretended "corruptions and crimes of Popery and its professors;" a body of people in Scotland called Freethinkers are petitioning the legislature of this Protestant country against proceedings not unlike those laid to the

charge of the monk inquisitors of the twelfth century. As we do not deal in assertion and fiction, like John Fox and his modern editors, we here annex the petition as a document of singular interest, after all the bales of paper that have been wasted to inculcate the notion that "per"secution is inseparable from Popery," and that liberty of conscience was obtained by the reformation, so called. The public journals report that Mr. Hume, on presenting the petition to the house of Commons on the evening of the 18th of May, 1824, said, the petitioners "complained " of the interference of the magistracy and police with their discussions. "Their room had been forcibly entered, and the whole of their books "taken from them by the public officers. Were men in the present enlightened times to be subject to this kind of inquisition? There had "lately appeared in the papers a decree, signed by Ferdinand, with "whom we seemed to be running a race, in putting an end to all in'quiry. Ferdinand, however, only took forbidden books' from those "who possessed them. We were not content with that, but we punish"ed the persons of the possessors! Was it to be endured, that because a man differed in opinion from the authorities in Scotland, he should on that account be at once imprisoned. He trusted some answer would be given to the case of the petitioners. The Lord Advocate observed, "that the honourable member for Aberdeen was very ill-informed with respect to the circumstances of the case which he had described, into "which however he (the Lord Advocate) would not go..-Mr. Hume “remarked, that as the learned lord would not make answer, he (Mr. "Hume) should set it down that there was an inquisition in Scotland, " and that the learned lord was the grand inquisitor." The following is the petition, which was ordered by the honourable house to be printed.

66

66

66

"Unto the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled; the Petition of the undersigned Individuals, who were Members of the Edinburgh Free-thinkers' Zetetic Society; humbly sheweth, "That your petitioners are of opinion, that severe laws, made to suppress free discussion, and punish those who question the truth and divine origin of religion, are extremely pernicious to society, as they are often employed to support error and suppress truth; and thus fettering the human mind in its progress of knowledge and improvement, they make men ignorant bigots or pretending hypocrites. Such laws are seeming proofs of the weak- › ness of religion, and make inquiring men suspect it is imperfect, and unable to support, itself. That if the Christian Religion is a divine revelation, no discussion can injure it, nor any human efforts overturn it; if it is founded on truth, free discussion will exhibit that truth, and consequently strengthen every rational mind in the belief of it; but if it is founded on errors, severe laws may harrass individuals who criticise it, and may prop it up for a time, but cannot permanently support it against truth and reason.

"That the laws of Scotland, made for the support of the Church, and the punishment of what is called blasphemy, were so severe and oppressive, that they suppressed all inquiry into the foundation of Christianity, or the truth of its doctrines, and compelled every one to submit to the established opinion, whether right or wrong. That though two of the statutes which awarded the punishment of death for what is called blasphemy were repealed by the Unitarian Act, passed in 1813, yet as free discussion on religious subjects is still considered by every one to be very dangerous, your petitioners apprehend that there are other laws yet in force for the protection of established religion, which are far too severe for the enlightened and inquiring spirit of the present time.

"That your petitioners, though peaceable members of society, and strongly attached to their country, regard these laws as still allowed to exist for their oppression; and even if these laws should be considered in dissuetude (which is doubtful), the uncertainty of that matter, and the apprehension lest they should be prosecuted for the open expression of. their opinion, keeps their minds in a state of great uneasiness, and creates a dislike to the laws of their country, instead of a respect for them.

"That your petitioners conscientiously differ in opinion from the established religion of their country, but have no wish whatever to disturb it: they conceive that Deists and

OF

For's Book of Martyrs,

No. 15.

CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL.

Printed and Published by W. E. ANDREWS, 3, Chapter- Price 3d. house-court, St. Paul's Churchyard, London.

EXPLANATION OF THE ENGRAVING.-At a conference between St. Dominic and some of the Albigensian chiefs, the former drew up in writing a short exposition of the Catholic faith, with proofs of each article from the new testament. This writing he gave to the heretics to examine. Their ministers and chiefs, after much altercation about it, agreed to throw it into the fire, saying, that if it burned, they would regard the doctrine it contained ∵ as false. Being cast into the flames it was not damaged in the least. This extraordinary circumstance occasioned the conversion of numbers of the Albigenses, and is recorded by Jordan, and by the ancient writers of St. Dominic's life, Theodoric of Afolda, Bernard Guidonis, and F. Humbert make mention of it.

Christians, if they act according to their professions, and are not knaves and hypocrites, may carry on their discussions with temper and moderation, and live together in peace, vying with each other in good works, and not striving for each other's destruction.

، That your petitioners are not anxious to engage in theological controversy; but as they are weekly consigned to eternal perdition from the pulpit, and daily by many of the people, they have surely the strongest reasons to examine the truth of these doctrines, and the merit of these books, from which they are threatened with such unrelenting severity.. That your petitioners being consigned to eternal misery in a life to come, and also unfairly dealt with in this, they are not allowed by the law to answer the arguments and examine the doctrines of those Christians who attack their opinion, abuse their character and motives, and use every exertion to make them detested by their fellow men.

"That, as your petitioners are compelled to pay their full proportion of the established clergymen's stipends, they consider that these reverend gentlemen would act more consistent with their professions, if they were to visit those whom they think have gone astray, and endeavour to instruct them, rather than so rashly to pronounce their condemnation. That, by the prosecutions instituted against all those who are known to print or sell their books, your petitioners are prevented from obtaining those books which defend or adve

cate their own opinions, and are thus deprived of the benefit of the press, and excluded from the same privileges which are enjoyed by every other sect, however extravagant. "That your petitioners being liable to be punished if they meet together for public discussions or instruction, are convinced that it is through the forbearance of the civil authorities, and not under protection of the laws, that they can meet for that purpose; cofisequently, in their present state, they have as little interest in the stability of the laws and institutions of their country, as Jews or Aliens.

"That your petitioners, in publishing their opinions concerning revealed religion, and in defending their opinions, conceive that they are no more guilty of blasphemy than the Jews, who openly dispute and ridicule the doctrines of Christianity, and even reproach the character of its founder, yet are protected by law.

"That your petitioners have no motive but the love of truth in questioning the divine origin of Christianity, and can have no interest in following error when it is so dangerous; they have as deep an interest in discovering and supporting true religion as any other men: they question the divine origin of Christianity from the sincere conviction of their minds, which their inquiries into its origin have produced, and not from any wish to disturb the peace of society or the happiness of individuals.

"That your petitioners do not conceive that their public discussions or the circulation of their books are dangerous to religion; as it is only reflecting men who engage in such inquiries, their principles are never likely to be generally embraced; besides, divines inculcate that the church is founded on a rock, and cannot be overthrown; and many who have studied the human character, are convinced that the principle of devotion is so deeply planted in the human heart, and so much influenced by surrounding circumstances, that it will never be destroyed by any arguments, however rational or strong. That the unrestrained circulation of books, and free discussion of all religious subjects, would be of great benefit in clearing away error and superstition, and displaying the merits of true religion, and also in directing and assisting the human mind in acquiring knowledge, and thus promoting the improvement and happiness of mankind."

Let it be here noticed, that these complaints of persecution are not made against Popish tyranny in the" dark ages," but against "Protestantascendency" in our own enlightened days. Not against the ministers and authorities of the Catholic church, but against laws enacted by men who had thrown off the yoke, as they termed it, of Popish supremacy, and raised up what was called the standard of evangelical liberty. Here let us revert to the case of Berengarius, and compare the conduct of the Catholic divines in that age to the steps taken against these complaining" Freethinkers" of Scotland. When the errors of Berengarius became known, the pen and tongue were employed to convince him and those who espoused his notions that they were in the wrong. Council after council was called; he was allowed to defend his ideas without restraint; he did defend them, but the strength of Truth was too powerful for him to withstand it; he was forced by reason and facts, not by pains and torments, to give way, and his opinions soon became buried in oblivion. And why is not the same course pursued towards these Freethinking petitioners. The answer is obvious. The chain of divine authority was broken by the pretended evangelical reformers of the sixteenth century; all was left to human fallibility, and conviction lost its hold in an unerring guide. To carry their point, therefore, they had recourse to the civil sword; and the temporal_magistrate was called in to restrain the mind, and put in force human laws passed to establish an Ascendency," wherever the reformers obtained the upper hand, raised by human interests and human power. But, it may be asked, did not the Catholics call in the civil sword and human laws to coerce conscience and punish those who differ from them in opinion? When this difference was confined to opinion, and not extended to actions, threatening the safety of the community, we believe NEVER. Not a single instance of such an infringement on the liberty of conscience on the part of the Catholic church can be produced, because

66