Royal veto of the appointment of bishops
Encyclopedia
A proposed Royal veto of the appointment of bishops was a contentious topic in the politics of the United Kingdom
, in the period 1808 to 1829. According to the proposal, any restoration of the full episcopal hierarchy of the Catholic Church, in Great Britain
, should be subject to a veto
of the Crown
over the appointment of any bishop whose loyalty was suspect.
The matter was eventually resolved by the passage of Catholic Emancipation
without such a condition.
. Their sympathies were thought to be with the French whom Britain had at that time cause to fear.
The authority of the bishops and the priests, the influence of both on the people, was great; and the Government thought if it could direct or control the influence of the bishops it would secure the allegiance of the people. When the College of Maynooth was about to be founded, the Irish bishops were asked if they would agree that the president or professors of the proposed college be appointed by Government; if they would consent that the bishops be appointed by the king; and how they would advise the pope if such a proposal about the appointment of bishops were laid before him.
The bishops on 17 February 1795, rejected the first and second proposals. To the third they answered that they would advise the people "not to agree to his Majesty's nomination if it could be avoided; in unavoidable, the king to nominate one of three to be recommended by the Provincial bishops".
In connection with the Union, William Pitt
intended to bring in a Catholic Relief Bill. He commissioned Lord Castlereagh to make such arrangements as would satisfy the king George III of Great Britain that no priest whose loyalty the king should have reason to suspect would be appointed to an Irish bishopric. Ten bishops, trustees of Maynooth College, met on 17 January 1799, to transact college business. Castlereagh submitted his views to them, reminding them of the suspicion of disloyalty under which the Catholics of Ireland lay since the insurrection of the year before. The ten bishops embodied their reply in certain resolutions, of which this was one:
And as a way towards that security, they expressed the opinion that the name of the priest chosen to be submitted to the pope might be transmitted to the Government, but that the Government should declare within a month whether there was any cause to suspect his loyalty. They did not leave to the Government to decide the reasonableness of such suspicion, for they said "if government have any proper objection against such candidate". Moreover they laid it down that no security given must in the working out "infringe the discipline of the Roman Catholic Church, or diminish the religious influence which the Prelates of the Church ought justly to possess over their respective flocks", and that any agreement made "can have no effect without the sanction of the Holy See".
, was leader of a party which was disposed to compromise the jurisdiction of the Holy See
by assenting to some plan about church discipline, wrote to him asking him for the facts. On 17 August 1799, Dr. Troy replied to the cardinal declaring it was quite false that any plan had been arranged, and having given an account of the meeting and resolutions of the Maynooth trustees he added:
In the spring of 1800, Dr. Troy, writing on the same topic to his agent at Rome, Father Concannon, says:
The opinion thus expressed by those ten bishops in January, 1799, was never published by them. It was not meant for publication; the bishops never took official cognizance of it except to discard it. Every pronouncement of the Irish bishops from that time forward rejected absolutely any proposal which would allow the British Government to meddle in appointments to Irish bishoprics.
and Lord Grenville presented to Parliament a petition to relieve the Irish Catholics from their civil disabilities. In the debate which followed, Sir John Hippisley spoke in a general way of securities for Catholic loyalty. That was the first time any such proposal was made in public; but nothing definite was proposed. On 25 May 1808, Henry Grattan
, in moving for a parliamentary committee to consider the claims of the Catholics, said he was authorized by them to propose
On 27 May May, Lord Grenville presented a petition for the Catholics in the Lords, and, in moving for a committee, proposed an effective veto for the king on the appointment of bishops.
What was known as the "veto" thus assumed a definite form as a public question in Ireland and in England.
wrote in his "Supplementary Memoirs of the English Catholics" that
what had been said by the promoters of the bill on the subject of the veto; and on 14 September they met and officially protested against the veto.
In 1810 Grattan gave notice that he would again bring the Catholic claims before Parliament. On 1 February the English Catholic Board held a meeting in London at which a series of resolutions were carried, including one which involved the veto. It is known as the 5th resolution. Charles Butler
, the leader of the English Catholic vetoists, says of that resolution that it
He was Dr. Milner, whom the Irish bishops had commissioned in 1807 to represent them. The Irish bishops at once condemned the 5th resolution. In May, Grattan's motion for a committee to consider the Catholic petition was defeated. Early in June Lord Donoughmore made a like motion in the House of Lords, which was also defeated. But here was the parting of the ways between the great body of the Irish Catholics led by the bishops, and the English Catholics, with whom were the vicars Apostolic except Milner.
, and Castlereagh brought in what purported to be a Catholic Relief Bill, with a condition which would practically place the appointment of bishops in the hands of a board of commissioners to be named by the king; it also provided that anyone exercising special functions or receiving documents from the Holy See without the knowledge and approbation of that Board, was to be considered guilty of a misdemeanour. Those conditions notwithstanding, an amendment to the Bill was proposed and carried, which would still disable Catholics "to sit and vote in Parliament".
The Bill was lost; the Irish bishops had declared that they could not accept the Bill "without incurring the guilt of schism". A few days after, at a meeting of the Irish Catholic Board in Dublin, Daniel O'Connell
proposed that their thanks be sent to the bishops. Some of the laity, who were in agreement with the English Catholics, opposed the vote; but it was carried by a very large majority.
In the light of these representations Mgr. Quarantotti, in his Rescript of February, 1814, whilst rejecting certain conditions of the Relief Bill as not lawful, declared that securities for the loyalty of bishops which the Government claimed might be allowed. It did not contain an order, but rather a permission, its words being: "Haec cum ita sint, indulgemus" etc., thus leaving the Catholics free to accept or refuse Emancipation on the condition offered.
It raised a storm, however, in Ireland. The Irish bishops deputed Dr. Murray and Dr. Milner to represent to the pope, who had been a prisoner when it was issued, that there was danger in the Rescript such as it was. Pope Pius VII
declared that Mgr. Quarantotti "ought not to have written that letter without authority from the Holy See". He appointed a commission to examine the question.
marched on Rome, and the pope fled to Genoa
. On 26 April 1815, Cardinal Litta, prefect of Propaganda, in a letter set forth conditions under which the Catholics could safely accept Emancipation. It rejected all arrangements hitherto proposed. The claim of the Government to examine communications between the Catholics and the Holy See "cannot even be taken into consideration". As to the appointment of bishops, it said that quite enough provision had been made for their loyalty in the Catholic oath; but for their greater satisfaction it permits "those to whom it appertains" to present to the king's ministers a list of the candidates they select for bishoprics; it insisted, however, that if those names were presented, the Government must, if it should think any of them "obnoxious or suspected" name him "at once"; moreover, that a sufficient number, from amongst whom the pope would appoint the bishop, must always remain even after the government objection.
The Catholics of Ireland sent deputies to Rome to make known their feelings to the pope. Two replies were sent, one to the bishops and the other to the laity. The pope insisted on the terms of Cardinal Litta's letter, pointing out its reasonableness under the circumstances. According to the terms of the letter it would, in fact, be the fault of the ecclesiastics who had the selection of candidates if any undesirable person were left for papal appointment. Cardinal Litta's letter was the last papal document issued on the veto question. The controversy between vetoists and anti-vetoists was, however, kept alive by the passions which it had raised.
in 1823, through which he successfully campaigned for Catholic Emancipation. The Bill was passed during the Premiership of The Duke of Wellington six years later for the Catholics of Ireland and Britain — without a veto.
United Kingdom
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern IrelandIn the United Kingdom and Dependencies, other languages have been officially recognised as legitimate autochthonous languages under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages...
, in the period 1808 to 1829. According to the proposal, any restoration of the full episcopal hierarchy of the Catholic Church, in Great Britain
Great Britain
Great Britain or Britain is an island situated to the northwest of Continental Europe. It is the ninth largest island in the world, and the largest European island, as well as the largest of the British Isles...
, should be subject to a veto
Veto
A veto, Latin for "I forbid", is the power of an officer of the state to unilaterally stop an official action, especially enactment of a piece of legislation...
of the Crown
The Crown
The Crown is a corporation sole that in the Commonwealth realms and any provincial or state sub-divisions thereof represents the legal embodiment of governance, whether executive, legislative, or judicial...
over the appointment of any bishop whose loyalty was suspect.
The matter was eventually resolved by the passage of Catholic Emancipation
Catholic Emancipation
Catholic emancipation or Catholic relief was a process in Great Britain and Ireland in the late 18th century and early 19th century which involved reducing and removing many of the restrictions on Roman Catholics which had been introduced by the Act of Uniformity, the Test Acts and the penal laws...
without such a condition.
Background
Although the penal laws enacted against the Catholics of Ireland and of Britain were still on the statute book towards the close of the eighteenth century, they were less strictly administered than before. Several causes helped to bring this about. The Catholics formed the vast majority of the population of IrelandIreland
Ireland is an island to the northwest of continental Europe. It is the third-largest island in Europe and the twentieth-largest island on Earth...
. Their sympathies were thought to be with the French whom Britain had at that time cause to fear.
The authority of the bishops and the priests, the influence of both on the people, was great; and the Government thought if it could direct or control the influence of the bishops it would secure the allegiance of the people. When the College of Maynooth was about to be founded, the Irish bishops were asked if they would agree that the president or professors of the proposed college be appointed by Government; if they would consent that the bishops be appointed by the king; and how they would advise the pope if such a proposal about the appointment of bishops were laid before him.
The bishops on 17 February 1795, rejected the first and second proposals. To the third they answered that they would advise the people "not to agree to his Majesty's nomination if it could be avoided; in unavoidable, the king to nominate one of three to be recommended by the Provincial bishops".
In connection with the Union, William Pitt
William Pitt the Younger
William Pitt the Younger was a British politician of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. He became the youngest Prime Minister in 1783 at the age of 24 . He left office in 1801, but was Prime Minister again from 1804 until his death in 1806...
intended to bring in a Catholic Relief Bill. He commissioned Lord Castlereagh to make such arrangements as would satisfy the king George III of Great Britain that no priest whose loyalty the king should have reason to suspect would be appointed to an Irish bishopric. Ten bishops, trustees of Maynooth College, met on 17 January 1799, to transact college business. Castlereagh submitted his views to them, reminding them of the suspicion of disloyalty under which the Catholics of Ireland lay since the insurrection of the year before. The ten bishops embodied their reply in certain resolutions, of which this was one:
- "That in the appointment of the Prelates of the Roman Catholic Religion to vacant sees within the kingdom, such interference of government as may enable it to be satisfied of the loyalty of the person appointed, is just, and ought to be agreed to."
And as a way towards that security, they expressed the opinion that the name of the priest chosen to be submitted to the pope might be transmitted to the Government, but that the Government should declare within a month whether there was any cause to suspect his loyalty. They did not leave to the Government to decide the reasonableness of such suspicion, for they said "if government have any proper objection against such candidate". Moreover they laid it down that no security given must in the working out "infringe the discipline of the Roman Catholic Church, or diminish the religious influence which the Prelates of the Church ought justly to possess over their respective flocks", and that any agreement made "can have no effect without the sanction of the Holy See".
Intervention from Rome
Those were not resolutions of the Irish episcopate, but simply the opinion of ten bishops who had met to transact business of another kind; they were driven against their wish to give an opinion. On 15 June 1799, Cardinal Borgia, prefect of Propaganda, having heard a report that Dr. Troy, Archbishop of DublinArchbishop of Dublin (Roman Catholic)
The Archbishop of Dublin is the title of the senior cleric who presides over the Archdiocese of Dublin. The Church of Ireland has a similar role, heading the United Dioceses of Dublin and Glendalough. In both cases, the Archbishop is also Primate of Ireland...
, was leader of a party which was disposed to compromise the jurisdiction of the Holy See
Holy See
The Holy See is the episcopal jurisdiction of the Catholic Church in Rome, in which its Bishop is commonly known as the Pope. It is the preeminent episcopal see of the Catholic Church, forming the central government of the Church. As such, diplomatically, and in other spheres the Holy See acts and...
by assenting to some plan about church discipline, wrote to him asking him for the facts. On 17 August 1799, Dr. Troy replied to the cardinal declaring it was quite false that any plan had been arranged, and having given an account of the meeting and resolutions of the Maynooth trustees he added:
- "As to the proposal itself, the Prelates were anxious to set aside or elude it; but being unable to do so, they determined to have the rights of the Church secured."
In the spring of 1800, Dr. Troy, writing on the same topic to his agent at Rome, Father Concannon, says:
- "We all wish to remain as we are; and we would so, were it not that too many of the clergy were active in the wicked rebellion, or did not oppose it. If the Prelates had refused to consider the proposal, they would be accused of a design to exercise an influence over the people, independent of government, for seditious purposes. Nothing but the well grounded apprehension of such a charge, though groundless in itself, would have induced the Prelates to consider the proposal in any manner. . .If we had rejected the proposal in toto we would be considered as rebels. This is a fact. If we agreed to it without reference to Rome we would be branded as schismatics. We were between Scylla and Charybdis."
The opinion thus expressed by those ten bishops in January, 1799, was never published by them. It was not meant for publication; the bishops never took official cognizance of it except to discard it. Every pronouncement of the Irish bishops from that time forward rejected absolutely any proposal which would allow the British Government to meddle in appointments to Irish bishoprics.
1805 Bill onwards
In 1805 Charles James FoxCharles James Fox
Charles James Fox PC , styled The Honourable from 1762, was a prominent British Whig statesman whose parliamentary career spanned thirty-eight years of the late 18th and early 19th centuries and who was particularly noted for being the arch-rival of William Pitt the Younger...
and Lord Grenville presented to Parliament a petition to relieve the Irish Catholics from their civil disabilities. In the debate which followed, Sir John Hippisley spoke in a general way of securities for Catholic loyalty. That was the first time any such proposal was made in public; but nothing definite was proposed. On 25 May 1808, Henry Grattan
Henry Grattan
Henry Grattan was an Irish politician and member of the Irish House of Commons and a campaigner for legislative freedom for the Irish Parliament in the late 18th century. He opposed the Act of Union 1800 that merged the Kingdoms of Ireland and Great Britain.-Early life:Grattan was born at...
, in moving for a parliamentary committee to consider the claims of the Catholics, said he was authorized by them to propose
- "that no Catholic bishop be appointed without the entire approbation of His Majesty".
On 27 May May, Lord Grenville presented a petition for the Catholics in the Lords, and, in moving for a committee, proposed an effective veto for the king on the appointment of bishops.
What was known as the "veto" thus assumed a definite form as a public question in Ireland and in England.
Reaction
How did the Irish bishops meet it? John MilnerJohn Milner (bishop)
John Milner was an English Roman Catholic bishop and writer who served as the Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District from 1803 to 1826.-Early life:...
wrote in his "Supplementary Memoirs of the English Catholics" that
- "both in conversation and in correspondence they universally disavowed"
what had been said by the promoters of the bill on the subject of the veto; and on 14 September they met and officially protested against the veto.
In 1810 Grattan gave notice that he would again bring the Catholic claims before Parliament. On 1 February the English Catholic Board held a meeting in London at which a series of resolutions were carried, including one which involved the veto. It is known as the 5th resolution. Charles Butler
Charles Butler
Charles Butler KC was an English Roman Catholic lawyer and miscellaneous writer.-Biography:Charles Butler was born in London, the son of James Butler, a nephew of Alban Butler. He was educated at Douai. In 1769 he became apprenticed to the conveyancer John Maire, and subsequently to Matthew Duane...
, the leader of the English Catholic vetoists, says of that resolution that it
- "was with the single exception of the Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District, agent of the Irish bishops, unanimously adopted".
He was Dr. Milner, whom the Irish bishops had commissioned in 1807 to represent them. The Irish bishops at once condemned the 5th resolution. In May, Grattan's motion for a committee to consider the Catholic petition was defeated. Early in June Lord Donoughmore made a like motion in the House of Lords, which was also defeated. But here was the parting of the ways between the great body of the Irish Catholics led by the bishops, and the English Catholics, with whom were the vicars Apostolic except Milner.
1813 Bill
In 1813 Grattan, George CanningGeorge Canning
George Canning PC, FRS was a British statesman and politician who served as Foreign Secretary and briefly Prime Minister.-Early life: 1770–1793:...
, and Castlereagh brought in what purported to be a Catholic Relief Bill, with a condition which would practically place the appointment of bishops in the hands of a board of commissioners to be named by the king; it also provided that anyone exercising special functions or receiving documents from the Holy See without the knowledge and approbation of that Board, was to be considered guilty of a misdemeanour. Those conditions notwithstanding, an amendment to the Bill was proposed and carried, which would still disable Catholics "to sit and vote in Parliament".
The Bill was lost; the Irish bishops had declared that they could not accept the Bill "without incurring the guilt of schism". A few days after, at a meeting of the Irish Catholic Board in Dublin, Daniel O'Connell
Daniel O'Connell
Daniel O'Connell Daniel O'Connell Daniel O'Connell (6 August 1775 – 15 May 1847; often referred to as The Liberator, or The Emancipator, was an Irish political leader in the first half of the 19th century...
proposed that their thanks be sent to the bishops. Some of the laity, who were in agreement with the English Catholics, opposed the vote; but it was carried by a very large majority.
The Quarantotti Rescript
The vetoists were disappointed at the defeat of the Bill of 1813. It then occurred to them that if they could get the Holy See in any way to countenance it, the mark of schism attached to it by the Irish bishops would no longer stain it. They therefore represented to Propaganda the great benefit which the Catholic religion would derive from Emancipation, and the harmlessness of the veto conditions on which the Government had offered it. Dr. Milner was represented to the secretary of Propaganda, Mgr. Quarantotti, as having an uncompromising attitude.In the light of these representations Mgr. Quarantotti, in his Rescript of February, 1814, whilst rejecting certain conditions of the Relief Bill as not lawful, declared that securities for the loyalty of bishops which the Government claimed might be allowed. It did not contain an order, but rather a permission, its words being: "Haec cum ita sint, indulgemus" etc., thus leaving the Catholics free to accept or refuse Emancipation on the condition offered.
It raised a storm, however, in Ireland. The Irish bishops deputed Dr. Murray and Dr. Milner to represent to the pope, who had been a prisoner when it was issued, that there was danger in the Rescript such as it was. Pope Pius VII
Pope Pius VII
Pope Pius VII , born Barnaba Niccolò Maria Luigi Chiaramonti, was a monk, theologian and bishop, who reigned as Pope from 14 March 1800 to 20 August 1823.-Early life:...
declared that Mgr. Quarantotti "ought not to have written that letter without authority from the Holy See". He appointed a commission to examine the question.
Counter-proposal
In the meantime, MuratMurat
Murat is a male Turkish name, spelled as Murad during the Ottoman period. Its meaning can be translated roughly into Reached Desire or Accomplished Goal...
marched on Rome, and the pope fled to Genoa
Genoa
Genoa |Ligurian]] Zena ; Latin and, archaically, English Genua) is a city and an important seaport in northern Italy, the capital of the Province of Genoa and of the region of Liguria....
. On 26 April 1815, Cardinal Litta, prefect of Propaganda, in a letter set forth conditions under which the Catholics could safely accept Emancipation. It rejected all arrangements hitherto proposed. The claim of the Government to examine communications between the Catholics and the Holy See "cannot even be taken into consideration". As to the appointment of bishops, it said that quite enough provision had been made for their loyalty in the Catholic oath; but for their greater satisfaction it permits "those to whom it appertains" to present to the king's ministers a list of the candidates they select for bishoprics; it insisted, however, that if those names were presented, the Government must, if it should think any of them "obnoxious or suspected" name him "at once"; moreover, that a sufficient number, from amongst whom the pope would appoint the bishop, must always remain even after the government objection.
The Catholics of Ireland sent deputies to Rome to make known their feelings to the pope. Two replies were sent, one to the bishops and the other to the laity. The pope insisted on the terms of Cardinal Litta's letter, pointing out its reasonableness under the circumstances. According to the terms of the letter it would, in fact, be the fault of the ecclesiastics who had the selection of candidates if any undesirable person were left for papal appointment. Cardinal Litta's letter was the last papal document issued on the veto question. The controversy between vetoists and anti-vetoists was, however, kept alive by the passions which it had raised.
Resolution
The Catholic cause grew so hopeless that in December, 1821, O'Connell submitted to Dr. Blake, the Vicar-General of Dublin, a sort of veto plan, to get his opinion on it. Soon after the prospect grew brighter; O'Connell founded the Catholic AssociationCatholic Association
The Catholic Association was an Irish Roman Catholic political organisation set up by Daniel O'Connell in the early nineteenth century to campaign for Catholic emancipation within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It was one of the first mass-membership political movements in...
in 1823, through which he successfully campaigned for Catholic Emancipation. The Bill was passed during the Premiership of The Duke of Wellington six years later for the Catholics of Ireland and Britain — without a veto.