And it has felt the consequences. Of all the kingdoms of this world, since the fall of Rome, the Popedom has been the _most_ marked by calamity. There has been no nation whose sovereign has been so _often_ flung from his throne; whose throne has been so often contested with bloody dissension, whose sovereign has been so often a prisoner in foreign lands, whose capital has been so often sacked, whose provinces have been so often in foreign possession, whose population is so miserable, and whose _vassalage_ has been so palpable, so humiliating, and so wretched. But need we look to the past, when we see the Papacy at this hour? Need we dig up ancient fields of battle, to see how often its armies have been buried; or dive into its dungeons, to see how many centuries of fetters are recorded there against its presumption? Need we break up its tombs to see its shattered crosiers and tarnished tiaras, when we see the living figure that sits in mock majesty in the Vatican, with a _French_ garrison in the Castle of St Angelo? But the Papist demands religious liberty. The words, in Papist lips, are jargon. He has never had it in any country on earth. Has he it in Rome? Can the man have the absurdity to call himself a freeman, when the priest may tear the Bible out of his hand; when, without a license, he cannot look into the Book of Life?--when, with or without a license, he cannot exercise his own understanding upon its sacred truths, but must refuse even to think, except as the priest commands?--when, for daring to have an opinion on the most essential of all things--his own salvation--he is branded as a heretic; and when, for uttering that opinion, he is cast into the dungeon?--when the priest, with the _Index Expurgatorius_ in his hand, may walk into his house, and strip it of every book displeasing to the caprices, insolence, and ignorance of a _coterie_ of monks in the Vatican? If the legitimate and noble boast of the Englishman is, that his house is his castle, what is the house of the Italian Papist, but his dungeon? If the Irish or the English Papist demands "Religious Liberty," let him demand it of his master the Pope. If the Papist _desires_ it, let him break the Popish fetter, and emancipate himself. Till then, we must look upon his claim as lawlessness instead of liberty, and hypocrisy instead of religion. But, before the Papist requires more than toleration, must he not show that at least he _tolerates_? If, in the Popish kingdoms of the Continent, fear or policy has produced some degree of Protestant toleration, what is the condition of Protestantism in the capital of Popery; and, in its most important point, freedom of worship? To this day, no English Protestant is suffered to worship within the walls of Rome.