OAXACA
180
OAXACA
Catholics from the worst consequences of the penal"
laws, came before the ICiiphsli Parliament, and in it
was emlio<iioil the Irisli Outli (18 (ieorge 111, e. 00).
This Act was passed with Ultle difhculty, and the oath
was taken without remonstrance by the clergy of all
schools.
The relief given by the Bill of 1778 was so imperfect that further legislation was soon called for, and now the disadvantages of the system of tests were acutely felt. A committee of lay Cathohcs, with (iallicanjjro- clivities, who afterwardscharacteristically called tliem- selves tlie Cisalpine Club were negotiating with the Government (see Butler, Ch.ihles). To them it was represented tiiat if more concessions were required more assurances should be given. They were accord- ingly presented witti a long " Protest ", which not only rejel'tcd the alleged malpracl ices, already disowned by the Irisli Oath, but declaimed against them and others of the same kind in strong l)Ut untheological language. It reintroduced, for instance, the objectionable terms "impious, heretical and damnable" of James's Oath of Allegiance. That complications might have ensued from signing such a document was not difficult to fore- see. Nevertheless, the committee insisted (1) that words would be understood in a broad popular way, and (2) that, to obtain the Relief -Act, it must be signed instantly. To prevent such a misfortune, it was freely signed by laity and clergy, and by the four vicars Apostolic, but two of these recalled their names. When, however, the signatures had been obtained, the new Relief Bill was brought forward by Government, with an oath annexed founded on the Protest (hence called the "Protestation Oath"), which excluded from relief those who would not swear to it, and accept the name of "Protesting Catholic Dissenters". A crisis had arisen for the Catholic Church in England; but with the crisis came the man. It was John Milncr (q. v.), then only a country priest, to whose energy and address the dissipation of this danger was chiefly due. The Second Relief Act, therefore, passed (1791) with- out changing the previous oath, or the name of Catho- lics. Though the Emancipation Bill was eventually carriedwithoutanyte.sts, this was not foreseen at first. The Catholic Committee continued its endeavours for disarming Protestant prejudices, but their proposals (like the Veto) too often savoured of Gallicanism. So too did the oath annexed to the bill proposed in 1813, which from its length was styled the "Theological Oath". Eventually, owing to the growing influence exercised by Daniel O'Connell and the Irish, Catholic Emancipation was fully, if tarchly, granted without any tests at all in 1829.
VI. Repeal op the Statutory Oaths against CATHOLicirs-, 1867-1910.— The Relief Bills, hitherto mentioned, were generally measures of relief only, leaving the old statutes, oaths, and tests still upon the Statute Book, and some of the chief officers of State had still to take them. The actual repeal of the disused tests and oaths of Wilham III have only taken place in quite recent times. In 1867 the Declaration was repealed (30, 31 Vict., c. 75). After this, the only person bound to pronounce the oath was the king himself at the commencement of his reign. In 1871 the Promi.ssorv Oaths Bill removed all the old Oaths of Allegiance (34, 3.5 Vict., c. 48). In 1891 the first attempt was made by Lord Herries in the House of Lords to get rid of the king's Declaration, but the amendments ofTered by Government were so insignifi- cant that the Catholics themselves voted against their being proposed at all. In 1901 strong resolutions were passed against its retention by the Canadian House of Commons, as also by its hierarchy, and these were emphasized by similar petitions from the hierarchies of Australia, and the Catholics of the English colonies. In 1904. lOO.'i, and 1908 bills or motions to the same cITcct were introduced by Lord Braye, Lord Grey, Lord Llandaff, the Duke of Norfolk,
and Mr. Redmond, but without the desired effect.
After the death of Iving Edward VII, however. King
George V is beheved to have urged the Government to
bring in a repealing Act. This w;is done and public
opinion, after some wavering, finally declared itself
strongly on the side of the Bill, which wsus carried
through both Houses by large majorities, and received
Royal Assent on 3 August, 1910, thus removing the
last anti-Catholic oath or declaration from the English
Constitution.
General. — See the articles Bellarmine; Butler, Charles; Challoner; England since the Reformation; P'ibuer, John; Milner; Potnter. For the full texts of the Acts of Parliament see The Statutes at Large (London, I7fi2 — ); Scobell, Collection of Ada, ieJ,0-ie66 (London, 1657-58); Statutes at Large (.Ireland) (Dublin, 1765 — ). For the debates in the parliament, see Han- sard, Parliamentary Debates; Journals of the House of Lords, and Journals of the //oujfe of Commons; CoBBETT, Parliamrrilari/ Hist, of Englami (London, 1806); Butler, Mem. of English Catholics (London, 1819), Catholic, but with Gallican proclivitie.s; Flana- gan, Hist, of the Church in England (London, 1857) ; Gillow, Bibl. Diet.; Diet. Nat. Biog.
Particular Oaths. — L — Bridgett, Life of B. John Fisher (Lon- don, 1888) : Gairdner, Lollardy and the Reformation in England (London, 1908); Camm, Lives of English Martyrs (London, 1904). II. — TiERNEY, Dodd's Church History of England, IV (London, 1851) ; Reusch, Index der verbotenen BUcher (Bonn, 1883) ; Som- MERVOGEL, Bibl. dc la C. de Jisus (Paris, 1890) ; de la SEnvifeRB, De Jacobo I. cum Card. R. Bellarmino disputante (Paris, 1900). III. — Birchley ivere Austin), The Catholique's Plea (London, 1659); Idem, Reflections on the Oaths of , Supremacy and Allegiance (London, 1661); Pugh, Blacklo's Cabal (a. 1., 1680). IV. — Thurston, Titus Oates's Test (London, 1909) ; Idem in The Tablet (London, 13 August, 1910), 292. V. — Milner, Supplementary Memoirs of English Catholics (London, 1S20) ; Burton, Life and Times of Bishop Challoner (London, 1909); Ward, Dawn of the Catholic Reriral (London, 1909); LiNOARD, The Catholic Oath in The Catholic Miscellany (1S32, 1833). Ill, 368; IV, 100. VI.— Lord Llandaff (Matthews), The Papal Declaration in Report of the Ninth Eucharistic Congress held at Westminster, 1908, 50; Bridgett, The Religious Test Acts in The Month (London, May, 1895), 58; Idem, The English Coronation Oath in The Month (Lon- don, March, 1896), 305; Gerard, The Royal Declaration in The Month (London, May, 1901), 449.
J. H. Pollen.
Oazaca (or Antequbra), Archdiocese of, situated in the southern part of the Republic of Mexico, bounded on the north by the Bishopric of Huajuapam and the Archbishopric of Puebla, on the east by the Bishopric of Vera Cruz, on the west by that of Tehuantepec, and on the south by the Pacific Ocean. When the conquest of New Spain was ac- complished, Herndn Cort(5s sought the aid of the powerful TIaxcaltecas, who had establislied a repub- lic and were at war with the Aztec Emperor Mocte- zuma. Out of gratitude to the TIaxcaltecas, the first bishopric that was founded on the American continent was called Tlaxcala, that of Mexico was second, and later that of Guatemala. Oaxaca, the fourth in the order of succession, was established, imder the name of Antequera, by Paul III, 21 July, 1535. the first bishop, the Right Rev. Juan L6pez de Zdrate, ha\ing been preconized that same year. From then to the present day only thirty bishops have governed the diocese, the last being the Most Rev. Eulogio G. Gillow, preconized 23 May, 1887. On 23 June, 1891, Antequera was raised to the rank of an archbishopric by Leo XIII, and has, at the present time as suffragan dioceses, Chiapas, Yucatan, Tabasco, Tehuantepec, and Campeche.
Prior to the Conquest the religion of the entire extensive region now compri.sed in the Archbishopric of Antequera, or Oaxaca, was idolatry in various forms, according to the different races that popu- lated this district, the Mixteca, Zapoteca, Mixe, an- thinanteca predominating, although twenty-two en- tirely different dialects are known among them. The famous ruins of Mitla indicate that the most venerable priest of the entire American continent resided there, one who was greatly venerated not only by the different villages of the ancient Anahuac, but by others; as those of Peru. We know from history that when the conquerors landed in Vera Cruz, Moctezuma consulted the High-Priest .\chiutla, who announced to him that the oracle had predicted
