"But on the other side the Church recognizes, and always will
recognize, the right of a free people to govern themselves; and,
not only recognizes that right, but will support it with all the
power at her command. I have acknowledged that in a few instances
in history ecclesiastics have interfered unduly with what did not
concern them--interfered, that is, not as citizens (for that is
their right, in common with all other citizens)--but in the Name
of Religion. Now that, gentlemen, is simply a thing of the past.
If secular rulers have learned by experience, so have
ecclesiastical rulers. . . . I have invited investigation into
the history of the last hundred years; and I have answered those
few charges that have been brought--I hope to your satisfaction."
(There was a murmur of applause.)

"In secular matters, therefore, the Church will be wholly on the
side of liberty. Ecclesiastical authorities, for example, would
be the first to welcome a repeal of legislation as regards
heresy; but, on the other hand, we fully recognize the right of a
secular State to protect itself, even by the death penalty,
against those who threaten the existence of the sanctions on
which a secular State takes its stand. We recognize her right, I
say; but I do not mean by that that you will not find a majority
of ecclesiastics who hold that it is, to put it mildly, a
deplorable policy and very imperfectly Christian.

"However, I have said all this before, both in public and now
again in answer to your questions; and I think that, at any rate
so far as I am concerned, I shall not be to blame if the nation
accepts the proposed change under a misapprehension.