Brian Condon: Letters and Documents in 19th Century Australian Catholic History
[Source: Adelaide Archdiocesan Archives copy]
Sydney
7th. June 1827
Sir,
In reply to your letter of the 4th. inst., which I had the honour of receiving on yesterday, I have to inform you, for His Excellency the Governor's information, that I have not attended, nor have I been ever solicited or invited to attend the funeral of any Catholic in the protestants' burial ground since my arrival in the Colony: But, to the reverse, I know several Catholic families who are determined to translate the Coffins of their deceased friends to the new burial place on account of its consecration.
In the Catholic Church, there is an ecclesiastical censure attached to the public notorious sinners who die as they had lived in a reprobate state, such as Duellists, suicidals, public adulterers, obstinate unto death, or culprits of any kind who expire in flagrante or in the actual flagrant commission of the crime. For instance persons shot in the act of robbery or stealth, all such and such like persons are branded with this excommunication, viz. exclusion from all Sacramental Rights, forfeiture of Christian Burial, and of all other sacred privileges and consolations of the Catholic Religion. This censure was instituted as a penalty on refractory members in terrorem of the living.
Some persons of these descriptions might have been buried without friends knowing that it would be useless to make to me any application. I have not heard of any others. Catholic Soldiers might be sometimes buried there, I not being informed of the funeral by any notice. I overlook one that was carried through mistake, then, and whilst I was directing them to the new ground, two protestants, two protestants that were on the road, volunteered to dig the grave (for there is no stipendiary grave digger) and applied for the loan of implements to a Reverend Gentleman in the Church ground who refused, replying what had they to do with burying Catholics? which expression occasioned them ever since to become Catholics.
Since I had the honour of receiving your letter on the present subject, I have made every inquiry relative to the said burial grounds, and I have been informed that some Catholic families have been at great inconvenience in removing their friends' remains from the old ground on George's Street to the place in question, and that they have been at considerable expense in erecting Tombs and Vaults for them. It is natural to suppose that some of those people would wish to be entombed in the same grave with their relations, and that they would feel it a grievance to be obliged to repeat the expenditure.
I know of none else inclined to continue that as a burial place, and if it be His Excellency's wish to make it, exclusively, [a] protestant place of interment (which I think very proper, since we have received the new burial endowment) I would recommend public notice to be given to that effect, excepting none but those who have had expensive Vaults erected for their families.
As to the other point referring to my non-attendance, it is evident that the suggestion which gave origin to that enquiry was officious, gratuitous, and ill-designed towards me on the part of the Informant. It was officious, because the informant had no right to concern himself about my spiritual affairs; that is a duty I owe to myself, to my conscience and to my God; and if I know myself, the control of Bishop or Pope (my only spiritual superiors) could not be more influential. It was also gratuitous, because no just cause existed for instituting such investigation. And it was ill designed, because he could not be actuated by zeal, by religion, or by fraternal charity.
If the informant be a Catholick, he must be malevolent because the most ignorant of them knows that in my spiritual functions I am subject only to my spiritual superiors; and therefore it was because of my salary from Government, that he would even dream of proffering such a frivolous story before His Excellency. I say to it "* * non curant de minimis [... pay no attention to trifles] and I am sure His Excellency will reply in the words of the Philosopher and Emperor Aquila non captat muscas [Eagles don't catch flies. Ed.] .
If the informant be not a Catholic, he is less blamable, tho' not without his design, because every aCatholic considers the rites of the Catholic Church superstitious if not idolatrous. Then it is probable that such persons will be sincerely affected and aggrieved, when the body of a Catholic is committed to the Grave unaccompanied with what he calls them (to say the least) superstitious ceremonies. Certainly not! And if he were to give his candid opinion, it would be that the application was worse than the omission. From this, I think that I have made it appear that, whoever the Informant is, in alluding to my absence from Interments he has done himself no credit.
Now, Sir, to conclude, is it not obvious that many must be interred without my attendance, unless it be said that I should have omnipresence: one might die in Hospital, Asylum or in any private house in Sydney, when I am attending in Liverpool, Parramatta, Windsor or elsewhere in the remote parts of the Country and "vice versa" when I am attending in Sydney. Death will not arrest his progress that I might have time to attend the funerals at those distant places.
I have the honor to be Sir,
Your very obedient Servant,
D. Power R.C.C.
P.S.
Sir,
Excuse the length of this letter, impute solely to the unfair charge of inattendance.