"of your superiors, to whom the right of holding "their sees still belongs, unless sheer violence "makes them lose it. You have despised authority "in

66

in them, and would you have it recognised in you? They at least held it from the universal Church, with which they were in communion: they formed a part of the apostolic chain of succession ; "but have not you by breaking this communion, broken also the chain? Have you not gone out of "the regular line? Intruders into these ancient sees, your authority comes from yourselves. You "have no existence, no power except from your royal governess; you are her creatures as she is

66

Ut fieri solet in ædificio collapso, ut qui illud restaurare cupit, in veteri fundamento non ædificet, quia convulsum est et minus firmum, et plenum ruderum, sed novum aliquod fundamentum ponit: ita in restauratione ecclesiæ factum est. Voluit enim Deus non in veteri fundamento, hoc est, in successione episcoporum, sed novo quodam et extraordinario modo illam instaurationem fieri.”

"Nostri episcopi et ministri non sunt a papisticis episcopis ordinati." (a)

It is a principle that he who withdraws himself from the authority of the Church, loses by that act all the jurisdiction he had received from it: and there no longer remains any jurisdiction for him to communicate. Thus the bishops who were not papistical, of whom Whitaker speaks, supposing even they had enjoyed the right of conferring it before their defection, would not have been able to transmit any after. Cardinal Pole was then the last archbishop of Canterbury in the apostolic succession, and Parker the first in the parliamentary and royal establishment.

And should the consecration of Parker have been valid (and this even, according to Le Courayer, is at least doubtful, to speak of it in the most favourable manner possible) it is certain that the jurisdiction of the Church could never have been communicated to him.

(a)Dr. Whitaker, lector reg. Cantabr. Controv. II. q. V. c. VI. Died in 1595.

"the creature of parliament; your authority comes "from her; her's from it. Join together, as long as you please, in framing rules of policy, among

66

you and yours. So far, so good. But do not "pretend to subjugate our opinions: they are free, "you know they are, you have taught us so, and with"out this, you would not be where you are." The dispute has continued since and still exists between the partisans of the established Church and the numerous sects who wish for none. The first, agreeably with the institution of the divine Legislator, judge with reason that without authority there can be no unity in the Church: the others, agreeably with the principles of the reformation and much more consistently, are of opinion, that if they must submit to a spiritual authority, there was no necessity for beginning by emancipating themselves from it, and that, all things considered, it would have been better to have kept to that which derived its origin from God himself. It is certain that the doctrine of the twentieth article is unwarrantable on the principle of the reformation, in England as well as upon the Continent,' There was no other means of establishing it than by returning to the Catholic principle. It would have been necessary that the first reformers, instructed by experience, should frankly have acknowledged their mistake, have loudly declared that they had gone astray, and that neither order,

'See among others, Lord Sommers' Tracts, vol. II. p. 460, where you will find an anonymous work, the author of which expresses himself in a strong and virulent manner, against the twentieth article, and against bishop Sparrow, the publisher of the thirty nine articles and the canons.

nor unity, nor salvation could be expected, unless under the protection of an infallible authority. A candid and spirited acknowledgment like this would have been too heroic to have been expected from the very persons who had raised the standard of revolt. But you who come so long behind them; you, who without partaking in their aggression, equally share in their errors and the fatal consequences, of which they were the first witnesses, and which they so much deplored towards the end of their career, what prevents you from surrendering yourself to the clearness of the proofs, the force of truth, and the lesson read by experience? Never lose sight of the day when the reformation took its rise in your country and elsewhere, and say; The Church and its authority were then as before, as to day, and as for ever, solidly established upon the promises of Jesus Christ; this foundation is not less firm and immovable than that of the universe, for the finger of God supports them both alike, and promises to them the same duration.

"Yes, Sir, you will say to me, I see with 46 you and our reformers the evils that have come "from their principles: in spite of myself I must acknowledge that men have abused to their ruin "the rights that had at first been given to them; "I am struck also with what you have said to me "on the infallibility of the Church: your proofs "embarrass me; I know not what reply to make; "nevertheless, Sir, excuse my boldness: I am an

66

Englishman; I love and adore liberty. Your "principles of authority destroy it. They are "adapted for nothing but to make slaves, and a "slave I can never become."

I was expecting to see you fly to this strong

entrenchment and your last refuge, Sir; I am aware of the sentiments of your countrymen and their ideas of liberty; ideas which they carry even into the sanctuary. I remember that during my residence in London, even one of your bishops (Dr. Hoarsley, if my memory serves me faithfully) published a work in which he pushed to excess this objection against the catholic principles. I read the work at the time, and was scandalized, not to say indignant. How, said I to myself, how can a man endowed with reason and great talents persuade himself that he is made a slave of, because it is proposed to him to submit his private and individual opinion to the uniform opinion of all the bishops of the earth? Liberty then, according to him, would be for each individual to prefer his own self to the highest authority of the world. But is it not the height of pride and the last degree of extravagance? "Not to "submit to such an authority, would be the height of "pride and the blindest arrogance. What

more manifest proof can there be of our ingratitude "to God, than to place our glory and exert our "efforts in opposing an authority, which he created "to be an aid and assistance to us ?""

But, Sir, because upon the single fact of revealed dogmas you are required to follow the decisions of antiquity, of all the councils universally adopted, will you on that account consider yourself as degraded from your liberty and treated like a slave? Were they slaves in Italy, in Germany, in

St. Augustine to his friend Honoratus on the Utility of believing the Church, chap. XVII.

France, Spain and England, where so many celebrated universities flourished, where so many great men have appeared in every state of life and every branch of science. To produce only one, but he the first of all, Bossuet, was he in your opinion a slave, he whose vast genius embraced so many sciences and treated them like a master, he whose inimitable and supreme excellence subdued all the enemies against whom he fought, made so many conquests to truth, and erected so many immortal trophies to religion? But, you will say, as far as relates to dogmas at least, Bossuet was a slave, since he teaches so boldly that when the Church has spoken, we have only to believe and be silent.

One moment, Sir, I pray. I may perhaps have something to say to you, which will produce a salutary confusion at your notion, and banish it for ever from your mind. Tell me, if you please, should Jesus Christ re-appear upon earth, or rather if you had had the happiness of seeing him and hearing his instructions, would you have refused him obedience? Would you have considered yourself a slave because he commanded you to believe in his word? You say nothing. Well then! the authority to which you are at the present day to subject yourself, is still the authority of Christ. It is not the voice of man, that you obey by hearing the Church; but that of Jesus Christ. He has spoken by his apostles; as all christianity agrees. He has spoken by his successors, and even as far as the fifth age, protestants are all agreed upon this. He continues to speak and will speak to the end of the word, by their means; this is demonstrated; he himself has said it, promised it, and often repeated his assurance of it: for this you