Iilv'c ! La

»r*4« hvc

THE SPALL n>:/
l

FROM THE BODY OF \THE BLESSED PETER

BRSJfl - --

^ PLEDGE FOR THE UNITY OF

THE CA THOLIC FAITH
m

T;?*l

i

VT.B H Sermon

PREACHED AT THE CHURCH OF THE LONDON ORATORY

(August 1 6, 1892)

Hr
m. AT THE SOLEMN INVESTITURE OF

SC.

The Most Rev. HERBERT VAUGHAN
ARCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER

I® ^

if By DOM F. AIDAN GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B.

i®

Author of
u Henry VIII. and English Monasteries

“ The last Abbot of GlastonburyA &c.

JOHN HODGES

BEDFORD STREET, STRAND, LONDON

Price Sixpence.

i V ’ ^

hi

'W'



BY FRARCIS A1DAN GASQUET, D.D.,
O.S.B.

Henrv VIII. and the English
Monasteries.

Attempt to Illustrate the History
of their Suppression, wit

Appendix and Maps showing the
Situation of the Kclig

Houses at the Time of their Dissolution.
2 vo

12s. each.

Mav tUo be had in 2 vols., with 34 pa^e
illustrations and 5 maps,

bound Herein morocco, top edge
gilg 3°*-

The illustrations scpara.

5>

The Sixth Edition 'is now being issued
in Monthly Shilling P

I. to XIV. ready.

Edward VI. and the Book of Common
Prayer. 1

Origin Illustrated by hitherto
Unpublished Documents. \YI

4
facsimile pages of the MS. Demy 8vo, I 3S.

{Third lhousa

MVe cannot refrain from expressing our admiration
of the methw

j

which the author has conducted his
whole inquiry, t h“'

f

circulation, for it contains by far the
bcst^account hare eitr seen of

j

changes introduced in Edward \ I. s
reign. Guardian.

A Sketch of the Life and Mission
of St. Benedi

With an Appendix, containing a
complete list

“J

lll

£
“N.

dictine Churches and Monasteries
in England, with the Ef

of their Foundation. 1 bird
fhousand, is.

A Chronicle of the English
Benedictine Monks, fr<

Renewing of their Congregation in
the I >avs of Queen MaQ

the Death of James II.; being the
Chronological Notes of 1 I

Bennett Welldon, O.S.B., a
Monk of Pans. Edited fro)

Manuscript in the Library of St.
(iregorys I nor\. ownij

Demy 4to, 12s. 6d.

The Great Pestilence, a.d. 1348-49,
now commJ

known as 'the Black Death. Demy 8vo,
7s. 6d.

Richard Whiting, the Last Abbot
of Glastonbj

and bis Companions. Demy 8vo, 7s. 6d.

The Pall, from the body of the
blessed Pete

Pledge for the Unity of the
Catholic Faith. A bel

preached at the Church of the London
Oratory, at the Sd

Investiture of the Most Rev. Herbert
Vaughan, Archlnsl .1

Westminster. Price Sixpence.

' Any of the above post-free on
receipt of the price.

JOHN HODGES, Bedford Street,
Strand, LONDOJ

DercMRfed



THE PALL.

Et (Eliseus) levavit pallium Elioe, quod ceciderat ei

ientes autem filii prophetarum .... dixerunt : Requievit
ritus Eliae super Eliseum.”

1

-And he
(
Eliseus

)
took up the mantle of Elias

,
that fell from

i ... . and the Sons of the Prophets .... said ; The spirit
Elias hath rested upon Eliseus

,}

(4 Kiags ii. 13-1 5).

J\
Y LORDS, Right Reverend and Rev. Fathers,

and dear Brethren,—Under the old law God
ide known His will to His people by a succession
' witnesses—the Prophets. He left these chosen

es, however, free to listen or not to listen to their

rds, or rather His words through them. In fact,

s messengers were most frequently a sign to be

itradicted, as in the case of the Prophet Elias

aself. Under the New Law, though the form be
•ied, there is continuity in the dispensation—in
' method of God’s dealing with man. The Divine

ssage now indeed, no longer destined for a single

•pie, is addressed to all nations of the earth
; and

• Lord in founding His Church has established an



4 Ube pall*

abiding and unfailing witness to bear testimony

throughout the world to the one Divine Truth, and

to point out to men the way of salvation until His

second coming. But, as under the Old Law, man was

at liberty to listen to the teaching or to turn a deaf

ear to it, so is it under the New. Our God demands

still the exercise of faith, the sacrifice of the willing

heart. And as with individuals so is it with nations.

They may hear and may hearken to the Divine

message, which comes through the Church, they

may follow it gladly, perhaps for centuries, and then

at their will they may turn away and reject it. So

for ever might they continue in their refusal to

listen to God’s voice, unless, in His mercy, He

preserves the flock of His chosen few, in lowliness

and obscurity, until in His own good time the word

comes to them, as it came of old to the prophet

Elias : “ Go forth, and stand on the mount before the

Lord.”

The ceremony at which we are assisting may well

recall this characteristic of God’s dealings with men.

In particular are we to-day reminded of the fact

that after He has so long suffered our own country

and people to reject His witness on earth, the Holy

Church, He has again brought about, at a time

when all hope, humanly speaking, seemed lost, a

revival of Catholicity in England. When the

history of this restoration comes to be written three

great events must be recorded with prominence on



Ube pall. 5

its pages—Catholic Emancipation, the Be-establish-
ment of the Hierarchy, and this, the first public

reception of the Archbishop’s Pall in England since

our country finally renounced its place in Christen-

dom. By the first, Catholic life—the public exercise
of the Catholic religion—became once more possible
for Englishmen. The natural development of that

life, no longer crushed by penal laws, made necessary

the second—the orderly disposition of the Church
under the government of an established hierarchy of

Bishops. And this again implies the appointment of

a Metropolitan, or chief of this episcopal college,

upon whose shoulders must rest the sacred Pall, the

symbol of his jurisdiction and the badge of his union

with Borne, the Mother and Head of Churches. To-

day, then, this solemn and public act, about to be

performed, marks yet another stage in the history of

religion in our country. For, although two eminent

Archbishops have already occupied the Metropolitan

See of Westminster, this token of jurisdiction and

power was taken by each from the “ body of the

Blessed Peter,” in the Eternal City itself, and thus

to-day we are met together to witness, after a lapse

of three centuries and a half, the renewal of what

took place age after age in this land of England, in

the case of every occupant of the throne of St.

Augustine, so long as the Church of Canterbury

remained faithful to the Church of God*

Now, first let us understand what this Pallium

•



6 XT b e pall.

(the Umbra Petri
)

is. You know, my brethren,

that it is the common practice of the Church, follow-

ing in this the example of Our Lord Himself, to use

the simplest means, and, in the eyes of the world,

the commonest and meanest objects, for the loftiest

and most solemn ends. In itself, then, nothing can

be more simple than this mere narrow fillet of woollen

cloth, which we call the Pall

;

neither do the crosses

marked upon it, nor the jewelled pins, with which it

is ornamented, serve to give it, as the precious things

of this world go, distinction. The material is afforded

by the fleeces of chosen lambs, blessed at the Mass

on St. Agnes’ Day, and kept with care until the

shearing time, when the wool is woven by the hands

of nuns in the cloisters of a convent. Then, on the

Vigil of SS. Peter and Paul, in June, these new-

made Pallia are carried to the Altar of the Confes-

sion, in St. Peter’s, where, after the First Vespers

of the Feast, they are solemnly blessed, if possible,

by the Pope himself. For one night they are left

lying upon the shrine, and are then kept until re-

quired in a silver coffer, near to the relics of the

Prince of the Apostles, so that when bestowed upon

a newly appointed Archbishop, the Pall—this woollen
fillet—may be truly said to be “ taken from the
body of St. Peter.”

This is not the occasion to discuss the origin and

early history, of the Archbishop’s Pall.
(1) As in the

case of so many ecclesiastical symbols or rites,



Ube palL 7

nothing certain is known as to its first adoption.

As a sacred vestment, it claims an antiquity of 1500

years,
(2) and by the time of St. Gregory the Great,,

before the close of the sixth century, it had undoubt-

edly become a well-recognised symbol of jurisdiction,

bestowed by the Sovereign Pontiff on those appointed

by him to be “Vicars ofthe Apostolic See,” of Rome. (3)

It concerns us little indeed that we should possess

full and accurate knowledge of its origin. What

does concern us, is to understand and realise what

the symbol means, and what it is to us.

Just as the most fundamental doctrines of our

faith, the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation, for ex-

ample, were not perceived in all their bearings, still

less enounced in all their fulness, in the earliest ages

of the Church, but were unfolded in the course of

the centuries
;
so did the organisation ofthe Christian

Church, with the hierarchy in its gradations and

subordinations, slowly proceed from the simplest

elements and relations of primitive times, and grow

to the full measure of that perfect body, which com-

prises all, from the lowest official in the humblest

Christian community to Christ’s Vicar upon earth,

the Homan Pontiff. And this sense of the essential

and necessary unity of all Christians in the Church,

and of the relations in which all stand to the Head

of the Church, once present, it could not fail at length

to express itself by symbol. Such a symbol, full of

import and meaning, is this sacred Pall, for which



8 ft be palL

by long-established usage every Patriarch, Primate,

and Archbishop, who rules a province of the Church

immediately under the Supreme Pastor, is bound to

supplicate from the Pope, “ earnestly, more earnestly,

most earnestly,” as the sign of his jurisdiction. (4)

The meaning of the symbol is best conveyed by

the words of the solemn blessing said over it. It is

the symbolum unitatis, the token of unity, since it is

the bond by which the hierarchy of the Church are

united together under one head, and signifies that

the chief pastor has bestowed a special measure of

jurisdiction upon the recipient. It is the tessera

communionis perfectce cum Romana Sede, the pledge

of perfect communion with the Homan See, implying

the due subjection of every chief of a province to the

successor of St. Peter, and thus becoming a surety

for the unity of the Christian faith
;
and it is the

vinculum caritatis

\

uniting the Archbishop who

wears it, and through him the bishops and clergy

and lay folk, to the one Supreme Head of the one

Holy Church on earth. (5)

The grant of the Pall, then, is the proof and token

that Peter, to whom is committed Our Lords King-

dom on earth, has imparted jurisdiction and power

of ruling to the prelate upon whom is laid the

burden of administering some portion of that

kingdom. For jurisdiction comes not with ordina-

tion or consecration to the episcopal office. This

high dignity confers upon the Bishop no authority



XT be pall. 9

over the souls of others. The charge of some

particular part of the flock must be given by a

direct commission of the chief shepherd. So true

is this, that even after consecration, or translation to

a metropolitan See, the Archbishop-Elect cannot

exercise his highest functions until he is possessed

of the sacred Pall. (6) It is thus the title of his

authority over others, and in every quarter of the

globe is the sign and token of the universal bond

which draws all hearts and souls to Pome, the only

centre of living unity, the only sure foundation and

guardian of the Christian faith.

From the coming of St. Augustine and the first

establishment of the Church of the English, no fact

is more clearly marked in the history of our country

than the intimate union which existed between the

Church of this land and the Holy Apostolic See.

When at St. Gregory’s command Augustine is

“ consecrated Archbishop of the English people,”

this is performed by the Pope’s Vicar, the Bishop

of Arles, in which city, be it remembered, British

Bishops 300 years before had, by solemn synodical

act, shown how they recognised the practical import

of St. Peter’s primacy among the Apostles.

The ceremony of to-day carries back our thoughts

to that month of June in the year a.d. 601
,
when

nearly 1300 years ago, by the authority of Pope

St. Gregory, the first hierarchy of English Bishops

was established, and “ the Pallium of honour from



IO Zhc

the holy and®Apostolic See ” was sent bv the hands

of Paulinus and Mellitus to Augustine as the first

Archbishop. It was from Pome that his jurisdic-

tion came: “We give you no authority over the

Bishops of Gaul/' wrote Gregory to his new Vicar,

when sending him this symbol of his power
;

“ but

all the Bishops of Britain we commit to your charge,

that the ignorant may be taught, the weak con-

firmed, the perverse corrected by authority.”

And as we review the centuries of Saxon rule, and

note how each occupant of St. Augustine’s Chan*

sends, or himself goes, to Pome for that sign of

pre-eminence, first conferred on the Church of

Canterbury, we recognise how to our English fore-

fathers the Poman Pall ever was the pledge and

symbol of “the Catholic faith, of unity, and of

subjection to the Poman Church,” as writes St.

Boniface, the English Apostle of the German people,

to Archbishop Cuthbert of Canterbury. Even in

the dark and stormy days of the tenth century, in

spite of the dangers and hardships of a journey from

England to Italy, (7) almost every successor of St
#

Augustine, including St. Odo, St. Dunstan,
(8) and St.

Elphege—those three glories of our English Church

—made that weary pilgrimage, in order that he
might bow his head before the Poman Pontiff, and

at his command and concession take from the shrine

of the Apostles this sacred [sign of his jurisdiction.

No difficulties could turn these sons of England



Ube pall. 1

1

from testifying their loyalty to the Holy See. Of

one Bishop—Alfsin of Winchester—we read, that
designated to succeed St. Odo on the throne of

Canterbury, “ according to the custom (more solito
)

he set out to Borne to obtain his Pall
;

” but, as his

saintly predecessor had in vision warned him, he

was destined never to wear it, and he perished of

the cold amid the snows of the Alpine passes before

he set his foot in Italy. -

Let us pass quickly onward. From the Norman

Conquest to the reign of Queen Mary seven-and-

thirty Archbishops of Canterbury received the

sacred wool as successors of St. Augustine and in

token of their union with and subjection to Borne.

To obtain it many, like their Saxon predecessors,

journeyed to Italy
;

whilst to others it was sent,

“ by reason of the perils and dangers of the road,”

by the hands of Papal delegates. And as they

knelt before the altar to receive the token of their

jurisdiction, most of the long line of prelates were

sworn upon the Holy Gospels, “ from this hour

forward to be faithful and obedient to St. Peter, to

the Holy Apostolic Boman Church, and to my lord

the Pope and his successors.” It was the profession

of the Church of England by the mouth of its

appointed head and by this solemn act of men like

Langton, Peckham and Courtenay, Arundel and

Bourchier and Morton—men no less illustrious as
churchmen than as champions of English great-



12 XT be ip all.

ness—was the Church of the land linked with the
Church of Christ, and by the Apostolic yoke of the

pall was it bound to Rome the centre of ecclesiastical

unity.

And as we meet this day to witness once more

the reception of this token of jurisdiction, the

memories of similar scenes in the past history of our

country come crowding to our minds. We seem to

see a vision of a long line of monks and clergy

passing through the streets of Canterbury. At the

close of the procession walks the tall ascetic figure

of Archbishop St. Anselm, who goes with feet bare

to meet the legate Walter bringing his Pall from

Rome. There is a sense of triumph in his soul, for

at last that which William Rufus has kept from him

during two years, is to be his. Nay, there is more

than this
;

for even with this symbol of spiritual

authority already in England, William had tried to

force the saint to receive it from his royal hands as

his gift, and only by a final struggle had Anselm

won the concession that he should take it from the

altar of his Cathedral church, “ as if from the hand

of St. Peter himself.” It was thus more than a

picturesque ceremony at which the multitude

assisted. It was the assertion of a great and

necessary principle : that jurisdiction over souls

came not from the Crown
;
but from the grant of

Peter’s successor. And this the assembled throng

of spectators—nay, co-actors—in the scene, knew



Ube pall. i 3

full well, as one by one, headed by the Cardinal

Legate, they knelt at Anselm’s feet and raised the

sacred ornament to their lips in solemn profession of

loyalty to the supreme spiritual authority of Rome.

Again we seem to be at Canterbury, as St. Thomas

a Becket—the great champion of the Church’s
liberty—like every recipient of the Pall in England,
goes barefoot in reverence to the gift and giver, (9) and

taking the symbol of his authority from the altar

presents it for the homage of the attendant clergy.

And, as we ponder on all that this narrow strip of

wool “ taken from the body of blessed Peter,” was

to him in his combat for the freedom of the Church

in England, once more the scene changes, and our

thoughts are borne on to the days of the last Henry,

when another Thomas—Thomas Cranmer—recived
his Pall from the hands of Bishop Longland. (10) It

was at Westminster on the very day of his consecra-

tion—March 30, 1 533—that upon his shoulders was
placed this symbol of subjection and loyalty to the

See of Peter. Already whilst taking his oath “ to

be faithful and obedient ” to the Roman Pontiff, he

had protested, in words that on such lips, and on such

an occasion, could only mean a meditated treachery,

that he thereby intended nothing “ contrary to the

law of the land, the King’s prerogative or the

Statutes of the Kingdom.” Then, before the recep-

tion of his Pall, renewing his protest, he again swore

upon the sacred Gospels his obedience to the Pope,



14 Ubc pall.

from whom he received his title to jurisdiction in

the See of St. Augustine. With the words of

loyalty to Home fresh upon his lips, he once more

swore to the King his rejection of the gift, declaring

that he “ took and held the said archbishopric

immediately and only of Henry, the King, and of

none other/’ (11)

But to-day let us not dwell upon the thoughts

this scene of sacrilege and perjury calls to the mind.

fret us turn rather to another and a brighter

memory of that day when for the last time an

Archbishop of Canterbury was invested in the

honoured svmbol of fealtv to St. Peter, which had

then, in those days of heresy, become the pledge of

orthodoxy also. It was on Lady Hay, 1556, that

the Pall was received in Bow Church by Cardinal

Pole. Son of a mother whom we venerate anions

the saints, he was a man, the beauty and elevation

of whose gentle soul, the growing light of historical

research is but now making known to us, and whose

high qualities bring him so near to his contemporaries,

the Blessed John Fisher and the Blessed Thomas

More. On this occasion, pressed at the last moment

to preach to the assembled multitude, the Cardinal

spoke from his heart words worthy of the sacred

cause he was called on to represent. Telling his

audience of the oreat dicmitv of this sacred Pall© ©

and of the all-important truth of which it is the

sicm, he concluded in words that will find an echo in© 7



ZTbe pall. !5

many hearts to-day. “ Would that ye but knew,”

he cried
;

“ would that ye but knew what God

grants you by the mission of this peace
”—-ay,

indeed, brethren, it was a true sacrament of peace,

the one still existing hope of maintaining the

inherited religious unity of our nation, the rejection

of which has banished that unity from the land,

perhaps for ever.

With Pole’s death came the great breach between

England and Christendom, and from that day to

this the Pall—the sacred, emblem of unity—has
never been received publicly in this land. The

history of the Church, which took the place of the

ancient Catholic Church of this realm, is written in

unmistakable characters in the annals of the six-

teenth century. On the very surface it is evident

that the religion then established was founded on a

denial of all that was Catholic, and the more deeply

we investigate the story of its origin, the more

surely do we find that this, its obvious characteristic,

is the real and only reason of its existence. Its

formularies of doctrine were conceived and framed,

not as the result of some unhappy accident, but

with a deliberate and set purpose to destroy

Catholic life and practice, and its Liturgy was

purposely designed to obscure and obliterate the

ancient Catholic worship and service of the

Almighty. (12)

There are many now to whom this is a grief.



They cannot, though they gladly would, blot out

such painful facts from this page of history. They

can but try to forget. Ay, gladly would they

forget—nay, brethren, gladly would we too forget
were that only possible. But in such vital matters

forgetfulness cannot be, neither for them nor for us.

Still in a measure eyes may be closed to the whole

reality. Many of you, no doubt, will have noticed in

recent years an increasing tendency among Pro-

testant writers to minimise the religious changes of

the sixteenth century. They seek to confine

discussion of the great revolution of that time to its

political aspects—or, as they are so fond of saying,
they would have it regarded merely as a quarrel

with Rome. But, indeed, they themselves, and all

men of sense and knowledge, who allow them-

selves to reflect, must know the movement was in

reality a rejection of the faith and the religion, of

the piety and the practice, of previous generations

of Englishmen, and a declaration of war against the

soul of every Catholic.

It has been sometimes suggested that, after all,

even whilst England was still Catholic, there was

not that union of the country with Rome, or that

complete and full acknowledgment of obedience to

the Holy See, which we claim existed for well-nigh

a thousand years in the ancient Church of this

realm. Difficulties and misunderstandings are fixed

upon as ample evidence that the Church of our



ft be pall. 17

Catholic forefathers owned no subjection to the See

of Peter, and did not recognise in the occupant of

Peter’s Chair the earthly head of the one Church of

God. Difficulties indeed there were, at times dis-

putes : and it must needs be that such difficulties

arise in its administration so long as the Church is

made up of men with human wills. But none of

these difficulties ever touched the reality, the neces-

sity, of the bond which united each and all to the

Holy See. My brethren, the one fact that every

occupant of the throne of Canterbury, from Augus-

tine to Pole, sought so earnestly for the sacred Pall,

the token of union with Borne, and at its reception

so many pledged themselves so deeply to loyalty and

obedience to the See of Peter, is the best and surest

evidence of their true spirit.

To turn to another point, of which the ceremony

of this day reminds us. The special phase ofAnglican

controversy at the present moment may be summed

up in a word so often used

—

Continuity. Apart

from other considerations, in these days, when every

institution, however venerable, is examined, when

every claim and title is called in question, and when

the words disestablishment and disendowment are

on the lips of politicians, there is a special interest

attaching to this word, Continuity. We cannot

wonder if the present possessors of the wealth of the

ancient Catholic Church in England should manifest

a solicitude as to any flaw in their title-deeds, and

B



Z be pall.18

if men, with any foresight at all, should come to

feel that a change of religion is a flaw indeed.

But this is no care of ours. We, brethren, have

long accustomed ourselves to the dispossession of an

inheritance which yet remains in proof of the piety

of our forefathers in religion. Nay, dear to us as

are the walls of many an ancient fane that still

graces the land—dear in a way which those who
are not Catholics can never understand—yet even
these are no objects of envy to us, for we know,

feeble flock though we may be, that the faith that

erected these glorious piles is still alive in us, and

that if God gives His blessing, and we be true to

Him, the glory of the later temple may be greater

than that which our forefathers knew. We may

not live to see it, but our part is to work in faith,

and if any should be disposed to account this a mere

empty dream, this very building in which we are

gathered is surely evidence to give courage to the

faint and faithless heart. Who a short half-century

ago could have imagined that a church like this

would be erected by the zeal, the courage, the self-

sacrifice of Englishmen ?

Well may we think, brethren, that the perfect

devotion of those who have gone before us, Martyrs,

Confessors, in the days of persecution and fiery trial,

has been rewarded. Not alone have they preserved

Catholicity for us, but their faith and zeal have

been the means whereby God has brought into the



XT be pail I 9

fold of the Church men who were the very salt of

the Anglican Establishmen t. That great generation

is passing away, and as we look we see that their

work has been accomplished. They have brought

home to every mind in England the existence of

Catholicity, living, working, acting throughout the

length and breadth of the land. For, we must

beware of measuring the influence of our faith

merely by the multiplication of our churches or the

increase of conversions. The resurrection of the

Church is shown on all sides by the change which

the fact of its very existence has wrought, even

within the pale of the Established Church of Eng-

land. Look around vou : is it not the case that
%j

there is hardly a spot in this country, no matter

how remote, where the effort is not now being made

to imitate the rites and practices of the Catholic

religion, even down to minute details and to charac-

teristics of its very inner life ? It is only too

obvious that Anglicans do not draw all this from

their own past. As with a similar though less

marked movement, in the days of King Charles I.,

induced by the same causes, it is done avowedly

with the object of preventing people becoming

Catholics. And if the Anglican Church is being,

as they declare, Catholicised to-day, it is through

the pressure which we Catholics, by our very pre-

sence, bring to bear upon it, making Protestants

themselves the very witnesses against their own past



20 XTbe pall.

words and deeds. Truly the proscribed religion of

our God has here its Divine revenge, for it subdues

the souls of men and turns them to love and bless

that which their forefathers cast out from their

midst.

That, my brethren, which the founders of the

Established religion in this country rejected, has

been preserved happily for us. Ours is an inheri-

tance above all price that none can take from us.

That inheritance is continuity indeed—the only con-
tinuity worth contending for

;
a continuity of faith

and practice. The possession of family title-deeds

does not prove descent
;
the occupation of stone

walls, the using of historic names, the publication

of lists without a break—none of these are evidences
of true continuity, in the presence of recorded his-

tory. When Cranmer rejected the authority of

Dome, which his sixty-six predecessors in the See

of Canterbury had acknowledged, and declared that

he accepted his office from the King
“
alone and no

other,” and that his authority as Primate was

derived from the Crown as that of previous occu-

pants of the See had been from thePope ;
(13) and when

Henry, on April 8, 1541, by his Poyal Letters

Patent, “ created ” the archiepiscopal See of Canter-

bury, and granted to it “ the insignia of an arch-

bishopric,”^ common sense, no less than the evidence

of subsequent events, tells us that here was a new

beginning. The throne of Augustine, founded by



XL be ©all. 21

Gregory, after enduring for 940 years, was cast

down in the dust, and in its place Henry established

another for Thomas Cranmer, the first Archbishop

of the Protestant See of Canterbury. Nor is this

all : as it was with Canterbury so was it with the

archiepiscopal throne of York. When, in 1544,

Edward Lee, the Archbishop, died, the King not

only translated Robert Holgate from Landaff to

the northern Metropolitan See, giving him power

to ordain, hold synods, make visitations, and gene-

rally granting him “ all spiritual and ecclesiastical

jurisdiction,”
(l5)

but by Royal Letters Patent he

bestowed upon him an Archbishop’s Pall, directing

Cranmer to invest him with it. (16) This the Arch-

bishop of Canterbury did in January, 1545, at

Lambeth, when he composed a blessing for this new

English Pall, and by a solemn parody of the old

Catholic form of investiture, placed it on Holgate ’s

shoulders : “In honour of God, of the Blessed

Virgin, of all the saints, and of the most illustrious

and serene Prince, Henry VIII.” (17) If continuity

there be here, surely it is but a continuity of names.

But I see before me to-day evidences of something

more real—of a continuity which comes not from
the mere abiding in temples made by hands, mere

stones heaped up
;
but from a faithful continuance

in that ancient Church founded by our Lord

Himself, built up of living stones, the souls of

faithful men—stones made precious and worthy of



22 Ube IP all*

God’s sanctuary by long years of persecution. I see

before me those who bear names honoured, and

rightly honoured, in the story of our country, but

more honoured still by unswerving fidelity to the

faith of their fathers. Yes, when our holy religion

was driven out from Lincoln and from Canterbury,

from St. Albans and Durham, it took refuge in the

upper rooms of many a country mansion and many

a sheltered farmstead. And there in obscurity, in

fear for life, was maintained in continuous, unbroken

existence, the Catholic faith, the Catholic practice,

the Catholic life of England. Although the sacred

and most necessary rites of religion were banned

and proscribed, and the very offering of Holy Mass

was visited with death, still, thanks be to God

!

there never failed those who preferred death in this

mortal body to the dying out in our country of this

most sacred lamp of Faith. In these heroic souls

was blended the most sublime devotion which can

fill the heart of man—love of God and love of
country. For tell me not these were not ardent

lovers of their native land. If the exercises of the

Catholic religion were proscribed in England, abroad

—in foreign lands—they might still be obtained ;
but these men chose to suffer the loss of worldly

goods, to be stretched on the rack, or to die the

death of felons, that England should not be robbed

of its Catholic inheritance.

Thanks be to God ! their efforts, their self-sacri-

fices, in a cause which seemed desperate, has been



Zh e pall. 23

blessed, for it is through them that we can rejoice

to-day in that true unbroken continuity of the living'

souls of men united in the living Church of God.

To all of you will doubtless occur the names ofmany

a house that has never fallen from the ancient faith

—each one is a living evidence of this sacred

continuity. And to-day two names especially

—

those of our own Archbishop and of him who has

brought the sacred Pall from Peters shrine—must
instinctively rise up in the minds of all, as telling of

unvarying, unbroken fidelity to one and the same

Holy Eoman Catholic Faith*

Nay, speaking before this great assembly, I know

not whether I may express all that fills my mind,

but this habit which I wear—all unworthy that I
am—tells me—tells you, brethren—ifindeed material
evidence be asked, that we and we alone possess

that true continuity of Catholic life which others

now would fain enjoy. For from the day when

Augustine first landed in England to the present

hour, the Order of St. Benedict, proscribed as it

was, ruined, scattered, was never driven from the

land. Ay, this too is a witness of a continuity

which carries us back even beyond the days of the

See of Canterbury, but carries us back like it only

to the See of Pome and the Chair of Peter, whence

at the command of Peters successor thirteen hundred

years ago the children of St. Benedict came as the

apostles of the English race.

Thoughts such as these make us realise the true



24 Ube pall.

import of this day’s ceremony, whereby our own

Archbishop becomes the heir and representative of

that illustrious line of prelates of the Church of

Canterbury whose succession runs back more than

two centuries before the foundation of the Enodish,

or, if you will, Saxon, monarchy. Has not West-

minster been created in the place of St. Augustine’s

See by the same authority which first called Canter-

bury into existence ? Yes, this Pall, this narrow

strip of woven wool, blessed by the hand of Peter’s

successor, is the witness and the true title to unex-

tinguished rights. The* jurisdiction which, through

it, St. Gregory conferred on St. Augustine by the

word of Leo, successor of Gregory, now descends to

you, my Lord Archbishop, as heir to the faith and

authority of the first Apostle of our race.

One word more. This morning, my brethren, as

our voices join in the joyous Te Deum
,

let all our

soul go out with heartfelt thanks to our God, whose

loving-kindness has preserved in us the faith ofthose

glorious English saints, Augustine and Dunstan,

Anselm and Thomas of Canterbury, and has kept

us loyal to Pome, the centre of all Unity, the only

sure foundation of Catholic truth. To Him, then,

“ to the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only

God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen
”

(1 Tim. i. 17).



APPENDIX.

(1) The origin of the Pall is involved in much obscurity. Some

writers see in it a Christian adaptation of either the ephod or the

rational used by the Aaronic priesthood in the service of the

Temple (Exod. xxviii. 6-9
;
xxxix. 8-18). Others assign its origin

to the supposed donation of a portion of the imperial costume by

Constantine to St. Sylvester
;

or, at any rate, by one of the first

Christian Emperors to the head of the Church, the Pope. Those

interested in the history of the Pall are referred to a pamphlet by

Fr. Thurston, S.J., published by the Catholic Truth Society ; or to

the republication of a series of articles from the T'ablet
,
by Canon

Moyes. A third theory was advocated by Mgr. Vespasiani, in a
tract entitled Be Sacri Pallii Origine

,
reviewed at length in the

Rambler for July 1856. This author points out that from the

earliest times the scholars of the heathen philosophers used to

adopt the dress as well as the principles of their masters, and the

actual mantle, or pallium
,
of a teacher was regarded as symbolical

of his spirit and as conveying his authority.

The history of Elias and Eliseus, recorded in the Book of Kings

(iii. and iv.), shows how the latter was called to the service of God

by being touched by the cloak of Elias, and how he received the

spirit of his master through his mantle falling upon him. In

early Christian times St. Athanasius gave his mantle to St.

Anthony, and when St. Paul, the hermit of Egypt, was, at his

request, buried in it, St. Anthony took the hermit’s cloak and ever

afterwards wore it on all great solemnities. St. Ignatius, patri-

arch of Constantinople, is said to have worn over his other epis-

copal vestments “ the venerable cloak of St. James, the brother of

our Lord,” brought from Jerusalem, which he had received “ as

though he had recognised in it its former apostolic owner.”

Other early examples are even more important, as involving the

principle of succession to an office by one on whom the mantle of
the previous holder of it was bestowed. Thus at Alexandria the

pallium of St. Mark was religiously handed down as the symbol
of succession to the office of Patriarch.

Mgr. Vespasiani consequently suggests that the probable origin

of the Homan pallium is the mantle, or cloak, of St. Peter him-



2 6 Zbc pall.

self. For this theory the author suggests several pieces of con-

firmatory evidence. For example : one of the earliest testimonies

to the use of the pallium occurs in a sermon on the Epiphany,

commonly attributed to Eusebius of Caesarea. In effect this dis-

course says that the Pall is the most ancient of the episcopal vest-

ments
;
that it took the place of the Jewish ephod

;
that it was

first worn by Pope St. Linus, in token of his plenary jurisdiction ;

and that it was this Pope who gave it its name and symbolical

character. The writer of the sermon adds that this account of

the origin of the Pall was given “ by ancient writers.” Other

venerable authorities mention practically the same tradition as to

its origin, and this token of succession to the chair of St. Peter

appears to be thus carried back to the chief of the apostles himself,

Further from the earliest times the Pall was described, as at the

present day, as pallium de corpore S. Petri

;

it has always been

blessed on the festival of his martyrdom, the day when virtually,

if not literally, its first transfer was made, and it was assumed by

each successive Pontiff at the place of the martyrdom, even when

the church of St. Peter’s had not become the chief church of

Lome. The writer of the review of this work in the Rambler

concludes his notice with the following remarks : “It only re-

mains to add to Yespasiani’s very learned and valuable disquisi-

tion an important fact from the ancient Christian monuments of

Rome, with which he does not seem to have been acquainted—viz.,
that the history of Elias leaving his mantle to Eliseus is repre-

sented both in the paintings of the catacombs, and in the sculp-

tures of Christian sarcophagi, belonging to the fourth and fifth

centuries; and it seems certain, both from the form arid features

of the figures themselves, and also from the whole tenor of our

present argument, that they were intended to represent nothing

else than the appointment of St. Peter to be the visible head of

the Church in the place of our Lord'—a fact which is otherwise
represented in the same monuments under the figure of Christ

transferring to St. Peter the rod of sovereignty or power, where-

with He Himself had previously been raising the dead to life,

changing the water into wine and performing other miracles, but

which afterwards is seen in the hands of St. Peter apprehended

by the Jews and of the same St. Peter under the character of

Moses, the dux novi Israel
,
striking the rock whence flow the

spiritual waters of grace and the sacraments of the new law.

The most ancient of the monuments of Elias and his successor, to

which we have alluded, is a painting in the catacomb of SS. Nereus

and Achilles, in which, however, the heads of the two figures have

been unfortunately destroyed by a grave that was cut through them

at a later period, but the horses of the chariot, and other access-

ories, remain uninjured.” After mentioning five other early ex-

amples of this subject the writer continues : “ In these it is Our



XT be fl> all. 27

Lord, who is going up to heaven under the figure of Elias and

St. Peter, to whom He is leaving His mantle
;
and St. Peter, not

deeming himself worthy to receive it, holds forth his hands only

under the covering of his cloak. The identity of the persons is un-

mistakable, and the theological conclusions to be drawn from it

too obvious to need explanation ” [Rambler, New Series, vi. p. 70).

(2) The earliest mention of the Pall as a sacred vestment is

probably that by Anastasius Bibliothecarius. Writing of Pope

St. Mark, who died a.d. 336, he says: “hie constituit ut

Episcopus Ostiensis, qui consecrat episcopum urbis (sc. Bomse)

pallio uteretur et ab eodem episcopo
(
leg

:

Episcopus) urbis Bomse

consecraretur ” {Vitas Pont. 49). We learn from St. Austin that
it belonged to the Bishop of Ostia to consecrate the Bishop of

Borne, and it would seem that Pope St. Mark gave the use of the

Pall to this bishop whenever he should be called upon to exercise

this privilege.

(3) In the sixth century Pope Vigilius granted the Pall to

Alexanius, bishop of Arles : “ because we think it proper that the

ornatus pallii should not be wanting to one acting in our stead ”

(Migne, Patrol. Lat . 69, p. 27). Pope Pelagius sends it to

another occupant of the same See, and for the same reason
;
since

the Archbishop of Arles was acting “ as Vicar of the Apostolic

See in the whole of Gaul ” [Ibid. p. 405). St. Gregory’s works

contain many letters sent to various bishops with the grant of the

Pall, and the same condition is generally implied and often

expressed.

(4) In 1293 the Church of Canterbury asked for the Pall of

Pope Celestine V. for Bobert Winchelsey, the Archbishop Elect,

in the following form : “ Postulat devota vestra filia Ecclesia

Christi Cant, concedi pallium de corpore beati Patri sumptum

electo suo, consecrato, ut habeat plenitudinem officii (Wilkins,

ii. 199).

Even in the time of St Gregory the Great the sacred symbol of

authority was only granted upon urgent request. Thus the Pope

refuses the Pall requested by Brunichild, because the person who

came for it was reputed to be tainted with error, and “ maxime

quia, et prisca consuetudo obtinuit ut honor pallei nisi exigentibus

causarum meritis etfortiterpostulanti dari non debeat ” (ii. Ep. xi.).

It is certain that the grant of the Pall was considered as a

concession on the part of the Pope. No right of the Archbishop
elect to it was supposed to exist. In a.d. 1060 Pope Nicholas,

in sending it to Archbishop Aldred of York and stating the days

on which it might be used, says : “ Denuntiamus praeterea, ut

nullus tuorum successorum vel quisquam in toto mundo Episco-



28 Ube palL

porum, hoc, quod in te misericorditer dispensative potius quam

auctoritate gessimus, in exemplum auctoritatis sibi assumere au-

deat vel deinceps ad tale aliquid aspirare prsesumat ” (Surtees Soc.

Liber Pont. C. Bainbridge, ed. Henderson, p. 384). In the same

way Pope Paschal, in a.d. 1 1 03, writes to Archbishop Gerard

:

“Pallium. . . . plenitudinem videlicet pontificalis officii, ex Apos-
tolici sedis liberalitate concedimus ” {Ibid. p. 385).

Van Espen says that by “the plenitude of power,” said to be
conferred by the grant of the Pall, is not meant that the Pall

actually gives it, but signifies that it is given. Without it the

elect cannot lawfully assume the name of Archbishop, or exercise

the functions of Metropolitan. The grant or refusal was allowed

to depend on the Pope. In a.d. 787 Pope Adrian I., for example,

raised the See of Lichfield to an Archbishopric, and granted it the

Pall
;
but in a.d. 803 Pope Leo III. again placed it under the

jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Canterbury.

The limitation to the number of days upon which the Pall

might be worn by Archbishops, whilst the Pope always used it in

the celebration of Mass, is said to signify the limited jurisdiction

of the Metropolitan. On this point Pope Innocent III. (a.d. 1204)

writes : “ Sane, solus Romanus pontifex in missarum solemniis

pallio semper utitur et ubique quoniam assumptus est in plenitu-

dinem ecclesiastic*© potestatis, quae per pallium figuratur. Alii

autem eo quod nec semper, nec ubique sed in ecclesia sua, in qua

jurisdictionem ecclesiasticam acceferunt certis debent uti diebus,

quoniam vocati sunt in partem sollicitudinis non in plenitudinem

potestatis.”

(5) The words of the solemn blessing are as follows :
—

“ Deus

Pastor seterne animarum, qui eas ovium nomine designatas per

Jesum christum filium tuum, Beato Petro apostolo, ejusque

successoribus, boni Pastoris typo regendas comissisti, atque ipsis

Sacrarum Vestium symbolis Pastoralis curse documenta significari
voluisti; effunde per Ministerium nostrum super hsec Pallia de

Beatorum Apostolorum Principum Altare sumpta copiosam

Benedictionis >$< et Sanctificationis tuse gratiam, ut quam mystice

reprsesentant Pastoralis officii plenitudinem, atque excellentiam,

pleno quoque operentur efiectu. Humilitatis nostrse preces benig-

nus excipe, atque eorumdem Apostolorum meritis et suffragiis

concede, ut quicumque ea, te largiente, gestaverit, intelligat se

Ovium tuarum Pastorem, atque in opere exhibeat, quod signatur

in nomine. Sit boni, magnique illius imitator Pastoris, qui

errantem Ovem humeris suis impositam cseteris adunavit, pro

quibus animam posuit. Sit ejus exemplo in custodia gregis sibi

commissi solicitus, sit vigil, sit circumspectus ne qua Ovis in

morsus incidat, fraudesque Luporum. Sit disciplinse zelo dis-

trictus, quod perierat requirens, quod alienum reducens, quod



IT be palL 2 9

confractum alligans, quod pingue, et forte custodiens. Videat

humeris sius impositam crucem, quam Filius Tuus proposito sibi

gaudio sustinere non recusavit; sitque illi crucifixus mundus et

ipse mundo. Tollat injectum collo suo Evangelicum jugum,

sitque ei ita leve, ac suave, ut in via mandatorum tuorum cseteris

exemplo et observatione praecurrat. Sit ei hoc Symbolum unitatis,

et cum Apostolica Sede communionis perfectae tessera, sit caritatis

vinculum, sit Divinae hereditatis funiculus, sit aeternae securitatis

pignus, ut in die adventus et revelationi Magni Dei, Pastorum-

que Principis Jesu Christi, cum ovibus suis creditis, stola potiatur

immortalitatis et glorie.”

(6) Pope Nicholas I. in his Responses ad consulta Bulgarorum

(a.d. 1866) orders that an archbishop is not to be enthroned and

is not to consecrate the Holy Eucharist before he receives the

Pall from the Roman See, “ sicut Galliarum omnes et Germanise

et aliarum regionum Archiepiscopi agere comprobantur.” Arch-

bishops could not hold synods or consecrate bishops till they had

the Pall. Thus, at a consecration of bishops at Lambeth on

January 5, 1381-2, the archbishop elect of Canterbury, William

Courtenay, although present and consecrated, having been trans-

lated from the See of Exeter, took no part : “ Dictoque domino

Willelmo Courteney, Cantuariansi electo et confirmato, ibidem

presente, sed minime consecrante, eo quod palleum non recepit
”

(Reg. Courtenay, f. 3). It is worth noting that Wharton in his

Anglia Sacra (i. p. 121), as if quoting the MS. Register of Bishop

Courtenay, says of this ceremony : “ Prsesente Willelmo, sed

manus non imponente.” This change of expression was probably

dictated by the writer’s desire to make out that the imposition of

hands is the consecration, just as Bishop Stubbs in his Registrum

Sacrum Anglicanum always styles the assistant Bishops Conse-

crators
,
in face of the evidence of the Pontificals and the express

declarations in all Episcopal Registers that they were only assistant

bishops.

The Pall is a personal grant, made by the Pope for a special

province of the Church. If an archbishop is translated he has to

receive another Pall. At death it, and if he has received more

than one, they, are buried with him. If it be lost or destroyed

another must be procured. Thus the first Archbishop of Sydney,

Dr. Polding, O.S.B., obtained three Palls; the two first having

been burnt in fires which twice destroyed his cathedral. So, in

a.d. 1326, Edward II. sent envoys to Rome to ask for a second

Pall for William de Melton, Archbishop of York, because thieves

had broken into his private chapel and “ carried away his Pall

and other Episcopal ornaments” (Rot. Rom. 19 Edw. II. m. 3).

(7) Adam de Usk, in giving an account of his journey towards



3° Ube pall.

Rome, in March a.d. 1401—2, speaks of his crossing the Pass of

St. Gothard as follows : “ Where I was drawn up in a cart by an

ox, half frozen with cold, and with mine eyes blindfold, lest I

should see the dangers of the passage.”

(8) It would seem that the Pope specially directed St. Dunstan

himself to take the sacred Pall from the altar of St. Peter. In

the account of Archbishop Dunstan’s Pontifical
,
now in the

National Library at Paris (MS. 973), it appears that upon folio 6

is the following heading: “Epistola privilegii quam jubente

Johanne Papa, suscepta benedictione ab eo, Dunstan archiepiscopus

a suis manibus accepit, sed pallium a suis manibus non accepit
,

sed eo jubente ab altari St. Petri Apostoli.”

(9) Both at Canterbury and York, when the Pall was brought

from Rome, the Archbishop-elect walked barefoot to meet it.

According to the direction in the York Pontificals the Archbishop

was to be “ nudis pedibus (si tempus non sit pluviosum).” At

Canterbury the rubric was : “ Deinde sequatur archiepiscopus

pontificalibus indutus, nudis pedibus .... usque ad portam civitatis

per quam intrabit, si serenitas temporis hoc permittat.” After

the Pall had been venerated by the clergy the rubric continues :

“ Quibus expletis, et lotis pedibus archiepiscopi, prseparet se

archiepiscopus ad missam celebrandam, &c.” (Masked, Monumenta

Ritualia
,

iii. pp. 297-299). After the Pall had been granted to

an Archbishop of Canterbury, and before its reception, the Prior

of the cathedral monastery brought the Cross of the Province to

London and presented it to the newly elected Metropolitan, using

the following form : “ Pater reverende, nuncius sum summi Regis

qui te rogat, mandat et precipit ut ecclesiam suam regendam

suscipias, eamque diligis et protegas fide non ficta. In hujus

signum nuncii summi Regis tibi vexillum trado ferendum. Accipe

libenter et porta fideliter ut cum sanctis predecessoribus tuis

ecclesise Cantuariensis patronis gaudeas in eternum.” The arch-

bishop took the Cross, kissed it, and handed it to his cross-bearer

(MS. Reg. Stafford, f. 3).

(10) Cranmer’s Bulls were obtained in Rome by his proctor,

who took the oaths in the usual way, in his name, and in his

behalf. In England, Cranmer (Jenkyns, iv. p. 116) said that the

proctor “ should do it super animam suamf and that he did not

intend to be bound by promises made in his name and confirmed

upon oath. He accepted the Bulls thus obtained, making the

protest on the day of his consecration that he did not intend to

bind himself by the oath he was about to take. The Bull of the

Pope recited the oath to be taken by Cranmer, and distinctly says

that if Cranmer did not take it, both he and the bishop who con-



tr be pall. 31

secratecl him without that oath, were suspended and forbidden

the administration of their Sees respectively, both in temporals

and spirituals : “ Volumus autem et auctoritate prsedicta statui-

mus et decernimus quod si, non recepto a te [Cranmero] per

ipsum antistitem prsedicto juramento, idem antistes munus ipsum

tibi impendere et tu illud suscipere prsesumpseritis, dictus antistes

a pontificalis officii exercitio, et tarn ipse quam tu ab administra-

tione tarn spiritualium quam temporalium ecclesiarum vestrarum

suspensi sitis eo ipso ” (cf. Lewis’ Sander's Schism
,
p. 89 note).

(11)
u Knowlaging myself to take and hold the said Arch-

bishopricke immediately and oonly of your Highness and of none

other ” (Strype. Mems oj Cranmer
,
App. vii.),

(12) See in Edward VI. and the Book of Common Prayer

the history and character of these changes.

13. As an example of this the following passage from a

letter of Archbishop Cramner may be cited : “ Moreover I

do not a little marvel, why he (i.e., Bishop Gardiner) should

now find fault, rather than he did before, when he took

the Bishop of Rome as chief head
;
for though the Bishop of

Rome was taken for supreme head, notwithstanding that he had

a great number of primates under him
;
and by having his

primates under him his supreme authority was not less esteemed

but much the more. Why then may not the King’s Highness,
being Supreme Head, have primates under him without any

diminuition
;

but with the augmenting of his said supreme

authority ” (Parker Soc. Cranmer's Works
,

ii. 304). That Henry

VIII. claimed, as King, Spiritual and Ecclesiastical as well as

temporal jurisdiction cannot be doubted by any who will take

the trouble to study the documents of this period. Mr. Gairdner,

the candid and able editor of the calendar of papers of this period,

takes this view. The King, he says, suspended the jurisdiction

of the bishops, and through his officers exercised spiritual as well

as temporal power (Calendar, vol. ix., preface, p. xvii.). All the

spiritual government of the kingdom he placed in the hands of

his vicar, Thomas Cromwell {Ibid. vol. vii. p. xxvii.). Cranmer

and the other bishops acquiesced in this claim of the King to

supreme ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and received “ authority of

spiritual jurisdiction by force of instruments under the seal

appointed ad res ecclesiasticus," which, on the accession of Edward

VI., they were required by the Council to renew (see Edward VI.

and the Book of Common Prayer
,
p. 42).

(14) Hot. Pat. 32 M. VIII. pars. 6. m. 1
:

printed in Dugdale

(Monasticon Anglicanum
,
ed. 1817, i. p. 106)*



3 2 tlbe pall

(15) Eot. Pat. 86 H. VIII. pars 13, m. 16. “ Et omnem juris-

dictionem spiritualem et ecclesiasticam.”

(16) Eot. Pat. 36 H. YIII. pars 2, m. 42.

(17) In the case of a new archbishop, Henry YIII. by Statute

(25 H. YIII. c. 20, s. 4) directed that a Pall be given him, “ with-

out suing to the See of Eome in that behalf.” Bishop Stubbs
writing about the Pall says : “ So important was the matter

(
i.e .,

the reception of the Pall) that even after the breach with Eome,

Archbishop Holdegate of York, in 1545, went through the form

of receiving one from Cranmer (Const. Hist. iii. p. 318). In the

Gentleman’s Magazine for November 1860, the form used on the

occasion by Cranmer is printed from that archbishop’s Eegister

(f. 309) at Lambeth. It may be of interest to reproduce the form

of investiture from this curious document.

Traditio Pallii

Ad honorem Dei Patris Omnipotentis, Filii et Spiritas Sancti,
Intemeratseque Yirginis Marise et totius coelistis exercitus, ac

illustrissimi et serenissimi in Christo principis et domini nostri,

Domini Henrici Octavi, &c., cui soli et nulli alii obedientiam et

fidelitatum debes et Exhibuisti, in decus Ecclesise Anglicanse ac

Metropolitans Ecclesise Eboracensis tibi commissse, tradimus Tibi

Pallium in plenitudine Pontificalis dignitatis, ut eo utaris in

divinis celebrandis, infra Ecclesiam Tuam et omnibus diebus ab

antiquo usitatis. Eecipe igitur, frater charissime, e manibus nos-

tris pallium hoc humeris tuis impositum, summi, viz. sacerdotii

Domini nostri Jesu Christi signum, per quod undique vallatus

atque munitus valeas hostis humani Temptamentis virilitas resis-

tere et universas ejus insidias solerta et penetralibus cordis tui

divino suffultus munimine, procul abjicere, prsestante eoden

Domino nostro Jesu Christo, qui Spiritu Sancto in unitate Patris

vivit et regnat per omnia sscula sseculorum, &c.

PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE, HANSON AND CO.

LONDON AND EDINBURGH.



New

Solemn

Edition,

Basilica.

The Origin

cribed for

Illustrations

Society. 8v

A Complete
Vol. I. The

Vol. II. Litur

46 Heroes of the

publishing a ser

have lived in all

aim to be histori
1

will be avoided.

Crown 8vo, price,

St. Gregory the Great.

Christopher Columbu

By Mariana Mon

The Right Rev. Samue
necticut and of“ the

D.D., President of th

Church.

St. Columba : The Story of

IN TH1
St. Stephen Harding, Found

printed from “ Newman’s

SEVERAL O TELEx

The Reformation in

by the late Dr. Maitland, Ke

Author of the “ Dark Ages,” &c

This Volume is being publish

many readers of the “ Dark

admirable Supplement.

JOHN HODGES, Bedford



ort Sermon

Year, founded

j.'heologica ” of

B.C.L., Rector

Preachers,” &c.

This valuable

,
has become very

th, realising fancy

copy, made by the

edition.
[
Shortly

.

m. Egidius Ran-
as first published in

onastery in Augsburg,

/en for every day in the

owever, consists in the

the Lives. In the New
bst effectively reproduced.

)tations rather than trans-

a Father of the English

hslated from the Latin by
r

iside College. 4 vols. Vol.

3s. 6d. each. Parts I. and

Each part will contain One

•

as seen in St. Osmond’s
alisbury. A New and Revised

[.
Preparing .

Sacrilege. By Sir Henry
ion, with an Appendix bringing the

te, by C. F. S. Warren, M. A.

be had separately, price is.