LOED LINDSAY S 
 (ECUIENICITY 
 
 THE CHUECH OF ENGLAND. 
 
the Church of England 
 BX 5129 .C7 
 
 Crawford, Alexander Williar 
 Crawford Lindsay, 1812- 
 cumenicity in relation to 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/cumenicityinrelaOOcraw 
 
(ECUMENICITY 
 
 AND 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
CHART OF THE CHURCH. 
 
 T« (V Till,: 
 
 0 u r $ a b i 0 ii r. 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
(ECUMENICITY 
 
 IN RELATION TO THE 
 
 CHUECH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 
 I. On the Catholicity ok the Anglican Church : — 
 
 II. On the Claims of England vsrstis Rome: — 
 
 III. On the Futility of Attempts at Reconciliation with the 
 
 Church of Rome : — 
 
 IV. On the (so-called) (Ecumenical Council of 1869-70. 
 
 On the Ultramontane and Gallican Theories in relation to 
 (Ecumenicity and the Church of England. 
 
 By ALEXAI^DER LORD LINDSAY 
 
 (EARL OF CRAWFORD AND BALCARRES), 
 author of ' progression hy antagonism," ' history of christian art,' &c. 
 
 FOUR LETTERS, 
 
 WITH AN APPENDIX, 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 
 1870. 
 
LONDON : PRINTKD BT WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, DOKK STREET, STAUFOHD STREKT, 
 AND CHARING CROSS. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The present volume may be considered as a continua- 
 tion, or rather complement, of that entitled ' Scepticism 
 a Retrogressive movement in Theology and Philosophy, 
 as contrasted with the Church of England, Catholic at 
 once and Protestant, Stable and Progressive ' — which 
 I published in 1861 on the occasion of the development 
 of Rationalistic tendencies among certain influential 
 members of the English Church. I had many years 
 before, in ' Progression by Antagonism,' pointed out as 
 a general rule in the history of religion that, towards 
 the expiration of every great struggle between Imagina- 
 tion and Reason, as represented by the Catholic and 
 Protestant parties in the Catholic Church, a revulsion 
 takes place in the opposite directions of Scepticism and 
 Mysticism, — a rule wliich, in fact, applies (as I have 
 since shewn) to every religious communion within or 
 without Christendom, and to every school of philosophy 
 whether in the Eastern or Western world. The 
 primary object of ' Scepticism and the Church of 
 England ' was to apply tliis rule to the case of Rational- 
 istic excess, of which the volume of ' Essays and 
 Reviews' (shortly before publislied) wns the repre- 
 sentative utterance at the moment, for the 2'>iii"pose of 
 lixing the character and position of the movement by 
 historical evidence, and of wai Jiiiig Chmchmen against 
 
vi 
 
 I'KEFACE. 
 
 the mistake of supposing it a step in advance when it 
 was, in reality, one of retrogression. The Mystical 
 reaction had manifested itself in secessions to Rome 
 previously to the publication of ' Essays and Reviews,' 
 and I was in hopes that that earlier phase of aberration 
 had exhausted itself ; but I fear that this is not the 
 case, that the road ' From Oxford to Rome ' will still 
 for a time exhibit its pilgrims, and that their number 
 will be multiplied through the charm of that voice — 
 still grand and sonorous in its decay — that now sounds 
 from the Vatican, as Pope Pius IX. summons all 
 peoples and languages to kneel down and worship the 
 Golden Image of Papal Infallibility and Universal 
 Monarchy which he, like a second Nebuchadnezzai", 
 and (like his prototype) in all honesty and good faith, 
 has set up. The four Letters printed in the present 
 volume all bear upon this especial phase of Mj'stical 
 secession from Catholicity, in relation to the Church 
 of England. They were written at different periods, 
 and, two of them at least, without any foresight of the 
 occasion which now appears to call for their conjoint 
 publication. This may account for and excuse some 
 repetitions, which otherwise might have been avoided. 
 The First was addressed to an Italian priest some years 
 ago, in presence of the theological movement then in 
 progress in Italy, as a simple statement of what I 
 believe to be the genuine faith and true character of 
 the Church of England. The Second was written on 
 the apparent prospect of a friend joining the Church 
 of Rome. The Third was addressed to another friend 
 in deprecation of that ardent desire for reunion to 
 Rome, almost on anv terms, whicli arises from an 
 
PREFACK. 
 
 over-mastering sense of her dogmatic pretensions and 
 historical prestige. The Fourth has been suggested 
 by a feehng bordering on indignation at the assumption 
 by which the title and character of an (Ecumenical 
 Council has been attributed to the Council of the 
 Roman-Catholic Church about to be opened at Rome ; 
 and by the attitude assumed by Pope Pius towards the 
 Churches of the East on the one hand, and the Church 
 of England on the other — an attitude and assumption 
 quite, I admit, in keeping with the traditions of the 
 Vatican, and thus not to be understood as personally 
 olfensive, but which nevertheless ought not to be 
 allowed to pass without protest and comment. I have 
 not been forward to speak on this occasion ; but 
 Englishmen in general are either ignorant of the entire 
 question between Rome and Catholicity, or miss the 
 point through confounding the Anglican Church with 
 mere Protestantism, thus playing into the hands of 
 Rome ; while many among us feel an unreasoning, an 
 unwise tenderness for the ancient and unchangeable 
 Church — as they fondly deem her to be ; or are shy of 
 speaking out as they really think from many motives, 
 not necessarily partaking of cow^ardice. Hence is it 
 that none of the many able replies which have been 
 published in England to the challenge thrown down by 
 Pope Pius have realised my idea of what should be said 
 on this occasion ; while that of the Gallican Bishop, 
 Monseigneur Maret, excellent so far as it goes, and 
 conclusive against Ultramontane claims as contrasted 
 with those of the Galilean protest, halts through the 
 inconsistency always exhibited by Galileans in the 
 application of their principles. I tru.st, then, that 
 
 h 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 what 1 have written may not be found superfluous- 
 I have added, in an Appendix, a paper containing an 
 analysis of the Galhcan argument as set forth by 
 Mgr. Maret, with the objections that may be urged 
 against it on the part of the Anglican Church and 
 (Ecumenicity, and an estimate of the points of agree- 
 ment and of difference between us, with such inferences 
 as the comparison suggests. This has been hastily 
 done, time being so short ; but I believe it to be in the 
 main correct. I need scarcely add that, while my 
 words may be strong, as the occasion demands, my 
 motto is " In Defence," not " In Offence," throughout. 
 I have very dear friends in the Church of Rome ; and I 
 love Rome for their sake, no less than for the verities 
 she witnesses to. But while my heart is with all 
 "who love theXord Jesus with sincerity" — and I can 
 forgive hard M'ords from others, as I expect forgiveness 
 in return — I dare not palter with truth ; and I feel the 
 less scruple in speaking as I have done, that no one 
 can be compromised, least of all the Anglican Church, 
 by what I have said, except myself — a simple layman. 
 
 I may repeat here, what I said in ' Scepticism,' that 
 there is no ground for discouragement in such pheno- 
 mena as those lately presented to us in the Church of 
 England. The alternate and truth-evoking struggles 
 of controversy in the higher regions of intellect, and 
 the reactionary lapses consequent on their close, are the 
 mark of a sound and healthy church in every stage of 
 its upward career, — it is only when churches have 
 become predominantly Materialistic or Rationalistic 
 through chronic depression or extinction of one of the 
 two constituent elements in wliich their vitality consists. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 ix 
 
 that such alternations of controversy and secession cease 
 to manifest themselves — thus betokening constitutional 
 decreptitude and death. If the Church of Rome 
 recover from the shock of the present Council — if the 
 Council disperses without effecting the main purposes 
 for which it has been summoned — I shall rejoice, in the 
 belief that the Orthodox, Protestant, or Constitutional 
 element within her, as represented by Gallicanism, is 
 not extinct — is about to renew its youth — and become 
 once more a living power, ultimately perhaps to restore 
 the entire Roman communion to fficumenicity. 
 
 Let me add, in conclusion, one word of affectionate 
 and respectful address to that band of self-denying and 
 conscientious men who have from time to time, during 
 the last few anxious years, abandoned the Church of 
 England for that of Rome. As far as I have seen, 
 their predominant motive for so doing has been to 
 secure themselves within that Ark of the Church out of 
 which they think there is no salvation. Enquiry had 
 led them to believe that, however corrupt Rome may 
 be, still she is that Ark — the One, Catholic, and 
 Apostolic Church, the centre of truth and unity, where 
 alone we may find refuge from the deluge of sin and 
 ruin. They have searched for and they have found 
 evidence — historical evidence — proving (as they sup- 
 pose) the fact. But have they read that evidence 
 right ? The question is a momentous one ; and my 
 hope is that some of them may, by perusal of this 
 book, be induced to examine the evidence once more by 
 the light of the doctrine and practice of CEcumenicity, 
 and in observance of the canons of criticism enforced in 
 these pages ; and that, so reading that evidence, they 
 
X 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 may return to the conviction tliat their Mother Church, 
 the Church of England — or, if they will, the Church in 
 England — has had, after all, the prior claim all along 
 to their adhesion, as emphatically Catholic and (Ecu- 
 menical. Should such an one, so convinced, reply — and 
 we know it to he the feeling of many now within the 
 charmed paradise of Rome — " We have taken the step ; 
 we cannot retreat from it, — once at Rome, there for 
 ever ; " the answer of the Church would be, " Con- 
 sistency in error is folly, is cowardice ; abandonment of 
 error for truth is courage, is wisdom. You have been 
 under a delusion, you are now awake ; you have been, 
 you are, in a house of bondage, — return to j^our 
 Mother's loving arms, and to the communion of those 
 with whom you once worshipped within the same 
 courts — and be free ! " 
 
 I have prefixed to this volume a ' Chart of the 
 Church ' (abridged from a much fuller one), for the 
 purpose of shewing, tabularly, first, the relation of 
 the Catholic and Orthodox Churches of the East and 
 West to the central standard of (Ecumenicity ; and, 
 secondly, the position and parallelism of the Christian 
 communions in the East and West which have diverged 
 from (Ecumenicity in the direction of Rationalistic or 
 Materialistic error, through the self-assertion of Private 
 Judgment. 
 
 Dunecht, 1st December, 1809. 
 
LETTER 1. 
 
 ON THE CATHOLICITY OF THE CHUECH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 My dear , 
 
 You aslced one of my family the other day 
 whether we, of the Church of England, were ' Protes- 
 tant!,' and when she replied ' No,' you rejoined ' Ma 
 siete Luterani ? ' and on her repeating the denial, you 
 suggested ' Allora, Presbiteriani ? ' wljich she was again 
 obliged to meet with a negative. I should be sorry 
 that an inquiry put with so much earnest interest 
 should remain unanswered ; and you will tlierefore 
 permit me to lay before you in few words the actual 
 historical and dogmatical status of the Anglican Church, 
 as recognised, with more or less clearness of vision and 
 fullness of acknowledgment, by all her children. 
 
 The Anglican Church is the ancient Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church of St. Gregory the Grreat, her founder, 
 the successor of St. Peter, and the Pope and head of 
 the Latin Church, — retaining her Apostolical succession 
 uninterrupted, and maintaining the doctrine of her 
 founder unchanged, — that doctrine being defined and 
 limited as Catholic doctrine, recognised, affirmed, and 
 enforced as such in the primitive ages by Qllcumenical 
 authority as having been held " ubique, semper, et ah 
 omnibus" since the days of Our Savioui- and the 
 Apostles. 
 
 J5 
 
2 
 
 ON THE CATHOLICITY OF 
 
 Letter I. 
 
 The Anglican Church recognises, with St. Gregory, 
 the Bible as the rule of faith, and the Catholic Church 
 as its witness and interpreter ; and she accepts that 
 interpretation in the sentences and judgments of the 
 Oecumenical Councils (rightly so called), especially the 
 four first, which St. Grregory qualifies as per excellentiam 
 the Evangelical Councils; whereby the Catholic faith 
 is constituted, 1. As affirming the articles embodied in 
 the Nicene Creed and the decisions of Constantinople, 
 Ephesus, and Chalcedon ; and, 2. As rejecting the 
 divergences from orthodoxy in the direction of Idealistic 
 Rationalism on the one hand and Materialism on the 
 other (the only two directions in which heretical aber- 
 ration is possible), as expressed in the respective 
 heresies of Arianism and Nestorianism, Sabellianism, 
 Macedonianism, and Monophysitism — condemning, by 
 implication and a fortiori, all similar and subsequent 
 aberrations from the centi al and safe path of Catholic 
 orthodoxy. Thus much the Church of England holds 
 in common with the Catholic and Apostolic Church 
 throughout the whole world ; and, in addition, she 
 accepts, with tlie Latin Church, the Creed commonly 
 called the Apostles' Creed, aud the Creed com- 
 monly called the Creed of St. Athanasius, the latter (in 
 particular) as embodying the decisions of the Third, 
 Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth OEcumenical Councils against 
 the heresies, with their sequences and developments, 
 above mentioned, and both these Creeds being in con- 
 formity with the Catholic faith and with Holy Scrip- 
 ture. She is further bound by Articles special to 
 herself, directed primarily to the maintenance of the 
 Catholic and Apostolic Faith in accordance with the 
 
J.ETTER I. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 3 
 
 three Creeds, which are embodied in and form a clause 
 of those Articles; and secondarily to the exclusion of 
 certain prevalent errors, corruptions, and obscurations 
 of that Faith. She recognises distinctly (although 
 implicitly, through her acceptance of the Athanasian 
 Creed) the Fifth and Sixth (Ecumenical Councils as 
 supplementary to the Third and Fourth, and as com- 
 pleting the providential definitions by which the door 
 is shut on Rationalistic and Materialistic error. She 
 admits inferentially the Seventh General Council as 
 Oecumenical, but distinguishes broadly between the 
 four first and all later General Councils, basing her 
 acceptance of such on the condition that their decisions 
 be in conformity with the express words of Scrip- 
 ture. She venerates the Holy Fathers and Doctors of 
 early Christendom, but holds their authority, however 
 weighty, to be subordinate to that of Scripture and of 
 the Church, speaking in her Oecumenical capacity. 
 Lastly (but of most high Catholic importance), she 
 preserves in her Liturgy and Church Services the 
 substance of the Apostolic form of worship as inde- 
 pendently handed down in the primitive Patriarchates, 
 — the revision of her ancient Service-Books having been 
 conducted on the principle of restoring and preserv- 
 ing the ancient prayers and offices by removing the 
 un-Catholic incrustations with which time had obscured 
 their beauty and simplicity. 
 
 The Church of England holds thus a positive and 
 definite dogmatical faith — that, viz., of Antiquity and 
 Universality ; and her sons are emphatically ' Catho- 
 lici Catholicorum,' Catholics per excellentiam, — holding 
 everything which lias been held as matter of obligatory 
 
 15 2 
 
4 
 
 ON THE CATHOLICITY OF 
 
 Letter I. 
 
 doctriue at all times from the beginning, everywhere 
 throughout the world, and by all orthodox branches 
 of the Apostolic tree whether in the East or "West of 
 Christendom — everything, in a word, which is CEcu- 
 menical and Catholic, and nothing else — as necessary 
 to salvation. 
 
 It is in this latter or negative sense, only, and yet 
 emphatically so, that the Anglican (like the Primitive 
 and (Ecumenical) Church is Protestant. Wherever 
 truth exists, there must be contention against error ; 
 and her protest is that — not of schismatics on behalf of 
 the rights of Private Judgment — but of the Catholic 
 Church on behalf of Catholic truth against all corrup- 
 tions of that truth by Private Judgment, whether on 
 the part of individuals or of communions, and in the 
 direction either of Materialism or Rationalism. If her 
 Catholicism consists in recognising and affirming every- 
 thing lawfully commended to her as ' Quod ubique, 
 quod semper, quod ab omnibus,' her Protestantism 
 correlatively consists in disallowing and rejecting every- 
 thing ' Quod non ubique, quod non semper, quod non 
 ab omnibus' — as matter of obligatory faith. 
 
 From this point of view the judgment of the Anglican 
 Church on the various communions of modern Christen- 
 dom, and her dogmatical position in regard to them, 
 will be sufficiently manifest. She agrees with them in 
 so far as they submit to Catholic authority ; she dis- 
 agrees with them in so far as, directly or indirectly, 
 they dissent from it. 
 
 The Church of England acknowledges that many 
 ' pious opinions ' unsanctioned by the Nicene Creed 
 and the decisions of the CEcumenical Councils have 
 
Letter I. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 5 
 
 been lield by wise and holy men in ancient times ; but 
 she considers that these 'pious opinions,' destitute as 
 they are of such requisite sanction, are not binding 
 upon herself, and are to be tested by their fruits, and 
 only allowed if found not to have led to error. Among 
 such ' pious opinions ' they disallow those which have 
 been ripened in the Roman-Catholic Church into the 
 doctrines of the worship of Saints and of the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary, the veneration of Relics, the dogma of 
 the Immaculate Conception, the doctrine of Purgatory, 
 Pardons, and Indulgences, the abuse of Masses, the 
 dogma of Transubstantiation, and the claim of Vicarial 
 Supremacy and of Infallibility for the Papacy, all of 
 which she regards as developments of mysticized 
 Materialism, — while, in the counter direction, she equally 
 condemns the Protestant theories, traditional from the 
 Scepticism of the early and mediseval ages of the 
 Church, which have expressed themselves in the denial 
 of Original Sin, in the denial of the Real Presence 
 and of effective grace in the Sacraments, in the denial 
 of Miracles generally, in the denial of the Inspiration 
 of Scripture, and in disregard of the Apostolical Suc- 
 cession and of the authority of the Church — all of which 
 she looks upon as developments of Rationalism. She 
 considers that all such errors, whether on the one side 
 or the other, have taken their rise and obtained their 
 sanction through the undue exaltation of Private or 
 Particular Judgment — whether as asserted by Zwingli, 
 Luther, and Calvin in the case of the Protestant 
 churches, or as enforced by the Papal See in disregard 
 of the CEcumenical rule of Catholicity, and of the 
 special judgment of the Latin Council of Constance 
 
6 
 
 ON THE CATHOLICITY OF 
 
 Letter L 
 
 that the Pope's authority is subject to that of General 
 Councils — to the effect, in both cases, of either adding 
 to or subtracting from the sum of Catholic truth ; and 
 she maintains in opposition to this, that it is her duty 
 and that of her children to submit their Private or 
 Particular Judgment in toto to that of the Catholic 
 Church on all points to which she witnesses, positively 
 or negatively, by her authoritative dicta, as above 
 stated. In the strength of this humility, but vindicating 
 her Christian liberty as correlative with her obligation, 
 she denies the power of the Pope, or of any Patriarch, 
 or Head of any Church, or of any Church acting per se, 
 to add one iota to the Catholic faith, as defined and 
 limited by the dicta in question, — no lesser authority 
 than that of the Universal Church being competent to 
 impose articles of faith as binding on mankind. If it 
 were possible, indeed, for an Oecumenical Council to 
 meet once more as at Nice or Chalcedon, she believes 
 that further dogmas might yet, under the influence of 
 the Holy Ghost, be promulgated with infallible autho- 
 rity, as during the first six centuries of Christendom. 
 And to such a tribunal she would gladly submit her 
 faith. But in the mean-while it would appear that, in 
 the fullness of time, and after every exit towards dog- 
 matic error had been closed by the decisions of the first 
 Six Councils, Divine Providence shut up and concluded 
 the faith by permitting human infirmity to take its 
 course in the separation of the East from the West — 
 thus, through that marvellous alchemy by which God 
 transmutes the dross of earth into the gold of heaven, 
 rendering the assemblage of OEcumenical Councils, com- 
 petent to add further definitions to the faith, a matter 
 
Letter I. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 7 
 
 henceforward (to human view) of impossibility — to tlie 
 effect of placing the several churches, thus mature, upon 
 the trial of their faith and wisdom ; and stamping with 
 anticipative reproof the arrogation to itself by any one 
 such separate church of Headship over the whole, or of 
 a monopoly of the promise of Christ that He would be 
 with the Apostles (collectively) and their spiritual seed 
 to the end of the world. Such then being the case — 
 and facts only being taken account of, apart from specu- 
 lation — the differences between the Church of England, 
 on the one hand, and the Church of Rome and the 
 Churches commonly called Protestant, on the other, 
 resolve themselves into this, — that, whereas the latter, 
 the Churches of Eome, of Luther, and of Calvin, have 
 either added to or subtracted from the Catholic faith 
 as laid down by the CEcumenical Councils, the former, 
 that is, the Church of England, holding the Catholic 
 and Apostolic faith in its exact integrity, repudiates 
 those additions and subtractions as unwarranted in 
 themselves and, judged by their consequences, injurious 
 to truth and morality. She stands on her Antiquity 
 and Universality as a representative of the Apostolic 
 Church, inheriting her succession and her doctrine 
 from primitive times ; and she rejects the novelties of 
 Romanism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism, in virtue of 
 her Catholicity. 
 
 As respects the occasional application to themselves 
 of the title ' Protestant ' by certain members of the 
 Church of England, the explanation is not difficult. 
 There have been antagonistic parties in the Catholic 
 Church, and in every branch of the Church, constitu- 
 
8 
 
 ON THE CATHOLICITY OF 
 
 Letter I. 
 
 tionally embodied within its pale, in all ages. Without 
 such parties there could be no life or progress — the 
 balance of such parties secures the health of the Church 
 — the undue confirmed predominance of any one such 
 party is the token of the spiritual and moral decay 
 or ruin of the Church so circumstanced. If the Latin 
 is more preeminently the Catholic, the Greek or 
 Orthodox is more preeminently the Protestant party 
 in the Universal, or OEcumenical Church. If the 
 Bibli cists or Dogmatics represented the Catholic, the 
 Scholastics represented the Protestant party in the Latin 
 Church of the middle ages. If the Realists represented 
 the Catholic, the Nominalists represented the Protestant 
 party among the Scholastics. If the Dominicans, again, 
 represented the Catholic, the Franciscans represented 
 the Protestant party among the Mendicant Orders. 
 In like manner there have ever been two parties, a 
 Catholic and a Protestant party, in the Church of 
 England, the Catholic dwelling with affection on the 
 authoritative sanctions, discij^line, and external formulae, 
 the Protestant, with zeal and energy, on the inner life 
 and spiritual essence, of the Church to which they 
 severally and conjointly belong. Members of this 
 Protestant party in the Anglican communion, com- 
 monly styled the Low Chui-ch, or Evangelicals, fre- 
 quently speak of themselves and of the church as 
 Protestant, and in their dislike of form and ceremony 
 disclaim the doctrine and name of Catholicity, con- 
 founding it with what they term Romanism and 
 Popery, — just as here, in Italy, the spiritual descend- 
 ants of St. Ambrose are wont to say ' noi Ambrogiani,' 
 ' voi Cattolici,' when insisting on the ecclesiastical 
 
Letter I. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 
 
 9 
 
 tradition of tbeir great see of Milan, without a thought 
 of conceding their rightful position in the Church. 
 The thoughtless and indifferent, moreover, and those 
 whose political feelings induce them to regard the 
 Papacy as the great enemy of the spiritual and tem- 
 poral independency of nations generally and of Eng- 
 land in particular, habitually term the Church of 
 England Protestant. But they are, all of them, not- 
 withstanding, Catholic — nolentes volentes, and whether 
 they are aware of it or not — through their baptism ; 
 for the Anglican Church depends for her character and 
 authority on her historical and dogmatical credentials, 
 on her Apostolic succession and her Catholic doctrine, 
 and not on the loose professions or self-qualification 
 of her ignorant or indifferent children. Those, on the 
 other hand, of broader views and deeper learning, who 
 appreciate those credentials, know themselves to be 
 Catholic. 
 
 I shall rejoice if this attempt to set forth and illustrate 
 the veritable dogmatical character of the Church of 
 England proves satisfactory, or at least interesting, to 
 you. I have spoken boldly and frankly, as bound to 
 do on such a subject. And you will appreciate, I am 
 certain, the sentiments of respectful consideration with 
 which I subscribe myself, 
 
 My dear ■ , 
 
 Your obedient and affectionate servant, 
 
 Lindsay. 
 
10 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 Lettee II. 
 
 LETTEK 11. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS EOME. 
 
 We are agreed, my dear friend, on the following' pro- 
 positions, which are indeed of common consent among 
 Catholic Christians, — 
 
 1. That there is a God, a personal Being, not evolved 
 
 from Man's consciousness, but objective and ex- 
 ternal to Man, and the Creator of all things : — 
 
 2. That Truth is not subjective ; does not vary with 
 
 Man's conceptions of what Truth is, or ought to 
 be ; is not dependent on circumstances, — but is 
 One, objective and external to Man, the reflex 
 or shadow (as it were) of God : — 
 
 3. That Man was created by God in innocence and 
 
 harmony, but has lapsed through sin, in the 
 exercise of his free will, into evil and discord : — 
 
 4. That God hath interposed for Man's restoration ; 
 
 that a record of that interposition exists; and 
 that Holy Scripture — the Old and New Testa- 
 ments comprised within the 'Book,' or Bible — 
 is that record : — 
 
 5. That the restoration is through Jesus Christ, Our 
 
 Saviour : — And 
 (3. That the Apostolic, Catholic, and Oecumenical 
 Church of Christ, constituted and maintained in . 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VEHSUS ROME. 
 
 11 
 
 life by the SacrameBts ordained by Christ, is the 
 
 appointed Ark of Salvation. 
 But you now ask me, and almost in a tone of despair, 
 a question of momentous import, ' Where is that Ark to 
 be found ? ' And, putting it in its most restricted and 
 practical form as regards ourselves, ' In the Church of 
 Eome or the Church of England?' I can only answer 
 it by inviting you to ascend with me to the fountain- 
 head of time, to the origin of being, and into the 
 council-chamber (so to speak) of the Almighty, as 
 opened to our view alike by His works and His 
 revealed word, I do not wonder at, although I grieve 
 for, the bewilderment and anguish you have lately felt ; 
 but we shall there, in that serener air, find strength, 
 certainty, and peace. Controversy on the question 
 you propose is endless, and passion and prejudice 
 distort every argument. It will not suffice to start 
 from the Anglican Reformation and from the Council 
 of Constance, or from the Fathers, or even from a 
 period yet earlier, and from the words of an Authority 
 against which, if fully understood, there could be no 
 appeal. It is in Holy Writ undoubtedly, and in the 
 Apostolic testimony, that the proof resides ; but Theo- 
 logy cannot fully discern or apply that proof aright 
 without the aid of Philosophy — rightly so called. You 
 will not, I trust, be startled at this avowal, or deem 
 me a heretic in consequence. Philosophy and Theology 
 are twin sistei's, each the necessary complement of the 
 other ; both are needed for the apprehension (so far as 
 it may be approximated to) of Truth ; in the recon- 
 ciliation of the two sisters is found Wisdom. All the 
 greatest Doctors of the Church recognised this till 
 
12 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. Letter 11. 
 
 the Reformation. It is only from this vantage-ground 
 of Wisdom, as from the ramparts of heaven, that we 
 can hope to view the conflicting claims of rival churches 
 with impartiality. It is under these conditions that I 
 propose to submit to you the following demonstration 
 of the claims of England against Rome in answer to 
 your question above proposed. 
 
 I. Created by Grod, and subject to the Unity of God 
 and the harmony of Truth — and interpenetrating each 
 other in mysterious commixture without confusion — 
 there exist two Worlds of coequal extent (so far as 
 human thought can explore the darkness), and of 
 which Man, most certainly, is impartially a citizen — 
 to wit, 
 
 1. The World (variously described as that) of Law, 
 
 of Providence, of Fate or Necessity, of the 
 Absolute, the Negative; Finite, Objective, and 
 Real,— 
 
 2. The World (similarly describable as that) of 
 
 Liberty, of Grace or Miracle, of Free Will, 
 of the Relative, the Affirmative, the Infinite, 
 Subjective, and Ideal ; 
 
 The former passive, fixed, rigid, immutable, 
 unbending, and lifeless, death-denounc- 
 ing, and life-destroying, — of which the 
 utterable expression is Matter, — 
 The latter active, motive, variable, mutable, 
 flexible, and life-quickening, — of which 
 the utterable expression is Spirit ; 
 The former citadelled intellectually in the 
 Imagination of Man, — 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VEIiSUS ROME. 
 
 13 
 
 The latter citadelled intellectually in the 
 Reason of Man ; 
 
 The former embodied dogmatically in the 
 Law, symbolised by the Circumcision, 
 and rejoresented by the Priesthood, of the 
 Old Testament ; but that Law and Priest- 
 hood checked throughout by the inde- 
 pendent catena of the Prophets, vindi- 
 cators of Free "Will, — 
 
 The latter embodied dogmatically in the 
 G-ospel, symbolised by the Uncircumcision, 
 and represented by the Ministry, of tlie 
 New Testament ; but that Gospel founded 
 on the accomplishment and satisfaction 
 of the Law, Jesus Christ Himself becom- 
 ing High Pi'iest under the new dispensa- 
 tion or covenant ; 
 
 The former the object of Faith and Obedience, 
 and the especial (but not exclusi^■e) pro- 
 vince of Theology, — 
 
 The latter the subject of Knowledge and 
 Free Will, and the especial (but not 
 exclusive) province of Philosophy ; 
 
 Our Saviour, in his Human nature, the Second 
 Adam, being the centre of the former, — 
 
 Our Saviour, in his Divine nature, the Second 
 Person of the Holy and Undivided Trinity, 
 and the active Creator of the Universe, 
 ■ , being (so to speak) the centre of the 
 
 latter, — 
 
 Worlds symbolised respccti\'ely by the Tree of the 
 Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life, 
 
14 
 
 ENGLAND VESSUS ROME. Letter IL 
 
 in Paradise ; and by Moses and Elias, the two witnesses 
 at the Transfiguration, — Worlds opposed to each other 
 in present hostility, but which are One, notwithstand- 
 ing, in origin and essence ; and for the reconcihation of 
 which in Unity Grod has provided a Means, — the right 
 understanding of that Unity being (as has been said) 
 Wisdom, 
 
 II. The operations of God upon the two Worlds of 
 Law and Liberty, Matter and Spirit, which (so far as 
 we know) comprehend creation, are direct, uniform, 
 simple, and (as it were) from above — downwards ; and 
 to this effect — that Providence, to wit, the course of 
 Nature (material and spiritual) as appointed by God, 
 and Miracle, Grace, or what we call in our feeble 
 speech Supernatural Interposition, coexist in these 
 operations in exactly commensurate degree, — this two- 
 fold action conducing to an ultimate harmony, not 
 beyond our observation.* 
 
 III. The operations of Man within the two Worlds 
 of Law and Liberty, Matter and Spirit, which com- 
 prehend the sphere of his activity, are indirect, complex, 
 and from below — upwards, in feeble but conscious 
 striving towards a visible but unattainable ideal of 
 excellence — ultimately indeed to be reached at the con- 
 clusion of time, but only through special means provided 
 
 * Miracles and the fixed laws of nature thus intermingle in equal 
 proportions in all God's works. Only a one-sided philosophy can 
 doubt the fact of miracles, either in past or present times. But the 
 manifestation of miracles (as apparent to the sense) varies according 
 to the intellectual development of nations and times, and the conse- 
 quent responsibility of Man, as I have elsewhere shewn. 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 15 
 
 for his need by Grod. Originally it was not so. As 
 created, in the image of God, and in Paradise, Man's 
 Flesh and his Spirit, his Intellect, and the two antago- 
 nistic elements of that Intellect, Imagination and 
 Reason, were in balance and harmony with each other 
 and with Grod. 
 
 " Ere wit oblique had broke that steady light, 
 Man, like his Maker, saw that all was right." 
 
 But Man sinned and fell — through eating of that Tree 
 which, " good " in itself (like the remainder of created 
 things), was to him forbidden ; and since the Fall his 
 being is, as it were, dislocated ; he is at war with him- 
 self and with his Creator. Morally, through his Flesh 
 and his Spirit he is prone to evil ; intellectually, he sees 
 only, as an individual, half the truth, and ranks ac- 
 cordingly, as Imagination or Season predominate in his 
 Intellect, under the World of Law or the World of 
 Liberty, exclusively and in distrust of the other — no 
 longer able, unassisted, to appreciate their essential 
 reconciliation in Harmony and Wisdom. It is thus 
 that, practically, 
 
 In Polity, men struggle either for Monarchical or 
 Democratic principle, in ultimate tendency (if 
 unchecked) to Despotism or Anarchy, — that, 
 
 In Philosophy, men side (so to speak) with Aristotle 
 or Plato, in ultimate tendency (if unchecked) 
 to Materialism or Idealism, — and that, 
 
 In Theology, men rank themselves under St. Peter 
 or St. Paul, as Dogmatists or Scholastics, 
 Catholics or Protestants, — their ultimate tend- 
 
16 
 
 ENGLAND VEBSUS ROME. 
 
 Letter II. 
 
 ency being (if unchecked) to Superstition or 
 Infidelity. 
 
 But the original work of God, which was " very good," 
 although impaired, is not destroyed ; the ' vis medicatrix 
 naturae ' implanted in Creation works in fallen manhood ; 
 and the very antagonism of the faculties of Imagination 
 and Reason which produces these diversities and partial 
 views in the individual, conduces by Divine Grace to 
 the progress of Man upwards, in his aggregate, national, 
 or universal character, towards the perception of a 
 truth higher than the individual can recognise, or at 
 least grasp and act upon, — as shewn by the facts, that 
 
 In Polity, the struggle of Monarchy and Democracy 
 evolves the theory of Constitutional Govern- 
 ment, in reconciliation of the rights of all, — 
 of which the British Constitution has hitherto 
 exhibited the most perfect type, — that 
 
 In Philosophy, the struggle of the elder schools of 
 Materialism and Idealism culminated in that 
 Socratic philosophy, comprehensive and cor- 
 rective of all others, which can but be imper- 
 fectly appreciated in its partial expression in 
 the teachings of Plato, Aristotle, and Xeno- 
 phon, — and tliat 
 
 In Theology, the struggle of the Dogmatic and 
 Scholastic (in succession to the Petrine and 
 Paoline) elements during the middle ages 
 potentially established the great principle of 
 abstinence from over - definition in matters 
 spiritual — to which expression was given in 
 the repudiation by the Chiirch Catholic in 
 
Letter 11. ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 1 i 
 
 England at her Eeformation in the sixteenth 
 century of the ' pious opinions ' enforced by 
 Rome on Christendom ; to the effect of re- 
 serving verge and scope for the antagonistic 
 views of truth upon matters not defined and 
 prescribed to our implicit belief by supreme 
 authority, and therefore, it is to be inferred, 
 left open to discussion for reasons and for an 
 object contemplated by Divine Wisdom, — that 
 very abstinence pointing to the existence of a 
 supernal philosophical truth in matters theolo- 
 gical, inclusive and reconciliative of the anta- 
 gonistic views in question, — a latitude and 
 freedom broadly to be distinguished by the 
 limitation above noted from what is technically 
 called Latitudinarianism ; 
 the rival claims of the two Worlds of Law and Liberty 
 being thus approximatively conciliated in each of these 
 results, towards the recognition of Harmony and repose 
 in Wisdom. 
 
 It follows therefore, as a general rule, from the premises, 
 
 i. That that is most perfect and nearest to Truth, approxi- 
 matively, in Polity, Philosophy, and Theology, 
 and in human life generally, in which the counter 
 worlds of Law and Liberty obtain the most free 
 and equal representation : — And, conversely, 
 ii. That that is less perfect, further from Truth, and 
 less in conformity to the Wisdom of God, in 
 either of these sciences and in human life, in 
 which one of these counter elements prepon- 
 derates over and enslaves the other. 
 
 c 
 
18 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. Letter IL 
 
 ly. The means, or instrumentality, provided by God 
 ab initio for the reconcihation of the Worlds of Law and 
 Liberty — a reconciliation in which mankind (so far as 
 Revelation assures us) are not merely included but form 
 a prominent object in the Divine counsels — consists 
 
 i. In the Incarnation, Passion, and Eesurrection of 
 
 Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Perfect God 
 and Perfect Man (necessarily so through the pre- 
 ceding conditions) — the ' Lamb of God ' slain 
 before the foundation of the world — at whose 
 foreseen advent the Sons of God shouted for joy. 
 In Him the Law of Death, announced on Mount 
 Sinai by the law-giver Moses — rigid, death- 
 denouncing, and material in its obligation ; and 
 the Gospel of Life, announced by (St. John the 
 Baptist in the power of) Elias, the counter- 
 witness as representative of the prophetical 
 schools, the rivals of the priesthood — loving, 
 life-giving, and spiritual in its emancipation 
 of the will from bondage — in other words, the 
 Worlds of Law and Liberty — meet in the 
 eternal conciliation of their contrariety, and to 
 the redemption of the universe : — And 
 
 ii. In the engraftment of Man by Baptism into the 
 
 Body of Christ, the Church, and his nourishment 
 therein by the Body and Blood of Christ con- 
 tinually imparted through the Eucharist, — the 
 Church being a society instituted by Our Saviour, 
 immediately before his ascension, in the College 
 of the Apostles, whom he commissioned, by them- 
 selves and by those on whom they should lay their 
 hands in ordination, to baptize all nations in the 
 
Letter II. ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 19 
 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost, — whom he endowed equally, each 
 and all, with supernatural powers, — whom he 
 promised (and promises from such a source imply 
 performance) to guide by the Spirit into all truth 
 (truth necessary, it must be of course understood, 
 to salvation), — and with whom (and necessarily 
 with their representatives) he promised to abide 
 until the end of the world, the close of the 
 dispensation. This Body of Christ, the Church — 
 One with Him— is thus coextensive with her 
 Divine Founder in the representation, com- 
 prehension, and reconciliation of the two Worlds 
 of Law and Liberty — so far as humanity is con- 
 cerned. And by entrance within her sanctuary, 
 and patient abiding therein, mankind are saved 
 as in Noah's ark from the deluge of destruction. 
 "When the fullness of time is come, and the war- 
 fare of the Church has been accomplished, Christ 
 shall deliver up the kingdom to the Father, and 
 God shall be all in all. 
 
 Y. The practical question, above proposed, here 
 emerges — ' Where is this Church, the Ark of Salvation ? ' 
 There are many competitors, many separate churches, 
 all varying more or less in the views they have superin- 
 duced upon primitive doctrine, and One among them 
 claiming superiority and headship over the whole as 
 exclusively the Church, Apostolic, Catholic, and (Ecu- 
 menical, founded by Our Saviour. What then is the 
 test by which that Church of Christ, Apostolic, Catholic,' 
 and Oecumenical, is to be recognised ? And how 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS KOME. 
 
 Letter II. 
 
 does this test determine the issue between the Church 
 of Rome and the Church of England, each claiming 
 to represent the Apostolic and consummate Church in 
 question, the former by exclusive right, the latter as 
 a pure and independent branch thereof ? 
 
 There are many tests, but the leading test, from the 
 present point of view, is as follows : — 
 
 The Church, like the reconciling Christ, Her Head 
 and Master, with whom she is One and Indi- 
 visible, embraces and recognises — and every 
 particular church which pretends to represent 
 the Church per excellentiam must embrace and 
 recognise — the two Worlds of Law and Liberty 
 with equal impartiality and love. 
 As the Worlds in question, a duality of existence, 
 working into harmony, are comprehended within 
 Creation under the conditions of Truth, the shadow of 
 God, so a duality of principles, working into harmony, 
 is comprehended within the Church, the Body of Christ, 
 the Reconciler. These two Worlds — warring in action 
 but conducing to Unity, are represented within the 
 Church, as in every school of philosophy and every 
 political constitution, by two intellectual or philoso- 
 phical schools of thought, headed respectively by St. 
 Peter and St. Paul, in the spirit of Moses and Elias, 
 and expressed in the broadest sense by the Western or 
 Latin, the Eastern or Greek Church, and in a minuter 
 degree by antagonistic parties within every separate 
 religious community — the two principles being formally 
 expressed, the former in Europe by the title of Catholic, 
 the latter in the East by that of Orthodox, tantamount 
 to the true and original sense of Protestant, as Protest- 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VEESUS EOME. 
 
 21 
 
 mg, like the Gallican and the Anglican Clmrclies, on 
 behalf of antiquity and stability against innovation, 
 amongst ourselves. 
 
 The field for the antagonism of the parties in question 
 is found, broadly, in the entire world of Revelation not 
 specially defined by CEcumenical authority ; and the 
 subjects of controversy may thus be specified as 
 
 i. The nature and accidents of the two Sacraments of 
 
 Baptism and the Eucharist, instituted by Our 
 Saviour (as above stated) before the promulga- 
 tion of Christianity as the initiatory and mystical 
 instruments by which Man becomes and is 
 nourished as a child of God, a member of Christ, 
 and an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven ; 
 
 ii. The nature and accidents of the articles of the 
 
 Catholic faith prescribed by authority as neces- 
 sary to salvation ; and 
 
 iii. The question of the truth or fallacy of that under- 
 
 growth of ' pious opinions ' concerning matters 
 spiritual which perpetually spring up in 
 thought, but have never been the subject of 
 Oecumenical affirmation, negation, or definition 
 — which by that simple silence are excluded 
 from the category of articles of faith last spoken 
 of — and which, conversely, although particular 
 churches may scruple to entertain, or may posi- 
 tively repudiate them, cannot without grievous 
 sin be denounced as damnatory to the souls of 
 those who honestly hold them as truth, — 
 all as viewed through the partial eyes of Dogmatism 
 and Scholasticism, unquestioning faith and free thought. 
 
22 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. Letter IL 
 
 In the primitive Church, before the disruption of the 
 East and West, both Worlds, both Schools of thought 
 were recognised impartially, — and such must be the 
 case at present — in theory at least, if not in full prac- 
 tice — ^wherever the Apostolic, Catholic, and Oecumenical 
 Church exists. And conversely, every church in which 
 one of the two Worlds, as represented by the counter 
 elements of antagonism and progress, has received 
 undue and official exaggeration, to the depression and 
 practical exclusion of the other — of St. Peter in favom* 
 of St. Paul, or of St. Paul in favour of St. Peter — has 
 so far compromised its claim to be the Church, or a 
 •branch of the Church, Apostolical, Catholic, and (Ecu- 
 menical per excellentiam. This special rule or test is, 
 it will be observed, in conformity with the general rule 
 above laid down, viz., 'That that is most perfect, 
 approximatively, in Polity, Philosophy, and Theology, 
 and in human life, in which the counter worlds of Law 
 and Liberty obtain the most equal representation : — 
 And conversely. That that is less perfect, less in reflec- 
 tion of Truth, and less in conformity with the Wisdom 
 of God, in either of these sciences and in human life, in 
 which one of these counter elements preponderates over 
 the other.' 
 
 Such, then, being the test, the application is direct, 
 and the result will, 1 think, be clear : — 
 
 The Church of Rome has, as matter of notoriety, 
 systematically exalted the World of Law, as 
 represented by the Catholic, or what is now 
 called in the West the Ultramontane element, 
 to the depression and practical extinction of 
 the World of Liberty, as represented by the 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VEBSUS ROME. 
 
 23 
 
 Gallican, or Protesting element within her 
 pale, — exalting St. Peter to supremacy over 
 St. Paul alike in theory and practice. The 
 process has been at work since the separation 
 of the East and West, and indeed from before 
 that time, as it led directly to the separation ; 
 but it has become more rapid and decided since 
 the Council of Constance and the Reformation, 
 and within the last century. Practically, 
 before the world, the Gallican, Protesting, or 
 Constitutional school of thought has almost 
 disappeared, and Ultramontanism reigns un- 
 challenged, if not supreme, in the Roman- 
 Catholic Church. 
 
 On the other hand, the Church of England, as is 
 equally notorious, recognises both Worlds, 
 both schools of ecclesiastical thought, both 
 Apostles, impartially within her constitution 
 and in her practice. The CEcumenical ground 
 on which she takes her dogmatic stand — the 
 alternations of theological thought which pro- 
 mote her progress and mark her history — the 
 near balance at all times of the High Church 
 and the Low Church parties — and the witness 
 of the Courts of Justice to the large latitude 
 established for both parties within her consti- 
 tution — all contribute to prove this. 
 
 Tried therefore by this crucial test, imposed alike 
 and in succession upon both churches. 
 
 The Church of England represents, and the 
 Church of Rome does not represent, 
 so far, per excellentiam, the Apostolic, 
 
24 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. Letter II. 
 
 Catholic, and (Ecumenical Church of 
 Christ ; and we are bound therefore to 
 recognise the Church of England as, 
 to ourselves, the Ark of Salvation. 
 
 YI. It might be suflficient to pause here. The con- 
 clusion above come to, standing, like the Angel in the 
 Apocalypse, alike on sea and land, or rather based im- 
 partially, like the arching bridge of Bifrost, upon the 
 pillars of heaven and earth, is (if I mistake not) beyond 
 impugnment except on the condition of denying the 
 existence, on the one or the other side of opposition, 
 of one of the two Worlds of Creation — of the "World of 
 Law, Imagination, and Theology by the Rationalising 
 Protestant ; of the World of Liberty, Reason, and 
 Philosophy by the Romanising Catholic. With the 
 former of these worlds I do not here concern myself, — 
 I have dealt with it elsewhere already. But the reply 
 of Rome will be ready to this as to every other argu- 
 ment in opposition to her claim to supreme authority, 
 viz., that Our Saviour, by his own words, conferred 
 Headship, Infallibility, and Power over the entire 
 Church upon herself and the Pope, the Yicar of Christ 
 and Head of Christendom as representative of St. Peter ; 
 and that the demonstration above given is thus naught. 
 It would be enough to answer, that the test above 
 applied, coextensive with the universe but applicable to 
 every individual microcosm within the compass of that 
 universe, overrules and supersedes all lesser argument. 
 And yet it will be wiser to descend for the moment to 
 this lower ground, and vindicate the preceding demon- 
 stration of the claims of England on grounds more imme- 
 
Lettkb H. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 25 
 
 diately appreciable and familiar. And this may be done 
 as follows : — By proving, I. That the alleged Headship 
 and Infallibility of Rome is a novelty (so to speak) of 
 yesterday, unknown to and negatived by the testimony 
 and practice of the Apostolic, Catholic, and (Ecumenical 
 Church ; and, II. That Our Saviour's words in his com- 
 mission to St. Peter, read in their context with other of 
 his words and with the rest of Holy Scripture, and with 
 the testimony of the Church, from which they cannot be 
 read in discordance, conferred no such exclusive privi- 
 lege as is alleged upon that Apostle or his represen- 
 tatives. 
 
 I. Supremacy and Infallibility of Rome. 
 
 1. A special test of the Church of Christ, Apostolic, 
 Catholic, and (Ecumenical, consists in this, — that the 
 Church acknowledges One Head only, to wit, Christ,— 
 no one Apostle, nor any one Church, whatever the 
 rank or precedency of that Apostle or Church, having 
 any spiritual supremacy over the others. This was 
 the doctrine of the Primitive — this is the doctrine of the 
 Catholic Church all over the world. All the Apostolic 
 Churches are equal under Christ ; and as such, on those 
 great occasions when they meet in (Ecumenical or 
 Universal Council, assembled by the command of Caesar, 
 they contribute their testimony to the faith delivered 
 to them severally by their founders, deliberating upon 
 the points submitted to them as representatives of the 
 two Worlds of Thought involved in Theology, Christ 
 being present in their midst, and the Holy Ghost in- 
 spiring them with wisdom and guiding them to dis- 
 cernment of truth. Such, as matter of history, was the 
 
26 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 Letter IL 
 
 rule and practice observed by the Primitive Church, 
 and under which the Catholic Faith was defined and 
 promulgated — Rome herself therein cooperating — in 
 the Nicene Creed and by the decisions of the Oecu- 
 menical Councils. And this rule and practice fixes the 
 point with all who hold to Catholicity. That it could 
 not have been otherwise is clear (to descend to still 
 lower ground) when we reflect that had one Church in 
 particular, that of Rome, the representative of a partial 
 or practically exclusive world of thought, been invested 
 by Christ with supremacy in matters of faith, (Ecu- 
 menical counsel and action would have been superfluous, 
 — every question, as it arose, would have been sub- 
 mitted at once to Rome for decision ; and such decisions 
 would, as shewn by the simple fact of the tendency of 
 Roman development, have been uniformly in one 
 direction, towards the depression of the Protesting and 
 exaltation of the Catholic element of thought in matters 
 of faith. Such supremacy cannot therefore be asserted 
 for Rome except in denial (as aforesaid) of the World 
 of Liberty, and limitation (involving an awful responsi- 
 bility) of the consummate perfection of Christ. But 
 Our Lord did not leave his people doubtful or comfort- 
 less in this matter. He vindicated the equal rights of 
 both worlds as represented in his Person, and in the 
 Church which is his Body, by his engagement to remain 
 with the Church, not with one Apostle only, but with 
 the twelve Apostles and their seed impartially — 
 personally, effectually, although invisibly present, till 
 the close of the existing dispensation, — thus siiperseding 
 the necessity and indeed precluding the possibility of any 
 special or exclusive Head or representative on earth. 
 
Letter II. ENGLAND VERSUS EOME. 27 
 
 Such, then, being the test or rule of OEcumenicity — 
 equality among the Apostles and their Churches, and 
 Headship alone of Christ on earth — it follows, con- 
 versely, that any Church, whatever its dignity, claiming 
 spiritual supremacy over other churches in virtue of a 
 presumed Headship and Vicariate on earth, has ipso 
 facto, so far, compromised its claim to represent the 
 Church, as a branch of the Church, Apostolic, Catholic, 
 and Oecumenical, per excellentiam. 
 
 Applying therefore this further test and rule to the 
 two Churches of Rome and England, the truth emerges 
 thus :— 
 
 The Church of Rome claims for the Pope, as 
 representative of St. Peter, the character of 
 Vicar of Christ and Headship over the entire 
 Christian and Catholic Church — excluding 
 from its pale (thus arbitrarily limited as co- 
 extensive with her own) all other Churches 
 which do not acknowledge this assumed juris- 
 diction — and practically setting at nought 
 the rule and practice of (Ecumenicity : — 
 The Church of England, on the other hand, claims 
 no such supremacy, but recognises the equality 
 of all other Churches holding the Oecumenical 
 faith ; and vindicates the Headship of the 
 Church for Christ alone, — all in conformity 
 with the principles of the primitive or Ecu- 
 menical Church : — 
 
 The Church of England therefore repre- 
 sents, and the Church of Rome does 
 not represent, so far, by this further 
 test, the Apostolic, Catholic, and (Ecu- 
 
28 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS EOME. 
 
 Letter IL 
 
 menical Church of Christ ; and the 
 reply to the present demonstration 
 grounded upon the impartial repre- 
 sentation by the Church of England 
 of the two Worlds which constitute 
 Unity within the Church and in Christ 
 falls to the ground. 
 2. A yet further test of the Church Apostolic, 
 Catholic, and fficumenial consists in this, — that the 
 Church limits her claim of Infallibility to such judg- 
 ments as the entire Apostolic College and the Churches 
 founded by the Apostles, which preserve the tradition 
 of their teaching, have come to, or shall hereafter 
 come to, in common. The Catholic Church knows no 
 other rule or measure of Infallibility but this. It is 
 a rule of boundless extent and measureless validity, but 
 guarded in its exercise by the strictest conditions. 
 
 That the Church is Infallible as to points of faith 
 necessary to salvation follows broadly from the promises 
 of Her Founder, tantamount to prophecies, that the 
 Apostles should be led into all truth, and that Our Lord 
 should be with the Church till the end of the world. 
 And it was thufi imderstood in (Ecumenical times. But 
 these promises (more especially the last of them) were 
 addressed (as has been shewn) not to one Apostle, not 
 to St. Peter only, but to all the Apostles. Infallibility, 
 therefore, is not the privilege of any one Apostle, or of 
 any Church, but of the Church Apostolic, and (Ecume- 
 nical. No single Church — not even Rome herself — 
 claimed Infallibility in primitive times ; and least of all 
 did St. Peter — the most humble, certainly, if the most 
 ardent of men — pretend to it. 
 
Letter IT. ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 29 
 
 But the Divine promises or prophecies in question 
 must further be taken in connection with the historical 
 fact, equally resulting in the course of Grod's providence, 
 and which, like every other historical fact, was present 
 to the mind of Our Lord when He uttered those promises 
 and prophecies ; to wit, that the two leading branches 
 or divisions of the Cliristian world, the Greek and 
 Latin Churches, broadly so distinguished, the especial 
 representatives of the Worlds of Liberty and of Law 
 within the Church, became separated in the ninth 
 century, so that Oecumenical Councils could no longer 
 be held as previously for the further definition of the 
 faith. It follows, in consequence, that it was the will 
 of God and of Our Lord that the faith should not be 
 defined further — so long, at least, as the state of sepa- 
 ration should continue ; and this for reasons which, 
 whether we apprehend them correctly or not, must have 
 been wise and right. 
 
 But, such being the fact, the Lifallibility of the Church, 
 already limited to the operations of OEcumenical consent 
 and counsel, is, for the present, alive indeed in poten- 
 tiality but suspended in activity, and must remain so 
 till the lets and hindrances are removed which at present 
 prevent reunion and common action — when it may be 
 the Divine will that further authoritative expositions 
 shall be added to the Christian faith, should circum- 
 stances require it. During this interim the Infallibility 
 of the Church is confined and restricted to the utter- 
 ance of a continuous testimony to the dogmatic truths 
 that have been laid down by those Councils which, as 
 representing the entire Catholic and Apostolic world, 
 are alone entitled to be called CEcumenical. To vindi- 
 
30 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 Letter IL 
 
 cate the ways of God to man is a perilous exercise for 
 human weakness, nor can we venture to attempt it save 
 at the risk of shipwreck in such speculation. And yet 
 a reason which may account for the Divine action in 
 thus limiting the gift of Infallibility in matters doctrinal 
 may be humbly inferred from the consideration of the 
 fact that by the decisions of the Third and Fourth, sup- 
 plemented by those of the Fifth and Sixth (Ecumenical 
 Councils, condemning the peculiar doctrines which are 
 broadly represented by those of the Arians and Nes- 
 torians, the Sabellians and the Monophj^sites, the possi- 
 bility of straying from the central path of dogmatical 
 and philosophical truth into the lateral wastes of Mate- 
 rialism and Idealism — the only two possible directions 
 of intellectual error — was in principle cut off ; and that 
 then, and not till then, the way having been cleared, 
 the compass of her course placed in the hands of the 
 Church, and the polestar of truth shining brightly before 
 her — was the privilege of Infallibility suspended, and 
 the Apostolic Churches went forth into the shadow of 
 their trial on their separate pilgrimages to the heavenly 
 Jerusalem. That this separation was needful in the 
 design of Providence towards their several education 
 and ultimate conjoint edification cannot be doubted 
 when we reflect upon the prevision and the promises of 
 Christ, both necessarily to be taken in connection ; and 
 the object, it may be believed, was to induce that inde- 
 pendent exercise of intellect and teaching of experience 
 which should conduce to final and consummate unity. 
 And, remembering that the Worlds of Law and Liberty 
 have equal place in the dispensations of God, the tem- 
 porary suspension of the power of fiu'ther (Ecumenical 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VEESUS ROME. 
 
 31 
 
 decision was, we may further infer, decreed for the 
 purpose of allowing free play for the differences of 
 opinion upon the bearings of dogmatic truths, and for 
 the warfare for and against ' pious opinions ' (as already 
 suggested) by which provision has been made for the 
 vitality and progress of the Church in the cultivation of 
 Theology, according to the same law which animates 
 the sister sciences of Philosophy and Polity. 
 
 The test then here to be applied is briefly this, — The 
 Church claims Infallibility for her judgments so far as 
 those judgments are Oecumenical, but no further, — from 
 whence it follows, conversely, that any Church, what- 
 ever its dignity, that claims for itself Infallibility, or 
 attempts to invest its * pious opinions ' with the dignity 
 of articles of the Christian faith and to impose them as 
 such on other Churches, has ipso facto so far compro- 
 mised its claim to represent the Church, as a branch of 
 the Church, Apostolic, Catholic, and Oecumenical per 
 crcellentiam. 
 
 Applying therefore this further test to Rome and to 
 England, the truth, as previously, emerges thus, — 
 
 The Church of Rome claims for herself and for the 
 Pope, as representative of St. Peter, Vicar of 
 Christ, and Head of the Church, the preroga- 
 tive of Infallibility — attempting to impose 
 such ' pious opinions ' as in the light of her 
 private judgment she holds to be correct as 
 articles of faith on other Churches, and requir- 
 ing their assent under the alternative of 
 excommunication and anathema,— thus prac- 
 tically setting at nought the rule and practice 
 of 05cumenicity : — 
 
32 
 
 ENGLAND VEBSUS EOME. 
 
 Letter IL 
 
 The Church of England, on the other hand, dis- 
 claims Infallibility for herself, and for all other 
 branches of the Apostolic and Catholic Church, 
 considered apart from CEcumenical Unity — 
 holds that the judgments of the Apostolic, 
 Catholic, and (Ecumenical Church in Oecu- 
 menical Council assembled are alone Infallible 
 — shapes her teaching accordingly — and re- 
 frains from any attempt to impose her par- 
 ticular or ' pious opinions ' as articles of faith 
 on the rest of Christendom : — 
 
 The Church of England therefore repre- 
 sents, and the Church of Rome does 
 not represent, so far, by this further 
 test, the Apostolic, Catholic, and (Ecu- 
 menical Church of Christ, — and the 
 reply to the preceding demonstration, 
 grounded upon the representation by 
 the Church of England of the two 
 Worlds which constitute Unity in the 
 Church and in Christ, falls likewise to 
 the ground. 
 
 II. Our Saviour s commission to St. Peter. 
 To the assertion and objection that Our Saviour's 
 words to St. Peter, " Upon this rock (TreVpa) I will 
 build my Church " — " I will give unto thee the keys 
 of the kingdom of heaven " — " Whatsoever thou shalt 
 bind on earth shall be bound in heaven " — " I have 
 prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not ; and when thou 
 art converted, strengthen thy brethren " — " Feed my 
 sheep," imply the creation of a Supi-emacy in St. Peter, 
 
Lkitkr It. ENGLAND VEIISUS ROME, 
 
 33 
 
 and in his successor, the Pope of Rome, as Viceg-erent 
 of Christ upon earth, and with Indefectibility as his 
 cincture and InfalhbiHty as his crown, the answer is ; 
 That the passages in question must be taken, 1. In 
 connection with those above referred to, in which Our 
 Saviour commissions the Apostles severally and con- 
 jointly to convert the nations, and promises to be 
 with them always — not (as must be again and again 
 repeated) with one Apostle and one Apostolic Church 
 only — but with all, till the end of the world — and to 
 lead them into all truth, — 2. With the understanding 
 and practice of the Apostolic College before the close 
 of the canon of the New Testament, and as recorded 
 therein, — and, 3. With the understanding and practice 
 of the Primitive Church during QEcumenical times, 
 before the disruption of the East and West, All the^e 
 various dicta of Our Saviour, and the testimony of 
 Scripture and the Primitive Church to their bearing 
 and intei'pretation, must be taken together. And no 
 interpretation will be found satisfactory which does 
 not fully answer to the requirement of the supreme 
 test already established, based upon the existence and 
 coequal claims of the two worlds of Law and Liberty. 
 
 1. To recognise and hold fast every revelation of 
 God in Scripture, however apparently contradictory, 
 and to abstain from picking and chusing between them 
 (the especial root and characteristic of error, schism, 
 and heresy), is the first and fundamental principle of 
 dogmatic criticism. The dicta of Our Lord cited on 
 behalf of St. Peter singly, and of the Apostles col- 
 lectively, by those who support their contending claims, 
 must be equally true ; and when it is difficult for us to 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 ENGLAND VEESUS ROME. 
 
 Letter IT. 
 
 reconcile tliem, the solution is to be sought for in the 
 judgment given upon them, directly or indirectly, by 
 those who were fully aware of Our Lord's meaning 
 at the time, and by the entire OEcumenical Church, 
 acting upon that judgment, afterwards. 
 
 In this manner, the edification of the Church upon 
 the rock, -neTpa, as in the words addressed by God 
 Our Saviour to St. Peter, must be understood coequally 
 in the sense in which Grod the Holy Ghost spoke by St. 
 Paul, when he wrote of the Church as " built upon the 
 foundation of the Apostles and Prophets" collectively, 
 " Jesus Christ himself being the head corner-stone," 
 Eph. ii. 20; and by St. John, when he describes the 
 twelve gates of the New Jerusalem — " and in them 
 the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb," i. e. all 
 equal in dignity.* 
 
 In like manner, the power of the keys, to bind and to 
 loose on earth and in heaven, promised at first to St. 
 Peter, was shortly afterwards extended by Our Saviour 
 himself, in the same words and without limitation, to 
 all the Apostles ; and it was so understood in the 
 primitive Church. To represent the keys as two only, 
 however suitable to the requirements of art, is treason 
 to truth. The keys are (more correctly) twelve, one 
 for every Apostolic gate of the New Jerusalem, 
 
 Neither therefore of the preceding passages applies 
 to St. Peter exclusively of the other Apostles, — on the 
 
 * That the rock, TreVpa, either implied Our Lord himself, or the 
 faith confessed by Peter, was the common opinion of the early 
 Fathers ; and it was not till long afterwards that the passage 
 was interpreted as implying the foundation of the Church upon 
 St. Peter personally. 
 
Letteu II. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS HOMK. 
 
 35 
 
 contrary, the Church was founded on the twelve pillars 
 of the Apostolic College, Christ being (as stated) the 
 chief corner-stone ; and the keys were given to all 
 the Apostles — pass-keys to all the gates of the divine 
 edifice, St, Peter being merely the first to whom the 
 Lord addressed the dicta in question, — a distinction 
 which might have been sufficient (did the evidence 
 warrant it) to indicate a primacy in place and vote, 
 but of honour only, certainly not authority. 
 
 The " Precavi pro te," addressed to Peter — the com- 
 mission to " strengthen " his brethren — and to " feed " 
 Our Saviour's " sheep," were, on the other hand, per- 
 sonal communications, in anticipation of the Apostle's 
 fall, of his recovery, of his stedfastness in the faith 
 afterwards, and of his true, although joint, pastorship 
 of the flock ; but nowise justify, even taken by them- 
 selves, and much less when taken with the other words 
 of Christ and the subsequent testimony of Scripture, 
 the pretension of supreme authority laid claim to by 
 Rome on his behalf, and on that of his successors. 
 Asia might just as well have claimed centrality and 
 authority for the Church of St. John on the score of 
 Our Saviour's dying committal of his Mother, the 
 Blessed Virgin, the type of the Church according to 
 early allegory, to the special guardianship of the 
 Beloved Disciple, — " Behold thy mother ! " " Woman, 
 behold thy son ! " 
 
 2. Subsequently to Our Lord's Ascension, it is evident 
 from every page of the early chapters of the Acts of the 
 Apostles that St. Peter held a very prominent position 
 among his brethren, partly, perhaps, owing to his 
 personal character, partly to his representing the elder 
 
 D 2 
 
36 
 
 ENGLAND rEBSVS ROME. 
 
 Lettek II. 
 
 although not more than co-equal World of Law in 
 the Christian economy — partly too, doubtless, to the 
 distinction of Our Lord's address to him above alluded 
 to ; but, on the other hand, St. Paul, the representative 
 of the later-developed but co-equal World of Liberty — 
 he who was specially called and aggregated to the elder 
 Apostles as the Prophets were called and aggregated 
 to the Priesthood of the earlier Dispensation — repre- 
 sents himself, speaking by the Holy Ghost, in vindi- 
 cating his office, as "not a whit behind the very 
 chiefest Apostles," "in nothing . . behind the very chief- 
 est Apostles, though I be nothing," — thus claiming, by 
 Divine authority, absolute equality with St. Peter in 
 the Apostolic College and Christian world. It is thus 
 that the mosaics of the early ages represent St. Peter 
 and St. Paul, as the Apostles respectively of the Cir- 
 cumcision, or Law, and of the Uncircumcision or 
 Liberty, to the right and left of the central figure of 
 Christ on the triumphal arches of the ancient basilicas 
 of Christendom. 
 
 That St. Peter, prominent as he was as a spokesman 
 and leader, enjoyed no autocratic supremacy in the 
 Apostolic College is clear from the minute account 
 given in the Acts of the Apostles of the first Apostolic 
 council, held at Jerusalem. On the Roman Catholic 
 hypothesis it must be presumed that he would have 
 presided on that occasion, and would have delivered 
 his judgment (as it were) ex cathedra, which judgment 
 would have been infallible as proceeding from the Vicar 
 of Christ, the other Apostles sitting merely as his 
 assessors, or rather as secretaries to register his decrees. 
 The reverse however obtained in every particular. St. 
 
Letter II. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 37 
 
 James presided, not St. Peter. It is true that, " when 
 there had been much dispute," St. Peter gave his 
 opinion with his usual clearness and precision, and 
 this opinion determined the court; but it was St. 
 James who at the end wound up the debate and 
 proposed what he calls "my sentence," or conclusion, 
 to which "the Apostles, the elders, with the whole 
 Cliurch" assented, and wrote letters accordingly, declar- 
 ing the judgment which appeared, as they say, "good 
 unto us, assembled with one accord, and good to the 
 Holy Grhost "—without any the slightest reference to 
 or admission (positive or constructive) of St. Peter's 
 presumed Headship, Vicariate, Primacy, and Infalli- 
 bility. In like manner, when St. Paul and his com- 
 l)anions visited Jerusalem shortly afterwards, we read, 
 *' the day following Paul went in with us unto James, 
 and all the elders were present" — who declared to them 
 the judgment that the Church had come to in the 
 recent controversy. And when, fourteen years after- 
 wards, St. Paul went up again to Jerusalem, he was 
 received there by "James, Cephas, and John, who 
 seemed to be pillars," St. James being mentioned first, 
 and each being represented as equally a pillar of the 
 faith. It has been suggested that the precedency 
 assigned to St. James in all these passages was due to 
 his being Bishop of Jerusalem ; but this would hardly 
 have invested him with presidentship over a Council 
 consisting of all the Apostles, or of the whole Christian 
 Cliurch in embryo, if St. Peter had held the Vicariate 
 attributed to him ; nor would the decision have in such 
 case, on the Roman-Catholic hypothesis, been announced 
 in the name of the Apostles, elders, and Church col- 
 
38 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS HOME. 
 
 Letter IL 
 
 lectively, but of St. Peter. The facts are hardly 
 even compatible with St. Peter's having held the 
 primacy, first rank, or prior vote in the Apostolic 
 College, which would imply nothing that Catholic 
 Christendom need take exception to. The real truth, 
 ascertainable from the comparison of the Scripture 
 narrative with the testimony of St. Clement of Alex- 
 andria and of the 28th Canon of the (Ecumenical 
 Council of Chalcedon, would seem to be, 1. That the 
 See of the Holy City, Jerusalem, was recognised as the 
 seat of honour, or primacy, at the foundation of the 
 Church ; and that that place and primacy " of honour " 
 (strictly so limited, and not of supremacy) was assigned 
 to St. James — it may be conjectured, as Our Lord's 
 brother — and not either to St, Peter or St. John, 
 although each might have asserted a claim to it ; 
 whereas they abstained from such contention, and 
 elected St. James, — but, 2. That afterwards, when 
 Jerusalem had fallen and the see sank into obscurity, 
 the primacy or precedency was conferred upon Eome 
 — not (as affirmed) by the institution of Christ, but 
 by the award of the Oecumenical Episcopate ; not upon 
 the Pope as the representative of St. Peter personally, 
 but as the bishop of the Imperial City, the capital of 
 the Eoman Empire, — not a vestige of superiority being 
 thus conferred upon him beyond the simple rank of 
 first Patriarch, as the Patriarch of the New Rome, Con- 
 stantinople, was in after times appointed the second, 
 in the Christian world. 
 
 The conflict of opinion between St. Peter and St. 
 Paul at Antioch, which followed shortly after the last 
 visit of St. Paul to Jerusalem, when St. Paul " with- 
 
Letteu 11. 
 
 ENGLAND VEllSm HOME. 
 
 89 
 
 stood him " (St. Petei ) " to the face, because he was to 
 be blamed," and remonstrated with him "before them 
 all" because he, Barnabas, and certain Jew converts 
 "walked not uprightly according to the truth of the 
 gospel," has an important bearing upon the question 
 here ; for had St. Peter been Vicar of Christ and Head 
 of the Church, and (in whatsoever way limited) endowed 
 with Infallibility, he, and not St. Paul, must have been 
 in the right on this great occasion, involving, as it did, 
 the entire question of Christian Liberty versus Jewish 
 Bondage, and which St. Peter had in the first instance, 
 acting on his private judgment, decided according to his 
 peculiar and reactionary instinct, as the Apostle of the 
 Circumcision, in favour of Law against Liberty. But 
 then, and ever since, the Christian Church, in which 
 alone resides Infallibility, supported and supports St. 
 Paul's protest. And that this judgment of the Church 
 and implied censure was just, is acknowledged by St. 
 Peter himself in his Second Epistle, written shortly 
 before his death, where he witnesses without reserve 
 and with (so far as the Scripture is human) his wonted 
 magnanimity, to thg wisdom of his "beloved brother 
 Paul " as shewn in all his epistles " — including that 
 to the Galatians, in which his own demerit is recorded. 
 
 This evidence from Scripture is of primary value, 
 and supplies a test by which all subsequent claims fall 
 to be tried and adjudged upon. 
 
 3. Lastly, acknowledging to the fullest extent the 
 occasional and collateral expressions of a peculiar defer- 
 ence for St. Peter's representative at Rome which 
 rapidly grew up in the primitive ages, and especially in 
 Western Europe, the broad fact remains that questions 
 
40 
 
 ENGLAND VEESUS ROME. 
 
 Letter II. 
 
 of doctrine were determined (as already shewn) 
 throughout the entire Oecumenical period by reference 
 — not to the judgment or the infallibility of the Bishops 
 or Popes of Eome, St. Peter's see, but to the judgment 
 and infallibility of the Apostolic, Catholic, and (Ecu- 
 menical Church, composed of all the Apostolic Churches, 
 meeting by their representatives in Universal Council, 
 testifying to the Apostolic tradition handed down in 
 each separate Episcopate — the Church, thus composed, 
 judging and determining, under invocation and guid- 
 ance of the Holy Spirit, on each point submitted to Her, 
 and on repeated occasions suspending or overruling the 
 decisions of the Popes, although pronounced with 
 the full weight of their see and backed by excommuni- 
 cation, during the intervals between Conciliary action. 
 This per se is decisive in the matter. On the hypothesis 
 of Eome there could have been no Apostolicity, no 
 Catholicity, no (Ecumenicity, — St, Peter, and not Our 
 Saviour and the Apostolic College, would have been 
 all in all. But such was not the case ; and therefore it 
 must be concluded that the words of Our Lord addressed 
 to St. Peter, whatever they implied, conferred — as by 
 the testimony of Our Lord (in addressing the same 
 charge to others), of the Church at Jerusalem, of St. 
 Paul, of St, Peter himself, of the Council of Chalcedon, 
 and of the (Ecumenical Church of the first eight cen- 
 turies — no such Headship, Vicariate, Supremacy, and 
 Infallibility as is claimed on behalf of St. Peter and his 
 successors at Rome. 
 
 Upon both these counts therefore, to wit, L That 
 the Headship and Infallibility of Rome is (as has been 
 
Letter H. 
 
 ENGLAND VEBSUS ROME. 
 
 41 
 
 shewn) a novelty, unknown to and negatived by the 
 teaching and practice of the Apostolic, Catholic, and 
 (Ecumenical Church ; and II., That our Saviour's 
 words, in his commission to St. Peter, read in their 
 proper context with the remainder of Holy Scripture 
 and with the testimony of the Church, conferred no such 
 exclusive privilege as is contended for on St. Peter or 
 his representatives — the objections on behalf of Rome 
 to the jireceding demonstration are untenable ; and, on 
 the contrary, the demonstration in question, namely, 
 that, by the crucial test of impartial representation of 
 the two Worlds of Law and Liberty, the Church of 
 England represents and the Church of Rome does not 
 represent, so far, per excellentiam, the Apostolic, Catholic, 
 and Oecumenical Church, and that we are bound there- 
 fore to recognise the Church of England as to ourselves 
 the Ark of Salvation — is amply vindicated. 
 
 VII. The question, as thus far discussed, has been 
 between the two Churches of England and Rome, as if 
 perfection, complete and absolute, was represented by 
 either one or the other of them. But it would be a 
 most narrow view to consider the Chureh of England, 
 or any other orthodox Church, as more than a branch 
 of the Church Universal, or as engrossing the praise 
 due to the Church, the Body of Christ, as a whole — 
 even although the same vital sap which permeates the 
 entire tree may flow through its veins. The Latin 
 Church, in a word, is imperfect without the Greek, 
 and the Glreek without the Latin ; and neither can 
 compass " all truth " except conjointly and in Christ.* 
 
 * I use the word ' Greek ' here, as frequently elaewherc, for 
 
42 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 Letter II. 
 
 The Latin or Western Church, and necessarily the 
 Anglican Church as its descendant, has an inherent 
 tendency towards the Catholic, Imaginative, or Material- 
 istic side of Truth, in excess of the principle of Order ; 
 while the Eastern or Grreek Church has a corresponding 
 tendency towards the Protestant, Reasoning, or Ideal- 
 istic side, in excess of the principle of Liberty. The 
 presence and consensus of each is therefore needed to 
 counteract the extravagance of the other ; the testimony 
 of each is required towards the recognition and expres- 
 sion of consummate Truth. But either, by itself, is 
 nothing ; and we come thus, at last, to the conclusion 
 with which we began, — it is only in the Perfect Man, 
 Jesus Christ — in Him, the Second Adam, in whose 
 consummate being the Roman and the Greek, the 
 Hindoo and the Medo-Persian, the Hamite, the Shemite, 
 and the Japhetan (or Aryan) lived and live, with all 
 their varied powers and balanced tendencies, in the 
 harmony of primeval rectitude — it is only in Christ, the 
 centre and exemplar of Unity and Truth, and in the 
 (Ecumenical Church which is His Body — (St. Peter and 
 his brother Apostles, and the Churches they represent, 
 being all equally, in the words of Pope Gregory, 
 Christ's members) — that the two Worlds of Order and 
 Liberty, the two Churches of the West and East, meet 
 in reconciliation. The profoundest humility is therefore 
 called for in vindicating the claims of any individual 
 Church to such Catholicity. And yet that claim must 
 be made, and with confidence, on behalf of the Church 
 
 convenience, without impeacliment of the claims uf other Oriental 
 Churches to Catholicity. 
 
T, UTTER II. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 43 
 
 of England. The question ' Where is the Church, the 
 Ark of Salvation?' should be answered therefore on 
 behalf of England, in this broadest point of view, in 
 accordance with the premises stated at the 'Commence- 
 ment of this Letter — although (I repeat) with humility 
 commensurate with confidence — as follows : — 
 
 The Church, Apostolic, (.''atholic, and OEcuraenical, 
 Headed by Christ, based impartially on St. 
 Peter and St. Paul, Moses and Elias, and the 
 two Worlds of Law and Liberty — Infallible 
 in judgment, but wielding the sword of the 
 Spirit only, and not of the flesh — is to be 
 found wherever the Church of England and 
 other Cathohc and Apostolic churches, which 
 hold as the primitive and (Ecumenical Church 
 held, are gathered together, — each such 
 Church, including the Anglican, sharing in 
 the qualification and character; whereas the 
 Church of Rome, through her unwarranted 
 usurpation of Headship over the flock of 
 Christ, and the novelties in doctrine which 
 she has prescribed to Christendom in the 
 exercise of her Private Judgment and on the 
 assumption of Infallibility — thus lapsing into 
 schism — has compromised so far, by the tests 
 above applied, her claim to the character of 
 (Ecumenicity. 
 
 Thus, my dear friend, have I answered (may I hope to 
 your satisfaction ?) the question you put to me, ' Where 
 is the Ark of Salvation ? In the Church of Rome or 
 that of England ? ' I have vindicated the claim of the 
 
44 
 
 ENGLAND VEBSUS ROME. 
 
 Letteu II. 
 
 latter to be a pure branch of the CathoHc and Apostohc 
 Church, and that may suffice us. "We may say to her, 
 when tempted to forsake her banner, as Simon Peter 
 said to Christ, " To whom shall we go ? Thou hast 
 the words of eternal life ! " But, while the Church of 
 England is content with her own, and is willing and 
 anxious to live in charity with all other churches, Rome 
 included, it is impossible, in the face of the calm 
 assumption of superiority on the part of Rome and fhe 
 aggressive character of her policy, not to point out that 
 the genuine representation of St. Peter — whatever of 
 honour or privilege that representation may be con- 
 tended to convey, is only now to be found in that 
 Church, descended from St. Peter, M'hich fulfils the 
 tests and conditions of Apostolical, Catholic, and 
 Oecumenical truth and unity, as above laid down. 
 Tried by these tests, the Church of Rome stands forth 
 confessedly non- (Ecumenical. Tried by these tests, the 
 Church of England stands forth, now, the legitimate 
 and only genuine representative of the undiluted 
 doctrine and status held by the Catholic Bishops of 
 Rome and by St. Peter — the succession devolving upon 
 her, although the younger branch, in virtue of her 
 purity of Apostolic descent and (Ecumenical doctrine, 
 through laches or lapse on the part of her elder sisters, 
 according to the precedent established in the case of 
 Esau and Reuben, and of the Jews generally, and in 
 analogy with the political rule in Constitutional Grovern- 
 ment — the sceptre passing from the senior and delin- 
 quent to the nearest junior branch capable of taking up 
 the duty. The Gallican Church would have had a 
 prior claim to this representation, not only through 
 
Lf.ttru II. 
 
 ENGLAND VERSUS ROME. 
 
 45 
 
 antiquity but tlirougli her noble testimony to the con- 
 stitutional authority of Councils — but for her inconsis- 
 tent self - identification with, or at least, allowance 
 hitherto, of the non-OEcumenical novelties of Romanism. 
 The time may come when Gaul and Rome will qualify 
 themselves by Oecumenical reform for resumption of 
 their pristine dignity ; ^nd England would then — how 
 gladly ! abdicate her compulsory throne, — but till then, 
 the keys of St. Peter — whatever his share in that 
 common heritage — are vested malgre elle by legitimate 
 descent and devolution in the Church of England. 
 Descended proximately from St. Augustine of Canter- 
 bury, and planted by Pope Gregory the Great in 
 England — One, through her Apostolical succession and 
 lier Reformation with all other Catholic Churches 
 in CEcumenical concord — and arrogating no personal 
 supremacy or infallibility, England is heir, during 
 the interregnum, to every legitimate dignity and pre- 
 eminence conferred upon St. Peter, whether by Our 
 Saviour's words above considered, or by the concession 
 of the early Fathers to the See of Rome ; while, in 
 vindication of that dignity, she displays within her 
 microcosm both Worlds of Law and Liberty (the grand 
 criterion) in impartial activity, and thus approximates 
 as near as any other branch of the Church Apostolic, 
 Catholic, and Oecumenical can do, to the theory of 
 Truth, the practice of Wisdom, and the image of God. 
 
 I remain, my dear , 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 Lindsay. 
 
46 FU'l'ILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Lettek III. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 ON THE FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION 
 WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 My DEAR , 
 
 I HAVE read the ' Eirenicon ' of Dr. Pusej, and 
 one or two of the rephes to it, — he was personally 
 invited to the controversy, and entered into it against 
 his wish and will, possibly against his better judgment ; 
 but of that I know nothing. His argument is very 
 able, and the spirit that animates the book is worthy 
 of all commendation — but, notwithstanding all this, my 
 opinion has been from the first the same, that such 
 overtures of explanation and conciliation, however well 
 intended, are useless, and that harm results from them 
 rather than good. Rome cannot change her ancient 
 attitude ; and there will always be a danger to ourselves 
 in such approximations, — for many who expect great 
 results from them and are disappointed are tempted on 
 such occasions to quit the Church under the influence 
 which the uncompromising frown of Rome exercises on 
 certain minds ; and those especially who have long been 
 wavering, and looking as it were for a miracle to con- 
 firm their faith, take the step not unfrequently with a 
 precipitance which they regret afterwards when too 
 late. I feel strongly persuaded that this temptation 
 
Letter III. 
 
 WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 47 
 
 will assail some of your friends before long, and I will 
 therefore, with your permission, lay before you a few 
 considerations which I think you might urge upon 
 them with advantage in such emergency. 
 
 In the first place I would say that in my opinion a 
 mistake lies at the root of all attempts at conciliating 
 Rome on our part. If Catholicity is to he the test of the 
 true Church, it is the business of Rome to approximate to 
 England, not of England to draw nigh to Rome. For 
 what are the facts, as testified by history ? What is 
 the principle of Cathohcity, as witnessed to by the 
 ancient Fathers and the practice of the primitive 
 Church ? Catholicity consists in the confession of the 
 entire faith, neither more nor less, as held and taught 
 by the successors of the Apostles and accepted by the 
 Church at large, throughout the world, during the 
 period when the Church of East and "West was Un- 
 divided and One — the faith in question, rooted in Scrip- 
 ture, being set forth authoritatively in the Nicene Creed 
 and in the decisions of the six (Ecumenical or Universal 
 Councils, — the seventh and last having contributed 
 nothing to doctrine. Beyond the Nicene Creed and 
 the decisions of these Oecumenical Councils the Catholic 
 Church (as distinguished from the Roman) knows 
 nothing of dogma. The theory of development has no 
 warrant from Catholic times ; it is a thing of yesterday, 
 a weed from philosophising and rationalistic Alex- 
 andria, a mere form of Private Judgment, secret and 
 insidious, — broadly to be distinguished from the 
 Apostolic Tradition appealed to in the primitive ages, 
 as handed down everywhere, openly taught, without 
 reservation, and known of all men, the 'consensus 
 
48 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Lkttkr HI. 
 
 omnium,' within the Catholic and Apostolic pale. 
 Since the (Ecumenical Councils have ceased to meet, 
 nothing can be added to, nothing can be subtracted 
 from the consummate whole of Catholic doctrine, except 
 in breach of Catholicity on the part of those who thus 
 tamper with the faith. And the Almighty, mercifully, 
 left mankind without excuse in this great matter. 
 When by those Six Councils the faith had been de- 
 fined, and the respective outlets towards Idealism and 
 Materialism had been shut off, in the repudiation of 
 Arianism and Nestorianism in the one direction, and 
 of Sabellianism and Monophysitism in the other, God, 
 in His providence, giving play to the passions of men 
 for the good of man, separated the East from the West, 
 and thus rendered the declaration and imposition of new 
 doctrine by any one branch of the Church as binding 
 upon the whole the token and confession ipso facto of 
 schism. From that time forward the two great families 
 of the Catholic Church have flourished or decayed 
 apart from each other, in unsocial but not altogether 
 unfriendly independence, — the Eastern Church leaning, 
 as a whole, towards the Orthodox or Protestant, the 
 Western towards the Catholic view of truth — the two 
 together making up in their antagonistic but essential 
 harmony that " One Catholick and Apostolick Church " 
 which we confess in the Nicene Creed. In the course 
 of ages, various ' pious opinions,' entertained even by 
 many before the great ecclesiastical separation, grew 
 up into prominence, and overshadowed the (Ecumenical 
 or orthodox faith — to the injury, doubtless, of primitive 
 simplicity, but not inferring schism or heresy so long 
 as they were not declared to be imperative on universal 
 
Letteu irr. WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 40 
 
 belief as truth, and even, ou the contrary, having their 
 special use as serving to educate thought and exercise 
 the theological mind in controversy — an excellent thing 
 so long as it is conducted with p"rayer, in charity, and 
 towards a better common understanding of consummate 
 truth. But when the Church of Rome, a mere province 
 or branch, however important, of the Catholic Church, 
 assuming a power which belongs only to that august 
 body in its integrity, and which would have been in- 
 dignantly repudiated in primitive times, declared, of 
 her own authority, certain of these 'pious opinions' 
 to be articles of faith essential to salvation, and im- 
 posed the curse of excommunication and exclusion from 
 heaven as the penalty of disbelief, she then, and 
 thereby, incurred, and till she retracts that undue as- 
 sumption, still incurs, the sin of schism, and forfeiture 
 thus far of her Catholicity ; and the representation of 
 the Latin or Western Church necessarily devolved (at 
 least in share, if not latterly in entirety) on the Church 
 of England as the one branch, springing from the Latin 
 or Western stem, which has consistently held and sted- 
 fastly maintains the Catholic doctrine, pure and simple, 
 according to the (Ecumenical standard, and in the 
 Apostolical succession, uncompromised by such for- 
 feiture, — the Church of England being now what 
 she was before the Eeformation, the old Biblicist or 
 Dogmatic Church of the middle ages, descended in 
 direct line, through St. Augustine of Canterbury, the 
 envoy of Gregory the G-reat, from St. Peter, and thus, 
 in default of the elder line, the legitimate representa- 
 tive of that Apostle. And that the position of the 
 Church of Rome, as represented by the Papacy, is now 
 
 E 
 
50 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letter III. 
 
 distinctly that of dissent and schism from the Apos- 
 tob'cal and Oecumenical standard as maintained by the 
 Church of England, is clear from the facts that she 
 repudiates the Catholic doctrine of the superior authority 
 of General Councils as vindicated by the Councils of 
 Constance and Basle in the fifteenth century, and that 
 she has elevated the various ' pious opinions ' above 
 alluded to to the dignity of dogmas of the faith, of her 
 own sole authority, by decrees of the Council of Trent 
 and the Creed of Pope Pius IV. in the sixteenth, and 
 by a recent ordinance of Pius IX. in the present century 
 — thereby, in each such instance, usurping Oecumenical 
 functions in disregard of the coequal rights of the 
 Eastern Church — stamping herself thus as a dissenting 
 and schismatic communion — and launching herself on 
 that career of defection and decay in the direction 
 of Materialism against which provision was made in 
 the germ by the Oecumenical Councils, before the 
 separation of the East and West, in the cases of 
 Sabellianism and Monophysitism, as already shewn. 
 Romanism, in a word, to sum up this review, repre- 
 sents, in conjunction with Calvinism, the Materialistic 
 or Imaginative, as Lutheranism represents the Idealistic 
 or Reasoning excess, beyond the pale of Catholicity, 
 since the schism of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, 
 — England, the while, as rejDresentative of the Latin and 
 the (Ecumenical Church, maintaining the old Catholic 
 mean and doctrine inviolate, unafi"ected by that schism, 
 and looking regretfully at her dissident sisters from the 
 central and constitutional rock of faith on which she 
 has stood, essentially unchanged, from the beginning. 
 It is for this cause, for these reasons, historical and 
 
Letter III. WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 51 
 
 dogmatic, that I deprecate attempt.? at explanation and 
 conciliation on the part of the Church of England, 
 which are certain to be misunderstood and misconstrued 
 by Rome as the apology of weakness and the fawning 
 of self-distrust. It is, in a word, for Eome, as a dis- 
 senting communion, to make advances to England as 
 the heir and representative of the Catholic and Oecu- 
 menical Church in the West, if conciliation is to be 
 resorted to ; and not vice versa* 
 
 Such are the facts that history witnesses to in this 
 great matter — facts which Rome will of course deny or 
 place her own interpretation upon, but facts neverthe- 
 less which stand out apparent to the impartial eye of 
 lay criticism, and which, it is needless to say, our Angli- 
 can controversialists have to a great extent lost sight of. 
 It is high time that these facts should be distinctly vin- 
 dicated on behalf of the Church of England. The laity 
 have indeed great reason to be dissatisfied with the 
 spectacle that their Church has exhibited of late years in 
 the arena of polemical discussion. There have of course 
 been noble exceptions, but too many of those who 
 undertook to fight her battles have not been loyal and 
 true — I do not say through wilful dereliction of duty, 
 
 * I do not, in saying all this, forget the noble Gallican Church, 
 or that of Utrecht or Holland, both of which have stedfastly pro- 
 tested against Eoman innovations and Papal supremacy on the basis 
 of the principles atfirmed by the Council of Constance. But both 
 these churches recognise much as of obligation which exceeds the 
 limit of Catholicity, and disqualifies them for the representation of 
 St. Peter. Nor do they recognise the Eastern Church as of co-equal 
 authority with the Western. They have only, however, to carry 
 out their principles to their legitimate issue to become constitii- 
 tional Catholics, of the type of St. Vincent of Lerins and of the 
 Church of England. 
 
 E 2 
 
52 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT T^ECONCILIATION Letter III. 
 
 far from it, but mainly through the fascination that the 
 Roman Church exercises on the minds of imaginative 
 and cultured men — they have not, I say, been loyal and 
 true to their own standard in presence of the enemy. 
 Many causes have contributed to this, and to the results 
 that flowed from it. Untaught in philosophy, and apt 
 to scorn her sober, corrective, and suggestive teachings 
 — dwellers in Western Europe, partial observers, accus- 
 tomed to think of the Roman Church, filling the 
 eye as she does, as all in all, and oblivious or un- 
 aware of the aspect and proportion in which she 
 appears to Oriental eyes — domiciled almost exclusively 
 in England, and ignorant of the practical working of 
 Romanism in foreign countries, where it is not under 
 the restraint of a watchful observance, as here — forgetful 
 of the limits and conditions of the principle of Catho- 
 licity — forgetting too the fact that Protestantism, legiti- 
 mate Protestantism, is but the expression of a truth 
 and the voice of a principle which underlies and ani- 
 mates one half of human nature — engaged face to face 
 with Rome in England, and familiar with her as a present 
 and living existence, rather than in her abstract and 
 historical aspect — overawed by the assumptions and the 
 historic grandeur of the Papacy ; accepting her asser- 
 tion that she is the Catholic Church as an unquestion- 
 able fact ; solicitous only to prove that England is 
 Catholic likewise ; taking it for granted that Rome will 
 make no concessions ; and intent, by cutting their 
 Anglican coat to Roman pattern, to bring the Church 
 into such a form that Rome might take her by the hand, 
 — and, to sum up all, overlooking that first maxim 
 of judgment in theology (no less than in philosophy 
 
Lktter hi. 
 
 WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 53 
 
 and politics), viz., to stand at the source of the river, 
 and look down the stream instead of up, — thus un- 
 philosophical, thus uninformed, thus at fault — putting 
 the cart before the horse in everything, and pre- 
 disposed for submission — our Anglican swordsmen 
 have, over and over again, allowed Rome to stand 
 on her own ground and prescribe her own weapons 
 in the duel of controversy, and, with the sun in their 
 eyes and a lurking self-distrust in their own hearts, 
 have yielded advantage after advantage to their cool 
 and wary antagonist, till, with few exceptions, they 
 have, one after the other, surrendered at discretion 
 and left our communion, — the saintly Keble, the revered 
 Pusey, and the veteran Henry of Exeter (representative 
 of an elder and sterner generation), mourning over their 
 fall. It is a melancholy review ; but never be it for- 
 gotten, there is no cause for surprise or discouragement 
 at all this, on the part of the survivors. It could not 
 have ended otherwise when every step in assumption, 
 every sqlf-assertion, every claim, every postulate of 
 Rome was either allowed or apologised for by these half- 
 hearted champions, the victims (in realit}') of an ignor- 
 ance and prejudice which clogged their free agency like 
 the fabled mists of magic in the legends of the middle 
 ages. Under this delusion, this glamour of the senses, 
 this suspension of the reason, and perversion of the 
 imagination, they accepted the quarrel as between Rome 
 and England in the nineteenth century ; whereas the 
 true debate is between Rome of the nineteenth century, 
 fully developed and represented by the Papacy, and 
 Rome of the primitive ages, Catholic, Apostolic, and 
 (Ecumenical, as represented by England. The very 
 
54 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT KECONCILIATIOX Letter III. 
 
 name of ' Catholic,' so venerable and imposing, as exclu- 
 sively arrogated by Rome, and held forth like a talisman 
 against them, paralysed their judgment, no less than 
 their detestation of the name and idea of Protestantism, 
 through its identification, in its abuse, with continental 
 rationalism. Blinded by this latter prejudice, they over- 
 looked the fact that the principle of Catholicity, as held 
 before the division of the East and West, and as now 
 represented by the Church of England, was balanced 
 throughout in the CEcumenical Church by that of 
 Orthodoxy, Apostolicity, or what we now call Protes- 
 tantism ; and that the very formula ' Quod ubique, 
 quod semper, quod ab omnibus,' by which the Church 
 appealed, century after century, to the genuine and 
 unbroken tradition of the Apostles against local and 
 jiartial corruptions of the faith, was first laid down by 
 the spokesman of the Protestant or Conservative party 
 (as I might call it) in the Catholic Church of Gaul, St. 
 Vincent de Lerins, in the fifth century. It is impossible, 
 in fact, to say whether the early or Oecumenical Church 
 was more Catholic or Orthodox, the two elements were 
 so nearly balanced. Had our friends argued thus, — 
 The Catholic Church must necessarily be Protestant, 
 contending against novelties — Rome, as introducing and 
 enforcing novelties, violates Catholicity — England, as 
 Protestant against Roman novelties, defends Catho- 
 licity ; had such been their argument (and it is the 
 simple truth in the matter), they would have distin- 
 guished clearly in their own minds and vindicated to 
 others the difference which exists between the Protes- 
 tantism which is the glory of the uncorrupted Catholic 
 Church and of England, and the ultra- or pseudo-Pro- 
 
Letter III. 
 
 WITH THK CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 55 
 
 testantism, the birth of unchecked Private Judgment, of 
 which Romanism, Lutheranism, and Calvinism are the 
 incarnation and the victims. And lastly, had they been 
 thus preoccupied, they never would have mistaken, 
 as they have done again and again, the immobility 
 and impassive vis inerticB of Rome — as manifested, for 
 example, just now once more in the rejection of Dr. 
 Pusey's ' Eirenicon ' — for a sign of strength instead of 
 what it really is, a sign of weakness. They would have 
 seen — what we may hope our young Anglicans may 
 now perceive and profit by the observation — that there 
 is nothing to astonish us in such rejection ; for, as 
 I said at the commencement of this letter, Rome could 
 not have acted otherwise, either now or at any other 
 period since the Reformation. Staggering under the 
 weight of un-Catholic dogmas which she has heaped 
 upon her head, she can only maintain an erect position 
 by preserving an uncompromising rigidity, speciously 
 disguised by a claim to infallibility— respecting which 
 it is enough to say that no individual branch of the 
 Church of Christ, but only the entire Church of East 
 and West, assembled in Oecumenical Council, can assert 
 for itself such a privilege. Response to friendly over- 
 tures on our part is thus for Rome impracticable ; and 
 recent offers have in reality, so far, had a tendency to 
 place us in a false position, as if England and Rome 
 stood on an equal footing, and could possibly meet 
 as friends on common ground under present circum- 
 stances. 
 
 What, then, I would suggest as practical and general 
 lessons, to be drawn from the preceding considerations 
 for future guidance, may be summed up as follows : — 
 
FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letter III. 
 
 1. No reconciliation is possible with Rome till she 
 
 abjures anti-Catholic error. With the Latin 
 Church, as represented by the Council of Con- 
 stance, peace might perhaps have been possible ; 
 but the Gallican Church is crushed ; the- candle 
 of the ancient Catholic Church of Holland is 
 waxing dim ; and we have now, practically, 
 to deal with Rome, as represented exclusively 
 by the Papacy and Ultramontanism. With 
 Rome, then, till she ceases to be Rome, there 
 can be no hope of reunion ; we ca7i give up 
 nothing ; she will give up nothing ; there is no 
 common ground for us to meet upon ; and all 
 attempts at explanation or approximation on 
 our side are time, labour, and temper thrown 
 away : — 
 
 2. English Churchmen ought never to enter into 
 
 controversy, if controversy must be entered 
 upon, with converts from their own or from 
 the Protestant communions, but only with men 
 born and bred in the Roman Catholic Church. 
 Converts alternately exaggerate and depreciate 
 points of difference, and never truly represent 
 the communions to which they attach themselves, 
 and with which, in arguing with them, we think 
 we have to do. But even ' Roman-Catholics ' is 
 almost too broad a term. It is only, in fact, 
 with Grallicans or their Grerman congeners, the 
 Constitutionalists (as it were) within the Roman 
 Church, that we can meet in intelligent and 
 honest debate. Dr. Pusey's appeals to the 
 great names of the Gallican Church fall on 
 
Lettkr III. 
 
 WITH THE CHUECH OF ROME. 
 
 57 
 
 hostile ears when addressed to Ultramontanes 
 and Romanists. This will receive illustration 
 from something I have yet to say before closing 
 this letter : — Lastly, 
 
 3. No controversy at all should be entered into 
 unless on the common and primitive ground 
 of appeal to Orthodox Catholicity, limited 
 strictly by the rule " Quod ubique," &c., and 
 under the conditions, positive and negative, 
 sanctioned by the practice of the early and 
 (Ecumenical Church. 
 
 I believe, in fine, that reunion is more likely to be 
 promoted by an entire abstinence from controversy 
 between Anglican and Romanist than by a continual 
 stirring up of angry waters. Time and circumstance, 
 thought and prayer, under God's blessing, may do 
 nmch towards restoring Rome to her ancient place at 
 the head of the Latin Church. Let her come back, on 
 the terms of Oecumenical Catholicity ; and we, of the 
 Church of England, will be the first to concede to her 
 her original precedence. 
 
 I have said all this in no spirit of hostility to the 
 Roman communion, but in justice to our own ; and I 
 trust that these considerations may be of service to 
 such of your parishioners as may be tempted to loose 
 their hold of the Catholic and Apostolic Church at 
 the present moment. It is long before we learn that 
 all that glitters is not gold, and that lofty pretensions 
 may rest on very sandy foundations. It is not numbers, 
 or lofty titles, or gorgeous ceremonial that betoken the 
 true Church Militant, but the unbroken preservation 
 
58 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letter III. 
 
 of the fficumenical faith, botli in its positive and nega- 
 tive aspect. We have much to unlearn as EngHsh 
 Churchmen, and the first and most imperative lesson 
 of all is to get rid of the prejudice which invests Rome, 
 developed and gorgeous Rome, with the prestige of 
 antiquity, and England, as purified from un-Catholic 
 corruptions in the sixteenth century, with the discredit 
 of novelty, — the reverse being the historic truth, viz. 
 that England — Catholic in her Apostolic doctrine and 
 succession, and Protestant in her rejection of anti- 
 Catholic error — is in reality the ancient, and Rome, 
 in so far as she differs from England, the modern 
 Church — by the test of OEcumenicity. It will be long 
 before we escape from the fascination which the very 
 name of Rome infers ; but till we do so, till we boldly 
 assert our true position, and place the onxis prohatidi 
 on the right shoulders, our trumpets must always give 
 an uncertain sound, preparing for the battle. The 
 truth is, we live so close to Rome, and have so much 
 in common with her, and value her so highly, and so 
 deservedly, for the Catholic truths to which she wit- 
 nesses amid all her errors, that we cannot, to use an 
 old saying, " see the wood for trees " when habitually 
 face to face with her ; and it is only by a severe and 
 sustained effort that we can stand sufiSciently back 
 to take note of and appreciate the historical and dog- 
 matic facts which attach to her, and apply to those 
 facts the principles of judgment which determine her 
 position in regard to Catholicity — and our own. The 
 more important therefore is it that we should make 
 this effort. 
 
Letteu III. 
 
 WITH THE CUUKCH OF ROME. 
 
 59 
 
 I have assumed in what I have above written, that 
 it is not a mere passion for show and ceremony that 
 induces the yearning that many English Churchmen 
 (usually young men) feel towards the Eoman Church, 
 but an honest desire for unity, and for shelter, through 
 reconciliation, if possible, within what they look upon 
 as the parent fold of Christendom. But I may assume, 
 and it is a fact that will hardly be denied, that their 
 strong sympathy is with Rome, and that they are 
 anxious to appropriate as much as possible of Roman 
 ceremonial and of the belief on which that ceremonial 
 is founded as they think they can reconcile with the 
 teaching of the Church of England. The question 
 therefore lies between the claims of fact and the claims 
 of sentiment ; and it is difficult to think that English- 
 men, if once convinced that facts are unfavourable to 
 their partial views, can hesitate between truth and 
 error, or leave the Church of their fathers, the living 
 and pure representative of the Catholic Church in the 
 West, for the de-Catholicised and schismatic Church 
 (for such it is) of Romanised Italy. Still, there are 
 minds so constituted, with such warm affections and 
 (if the suggestion may be forgiven) with powers of 
 judgment and self-command so enfeebled by the con- 
 stant habit of subordinating reason to imagination, and 
 leanitig unduly upon authority, that after every crisis 
 of church controversy some of them pass naturally over 
 to Rome, in weariness and disgust, in search of the 
 quiet and peace of mind which they believe must needs 
 subsist under the shadow of the Vatican. We grieve 
 for such defaulters, but less on the Church's account 
 than their own ; for they seldom, I fear, find the 
 
60 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letteu IIL 
 
 promised land realise their expectations. Rome, dis- 
 guise it as she may, has no genuine love for her 
 Anglican converts. She accepts and tolerates, but 
 rarely trusts them, and for this simple reason, — they 
 either attach themselves (as I have above observed) 
 with peculiar fervour to those doctrines which mark 
 the divergence of the Papacy from the rest of Christen- 
 dom, and which Rome herself is in her inmost heart 
 distrustful and afraid of — exaggerating and putting 
 them foremost, with the zeal of neophytes, in the van 
 of controversy, and thus concentrating the attention of 
 the world on the weak points of Tridentine theology ; 
 or, in passing over to Rome, they retain too much of 
 the leaven of Anglicanism, and thus associate them- 
 selves, unconsciously, in the Roman point of view, with 
 those Roman-Catholics, born in the purple, the children 
 rather of the Latin Church than of the Papacy, and 
 Gallicans in heart, if not in name, who form the elite 
 of the Roman- communion, dwelling, as they do, in 
 thought and life upon those great Catholic principles 
 which Rome holds in common with other churches, 
 rather than on the controverted topics of Roman 
 centrality and Papal infallibility. Hence the disap- 
 pointment which is generally experienced by those 
 who quit the English for the Roman altar ; they either 
 fall below, or soar above, the mark at which they 
 would be practically useful to their new and astute 
 masters, while the simpler-minded class of Gallicans 
 distrust them on other grounds, — no wonder then that 
 they think the Church of their adoption cold and un- 
 generous; but it is simply that their own minds are 
 fevered to a degree which incapacitates them from 
 
Letteii 111. WITil THE CIIITIICII OF ROME. CI 
 
 seeing tilings as tliey actually are.* Considerations 
 like these will never prevent pure-minded and honest 
 converts from pressing into vs^hat they deem to be the 
 kingdom of heaven ; but it is well that they should 
 know what they have to expect there, before crossing 
 the Jordan. So much for the ])resent hour — the time 
 will come when we shall see things more clearly, all 
 of us, of whatever communion, in the mirror of truth, 
 when the rust of time and the clouds of misapprehen- 
 sion have been wiped away from its heavenly surface, 
 as well as the tears from the eyes of those who at 
 present gaze, with passionate yearning, into its misty 
 depths. Under this conviction and with such expecta- 
 tion, it should be our principle, if controversy there 
 must be, to meet our antagonists, not as enemies in the 
 bitterness of personal or sectarian hate, but as friends 
 in a gallant tournament before the Court of Heaven 
 and the Judge of the combat ; at whose solemn banquet 
 we shall all of us who have done our devoir sit down at 
 eve, like the Salii of ancient Rome or the Aesir of our 
 ancestral Scandinavia, in amity and peace, to drink the 
 ' new wine ' of eternal happiness with our Redeemer 
 and the assembled Church of humanity in the kingdom 
 of the Father. In which faith, in which hope, and in 
 which charity may God preserve our friends, yourself 
 and me— submitting, as I do, these observations under a 
 deep sense of their importance at the present moment. 
 Believe me most sincerely 
 
 Your friend and servant, 
 
 Lindsay. 
 
 * All this was written, it will be easily divined, some years ago. 1869. 
 
62 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letter IIL 
 
 NOTE 
 
 UPON THE PRECEDING LETTEE. 
 
 It has appeared to one of my friends, whose judgment carries 
 great weight with me, that I have taken in the preceding Letter 
 too high and haughty a line in liolding (as he understands it) 
 that the Church of England is absolutely perfect, and in calling 
 upon Eome to submit to her unconditionally on that ground. I 
 should be sorry to be misunderstood in so gi-ave a matter ; but 
 I have thought it best to retain what I have written unchanged, 
 even at some risk of misconstruction. In days like these, when, 
 under the regis of British toleration, tlie Cliurch of Rome — the 
 Papacy, I should rather say, as distinguished from the Gallican 
 and Latin Church — assumes an attitude daily more imperious 
 and aggressive in England, and when the very audacity of her 
 presumption foscinates and allures so many away from tlie sim- 
 ple faith of Christ, it will not do to be mealy-mouthed, or to veil 
 strong conviction under a tissue of hollow compliment. Nor, 
 knowing Rome and Jesuitism historically, do I affect not to 
 dread their growing influence in England. There is another 
 reason too which necessitates plain-speaking. Individuals of 
 pre-eminent sanctity, better than their creed (though sometimes 
 its victims), continually vindicate the claim of the Church of 
 Rome to the presence within her of the ' Spirit of God ; ' and 
 this has a direct tendency to lead us off the scent, and ob- 
 scure the point at issue between the two churches. For that 
 Holy presence is not the test in the question between Eome 
 and England. The question is that of orthodoxy, and the 
 test of orthodoxy is Catholicity. Examples of grace, equally 
 marked although in the very nature of things less publicly con- 
 spicuous, continually manifest themselves in the Lutheran and 
 Calvinistic churches, to say nothing of our own. But unless 
 such examples of holiness be accepted as proofs of the Divine 
 institution and mission of the churches of Calvin and Luther, 
 and a fortiori those of Greece and England, Rome cannot lay 
 stress on the sanctity of individuals within her communion as 
 
Letter III. 
 
 WITH THE CHURCH OF ROME. 
 
 G3 
 
 proof of spiritual pre-eminence ; and yet this argument, utterly 
 fallacious and self-destructive as it is, is constantly and success- 
 fully directed against our weaker and wavering brethren. The 
 question, I repeat, between Eome and England is that of ortho- 
 doxy, and the test of orthodoxy is Catholicity, as limited by the 
 Bible and by Primitive Tradition — Ecumenical Catholicity. 
 And the importance of orthodoxy consists in this, that, apart 
 from orthodoxy, we have no security against lapses into the 
 grossest forms of error. Jerusalem has erred, Alexandria has 
 erred, Antioch has erred, Rome has erred — so say our Articles ; * 
 and if entire churches have erred through the abuse of Private 
 Judgment, who sliall presume to say that he is in no risk of 
 making similar shipwreck ? For these reasons I have not 
 altered what I have written in the preceding Letter, feeling 
 assured that those who accept the principle the argument pro- 
 ceeds upon will not think my words stronger than the occasion 
 calls for. But here, in this Note or Memorandum, I can afford 
 to say, in order to preclude any possibility of being misunder- 
 stood, that, in the first place, I do not think the Church of 
 England (in practice at least) perfect ; nor do I call upon Rome 
 to submit to her at all. My argument is, — -if there is to be 
 approximation, it must be on the part of modern and Romanised 
 Rome towards England, not as England, but as the representa- 
 tive of ancient and Catholic Rome in Europe, as representative, 
 in a word, of that Catholicity which the Vatican professes to 
 represent and in practice repudiates. No one disputes the 
 leadership of St. Peter in the West, — the question is, which of 
 the churches descended from him maintains his doctrine ? Let 
 Eome reform herself in absolute submission to that primitive 
 orthodoxy and discipline to which she continually appeals, and, 
 as I have already said, England will be the first to recognise her 
 precedence. As for the Church of England, she makes, as such, 
 no claim to submission on the part of Rome or any other com- 
 
 * The statement is only true of those Churches in their dominant 
 heretical developments ; the Orthodox, Catholic, or legitimate lines 
 never became extinct, and, although grievously attenuated, still 
 survive, the true representatives of the original Churches, in each 
 instance. But the framers of the Articles were not aware of this. 
 
64 FUTILITY OF ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION Letter III. 
 
 munion ; as such, slie has no pretensions to infallibility ; short- 
 comings must attach to her practice as in all things human ; her 
 discipline may, for example, be lax; her watchdogs may not bark; 
 she may have some reason to complain of state-repression, — evil- 
 spoken of she musi be, or she would lack the prime characteristic 
 of the Militant Church; but what of all this? These are merely 
 the breakers which assail the labouring ship, the groans of her 
 cordage battling with the storm ; but the sliip is that in which 
 Christ sleeps, and the storm will, in His own good time, subside 
 at His bidding, — all such shortcomings in discipline and practice 
 are but motes in the sun's beam, to disappear ultimately in the 
 blaze of perfect day. It only needs the clear eye of reason 
 and the grasp of faith to read our Church aright, and realise 
 her essence and her destiny : — In herself weak, fallible, im- 
 perfect, failing, sulfering alike from the halt-trust of friends 
 and the whole-jealousy of foes, and strong only in her weakness 
 and her dependence on Christ, she is nevertheless sound in 
 doctrine and therefore safe, Catliolic in creed and therefore 
 pure ; she is CEcumenical, and so far, and no further, infallible ; 
 she is, in one word, as (Ecumenical, Divine, — and, if it behoves 
 her children to rally round lier and fearlessly maintain her 
 creed and her prerogative, it trebly concerns those, whether 
 Eomanist or Protestant, who have lapsed from CEcumenicity, 
 to flee for refuge — not to her, not to Canterbury, although 
 St. Peter's most legitimate representative sits in St. Austin's 
 chair — but to the banner of the Apostles, of Orthodoxy, and 
 of the CEcumenical Church, handed down from St. Peter, 
 which England now alone uplifts — like one of the disparted 
 arms of the sacred AoKuva of Sparta — in Western Christendom. 
 It is not in pride, then, but in humility, although trumpet- 
 tongued, that she speaks alike to Rome, to Augsburg, and to 
 Geneva, summoning them to her side, to take part— and for 
 Rome to take tlie leading part, if for such slie qualifies herself — 
 in the war with Antichrist. She could not speak as she does 
 if speaking on her own behalf, as the mere Church of England. 
 The test of humility lies in a childlike and absolute submission 
 of Private to CEcumenical Judgment and Authority. Tried by 
 this test, which among the churches of the West is humble, 
 which Catholic — Augsburg, Geneva, Eome — or England? 
 
Letter IV. ON THE COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 65 
 
 LETTEK IV. 
 
 ON THE (SO-CALLED) ECUMENICAL COUNCIL 
 OF 1869-70. 
 
 My dear , 
 
 The pact of a Greneral Council of tlie Latin 
 (or Roman-Catholic) Church being sinnmoned after the 
 lapse of three hnndred years, and by a Pope, to meet at 
 the Yatican, is one well calculated to arouse attention 
 in England, The very title ' CEcumenical ' attributed 
 to it, and imperfectly understood, influences many in 
 this country to deference and awe. Much has been 
 said lately on the expediency of accepting the invitation 
 which it was assumed without warrant had been issued 
 to the Protestant communions to be present — and, it 
 was taken for granted, to be heard — at St. Peter's. 
 Many even of the Church of England have thought 
 that it would be cowardly and faithless to neglect such 
 an opportunity of vindicating our Reformed position 
 and pei4iaps (for such a dream may have crossed their 
 fancy) converting the Pope himself, the excellent and 
 well-meaning pontiff who presides at the Vatican, to 
 their own views of theology. I am happy to think 
 that recent communications have dispelled these visions 
 and saved us from any possible step that could be 
 construed into an apparent recognition by the Church 
 
 P 
 
66 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letteb IV. 
 
 of England of a Council convoked under such false 
 colours. 
 
 If there is one subject upon which Englishmen in 
 general — ^many clerks as well as most laymen — may be 
 said to be indifferent, if not ignorant, it is that of the 
 authority and standing of our own Anglican and 
 Reformed Church in relation to that of Rome and to 
 the other religious communions of Christendom. The 
 effect of this ignorance and indiflference — part and 
 parcel of our proverbial insular self-satisfaction — is to 
 put us at a disadvantage when great questions such 
 as those brought before Europe by Pope Pius at the 
 present moment are under discussion. The false posi- 
 tion it betrays us into is rendered obvious by the very 
 fact of the readiness of some, high in station in the 
 Anglican Church, to place themselves side by side with 
 the Protestant communions in their expostulation with 
 Rome on the present occasion, — as if the Anglican 
 Church were embarked in the same boat with those 
 communions — as if it were possible for her to vindicate 
 her status and prior claims to adhesion except by appeal 
 to an age and an authority which those communions 
 (founding, like Rome herself, upon Private Judgment 
 in their construction of the faith) are incapacitated 
 by the very conditions of their dissent from resorting 
 to. The great question of (Ecumenicity, what (Ecu- 
 menicity really consists in and implies— the dogmatic 
 position of the Oriental Churches as orthodox or dissen- 
 tient from (Ecumenicity — the relation of Gallican and 
 Ultramontane to the Latin Church — the import, limita- 
 tion, and value of the rule ' Quod ubique,' &c. — the 
 relation of the present succession of Popes to the 
 
Letter IV. OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 67 
 
 Council of Constance, and the great question of Infal- 
 libility as between the Pope and General Councils — the 
 essential distinction between General and Oecumenical 
 Councils, which our Anglican Reformers, educated in 
 the Church of Rome and predisposed by her traditional 
 language to confuse them, did not always (at least in 
 words) fully appreciate — the history of the origin and 
 transmission of such doctrines as those, for example, of 
 the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of the 
 Blessed Virgin, and of Papal Infallibility, in and from 
 mediaeval times — the relation of the great subjects of 
 dispute between the Dogmatists^ or Biblicists, and the 
 Scholastics of the middle ages, and, again, between the 
 Realists, Nominalists, and Conceptual ists among the 
 Scholastics, to our modern schools of thought ^ — the 
 mutual interdependency of Philosophy and Theology as 
 broadly recognised previously to the Reformation — the 
 relative rights of Law and Liberty in their application 
 to dogma — all these, and a score of other questions of 
 equal magnitude —to say nothing of those relations 
 between the Civil and Ecclesiastical power which are 
 under such able discussion just now in Germany — these 
 are subjects which we entirely overlook in England, 
 while, in fact, they underlie, and their due appreciation 
 is the only key to an understanding of the matters of 
 dispute between Romanists and ourselves in the present 
 day. The summons of Christendom to an ' OEcumenical 
 Council ' by Pius IX. — the ancient words employed in 
 a new sense to express an idea and enforce a procedure 
 unknown to Apostolic, Primitive, and Ecumenical 
 times — opens up the very roots of difference between 
 Lambeth and the Vatican, Somewhat I have said on 
 
 F 2 
 
68 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 all these matters in ray ' Scepticism and the Church of 
 England '—how imperfectly no one can be readier than 
 myself to acknowledge. But the time and the occasion 
 seem to call at present for, 1. A reply to the question 
 ' What is (Ecumenicity ? ' 2. A statement, what are 
 the nature, order, object, and sanction of an (Ecu- 
 menical Council? 3. An inquiry whether the Council 
 about to be held at Rome has any pretensions to be 
 styled an ' (Ecumenical Council ; ' 4, Some conjectures 
 as to the results for good and evil likely to be effected 
 by it ; and, 5. An estimate of what an (Ecumenical 
 Council, really such and legitimately called together, 
 might do, under God's blessing, towards restoration of 
 intercommunion between the Apostolic Churches, and, 
 if it so please Grod, the ultimate reunion of Christendom. 
 A few words on each of these subjects shall now be 
 submitted to you — with modesty, I trust, and yet with 
 confidence arising from strong conviction of the truth 
 of what I shall say. 
 
 1. What is (Ecumenicity? 
 In my Letter entitled ' England versm Rome ' I have 
 spoken of the Church as ' Apostolic, Catholic, Orthodox, 
 and — (Ecumenical.' The application of the term ' (Ecu- 
 menical ' to the Church itself, and the word ' (Ecumen- 
 icity ' as expressing a principle, are both, it must be 
 confessed, new. But ' (Ecumenical ' as applied to the 
 Great Councils is ancient, and the idea thus con- 
 veyed and which the word ' (Ecumenicity ' expresses is 
 of the very highest importance. In order to estimate 
 this importance we must take into account the true sig- 
 nificance of the words ' Apostolic,' ' Catholic,' ' Orthodox,' 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THK VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 69 
 
 and ' CEcumenica],' and the result may perhaps lead us to 
 recognise in this last term the most comprehensive and 
 at the same time the most precise of all. We shall then 
 be prepared to define ' (Ecumenicity,' and to deal with 
 the ensuing question, ' What are the sanctions of an 
 Ecumenical Council ?' Unfortunately, in our mundane 
 imperfection, we cannot do without words and names — 
 I say unfortunately, because words and names, imper- 
 fectly understood and used without mutual concert as 
 to their precise meaning, or deliberately adopted or 
 imputed with the intention of bettering our own posi- 
 tion or prejudicing that of others — are, under such 
 conditions, the most confusing of all things, and darken 
 knowledge instead of throwing light upon truth. To 
 most people in England 'Catholic' implies Roman- 
 Catholic, ' Orthodox ' conveys an unpleasant feeling of 
 coldness and aridity, 'Apostolic' sounds venerable but 
 vague, and ' Protestant ' alone supplies the popular ideal 
 of a sound, sturdy support of Private Judgment in the 
 interpretation of Scripture against ' Catholicism.' Rome, 
 in her wisdom, has taken ample opportunity of the 
 advantage ceded by us in ignoring our prerogative of 
 Catholicity ; and thus one-half of England occupies 
 part of every Sunday in professing their allegiance to 
 the ' Holy Catholic Church ' within the house of God, 
 and spends the remainder of the week in denouncing 
 the ' Catholics.' Such are human inconsistencies. The 
 effect of this is of course to obscure the force of argu- 
 ments founded on ' Catholicity ' as addressed to English- 
 men, the term having been narrowed and twisted from 
 its original meaning. The words ' OEcumenical ' and 
 ' CEcumenicity ' may be said (fortunately) to convey to 
 
70 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 the generality as yet no meaning at all ; and I would 
 fain hope therefore that it may not be too late to pre- 
 serve them from perversion and vindicate their appro- 
 priateness henceforward as expressing the characteristic 
 marks of the Church of England. 
 
 It may be suggested here that the name of ' Chris- 
 tian,' in itself so beautiful and ample, might supersede 
 all others ; and would to God it might do so ! But my 
 argument is addressed to those who, like yourself, recog- 
 nise what is called in the West ' Catholicity ' and in the 
 East ' Orthodoxy ' as the standard of their Christianity. 
 The word ' Christian ' cannot be so used as to exclude 
 those who are " not of this fold " — who dissent from 
 both the Catholic and Orthodox communions, yet of 
 whom, as earnestly loving their God and Saviour, and 
 witnessing to their faith by a holy life, we must believe 
 that they have their share in the blessings which are 
 more expressly covenanted to those who rank under 
 the disciplined army of the Church Militant. 
 
 First, then, let me observe, that while the two 
 Western Creeds (or rather Confessions), that attributed 
 to the Apostles, and that known as the Athanasian, 
 term the Church the ' Holy Catholic Church,' and its 
 faith ' the Catholic Faith,' or ' Religion,' only, the 
 Nicene Creed, the common standard of the East and 
 West, applies to her the double title of ' Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church.' ' Apostolic ' thus imphes something 
 not identical with ' Catholic ; ' and as the particle h-al 
 implies, in its original signification, separation or dis- 
 tinction, the title 'Apostolic' may be expected either to 
 enhance that of 'Catholic' by expansion, or to qualify 
 it by limitation ; while it is also possible that the apposi- 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 71 
 
 tion may imply perfect equality or balance between the 
 constituent qualities thus attributed. 
 
 * Catholic,' as applied to the Church, implies etyrao- 
 logically that which is Universal in a moral or general 
 sense, unqualified, boundless, or without limitation. It 
 is thus the expression of the principle of Order, ruling 
 by Law, but liable to degenerate, if unchecked by its 
 correlative antithesis, into Despotism, Tyranny, and 
 mere Force, moral and physical. 
 
 'Apostolic,' on the other hand, implies that which 
 is strictly limited by the conditions under which the 
 Apostles founded the Church — definite doctrine, definite 
 privileges, definite obligation. It is the expression of 
 the principle of Liberty, ruling by Free Will under 
 the constraint of Love, but liable to degenerate, if 
 unchecked by the counter element of Catholicity, into 
 Licence, Anarchy, and absolute Independence of all 
 control. 
 
 It was to be expected It priori that the definition of 
 the Church in the Nicene Creed would include the 
 length and breadth of her constitution within the scope 
 of its expression ; and the double title ' Catholic and 
 Apostolic,' thus critically analysed, supports this con- 
 clusion. 
 
 ' Orthodox,' again, implies etymologically the Church 
 that holds the faith right, in the sense of unerring 
 straightforwardness, without deflection either to the 
 right hand or the left, or that stands aloft like a pillar 
 raised by a wise master-builder, meted by line and 
 square (the Kavwv of the Greeks), and grounded on 
 the truth. The word, like 'Apostolic,' expresses con- 
 tinence within the bounds of the Evangelic faith, but 
 
72 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letteb IV. 
 
 with an intimation of resistance in reserve against any 
 attempt on the part of Order to abridge that Liberty 
 wherewith Christ hath made us free. 
 
 The title ' CathoHc ' is thus the peculiar expression of 
 Order, or Law ; that of 'Apostolic ' is the utterance of 
 Liberty, or Free Will, in both cases in the abstract ; 
 while ' Orthodox ' implies Liberty likewise, but on the 
 defensive. 
 
 While the title ' Catholic ' has been practically mono- 
 polised by the Western Church, that of ' Orthodox ' 
 has been the almost exclusive title of the Eastern — 
 although the Latins claim to be Orthodox and the 
 Greeks to be Catholic likewise, in subordination to their 
 distinctive appellations ; and both profess themselves 
 'Apostolic,' — Rome, in addition, assuming to herself the 
 character of the 'Apostolic See ' 'per excellentiam — but 
 by usurpation, inasmuch as all the Sees were originally 
 Apostolic, and are styled so even by the early popes 
 themselves, equal in dignity, although not in prece- 
 dence ; and Constantinople is thus no less the Apostolic 
 See than Rome. 
 
 The title ' Protestant,' so familiar to us in England, 
 has no such venerable authority, and yet the idea existed 
 from the first in the Church, and is, in fact, the same 
 substantially as that expressed by ' Orthodox.' It im- 
 phes, in its original medieval sense, a man who testifies 
 in vindication of justice against the attempts of another 
 to abridge the liberty or deprive him of the rights 
 secured to him by charter, bond, or law. St. Paul was 
 thus a ' Protestant ' when he withstood St. Peter's 
 Judaising conformity at Antiocli. Tertullian was a 
 ' Protestant ' when fighting in Africa against the 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 73 
 
 intrusion into Christianity by the virtuous Marcion of 
 the two independent, coequal, and internecine principles 
 of Zoroaster, doctrines closely akin to the dark and 
 mystic terrorism of the Gnostics. Polycrates of Ephesus 
 was a ' Protestant ' when he opposed the attempts of 
 Pope Victor to abridge the liberties of the Churches of 
 Asia Minor in the matter of the time of keeping Easter. 
 The Church of Gaul, once more, was ' Protestant ' when 
 opposing, by Yincent de Lerins, the formula ' Quod 
 ubique,' &c. against the attacks of those heretics of the 
 fifth century who would have subverted the chartered 
 liberties of the Church and subjected mankind to 
 another Gospel than that of Christ. During the early 
 ages the Catholic Church in the West was emphatically 
 ' Protestant,' or to use the Greek term, ' Orthodox,' 
 struggling for Order and Antiquity against the 
 novelties of heresy, — and even more uniformly and 
 steadily so, upon the whole, than the Greek Church in 
 the East. But times changed — Greece, after the oscil- 
 lations incidental to a more philosophical genius than 
 that of Rome, settled herself in orthodoxy ; while Rome, 
 firm on the broad foundations, and true to the Latin 
 instinct of Law and Order, but open to mystic influences 
 from Oriental sources, allowed errors and abuses to creep 
 into her faith, and attempted to enforce those errors on 
 mankind. When the nations of the Continent rose under 
 Zwingli, Luther, and Calvin to disavow those errors, 
 disown that tyranny, and emancipate the Gospel from 
 the yoke of the Law thus cruelly reimposed upon her 
 by the Western representatives of St. Peter, their ' pro- 
 test ' was the same, in principle, as that of St. Vincent 
 in Gaul, St. Polycrates at Ephesus, Tertullian at Car- 
 
74 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 thage, and St. Paul at Antioch ; but they stood further 
 removed from the ' origines ' of the Church ; and the 
 creeds and dogmatic sanctions of the true faith, as held by 
 Eome, stood before them so interlaced with and obscured 
 by the supergrowth of error, that the whole appeared 
 to them as one enormous growth of fungus and cor- 
 ruption ; and comparing it with the simplicity of Scrip- 
 ture, they decided that a ' tabula rasa ' of the entire 
 fabric could alone satisfy the demands of the Gospel 
 and of Truth. Thus, confounding good with evil, right 
 with wrong, looking solely to the word of God, un- 
 taught to discriminate between true and spurious tradi- 
 tion, and testing everything by their parti cidar judgment 
 of Scripture, they loosed their hold of the Catholic 
 Church, and became — I can no longer say ' Orthodox,' 
 but — ' Protestants,' — the blame of this dissent resting, 
 in a predominant measure, with the Church which 
 drove them to such extremities. The title ' Protestant,' 
 therefore, although so nearly identical originally in 
 principle and practice with that of ' Orthodox,' has 
 acquired so distinct a character, through the extrava- 
 gance of dissent in modern times, that it must stand 
 apart as exclusively applicable to those communions 
 which seceded from Catholicity in the sixteenth century. 
 I have often been embarrassed by the necessity of using 
 the term ' Protestant ' to express that constitutional 
 party in the Catholic and Anglican Church which, as 
 above shewn, vindicates its position by appealing ex- 
 clusively to the documentary charters of Christianity. 
 ' Orthodox ' would perhaps have been the more appro- 
 priate epithet. 
 
 We may thus perceive, broadly — to resume what 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 75 
 
 has been written thus far — that, while the title 
 ' Catholic,' applied to the Church, is the peculiar ex- 
 pression of Order, or Law, and that of 'Apostolic ' is 
 the utterance of Liberty, or Free Will^ both in the 
 abstract — ' Orthodox ' implying- Liberty likewise, but 
 Liberty on the defensive — and while the conjunctive 
 but correlative terms ' Catholic and Apostolic ' are used 
 in the great Symbol of the faith, the Nicene Creed, to 
 denote the character of the Church as the embodiment 
 and reconciliation of those primal laws upon which 
 Christianity is founded, still, a comprehensive term is 
 needed, in the interest of precision, other than that 
 of * Christian,' to cover and embrace them both, and 
 express the fullness of their constitutional unity. It 
 remains to be seen whether such a term cannot be 
 found — and whether that term be not ' fficumenical.' 
 
 The title ' Oecumenical,' as found in ancient writers, 
 is applied exclusively to the great Councils of the 
 Apostolic Churches scattered over the world, and to 
 the two Patriarchs who presided over the Imperial 
 cities of Rome and Constantinople, the capitals of the 
 Roman Empire — both of whom (but not the other 
 three Patriarchs) receive from the Greek Emperors 
 and writers the style of ' CEcumenical Patriarch,' 
 although the Popes never themselves adopted it, taking 
 the counter style of the ' Apostolic See,' ' Vicars of 
 Peter ' and ' of Christ/ and * Servi servorum Dei.' 
 The root of the word is ot/co?, a house, or, derivatively, 
 a family, the unit of society, whether civil or ecclesias- 
 tical. " The Church which is in thy house " is the 
 primal expression of the Christian sodality ; and, 
 although the house-father was not the Christian priest. 
 
76 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Lkttkr IV. 
 
 as in the primeval world and among some modern 
 races before their conversion to Christianity, (and the 
 Montanists and others fell into grievous error through 
 maintaining the proposition,) still the otvo? was, and is, 
 the root of all. Developed into oiKovfxkvrj, the word 
 rises to the significance of the inhabited world, the 
 length and breadth of humanity, as settled under Law, 
 whether in a lower or higher state of civilisation. The 
 word is sometimes used more narrowly for the Roman 
 Empire, although this hardly amounts to a restriction, 
 inasmuch as the dominion of the Caesars and the civi- 
 lised world (as known to the ancients) were nearly 
 coextensive ; and it was in this sense — of the coexten- 
 siveness of Rome and Christendom (as expressed in the 
 familiar ' Urbs et Orbis') that the title of ' (Ecumenical 
 Patriarch ' was, as above mentioned, applied to the 
 bishops who ruled spiritually, as officers of the Empire, 
 over the elder and the younger Rome. But the term 
 ' CEcumenical,' as used in reference, not to individual 
 prelates, but to the Church, had a wider meaning than 
 could be compassed by the empire of the Caesars. Like 
 Catholic, it implied Universal, but with a difference ; 
 that is to say, not morally, not in genere, not in the 
 abstract, not unlimitedly — but limitedly, constitution- 
 ally, politically, in the strictest use of this latter word, 
 and in a Christian sense too, as embracing and denoting 
 the entire brotherhood of that society whose country 
 and home is the ttoXj?, the " city," or kingdom, " of 
 God," and whose life and activity is strictly ruled by 
 the conditions of its Apostolic constitution. We must 
 not be led away from the truth by such expressions as 
 that of St. Paul, " We have no abiding city " liere 
 
Lettek IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 77 
 
 below, — the qualification in the phrase is the imper- 
 manence of the citizen, not the instability of the city ; 
 and, although the kingdom be, as Our Saviour says, 
 " not of this world," it is in reference to Himself that 
 he says so ; the kingdom is on earth, in and around 
 us, although he rules it from heaven. But a city and a 
 kingdom imply rule and governance under appointed 
 chiefs acting by fixed laws, tending to the restraint 
 alike of despotism and anarchy, and the development 
 of Liberty within the domain of Order ; and thus the 
 word ' Oecumenical ' implies all that can be understood 
 of a society which, spread over the earth, under many 
 regents, includes East and West, North and South, 
 within the compass of its brotherhood of charity, and 
 lifts up a common sacrifice of obedience and love to its 
 Lord in heaven. 
 
 We may now, therefore, answer the question ' What 
 is fficumenicity ? ' by defining it as ' the quality or 
 condition of the Universal Church as governed upon 
 earth, in doctrine and discipline, by the laws dic- 
 tated by the Holy Ghost, throughout the Apostolic 
 Churches : ' — ' Oecumenical,' in like manner, as applied 
 to the faith, will designate 'that faith which is con- 
 fessed (neither more nor less) by the Universal Church 
 under the preceding conditions : ' — Applied to Councils, 
 ' Oecumenical ' signifies, in accepted theological lan- 
 guage, 'the assemblies of the Universal Church held 
 under the conditions by which the faith is ascertained 
 and the discipline of the Catholic community regulated 
 according to the Apostolic constitutions in such 
 matters:' — And, applied to the Church, ' QCcuraenical ' 
 would designate ' the Universal Church, Catholic at 
 
78 
 
 ON THR COUNCIL 
 
 Leti'ee TV. 
 
 once and Apostolic, or Orthodox, in doctrine and dis- 
 cipline, each quality or element completory of the 
 other towards the reconciliation of Order and Liberty 
 according to the Divine polity of the City of God.' 
 It is, in a word, in ' Ecumenicity ' that ' Catholic ' and 
 'Apostolic ' — and let ' Apostolic ' answer to ' Orthodox ' 
 or ' Protestant ' in this conclusion — find, and find only 
 there, their point of agreement, the common keystone 
 of their arch of strength. The idea, and name are 
 analogous to that of ' Constitutional ' which I have so 
 long advocated as, not a middle (properly speaking) 
 but an inclusive term for the two great intellectual 
 parties which divide our British Commonwealth. 
 
 You will not, I trust, think that, by admitting limi- 
 tation in this qualification of the Church as ' (Ecu- 
 menical,' I subordinate or undervalue the dignity which 
 would be found without bounds or limitation in the 
 term ' Catholic' The word ' (Ecumenical ' is the cor- 
 recter term as expressing the Church's precise character 
 as the 'Body of Christ,' — infinite, yet limited by the 
 strictest, although mysterious conditions of her being. 
 The moral of the whole is this, ' What God has thus 
 joined. Catholic and Apostolic, Orthodox, or (in its 
 original sense) Protestant, let not man put asunder.' 
 After all, the original name of ' Christian,' planted 
 at first as a germ at Antioch, will ultimately expand 
 into the perfect flower; and the Church Triumphant 
 — all those who at present, through ignorance, are 
 stragglers from the (Ecumenical army having been 
 gathered into the camp —will be wholly ' Christian ' 
 in heaven. 
 
 I proceed to shew how, and by what sanctions, the 
 
LlCTTKB ] V. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 79 
 
 CEcumenical faith was ascertained in the times of the 
 Undivided Church. 
 
 2. What is an (Ecumenical Council ? 
 
 The nature, order, object, and sanctions of an Ecu- 
 menical Council were described by me as follows some 
 years ago, at a time when I had no temptation to over- 
 state matters in the view of circumstances like the 
 present. I transcribe the passages therefore verbatim : — 
 
 " The fountain of the faith in the primitive and un- 
 divided Church during these six centuries was the Holy 
 Bible, consisting of tlie canonical Scriptures as posssessed, 
 transmitted, and uninterruptedly read in the Apostolic 
 Churches ; and the rule of interpretation, the test of 
 the faith, was the Tradition of antiquity, ubiquity, and 
 universality, uniform and unbroken, descending, not as 
 a secret or underground, but as an open-daylight river 
 or stream through the successors of the Apostles in their 
 respective churches, and ultimately derived from " the 
 mind of Christ," — all these churches, originally and 
 rightfully independent of each other, being collectively 
 One, under, and in, Him. Private, or individual Judg- 
 ment was held in abeyance to this supreme autho- 
 rity. When doubts arose upon any grave point of 
 vital orthodoxy, or when counter traditions, the Apos- 
 tolic and the heretical, came into collision so as to 
 require authoritative discrimination and settlement for 
 the guidance of the faithful (as in the case, for example, 
 of Sabellianism, Arianism, Nestorianism, and Euty- 
 chianism or Monophysitism), reference was made to the 
 common consent of the Apostolic Churches ; an Ecu- 
 menical or Universal Coimcil was convened — the 
 
80 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 Gospels were placed in the centre of the assembly — 
 the promises of Our Saviour, that He would be with the 
 Apostles always till the end of the world, and that 
 the Holy Grhost, the Comforter, to be sent by Him from 
 the Father, should lead them into all truth, were 
 appealed to — evidence was taken, and duly tested, as to 
 the fact of the Apostolic tradition as bearing upon the 
 point in controversy, and its conformity with Scrip- 
 ture — ^the concurrence of the thoughts of the holiest 
 and wisest fathers of the Church, Catholic and Pro- 
 testant, was applied to the discussion and resolution 
 of difficulties and the ascertainment of truth, always 
 under submission of private to general judgment, and 
 in confidence that this wrestling of Jacob with God 
 would bring its blessing — and the decision of the 
 Council, so held and thus guided, affirming that such 
 or such a doctrine was the true one, as having been 
 held by all, everywhere, and always in the Apostolic 
 Churches, or that such another was irreconcileable 
 with the Catholic testimony and with Scripture, was 
 accepted and (as it were) ratified by the Christian 
 world as infallible and decisive, as the very word of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, speaking by the Council. 
 Such is the simple and most unmystical — I had almost 
 said, the common-sense, but, certainly, the historical 
 view of that Catholicity to which the Church of England 
 and the Apostolic Church at large appeal as the rule 
 for the interpretation of Scripture, as the test of ortho- 
 doxy and heresy. 
 
 " The Articles of the Nicene Creed (with the excep- 
 tion of the clause in dispute between ourselves and the 
 Greek Church) and the special decisions of the post- 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 81 
 
 Niceno (Ecumenical Councils constitute theiefoi'e the 
 fundamental elements or foundation-stones of Christian 
 theology. Heresies and errors have ever been built 
 on isolated texts of Scripture, interpreted by Private 
 Judgment; but the articles of the Catholic and Apos- 
 tolic faith repose, each one of them, on the entire 
 breadth of the Bible and of human nature, and are 
 the majestic utterances through the lips of the Church 
 — not of fallible men (either singly or in successive 
 fleeting generations), but of that consummate and only 
 wise and ever living Mind, in Whom alone the anta- 
 gonistic elements of humanity repose in equal strength 
 and perfect constitutional harmony. That such is the 
 case is susceptible (moreover) of the most exact proof 
 from subsequent history and experience. Each indi- 
 vidual deviation from the straiglit and narrow way of 
 Catholic precision as defined by the Oecumenical Councils 
 has led men into errors of belief and practice fatal to 
 religion, piety, and morality, landing them either in 
 Materialistic atheism orRationalisticpantheism, except in 
 such cases where they stopped short of such conclusions — 
 maimed and halting indeed, but not utterly lost — in logi- 
 cal inconsistency. The ecclesiastical history of the middle 
 ages and of modern times is a running commentary on 
 this simple but pregnant fact. Innocent as the devia- 
 tions in question seem at the first glance to be, there is 
 scarcely one of them which has not led to the wildest ex- 
 cesses of fanaticism. No philosophy existing at the time of 
 the (Ecumenical Councils could have foreseen these con- 
 sequences, — human wisdom could not have sufficed, un- 
 assisted, to moor the bark of the Church in safety between 
 these reefs of liidden but growing peril, — in no other case 
 
 (J 
 
82 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Lettkb IV. 
 
 of human counsel has judgment been so amply warranted 
 by the event, have actions been so surely attended by 
 their results, has wisdom been so thoroughly justified of 
 all her children. The wisdom, therefore, that inspired 
 such actions, in utterance of such judgment, and in 
 foreclosure of si;ch results, must — it is the inevitable 
 conclusion — have been from heaven. It is only, more- 
 over, on the straight and narrow path marked out 
 by Catholicity that Christianity has actually advanced, 
 in progressive constitutional vigour, towards the high 
 places of thought, where Man meets with God in the 
 converse of eternity, — it is only in churches thus 
 Catliolic and Apostolic that Scepticism and Mysticism, 
 when they appear during the lulls of the great consti- 
 tutional antagonism which marks and chronicles their 
 progress, are at once pulled up, checked, and superseded 
 by the new and engrossing process of healthy struggle, 
 which speedily occupies the scene to the exclusion of 
 the lesser lights of the interregnum. 
 
 " When the canon of Scripture had been completely 
 ascertained, and the great questions of the faith, as 
 therein contained, had been defined, determined, and 
 bound up into the garland of dogmatic truth, of " Chris- 
 tian Verity," that, like a wreath of lilies, roses, trefoil, 
 ivy, and holly, binds the brow of" the Catholic Religion" 
 — after the right path had been indicated, and the 
 respective exits, towards Idealism and its excess, on the 
 one side, and Materialism and its excess, on the other, 
 (as represented in essence by Arianism and Nestor- 
 ianism, Sabellianism and Monophysitism,) had been 
 dogmatically barred off, leaving no further possibility of 
 speculative error for those content to be not wiser th-an 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 83 
 
 their Maker — after, that is to say, the fficumcnical 
 Councils had uttered their several voices, like the 
 trumpets in the Apocalypse — God saw fit, in His Pro- 
 vidence, to divide the East from the West, at first by 
 jealousies and misunderstandings, and subsequently by 
 formal rupture, and to shut up and conclude the faith of 
 Christianity, — rendering it as impossible for Christians " 
 — I should have added here, ' so long at least as the 
 breach continues ' — " to meet or agree in Ecumenical 
 Council for the declaration of further absolute doctrine 
 as for the Jews to count their genealogies and point to 
 a future Messiah after the advent of Our Saviour, the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, and the dispersion. The 
 canon of faith and cycle of primitive Church-history 
 were completed and sealed up in parallel manner in 
 either instance." 
 
 I have only to add to these observations a remark 
 which some words of mine, page 67 supra, may have 
 already suggested to you, upon the statement in the 
 21st of the Articles appended to the Anglican Prayer- 
 book that " General Councils . . may err, and some- 
 times have erred, even in things pertaining unto God." 
 The proposition is true in the sense in which our 
 Reformers used the word ' General ' — in view of the 
 co-equal weight assigned by their Roman antagonists 
 to the entire series of Councils beginning with that 
 of Nice and ending with that of Trent. It would be 
 false, on the other hand, if applied to the first Seven, 
 Great, or (Ecumenical Councils, from which the Nicene 
 Creed and the decisions of the third and later Councils 
 against the Nestorians, Monophysites, and Monothelites, 
 embodied in the 'Athanasian' Creed, proceeded. But 
 
 G 2 
 
8i 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 that the protest of the Reformers in the Article in 
 question contemplated the whole series of General 
 Councils as so qualified and set forth by Rome, cannot 
 be denied ; for any other interpretation would be at 
 variance with their acknowledgment of the authority 
 of the Church in matters of faith, coupled with their 
 acceptance of the three Creeds as thoroughly to 
 be believed, and with the official recognition of the 
 primitive Councils and of the " Creeds, Apostolic and 
 Catholic," by the State, under the protection of which 
 the Anglican Reformation was carried through. 
 
 3. lias the Council about to be held at Rome any ])rete7i- 
 sions to be styled an (Ecumenical Council? 
 
 To this question I must answer, None. It could only 
 be termed such in pure ignorance or perversion of the 
 historical significance of the name. 
 
 I need only glance at the fact that the projected 
 Council is convoked by the Pope, not (as it ought to 
 be) by an Emperor, or by the joint action of sovereigns 
 representing the Civil Power, which, as on former noted 
 occasions, should summon (if it so deem expedient) the 
 representatives of contending factions impartially, and 
 provide for freedom of discussion and judg-ment, to 
 say nothing of personal safety. A Council of Bishops 
 sworn by their consecration-oath to obedience to the 
 Pope, and summoned to Rome, the head-quarters of 
 the Inquisition, to register (as must be the presumed 
 intention) the Pope's decrees, or those at all events of 
 the ' Curia Romana,' is a very different thing from a 
 Council of independent prelates meeting for free dis- 
 cussion and judgment at a central and neutral point 
 
Lettku IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 85 
 
 where no undue constraint can be exercised over them 
 on the part of any one patriarch. But the objection 
 to conceding to tlie present Council the character of 
 * CEcumenical ' rests on a far more vital distinction : — 
 
 An Oecumenical Council implies the assemblage of 
 the representatives of the Apostles throughout the 
 world. The so-called CEcumenical Council summoned 
 to meet in December 1869 will be an assemblage of 
 the representatives or disciples of one Apostle only, 
 St. Peter. St. Paul, for example, whom the G-reeks 
 ranked before St. Peter, will practically have no voice 
 there. The Patriarch of Constantinople will not be 
 represented, — we have already seen how wisely and 
 with what dignity he has refused to recognise the un- 
 precedented summons. The orthodox Patriarchs of 
 Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem — the ' Despot ' 
 of Cyprus, (St. Barnabas's representative) — to name 
 no others — they too will be absent. Greek, Armenian, 
 Coptic, Syrian, and perchance Syro-Indian Bishops may 
 be present doubtless, personating the respective national 
 or provincial Churches, and thus giving the assembly 
 (to the unjjractised eye) the semblance of CEcumenicity ; 
 but the communions they represent will be, not the 
 ancient Churches which still exist in the East, but 
 bodies of Roman-Catholic dissenters from those Churches, 
 usurping their name — the fruit of the unscrupulous 
 proselytism by which Rome has eaten into the flanks (as 
 it were) of every independent Church with which she 
 has come in contact ; and no more identical or even 
 connected with the A postolic Churches as they appeared 
 at Nice and at the Six G-reat Councils afterwards than 
 the Roman-Catholics of England are with the ancient 
 
86 
 
 OX THE COUNCIL 
 
 Lettf.k IV. 
 
 Roman, Catholic, Reformed, and still Established Church 
 of Gregory the Great in this country, out of which their 
 ancestors were called by the then Pope's mandate several 
 years after the Reformation in the sixteenth century. 
 The flock of St. Peter, gathered from every part of 
 the world, will meet in conference at the shrine of the 
 ' Prince of the Apostles,' and a venerable assembly 
 and deeply interesting spectacle it will be ; but it will 
 be merely a General Council of the Latin Church, not 
 an Oecumenical Council ; and, whatever its decisions 
 may be, those decisions must necessarily stand on the 
 same footing as those of Trent or Constance, without 
 authority beyond the limit of the eparchy, or province, 
 which thus by its representatives consults together. All 
 such a Latin Council can do is to condemn what it con- 
 siders to be error, and to recognise or enounce ' pious 
 opinions,' in matters de fide ; but it cannot legitimately 
 impose acceptance of its decrees even on the com- 
 munion it represents, and much less on the (Ecumenical 
 world, as articles of faith necessary to salvation. All 
 its decisions are subject to revision, either in confirma- 
 tion or rejection, by a genuine Oecumenical Council 
 when such may meet. And if it overstep its powers, 
 the responsibility of any scandal or schism that may 
 ensue, arising from the violence done to the consciences 
 of men, will lie exclusively at its own door, and that of 
 those who promote and carry it through, 
 
 I do not lose sight here of the Roman-Cathohc theory 
 upon which, alone. Pope Pius can justify himself in 
 terming the present an Oecumenical Council. That 
 theory is a cate7ia of assumptions, of which the lead- 
 ing links may be stated as follows, — that the Pope, 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 87 
 
 as representative of St. Peter, is the Vicar of Christ 
 on earth, endowed with supreme authority, and the 
 source of all power and virtue elsewhere existent in 
 the Church, — that Rome is, consequently, the "mother 
 and mistress of all churches " throughout Christendom, 
 and the centre of unity, out of whose communion there 
 is no salvation, — that, it being impossible for Christ's 
 Church to fail, and the Church being Rome, Ecu- 
 menicity and the Roman Church are convertible terms, 
 — that the blame of the schism between the East and 
 West necessarily therefore attaches to the East, — that 
 the Greek Church, for example, to say nothing of the 
 other Oriental communions, orthodox and heterodox, 
 are thus ipso facto non- Catholic and heretics, outside 
 the fold of Christ, — that the Apostolic churches have 
 thus, in a word, ceased to exist, except that of St. 
 Peter, — and, finally, that the Pope is therefore all in 
 all, and General Councils held in the West under the 
 authority of the Popes since the Seventh till now have 
 been OEcumenical and, as such, infallible. The tlieory 
 would be plausible were it not in direct opposition to 
 Scripture and to Tradition, as testified by the practice 
 of the Seven Great or Ecumenical Councils. And the 
 argument proves too much ; for, if the Oriental com- 
 munions no longer exist as churches, or members of the 
 Church, there can be no more Ecumenical Councils, 
 inasmuch as the promises are not to one, but to all 
 the Apostles ; and the doctrine that the rights of the 
 other members of the Apostolate were derived from 
 or dependent upon St. Peter is quite modern. But the 
 ancient Churches, the Greek especially, still exist, — and 
 the Oriental Bishops who represent the spiritual con- 
 
«8 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 quests of Rome in the East are thus, at all events — and 
 I say it with no disrespect to their personal merits — 
 birds in borrowed feathers, mere masqueraders upon the 
 ecclesiastical stage of Europe. 
 
 It may startle timorous and wondering Ang-licans to 
 say so, but this fict is certain, that, if fficumenicity be 
 the law, and schism, if not heresy, be incurred .on the 
 part of those who transgress its sanctions, the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, as representing that branch of 
 the Western Church which has maintained its (Ecu- 
 menicity intact alike in succession and doctrine, would 
 be more competent than the Pope — I do not say, of 
 course, to summon, but to invite the Christian world, 
 in St. Grregory's name, to OEcumenical conference. I 
 have already, in many places, shewn the reason why. 
 
 4. W/iat are the results for good or for evil likely to be 
 effected by the coming Council ? 
 
 The objects of Pope Pius and his advisers in con- 
 voking the Council are now pretty well known — what- 
 ever the actual course taken may be, after the temper 
 of the assembly has been tested and ascertained. The 
 formal adoption of the dogma of the * Immaculate Con- 
 ception ' of the Blessed Virgin ; the enunciation of a 
 further dogma atiirming her Assumption ; and the 
 recognition of the Infallibility of the Pope in contra- 
 diction to the judgment of the Council of Constance, 
 which, in conformity with (Ecumenical principle, 
 (although itself not (Ecumenical,) subordinates the 
 Papal authority to that of the Church assembled in 
 General Council, are the three most prominent of these 
 objects — the first presumably, the second probably, and 
 
Letter TV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 8!) 
 
 the tliird (if God do not interfere to prevent it) cer- 
 tainly, to be attempted, if not accomplished. The 
 effect looked for by Rome from the affirmation of these 
 dogmas and their imposition, especially of the last, on 
 the Roman-Catholic world, is the final crushing down 
 of the remnant of the Gallican school and of the anti- 
 papal, liberal, constitutional, or in one word, of the 
 CEcumenical party all over Europe, and the absolute, 
 uncontrolled, and unmitigated triumph and supremacy 
 of the Ultramontane or Papal faction over the necks of 
 their enemies — with consequences in the further dis- 
 tance (the political doctrines of the Syllabus, likewise 
 to be confirmed, cooperating towards their realisation) 
 tending to establish once more, and on a directly divine 
 sanction, the tyranny of Gregory VII. and Innocent III. 
 over the kings and peoples of the earth. What was 
 symbolised in history when Pope Alexander III. 
 planted his foot on the neck of the Emperor Barbarossa 
 is now, by palpable inference, to be carried out in the 
 absolute supremacy of the Ecclesiastical over the Civil 
 Power. It is impossible to speak of what is now con- 
 templated (as by its programme, the Syllabus) in terms 
 of too strong moral reprobation. Nothing is to be re- 
 tracted, nothing to be softened, nothing atoned for, in 
 the dark catalogue of falsehoods, of cruelties, and crimes 
 perpetrated by the Popes of the past against humanity 
 and God. 
 
 Political questions I shall not here enter upon, — the 
 Civil Power can defend itself. I pass over the ques- 
 tions connected with the veneration of the most holy 
 and blessed Virgin with the simple observation that, as 
 novelties, we of the Anglo-Catholic and (Ecumenical 
 
90 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Lettee IV. 
 
 Church protest against their entertainment. But on 
 that of Papal InfalHbility, it is impossible to abstain 
 from observing that it is now sought to put the final 
 seal on a theory absolutely void of Scriptural, Tra- 
 ditional, or Historical warrant, based originally on 
 arrogant pretensions constantly put forward but in- 
 variably disallowed by CEcumenical authority in primi- 
 tive times, propped up and vindicated by endless and 
 shameless forgeries concocted during a long series of 
 ages, never abandoned till very recent days, and still 
 asserted on the principles established by those forgeries 
 as confidently as if the forgeries themselves had not 
 been exposed and abandoned, — a theory absolutely 
 contradicted, not only by the doctrine and practice of 
 the genuine Oecumenical Councils, but by the Latin 
 Council of Constance, which Rome herself holds to be 
 Oecumenical . 
 
 I do not pause to speculate on the amount of sin 
 incurred by those who, in the abuse of Private Judg- 
 ment, superadd to the Scripture and to the Catholic 
 Tradition the doctrines of men, and bar the gate of 
 heaven against those who refuse to utter the prescribed 
 Shibboleth for entering in. It will be for the Gallicans 
 to point out (as they have pointed out before) the 
 dilemmas in which Pope Pius will find himself when 
 face to face with the Council of Constance — that Council 
 which he must, on his own theory, recognise as 
 General and Oecumenical, and of coequal authority 
 with any subsequent one, but which decided that the 
 Pope is subject to a Greneral Council, and thus neces- 
 sarily against the pretension to Supremacy and Infalli- 
 bility which he now calls on the Council of the Vatican 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 91 
 
 to affirm in liis favour. The leading dilemma is as fol- 
 lows : — Either the Council of Constance was infallible 
 (on the hypothesis of its fficumenicity) or it was not. 
 If infallible, cadit qucesiio — there is no more to be said 
 on the subject ; the Pope, apart from the Council, is 
 fallible ; and if he dispute the fact and assert his own 
 superiority, he incurs ipso facto the sin of schism, the 
 penalty of deposition. But if not infallible, then follow 
 a long train of consequences attendant on the alterna- 
 tive. Every other Council backward, that of Nice 
 included, must, on the Ultramontane theory of the 
 Pope's sole Infallibility, have been equally fallible with 
 that of Constance, equally liable to error, and except 
 throughi the direct or constructive recognition of the 
 Popes (to which the early Oecumenical Church attached, 
 as matter of history, no' authoritative value) we have 
 had no formal and legitimate assurance all this time of 
 a single article of the Christian faith ; nor can we have 
 any till Pope Pius, as head and representative of the 
 entire line of infallible Popes from St. Peter down- 
 wards, speaks, as his predecessors have never spoken 
 hitherto, ratifies the Nicene Creed and whatever has 
 since been affirmed by Greneral Councils, and stamps 
 them as truth — as much or as little as he thinks fit — 
 by retrospective recognition and new promulgation, in 
 1869-70 ; adding, moreover, now or hereafter, other such 
 articles as may seem to him called for, without let or 
 hindrance, all on his own absolute authority, — I say 
 absolute authority, for where there is Infallibility there 
 can be no responsibility ; it is God that speaks, not 
 Man. If this be true, then Christ has been in the midst 
 of His Church, as His promise pledges Him to be till the 
 
02 
 
 ON THR COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 end of the world, the Holy Grhost, the Paraclete, guid- 
 ing her to all truth — -but only through the Infallibility 
 and utterance of the Pope — this fact having been un- 
 known to Pope and Church these eighteen hundred 
 years — this fact being now for the first time revealed ! 
 Can anything point its moral more clearly ? But, 
 further still, — if none of these General Councils has 
 been infallible and competent to decree doctrine, can 
 this of the Vatican be so ? How a fallible Council can 
 by its voice and action vest Infallibility in the Pope, or 
 recognise it in him so as to make it an article of faith, 
 is a curious problem ; to which the proverb ' Ex nihilo 
 nihil fit ' would seem the sufficient answer. The only 
 escape from the embarrassment thus presented would be 
 for the Pope to announce his Infallibility simpUciter, 
 and act ujDon it — like Napoleon placing the imperial 
 crown on his own head — by receiving the homage of 
 the Council and relieving them from all duty hencefor- 
 ward except that of response to consultation. Yet what 
 can be the warrant to a critical world that Pope Pius, 
 thus self-announced as the Prophet of Grod, has a better 
 claim to the title than Buddha or Mahomet ? But then 
 another difficulty presents itself The Council of Con- 
 stance, which thus falls, terminated a long and disgrace- 
 ful schism by deposing John XXIII., and installing 
 Martin V. in his place. Pope Pius being the direct 
 representative of Pope Martin and the Council — legiti- 
 mate, if the Council of Constance was right, illegitimate 
 and an intruder if the Council of Constance was wrong. 
 It is argued, or rather asserted (by Ultramontane 
 Eomanists), that Martin V. in confirming the Council of 
 Constance expressly excepted from his approbation the 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 03 
 
 special decrees which define' the relation of the Pope 
 and General Councils. If he did so it was a mere 
 hrutuni fulmen, for the Papal confirmation or approba- 
 tion is not essential to the validity of an (Ecumenical 
 Council — even were that of Constance reckoned to he 
 one, which the Oecumenical Church cannot allow. But 
 the question is one of simple honesty and good faith, 
 not (in its higher sense) of legal obligation. If Martin 
 Y. accepted or retained the Popedom in the place of 
 the degraded Pope, it was on the conditions laid down 
 by the decrees of the Council of Constance, clearly 
 tabled before his eyes. If he accepted it with the secret 
 intention to evade any conditions he might disapprove 
 of by withholding his confirmation, it was a deliberate 
 act of deception, — if, after full acceptance, he permitted 
 himself to change his mind, he betrayed his trust ; but 
 the original obligation endures even to the present day 
 — for no man, not even a Pope, is morally free to trade 
 on the wages of his own or his predecessors' iniquity. 
 But no evidence exists, or has at least (to my know- 
 ledge) been produced, of the fact alleged ; the acknow- 
 ledged acts of Martin Y. are inconsistent with the 
 allegation ; and the other two Obediences, the parties 
 attached to the two rival Popes, Benedict XIII. and 
 Gregory XII., ultimately concurred in assent, obviating 
 every conceivable objection. Thus then it stands ; and 
 it remains for the Ultramontanes to shew how Pius IX. 
 can be considered other than an usurper, and no Pope, 
 if, through the dogma of Infallibility, which he must 
 now virtually, himself, pronounce, the authority of the 
 Council which elected his predecessor in lieu of one who, 
 although a bad man, was tlie legitimate Pope, be vitiated. 
 
94 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV 
 
 All this indeed, although it nearly concerns the Gral- 
 lican Church, is to the Anglican, standing as she does 
 upon Q^cumenicity, matter of indifference, the Council 
 of Constance being to us merely a Latin, not an (Ecu- 
 menical Council, although entitled to the greatest 
 respect as having reasserted Oecumenical truth on the 
 point in question after centuries of obscuration, and 
 prescribed to the Church in the West that " reformatio 
 in capite et in membris " which we carried out in 
 England in obedience to its behest, when the Popes 
 hung back from doing so, above a century afterwards. 
 
 As regards the practical results to be expected from 
 the Council of the Vatican, they will be, I conceive, of 
 a twofold nature, Evil and Good ; and we must hope 
 that the latter element will predominate, — for in all 
 these matters 
 
 " 1'here is a Providence whicli i^llapes our ends, 
 Eough-hew them as we may." 
 
 To take the evil first : — 
 
 Among the ' pious opinions ' evolved by the Roman- 
 Catholic Church, few are so unsupported by (Ecumenical 
 testimony, few have been condemned by so many good 
 and wise men within the Roman pale during the last 
 seven centuries, as that of tlie Immaculate Conception. 
 The doctrine, as set forth and promulgated as dogma 
 by Papal authority a few years ago, awaits the judgment 
 of the Council about to be held at Rome, styling itself 
 (Ecumenical; it must be recognised by the Council as 
 matter of faith before it can become binding even on 
 the Roman-Catholic Church. If therefore the Council 
 does not disavow it — if it sanctions its publication — if 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 95 
 
 it holds that the judgment of the Pope is not irre- 
 formable even in so flagrant a violation of QEcumenical 
 principle, then indeed the iron must have entered into 
 the soul of the Church which it represents ; a grave 
 crime against Christian liberty will be consummated ; 
 and the responsibility of what may ensue must rest on 
 the Council which thus betrays its trust, and may be 
 said by the simple fact of such a decision to prove itself 
 non-Oecumenical. The like consequences will follow, 
 and the same responsibility will attach to it, if it elevates 
 the ' pious opinion ' of the Assumption to the rank of 
 dogma necessary to salvation. 
 
 All this would be disastrous enough. But if the 
 doctrine of Papal Infallibility be afiSrmed — with what- 
 ever safeguards and restrictions- — then the witness of 
 Rome to the principle of OEcumenicity ends ; the 
 portcullis suspended and threatening to drop between 
 Rome and Catholicity will peremptorily fall ; the autho- 
 rity of every OEcumenical Council from that of Nice 
 downwards will be (as I have said).' invalidated in the 
 eyes of the Latin world ; the objective and unchange- 
 able authority of Scripture and of Apostolic Tradition 
 is superseded by the subjective and shifting oracle of 
 Mysticism ; the Pope becomes, as a friend of Dr. Pusey 
 observed to him, a Lama of Thibet, an incarnation of 
 God, — and more than this : — I have, through a life of 
 thought and struggle after truth, strenuously resisted 
 the exclusive application of the prophetic language of 
 the Bible to any Christian church — although the 
 Roman-Catholic divines up to the Reformation were 
 not so reticent when condemning the Popes and the 
 Popedom. But if this doctrine be affirmed, it would be 
 
96 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 difficult, I think, for any one who believes in revelation 
 and realises the full amount of ouirecuidarce involved 
 in the claim of Papal Infallibility, not to recognise in 
 the Popedom henceforward a near approximation to 
 the character of that " Man of Sin " prophesied of by 
 St. Paul, who, "as God, sittetli in the temple of God, 
 shewing himself that he is God." Practically, after 
 such a declaration, the Saviour God would be wor- 
 shipped at St. Peter's, not in Heaven. 
 
 And what shall be said of the triumph about to be 
 afforded to the Infidel, witnessing (as he will) the 
 attempt by one section of Christians, the Ultramon- 
 tanes, to extirpate another co-existing within the same 
 fold, the Gallicans? Pilate and Herod, the Materialist 
 and the Rationalist, the Atheist and the Pantheist, 
 will be made friends together over such a spectacle. 
 The certain effect of the victory of the Ultramontane 
 over the Gaul will be the declension of the Eoman- 
 Catholic, or rather the Papal Church till it reaches the 
 point marked out for it of confirmed Materialistic 
 Mysticism. The passive susceptibility, the impotence 
 of resistance which, after centuries of protest, has per- 
 mitted the latest birth of Papal Private Judgment, the 
 dogma of the Immaculate Concejjtion, to achieve, hitherto, 
 almost a triumph, will then become the ready wax for 
 every fresh seal that Superstition may seek to imprint 
 upon it. Not, indeed, that Liberty will thus be crushed 
 out of the Church of Christ. Order and Liberty are 
 older, not than Christianity, but than the Popedom ; 
 the Church, Catholic and Apostolic, is founded im- 
 partially upon both ; and, although sejjarate jDrovinces 
 inav lapse into Materialism or Idealism, the central 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G9-70. 
 
 97 
 
 standard survives in fficumenicity — in Greece and, to 
 name no other strongholds, in England. The Gallicans 
 have Ecumenicity to rally to. 
 
 Lastly, — the arraying of the governments of the 
 world, the Civil Power, in self-defence and opposition 
 to the reviving encroachments of the Spiritual, will 
 tend, equally with all that precedes, to alienate and 
 de-Christianise the nations. 
 
 Turning from the evils to a more pleasing spectacle, 
 the benefits that may result from the coming Council, 
 they may be estimated as follows : — 
 
 In the first instance, let me not overlook the good 
 that may be found even in the Encyclical Letter and 
 the Syllabus of Pope Pius. Premising that the two, 
 combined, exhibit the tinmitigated protest of Law 
 against Liberty, of one half of creation against the 
 other half, thus sinning through a fatal onesidedness, and 
 self-convicted of fallibility ; and that consequently 
 it is very difficult to disentangle the truths affirmed 
 from the unwarranted implications with which they 
 are bound up — tliis fact remains, that, read impartially, 
 they proclaim uncompromisingly to a generation of 
 Didymi and Machiavellis, the pseudo-philosophers and 
 the sons of cold expediency throughout Europe, that 
 God Almighty — no mere potency of matter or in- 
 tangible effluence of human consciousness, but a personal, 
 appreciable, and supreme Being — reigns in heaven and 
 governs, rewards, and punishes his subject and liege- 
 man, Man, on earth : — That Power is from God, and 
 Man wields it merely as God's responsible delegate : — 
 That Might is only Eight when thus sanctioned : — That 
 Knowledge is only Powc]- wlien exercised in the fear 
 
 n 
 
98 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 of God : — That Public Opinion, the voice of the million, 
 is not a trustworthy witness to Truth in philosophy, 
 theology, morals, or politics, — like water, it can but 
 rise to its own level : — That AVealth and Pleasure are 
 not the highest object in life for the individual or for 
 nations : — That Obedience to the Powers that be, to 
 C^sar as well as to God, is the first political duty of 
 Christians : — That Science must not overpass her 
 prescribed limits : — That Eeason is not the arbiter of 
 truth and falsehood, nor can she scale the heavens by 
 her own unassisted wings : — That the Bible is the word 
 of God, and that the prophecies and miracles therein 
 recorded, and the dogmas regarding Christ, Our Lord, 
 as the centre of those miracles, are no fond myths but 
 matter of sober waking verity — belonging, in a word, 
 to a world into which the unillumined eyes of science 
 cannot penetrate, — truths that may be summarised 
 in the words of Habakkuk, " The Lord is in his holy 
 temple ; let the whole earth keep silence before him ! " 
 This testimony is true — and, if the document that 
 prefers it lack the sobriety of truth through its utter 
 disregard of the limits which the counter-claim of 
 Liberty and Mount Olivet prescribes to the voice of 
 Order sounding from Mount Sinai — if, further, it heaps 
 up fallacies and errors, like wood, hay, and stubble, 
 upon this solid foundation, for the searching fire of 
 judgment to dissipate hereafter — still we may be grate- 
 ful for the affirmation of such truths, from the chair of 
 St. Peter, from the lips of the first Patriarch (for- 
 tunately not as yet infallible) of the Christian world — 
 truths which his brethren on the thrones of Constanti- 
 nople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, and every 
 
Letteu IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1809-70. 
 
 99 
 
 other Father in Christ throughout the world, would 
 willingly assent to. 
 
 But, after this acknowledgment, my hopes of good 
 from the Council called together by Pope Pius spring 
 from the demerits, not the merits, of the propositions 
 upon which it is understood he will call upon the 
 assembly to pronounce. Under two alternatives benefit 
 may thus arise : — 
 
 If the Gallican and moderate party in the Council 
 prove strong enough to prevent mischief and bridle the 
 Papacy, then we should be entitled to look for, 1. An 
 affirmation or equivalent recognition of the Declaration 
 of the Gallican Clergy in 1682 (hitherto repeatedly 
 condemned by the Popes), in the two especial points, 
 that Kings and Princes are not subject to the eccle- 
 siastical authority in temporal things, nor can they 
 be deposed directly or indirectly and their subjects 
 absolved from their fealty by the Spiritual Power ; and 
 that the Spiritual Power of the Popedom must be 
 understood in accordance with the limitations laid 
 down by the Council of Constance, in conformity with 
 earlier General Councils : — For, 2. A revival of con- 
 stitutional action within and throughout the Roman- 
 Catholic Church, towards which decennial meetings 
 in council, as recommended at Constance, would greatly 
 conduce : — 3. For the reversal of unauthorised dicta 
 and decisions of the Popes, more especially of that on 
 the subject of the Immaculate Conception : — 4. For a 
 revulsion from mystical, effeminate, and Jesuitised to an 
 open-day, manly, and Catholic teaching and devotion : 
 — And, 5. For a higher tone of morality, generally, 
 throughout the Roman world. In the strength of this 
 
 n 2 
 
100 
 
 ON THE COUNCJL 
 
 I;I:t i i:r IV. 
 
 reaction the rule of OEciimenicity, rightly understood 
 and candidly and searchingly applied, may in time 
 come to be generally recognised, and a prospect of 
 reconciliation opened to ourselves, which we should 
 welcome with joy — but on no other conditions. 
 
 On the other hand, if Pius IX. prevails, and the 
 Council recognises, or he himself declares and the 
 Council acquiesces in the dogma of Papal Infallibility, 
 thus cutting himself and his adherents finally olf from 
 CEcumenicity, if not from Christianity itself, then we 
 may look for a Reformation in the body of the Latin 
 Church which continues firm in the faith — the pro- 
 moters of that Reformation not (through that process) 
 committing schism, but standing, as in England, simply 
 where they have stood from the first — lamenting the 
 secession of their former chief and patriarch, but refus- 
 ing to follow him into the wilderness — holding fast to 
 the pillar and ground of the truth as reared by the 
 Great Councils on the field of Scripture, and witnessed 
 to in principle, although with imj'erfect vision, by the 
 Council of Constance — abiding, like St. Paul, by the 
 Ship of the Church, rowed by the Apostles, with Our 
 Saviour at the helm, even if St. Peter's lineal descen- 
 dant forsakes them — to embark in a boat of his own, 
 and toss about thenceforward, like so many dissidents 
 in former times, on the sea of uncertainty and night. 
 It is only to be hoped that, if this " reformatio in 
 raembris" if not "in capite" take place, the Galhcans 
 and Orthodox or Constitutional party all over Europe 
 will not commit the error of the German Protestants 
 and in their horror of Popery run out of (Catholic) 
 Christendom. They have, I repeal, the Anglican 
 
OF 'J'lll!; VATICAN, lh(i;)-70. 
 
 101 
 
 Church — Established in England, Yoluntary in Scot- 
 land — to look to as an exemplar, Catholic, Apostolic, 
 Orthodox, and (Ecumenical, as by her succession and 
 her doctrine — the succession unbroken, the doctrine 
 chastened, corrected, and limited by her reformation in 
 the sixteenth century on the ancient rule of Catholic 
 protestation, 'Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab 
 omnibus ' — that rule so often cited, but in such igno- 
 rance of the church, the country, and the occasion 
 whence it emanated. Italy, from which so much was 
 to be expected, has missed, or as yet taken no advan- 
 tage of her opportunity for effecting such a reformation ; 
 but the field is still open to herself, to France, to Ger- 
 many, and to Spain ; and Grod grant that the respective 
 churches may so correct themselves, under the necessity 
 here presupposed, as to preserve and not to compro- 
 mise the position they hold as branches of the Catholic 
 Church — always broadly to be distinguished from the 
 fabric of spiritual domination which we condemn in the 
 Papacy. Thus leforming themselves, we of England 
 may, earlier perhaps than as above suggested, join 
 hands with them in union — Christ, Our Saviour, the 
 true Head of the Church, reigning, according to His 
 promise, in the midst of us. They may be assisted 
 towards these results by that one large and broad con- 
 sideration (already in part suggested), which must stamp 
 itself on the mind of all who witness what is in pro- 
 gress before us at Rome, to wit, that the very fact of the 
 absolute and uncompromising self-assertion of Order, 
 or Law, as impersonated in the Papacy, above Liberty, 
 claiming (as the Papacy now does) to consecrate its 
 long list of usurpations by tlie immediate warrant 
 
102 
 
 OX THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letteb IV. 
 
 of God, proves per se that Rome, thus represented, 
 embodies but one half of the truth, — that, if she repre- 
 sents St. Peter, it is as St. Peter rebuked by St. Paul, 
 but without St. Peter's penitence, — in a word, that she 
 is not exclusively (Ecumenical, and therefore cannot be 
 Infallible, and that none can support or acquiesce in 
 her present last and worst aggression without aiding 
 to cut the ground for ever from beneath her feet, and 
 sinning alike against Man and against God. 
 
 There is, in fine, only one aspect in which the 
 ' Oecumenical Council ' of the Vatican may be anti- 
 cipated as productive of unmitigated mischief — except, 
 indeed, to our own Anglican communion. It is, of 
 course, on the cards that the Council may, after all, 
 end in a gigantic Jiasco — neither party being suflSciently 
 strong to prevail, and the vast assembly separating 
 after passing a few merely disciplinary regulations 
 and emitting a few unmeaning generalities on moral 
 and political subjects, presenting to the world, after its 
 abortive incubation, the spectacle of a mountain in 
 labour to produce a mouse. The evil of this would be 
 incalculable ; for it would hold up to ridicule the vene- 
 rable name and the great historical idea of (Ecumenical 
 counsel, and make the very name of Catholicity a 
 byword among — I had nearly written the heathen, but 
 among those, at least, whose Private Judgment is their 
 god. The more necessary is it, therefore, that the 
 fallacy by which the quality of an ' (Ecumenical Coun- 
 cil ' has been attempted to be given to the Latin synod 
 now gathering together should be exposed, and the 
 true character of (Ecumenicity be vindicated. 
 
 The lesson that should approve itself to ourselves in 
 
Letter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 18G0-7O. 
 
 103 
 
 England on witnessing this great debate is clear, — to 
 put higlier value upon that constitutional balance of 
 parties within our Church which allows to each free 
 play and wholesome interaction, to the promotion of 
 mutual respect, progressive wisdom, and ultimate har- 
 mony ; for what are the ennobling struggles of our own 
 constitutional and healthy antagonism in comparison 
 with those internecine combats which tear to pieces and 
 deface the so-called seamless coat of Catholic unity as 
 exhibited at the Yatican ? But, not only Churchmen 
 in England — the Dissenters (who are Churchmen in 
 reality, although absenting themselves from our services 
 on principle through condemning a few matters which, 
 had they been calmly discussed as in modern times, and 
 not enforced on their ancestors by absolute authority, 
 they would have learnt to consider indifferent in com- 
 parison with the points in which they agree with us) — 
 our Dissenters will, if they are wise, draw nearer to the 
 mother Church in sympathy and respect, and in distrust 
 of their own position, when they notice in the drama 
 now passing before them the disastrous effect produced 
 by the predominance of one of the two principles of 
 constitutional life — whether Order or Liberty matters 
 nothing — in the communion where it reigns unchecked, 
 — where Private Judgment regulates belief, and not, 
 as with ourselves, the Catholic, Apostolic, and Ecume- 
 nical testimony, against which there is no appeal, and 
 in the presence of which all lesser authorities dwindle 
 into insignificance. 
 
 If the preceding aspirations be realised, and if Ultra- 
 montane Rome herself, made wise by the event, ulti- 
 mately revert to Ecumenicity, this Council, so disastrous 
 
104 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letteu IV. 
 
 in its present asjject, may be looked back upon as a 
 blessing. It beboves all Christian men, in the mean- 
 while, to address their supplications to Almighty- 
 God that He may bless the good and neutralise the 
 evil tbat appears to attach to it. 
 
 5. What an (Ecumenical Council, really such, and legiti- 
 mately called together, might he expected to achieve, 
 ■ icith God's blessing, towards restoration of communion 
 between the branches of the Catholic Church, and, if it 
 so please God, towards the ultimate reunion of Chris- 
 tendom. 
 
 There is but small prospect of such reunion at 
 present, and yet the development of thought in pro- 
 gress throughout the world, although tending to produce 
 scepticism and infidelity in the first instance, is doubt- 
 less designed in the providence of God to prepare the 
 way for a higher philosophy and a more profound 
 theology. Bacon's observation is of universal value, 
 that a little knowledge will make a man an unbe- 
 liever, but a little more will make him once more a 
 Christian. The time is not far distant, I trust, when 
 scepticism will be recognised in the higher places of 
 thought as what it really is, a febrile, intermittent, 
 and weak reaction from the ever progressive march and 
 assurance of truth. Christianity, in its full sense, im- 
 plies the steady direction of all the elements of our 
 human being. Sense, Spirit, Imagination, and Reason, 
 reconciled through Faith, educated by Knowledge, and 
 energised by Love, towards the service of God. 
 Knowledge, teaching in philosophy and vindicating 
 Liberty, rnust concur with Faith, teaching in theology 
 
Letter IV, 
 
 OF TIIK VATICAN, lRf;9-70. 
 
 105 
 
 and conserving Order, towards building up tlic New 
 Jerusalem upon lier Apostolic basis. In this belief I 
 venture to indicate certain principles upon which, as 
 it appears to me, an Oecumenical Council, truly such, 
 convened and acting on the model of those which 
 defined the faith in primitive times, and based upon a 
 full recognition of the six great points which I assumed 
 in my Letter on ' England versus Rome ' as of common 
 consent among Catholic Christians, may at some future 
 period address itself with success, under the guidance 
 of the Holy Grhost, to the task of reconciling Christen- 
 dom and converting the heathen. These principles are 
 few and comprehensive, and may be stated (liable to 
 correction) as follows : — 
 
 i. That the dogmas affirmed by CEcumenical autho- 
 
 rity, i, e., by the first Six Great Councils (the 
 Seventh having decided nothing upon doctrine), 
 previously to the separation of the East and 
 West, are vital, that is to say, essential to salva- 
 tion (except through the uncovenanted allow- 
 ance of God) ; and, conversely, that all dogmas, 
 whether true or erroneous, which are not affirmed 
 by CEcumenical authority are mere ' pious 
 opinions,' not vital, nor essential to salva- 
 tion : * — 
 
 ii. That agreement on vital points is sufficient ground 
 
 * The obligation of private prayer, of public worship, and of 
 commnuion through the Eucharist, as prescribed in the Bible, 
 fall imdcr the category of discipline rather than dogma, and, like 
 llaplisiii (wliicli i'omis tlio subject of an article in the Nicene 
 Crccilj, are presupposed among all Catholic Christians. 
 
106 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Lettrr IV- 
 
 for intercommunion, if not reunion, as between 
 Christians : — 
 
 iii. That the various communions of Christendom are 
 
 entitled to hold their ' pious opinions ' as doc- 
 trines indifferent, without compromise of (Ecu- 
 menicity ; but that the attempt by any one com- 
 munion to impose its ' pious opinions ' on others 
 is equivalent to secession from CEcumeuical 
 unity : — 
 
 iv. That, although held by the respective communions 
 
 on their own sole responsibility, such ' pious 
 opinions ' shall be respected by all, as the growth 
 of that Liberty which in the absence of Oecu- 
 menical definition has been permitted by Provi- 
 dence for the advancement of theological study, 
 discussion, and wisdom, and towards the enlarge- 
 ment of Christian charity between the several 
 communions — until the time arrives when all 
 points of doubt and error shall be cleared up in 
 the perfect vision of truth. 
 These principles, carried out, would conduce at once 
 to the central unity and harmony of the Church, and 
 the individual activity and life of the several branches, 
 through the constitutional interaction of the two great 
 powers of Law and Liberty, acting under the law of 
 progression by antagonism. 
 
 The restoration of intercommunion between the Chris- 
 tian Churches on the primitive and historical l^asis of 
 (Ecumenicity would tend to the conversion of mankind 
 and the promotion of the Kingdom of Christ upon earth 
 through the strongest of all incentives, examjjle — by 
 rendering it possible once more for lookers on, without 
 
Letter IV. OF THE VATICAN, 1SG9-70. 107 
 
 tlie pale, to exclaim in admiration, ' Behold, how these 
 Christians love one another ! ' 
 
 The first step will be taken towards an Oecumenical 
 Council such as I have ventured to prognosticate when 
 Christians everywhere may be induced to adopt the 
 basis laid down in his recent reply to Pope Pius by 
 the Patriarch of Constantinople, the head of the Grreek 
 Church, in the old Imperial style the ' (Ecumenical 
 Patriarch:' — " SixcE it is manifest that there was 
 A Church ix existence ten centuries back which 
 
 HELD the same DOCTRINES IN THE EaST AS IN THE 
 
 West, in the Old as in the New Rome, let us 
 each recur to that, and see which of us has 
 added aught, which has diminished aught there- 
 from; and let all that mat have been added be 
 struck off, if ant there be, and wherever it be; 
 and let all that has been dimnished therefrom 
 be re-added, if ant there be, and wherever it be ; 
 and then we shall all unawares find ourselves 
 
 UNITED IN THE SAME StMBOL OF CaTHOLIC OrTHO- 
 
 DOXT." Is it beyond hope that the authorised repre- 
 sentatives of the different Christian communions may 
 be, in time, persuaded to meet together in friendly 
 conference and under the sanction, if possible, of the 
 Civil Power, with the view of inquiring whether it 
 be not possible to come to accordance and consent in 
 unity on this truly Christian basis ? 
 
 Were such an opportunity to present itself — and 
 the idea is not chimerical, for "with God nothing is 
 impossible," and our daily prayer, dictated by Our 
 
108 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 Saviour, that the Kingdom of God may come and His 
 will be done on earth as in heaven, cannot fail of its 
 accomplishment — should such an opportunity be vouch- 
 safed to us, it were to be wished that the initiative 
 towards unity should be taken by England in approxi- 
 mation to Greece. The great point at issue between 
 the Latin Church and the Eastern, which stands in the 
 way of CEcumenical reunion, is the unauthorised inter- 
 polation by the Latins of the clause " filioque " in the 
 Nicene Creed. The question is not whether the dogma 
 of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son as 
 well as from the Father is theologically correct or not 
 — we of England have no doubt that the doctrine is 
 true — but whether it is CEcumenical, whether (that 
 is to say) it has been affirmed by the Holy Ghost 
 as an article of the faith necessary to salvation. It 
 certainly is not (Ecumenical, and the Western Church 
 has erred therefore for centuries in imposing what 
 was merely its pious or private opinion upon the 
 Christian world. To insist upon it is thus wilfully 
 to place a stumbling-block in the path of our brethren. 
 It matters little with whom the novelty originated, 
 or when, and through what process, and under what 
 degree of authoritative sanction, it was absorbed into 
 the dogmatic faith of the West ; but this is clear, that 
 the Church of Rome is practically compromised on the 
 point, and cannot recede from it so long as she main- 
 tains her present claim to exclusive Infallibility. But 
 the Anglican Church is not compromised by her accept- 
 ance of the dogma hitherto, inasmuch as she does not 
 pretend to Infallibility. By the definition of her posi- 
 tion after the Reformation, as expressed in the 1 Eliz. i, 
 
Lkttku IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1SC9-70. 
 
 109 
 
 she bases her faith Lrondly on the four first General or 
 Evangelical Councils siinpliciter, to say nothing- of later 
 Conciliar authority. Her acceptance of the Nicene 
 Creed is therefore governed by and subject to that 
 higher sanction. She accepts the Creed in its dogmas 
 as necessary to salvation in so far as those dogmas are 
 Oecumenical, and no further. The ' filioque ' (as stated) 
 is not CEcumenical. She holds that dogma therefore 
 on her own responsibility, her own private judgment, 
 as a ' pious opinion ' only, to which she gives the fullest 
 sanction within the limits of her pale, but to which she 
 is not otherwise tied, and which she is at liberty, or 
 rather bound, to waive as matter of dogma in any 
 negotiation with the East for CEcumenical intercom- 
 munion or reunion. The case is exactly parallel to that 
 of the doctrines, or rather beliefs, touching the Blessed 
 Virgin, the cultus of the Saints, the time of keeping 
 Easter, and others to which the Eastern Church 
 attaches importance, and which, rightfully as we think, 
 we object to, but which, by the rule of Ecumenicity, 
 are but pious opinions, not dogmas necessary to salva- 
 tion, and no bar therefore to reconciliation on the basis 
 above proposed. 
 
 A similar overture might then be made by the 
 Anglican, supported by the Greek Church, to the 
 Catholic Patriarch of Antioch, the Eastern representa- 
 tive of St. Peter, (as distinguished from the Patriarch of 
 the more numerous Monophysite succession in Syria and 
 elsewhere,) — to the Melchite Pope, or Patriarch, the 
 legitimate heir of St. Mark, St. Cyril, and St. Athan- 
 asius, at Alexandria, — to the Ortliodox Patriarch of 
 Jerusalem, the successor of St. James, — and to the 
 
110 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 ' Most Blessed Despot,' Archbishop of Cyprus, the auto- 
 cephalous or independent representative of St. Barnabas, 
 — and it may be hoped that the tried and faithful rem- 
 nant of those ancient Churches, will accept, through 
 their spiritual chiefs, the satisfaction and amity thus 
 oflered to them. 
 
 It would then be for the Anglican and Catholico- 
 Orthodox churches conjointly— four of the five Patri- 
 archates of Oecumenical times, and England as repre- 
 senting the fifth, thus acting in accordance — to address 
 their brethren of Armenia with a prayer for their 
 adhesion to the decrees of the (Ecumenical Council of 
 Chalcedon, which — although not (it maybe held) defini- 
 tively refusing — they have not as yet formally accepted. 
 Absence from the Council through the Persian invasion, 
 misconstruction perhaps of what took place there, pre- 
 vented their adhesion at the time ; and traditional 
 jjrejudices and the thousand conflicting lateral influences 
 to which Armenia has been pre-eminently exposed, 
 have prevailed subsequently ; but it would be diflScult 
 for the descendants of those who condemned Eutyches 
 and the Chalcedonian decrees in the same breath and at 
 the same moment in a.d. 491 to withstand an ajjpeal 
 grounded on such inadvertence, and on that previous 
 assent to the Council of Ephesus which only needs to 
 be supplemented by acceptance of Chalcedon in order 
 virtually to accomplish the complete circle of Catho- 
 licity — assent to the fifth and sixth Oecumenical Coun- 
 cils following as a necessary consequence upon recog- 
 nition of the earlier four. With the example of 
 England's submission to (Ecumenical precision for the 
 love of Christ and his Church, and the noble ' charge ' 
 
• 
 
 Leiter IV. OF TUIi VATK.'AN, 18G9-70. 
 
 Ill 
 
 (as it may be called) to Christendom by the OEciimenical 
 Patriarch in his reply to the Pope, before them, is it 
 too much to expect such a response as the CEcumenical 
 Church supplicates, in Christ's name, from the kindly 
 and thoughtful Armenians ? 
 
 It would then, yet further, be for England, Greece, 
 Armenia, and the Catholico- Apostolic successions of 
 Alexandria, Antioeh, and Jerusalem, by God's blessing 
 i-econciled and at one, to turn to the Nestorian and 
 Monopliysite Churches — still Apostolic in descent 
 although schismatic in creed, and devoted to their views 
 of truth — in Syria, Egypt, Abyssinia, Chaldrea, and 
 Malabar, with an earnest appeal that they should recon- 
 sider their rejection of the decrees of Ephesus and 
 Chalcedon, on the ground of the illustration that time 
 has afforded of the disastrous effects of laying undue 
 stress upon either of the two sides of truth, of elevating 
 Liberty above Order, or Order above Liberty, as the 
 Nestorians (we contend) have done in the first instance 
 and the Monophysites in the second. The develop- 
 ments alike of theology and of philosophy (and the fact 
 is as patent in Mahometan as in Christian thought and 
 science) shew, that the principle advocated by Nes- 
 torius, of unchecked individuality, leads to the wildest 
 Rationalism, while the counter principle on which Euty- 
 ches and Dioscurus (more especially) stood, of indis- 
 criminate concretion, leads to a similar excess, of 
 Materialism, Deep sympathy must mingle with our 
 blame of aberration such as that here characterised ; 
 for Nestorian and Monopliysite alike erred through 
 jealousy for Christian liberty and the Nicene faith, in re- 
 calcitration against what they conceived to be uncalled 
 
112 ON THE COUNCIL Letter IV. 
 
 for additional definition. The mere fact that the deci- 
 sions of the third and fifth, the fourth and sixth Councils 
 have so providentially steadied the course of the highest 
 thought through subsequent ages may lead the Nes- 
 torians at last to recognise the former, and the Mono- 
 physites the latter, likewise as Divine. The dominant 
 and ultimate stress of appeal should of course be laid, 
 not on the point of the philosophic warrant for the 
 QEcumenical definitions (although that may suggest an 
 independent obligation to adhesion), but on the duty 
 of submission to the voice of the Holy Ghost speaking 
 in the respective Councils and affirming authoritatively 
 truths which it is no reproach to human fallibility that 
 it should misapprehend without such guidance. Hetero- 
 dox as Nestorian and Monophysite must be considered 
 in an (Ecumenical point of view, it must not be sup- 
 posed that God has rejected their halting yet devoted 
 obedience. The love of Christ glows like a lamp of 
 purest oil in the hymns and liturgies of their respective 
 Churches ; and this love, it may be hoped, will constrain 
 them to unity, with each other and with us, in course of 
 time. We have, all of us, much mutually to concede 
 and to forgive. 
 
 Long before such consummation, it may be hoped 
 that Rome, or at least the Gallican School throughout 
 Europe, and the remnant of the Church of Utrecht, 
 will have become reconciled to England on the common 
 basis of (Ecumenicity. 
 
 "Whether the Protectant Communions of the "West 
 which have rejected the rule of Catholic consent, and 
 stand, like Romanist Rome, on the private judg-ment oi 
 their founders, will ultimately unite themselves witl 
 
r.ETTER IV. OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 113 
 
 the Apostolic College, may be doubtful. Possibly they 
 may be intended in the designs of Providence to serve 
 a purpose apart, like the Proi)het.s under the Mosaic 
 Dispensation. It must be remembered, however, that 
 such Prophets were mediums of truth only in so far as 
 they faithfully reflected the will and reported the whole 
 counsel of God. 
 
 Everything, it must be reiterated, is possible with 
 the Almighty ; and as Our Saviour j^rayed that His 
 Church might be One, and his prayers and promises 
 alike imply accomplishment. One it will assuredly be, 
 in God's own good time. It may be that this union 
 will be effected only by His Second Advent, when error 
 shall flee away before the lightning of his presence; 
 but it is possible that the Holy Ghost will prepare the 
 way through the ancient path of (Ecumenical confer- 
 ence and judgment, perpetuated perhaps through a 
 series of many generations ; and in this expectation 
 we must hope and pray that the Churches, at present 
 disunited, may thus be induced to harmony. 
 
 An CEcumenical Council, agreeing ujDon intercom- 
 munion, if not union, on the premises above laid down, 
 might be expected to draw up, at the close of its first 
 periodical assemblage, 
 
 i. A formula of adhesion for common subscription, 
 
 specifying the vital dogmas of (Ecumenicity by 
 recital, 1. Of the Nicene Creed; 2. Of the deci- 
 sions of the subsequent CEcumenical Councils on 
 the doctrinal points siibmitted to them : — 
 
 ii. An (Ecumenical Liturgy, a Form of Prayer and 
 
 I 
 
114 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 Administration of Baptism and of the Eucharist, 
 to be used in common by the subscribing 
 Churches on a certain festival, to be agreed 
 upon, once a year; and which may be used at 
 other times whenever the members of the inter- 
 communing Churches may be gathered as " two 
 or three " together. This Liturgy should include 
 a prayer for perfect unity and for the conversion 
 of mankind, to be used also daily by every 
 individual in private : — 
 
 iii. An appeal to such Apostolic Churches as may 
 
 not hitherto have adhered to the full doctrine 
 of CEcumenicity, pointing out the reasons for 
 adhesion : — 
 
 iv. A memorandum of recommendation how the 
 
 intercommuning Apostolic Churches should deal 
 with the Dissenting communions within their 
 respective bounds, towards reconciliation : — 
 
 V. An appeal to the Jews, pointing out the claims of 
 Christianity to their adhesion, as not abrogating 
 but fulfilling the Law under the postvenient and 
 yet antecedent obligation of the Gospel : — 
 
 vi. An appeal to the Heathen and non-Christian 
 world, collectively and in categories or classes, 
 pointing out the claims of the Catholic, Apostolic, 
 and Ecumenical Church of Christ to their adhe- 
 sion, 1. As answering to and co-extensive with 
 the entire economy of human nature, taking 
 up by chemical affinity every crumb, so that 
 nothing be lost, and dedicating it to God ; 2. 
 As recognising and assigning their due place 
 within its macrocosm to the fundamental prin- 
 
Lf.ttf.r IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 115 
 
 ciples of each group of non-Christian reh*g-ion.«!, 
 — all such religions being of a tentative clia- 
 racter, seeking after God through the exag- 
 gerated development of the Spirit, the Imagina- 
 tio]i, or the Reason of Man, eacli to the depre- 
 ciation of the others ; whereas all of these 
 elements meet, in adjustment of relative rights 
 and perfect conformity to the will of Grod, in 
 the Person of the Saviour, and in His Mystical 
 Body, the Church, as said above is. 
 
 That the Church of England, in particular, would 
 joyfully welcome such a day of jubilee as an Eighth 
 Oecumenical Council, genuinely such and lawfully 
 assembled, would proclaim to mankind, may be suffi- 
 ciently gathered from the Declaration of Queen Eli- 
 zabeth in 1569, commanded to be publicly read in all 
 churches, in definition and vindication of the Royal 
 authority exercised in the Reformation. I may cite 
 even more than the mere passage which justifies this 
 presumption. In days when it is still urged and 
 believed by many that the Anglican Church is the 
 creature of the State — a mere Protestant Establishment 
 set up in England, unCatholic and nonfficumenical, 
 dating but from the sixteenth century — it may be 
 well to listen once more to the voice of the Lion 
 Queen sounding across the gulph of time, vindicating 
 alike herself and the Church she cherished, and yet 
 humbling herself before the dignity of that Universal or 
 (Ecumenical judgment which she appeals to at the close 
 of what I am about to recite : — 
 
 I 2 
 
116 
 
 ON THE COUNCIL 
 
 Letter IV. 
 
 " We know no other Autliority," she says, " either 
 given or used by us as Queen and Governor 
 of this realm, than hath been by the law of God 
 and this realm always due to our progenitors. Sove- 
 reigns and Kings of the same, . . without that there- 
 by we do either challenge or take to us . . any 
 superiority to ourself to define, decide, or determine any 
 article or point ' of the Christian Faith or Religion, or 
 to change any ancient ceremony of the Church from the form 
 before used and observed by the Catholic and Apostolic 
 Church : — But that Authority which is yielded to us 
 and our Crown consists in tliis, that, considering we are 
 by God's Grace the Sovereign Pi ince and Queen next 
 unto God, and all the people in our realm are immedi- 
 ately born subjects to us and our Crown and to none 
 else, and that our realm hath of long time past received 
 the Christian faith, ice are by this Authority bound to 
 direct all estates, being subject to us, to live in the 
 faith and the obedience of Christian Religion ; and to see 
 the laws of God and Man, which are ordained to tJiat end, 
 to be truly observed, and the offenders against the same duly 
 punisJied; and consequently to provide that the Church 
 may be governed and taught by Arcltbishops, Bishops, and 
 Ministers according to the ecclesia-^tical ancient policy of 
 the realm, wliom we do assist ivith our Sovereign power. 
 . . And . . we know not, nor have any meaning to 
 allow that any of our subjects should be molested, 
 either by examination or inquisition, in any matter, 
 either of Faith, so long as they s/iall profess the Christian 
 Faith, not gainsaying the authority of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures and of the Articles of our Faith contained in the 
 Creeds Apostolic and Catholic; or for matter of Cere- 
 
Lktter IV. 
 
 OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. 
 
 117 
 
 monies, or any other external matters appertaining to 
 Christian reHgiou, as long as they shall in their out- 
 ward conversation shew themselves quiet and conform- 
 ahle, and not manifestly repugnant and obstinate to the 
 laws of the realm which are established for frequentation 
 of Divine service in the ordinary churches, in like 
 manner as all other laws are, whereunto subjects are of 
 duty and by allegiance bound. 
 
 "And," the document proceeds, if any Potentate in 
 Christendom, cJiallenging any universal and sole superiority 
 over the whole Church of Christ, as it is pretended, shall 
 condemn or reprehend this our office, appertaining and 
 by justice annexed to our Crown, because it is not 
 derived from his authority ; we shall be ready in 
 place and time convenient, where such person as shall so 
 reprehend us may not be the judge of his own cause {an 
 order against nature), and where other Christian MonarcJis, 
 Potentates, and Princes shall be suffered generally to as- 
 semble with good freedom, security, and liberty, as in former 
 better times hath been Christianly used, to the great benefit 
 of the Church of God, to cause such plai.y accompt 
 to br made for our defence by the rules of 
 Christian Eeligion as we trust shall in reason 
 SATISFY the University of the Good and Faithful ; 
 or, if not, ice shall be ready, as an humble Servant and 
 Handmaid of God, to reform ourselves and our 
 policy in any manner as Truth shall guide and 
 LEAD us : — Which Truth is to be by us understood, 
 known, and received as Almighty God shall please to 
 reveal it by His ordinary means, and not to be in a 
 disguised manner obtruded and forced by outward 
 wars, or threateuings of bloodshed, and such-like 
 
118 ON THE COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN, 1869-70. Letter IV. 
 
 curses, fulminations, or other worldly violences and 
 practices, — things unfit to be used for establishing or 
 reforming of Christian Eeligion, and to be rather 
 contemned by Sovereign Princes having their Seats 
 and Thrones stablished by Almighty God, and not 
 subject to the wills of foreign and strange usurped 
 Potentates." * 
 
 Thus, my dear , have I ventured to write on 
 
 this great subject, not (I trust) presumptuously, but 
 as expressing the sense (I feel assured) of our Mother, 
 tbe Church of England, although not, perhaps, the 
 particular views of any one of the theological schools 
 which make up her unity. And if what I have said 
 meet your approbation, or conduce to edification and 
 future peace, great will be the satisfaction and deep the 
 
 gratitude of, my dear , 
 
 Your affectionate humble servant, 
 
 Lindsay. 
 
 * ' Declaration of the Queenes Proceedings since her Eeign,' — 
 State Papers, &c. left by William Cecil, Lord Burleigh, edit. 
 Haynes and Murdin, vol. i, p. 589. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 On the Ultramontane and Galucan theories in rela- 
 tion TO (Ecumenicity and the Chuuch of England. 
 
 Two remarkable books have made their appearance lately, 
 "Janus," the work, it is understood, of two learned theologians 
 in Germany, and the 'Du Concile General et de la Paix 
 Religieuse ' of Monseigneur Maret, Bishop of Sura. Tlie former 
 is of primary value as presenting in a condensed form, and by 
 Roman Catholics, the history of the origin and development of 
 the Roman and Papal assumption of universal and absolute 
 monarchy, and of the means adopted, through forgeries and 
 otherwise, to sustain and enforce it upon mankind, — the latter, 
 as exhibiting the argument for the Church of Rome as a consti- 
 tutional monarchy — tiie Pope as King and the Episcopate as an 
 Aristocracy — the Monarchy dominating except in the highest 
 and ultimate utterances of the Church through a General 
 Council, when the judgment of the Council overrules that of 
 the Pope — the Council, on the other hand, being, in itself, 
 inefficacious and no General Council without the adhesion of 
 the Pope — which adhesion, nevertheless, he is bound to yield 
 to the majority in the Council, and to accept their decision as 
 infallible, under penalty of dejiosition. From both these works 
 we may form some conception of the depth of abhorrence enter- 
 tained by the most enlightened of the Roman-Catholic Church 
 for the impending dogma of Papal Infallibility. That the 
 Gallican argument might be put more forcibly, because less 
 reservedly, in the spirit of 1682, of 1414, and of the first Seven 
 Councils, must doubtless be allowed ; but, although Mgr. Maret 
 endeavours (as it were) to mediate between the Council of 
 Constance and the Ultramontanes — to establish a middle term 
 which may reconcile what he esteems to bo the legitimate claims 
 of the Papacy with the rights established by the Fathers of 
 
120 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Constance — still he recognises the Council as the supreme 
 authority, and affirms distinctly the dominancy of the Episcopate, 
 in Council assembled, over the Pope. It cannot be doubted 
 therefore that he fairly represents the Gallican Church of 
 the nineteenth century ; and as the ' Du Concile Gdii^ral' is the 
 only full answer which has as yet appeared in France to the 
 challenge of Pius IX., it must be received, I presume, as 
 the manifesto of that Church on this momentous occasion. It 
 has a further and independent value as placing in a clear Light 
 the argument for the claims of St. Peter's Chair as recognised 
 by Mgr. Maret and his brethren, based upon the genuine, not 
 the spurious evidence, and stated and commented upon with all 
 candour and honesty, although with an unconscious bias to 
 exaggeration, the result of a fallacy in reasoning which I shall 
 take account of presently. 
 
 I propose, after a few preliminary observations, 1. To reduce 
 Mgr. Maret's argument into a series of brief articles or pro- 
 positions, and to state as succinctly as possible the objections 
 to them raisable on behalf of (Ecumenicity and the Church of 
 England : — 2. To estimate the extent of agi-eement, and to fix 
 the point where disagreement begins and where it becomes con- 
 firmed, between the Gallican Church (as represented by Mgr. 
 Maret) and the Anglican : — And, 3. To enquire which of the 
 two adheres to and which disavows the CEcumenical standard 
 after parting company at the point in question, — the question 
 at this latter stage resolving, in fact, into that of 'England 
 versus Kome ' — Eome claiming to be the only fold of Christ — 
 as argued on other grounds in the Second of the Letters printed 
 in this volume. 
 
 In days like these, when Anglicans know as little of Rome as 
 Eome does of the Anglicans, the analysis thus given, the dis- 
 tinctiojis it enables us to establish, and the inference deducible 
 from the comparison of these distinctions, may not be ^\-ithout 
 their value to English Churchmen. 
 
 Let me remark, on the tluesbold, that Mgr. Maret's argument 
 is expressed with respect towards the Ultramontanes and with 
 charity and courtesy to all ; and that it breathes throughout 
 t!ie spirit of conciliation and peace. 
 
APPEKDIX. 
 
 121 
 
 Mgr. Maret speaks with kindness of the Protestants as a 
 body — " nos frores separ^s " — brethren still, although unfortu- 
 nately straying from Apostolic unity. I do not complain that, 
 like all Eoman-Cutholics, he confounds the Anglican Church 
 with the Protestant communions, for English Churchmen have 
 themselves (in great measure) to thank for it, as I have else- 
 where shewn. What I would remark is, that the notes and 
 characteristics which he attributes to the Protestants in no wise 
 apply to the Church of England. If the sufficiency of Private 
 Judgment in the interpretation of the Bible — if the Priesthood 
 of the Individual, and, correlatively, the Non-necessity of a 
 Church — if the Sovereignty of the Christian Community in 
 spiritual matters, and, correlatively, the Derivation of all 
 Spiritual Powers as exercised in the Pastoral Office from that 
 Community by Delegation, in the interest of order, but which 
 powers thus delegated are revocable at will — if, finally, the 
 Subordination of the Spiritual to the Temporal authority in 
 matters spiritual, and the Transformation of National into 
 Spiritual Sovereignty — if such be (as he states) the tenets and 
 marks of Protestantism, they are not those of the Anglican 
 Cimrch, which repudiates tliem in toto, standing as far apart 
 from Lutheranism, Calvinism, and the other Protestant sects on 
 the one hand, as she does fi-om Komanism on the other — 
 grounded, as she is, on the central point, an 1 marching towards 
 Zion on the central path, of (Ecumenicity. If England 'pro- 
 tested,' if England ' reformed ' herself in the sixteenth century, 
 it was in the same Catholic and general sense in which 
 Mgr. Maret uses the words himself, as may be seen in various 
 passages of his work. And he himself does not deny that the 
 schism of the sixteenth century was bi-ought about in no slight 
 degree by the obstinate recalcitration of the Popes and the 
 " curia " of Rome against the mandates of Constance and Basle 
 for the " reformatio " of the Church " in capite et membris," 
 which the Protestants wished to see brought about by a Creueral 
 Council, and only undertook themselves when the prospect of 
 reformation had become hopeless otherwise.* 
 
 I have already borne testimony to Mgr. Maret's candour, 
 
 * Da L'onci.lc General, torn, i, p. 500. 
 
122 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 that he builds only upon genuine evidence, dismissing the for- 
 geries, but with the observation that he betrays an unconscious 
 bias, which, I may here state, proceeds from the enduring 
 influence left by those forgeries on the thought of Rome. The 
 forgeries, extending over centuries, were partly the offspring, 
 partly the parents of a theory of Universal Papal Supremacy 
 utterly unsupported by and at variance with the genuine evi- 
 dence, which it was necessary, therefore, partly to falsify by 
 interpolation, partly to obscure and set aside by purely new 
 inventions. Tliese forgeries have been long ago exposed, 
 although they have not as yet been totally abandoned ; but the 
 theory to which they were ancillary survives and flourishes 
 more vigorous than ever, to the effect of giving a retrospective 
 colouring and interpretation (utterly uncritical) to the entire 
 field of Christian antiquity, and to the evidence adduced by 
 every Roman-Catholic writer. Mgr. Maret included, in support 
 of the pretensions of Rome, whether as urged in the moderated 
 tones of Gallicanism or in the unmitigated dictation of Bellar- 
 mine. It is most diflScult, I admit, for any Roman-Catholic to 
 emancipate himself from this influence to perversion, this bias 
 to error ; and his only chance of escape is to place himself at 
 the source of the stream and look down its waters, not up — 
 judging by the evidence afforded by the Bible and by strictly 
 CEcumeuical Tradition, not (as Mgr. Maret complains of the 
 Ultramoatanes) by later and disturbing theories and systems. 
 A thousan 1 passages in the early Fathers habitually cited in 
 proof of Roman-Catliolic dogmas, and which appear to support 
 them when read by the imputed light of the mediaeval and 
 modern faith of Rome, are utterly unsusceptible of such con- 
 struction when interpreted in accordance with the vital rule 
 thus indicated. 
 
 The distinctive mark between the Ultramontane and the 
 GaUican — as it is between the Galilean and the Anglican — 
 and, I may add, between all communions in wliich the CEcu- 
 menical stamlard has been lost and the children of pure unalloyed 
 Catholicity, is the isolation of texts of Scripture and their 
 adduction in support of theories apart from correlative texts 
 and the dicta of CEcumenical authority. Mgr. Maret protests 
 repeatedly and forcibly against this jjractice in Ultramontane 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 123 
 
 hands, wliich thus concentrate all power in St. Peter and the 
 Tope to the defraudment of the Episcopate. It is a sound pro- 
 test, on a true principle, — but this is the precise complaint that 
 the Anglican has to bring against the Gralli&in, when, like Mgr. 
 Maret lor example, (although without any view to England), he 
 takes the dicta of Our Saviour to St. Peter by themselves apart 
 from the testimony of St. Paul to his own absolute equality — to 
 say nothing of his reluctance to admit the fact, which he is on 
 the other hand too candid to deny, that St. James, and not St. 
 Peter, presided at the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem. When, 
 however. Mgr. Maret applies the same principle to the writings 
 of Fathers and the dicta of Popes (which last he admits are not 
 per se infallible), it is necessary to protest against a canon 
 which would put those writings and dicta on the same level 
 with Scripture and with the voice of the Holy Ghost speaking 
 by the Councils. The Bible, as the work of one Divine Author, 
 who, speaking through many mouths, adjusts the measure of their 
 utterance so as to scatter the truth broadcast (as it were) over 
 the Sacred volume, for purposes which we need not here inquire 
 into, is a proper subject fur the canon in question. The dicta of 
 the Oecumenical Councils, presided over by the invisible Head 
 of the Church, and inspired by the Paraclete, must equally be 
 taken in connection as one whole, — and indeed they themselves, 
 from first to last, bear witness to their own consistent integrity. 
 But the Fathers, good and wise as they were — and the Popes, 
 many of them good and wise, but many much the reverse — were 
 fallible men, and thought and spoke differently on many points 
 at different periods of theii" lives and of the Church's history, so 
 that to put a qualiiied sense on the clear and explicit words of a 
 Father because he had jireviously uttered words with which his 
 later judgment will not harmonise, or to assume that the dicta 
 of a particular Pope cannot be interpreted differently from the 
 dicta of a former one, is to raise the Fathei's and the Popes to 
 a co-ordinate authority with the inspired writers and Councils, 
 and to assert practically their infallibility — which Mgr. Maret 
 would not, se-ipso teste, wish to do. The fact is, that the Fathers 
 contradict themselves and each other so frequently that it is 
 impossible for either one side or the other in the lioman- 
 Catholic controversy to base reliable argument upon them — 
 
124 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 unless in eases where their statements are strongly supported 
 by external testimony. It is to be remembered, moreover, tliat 
 the Fathers whose writings have come down to us, especially in 
 the Western Church, are such only as represent the dominant 
 party in the Church ; the writings of men out of favour with 
 Rome have for the most part perished. The evidence is therefore 
 imperfect as to the length and breadth of Christian thought in 
 those ages ; and to take the extant Fathers together as setting 
 forth one consistent scheme of truth is thus not warrantable on 
 any principle of sound criticism.* To the encomia of the Popes 
 — a long, consistent, and almost uninterrupted catena — on their 
 own particular See, its merits and its privileges, no weight at 
 all can be allowed, as being mere affirmations by a party in his 
 own interest. 
 
 I am happy to add that Mgr. Maret is a sound but liberal 
 Roman-Catholic, of a generous type. Lamenting the tendency 
 of the age towards Materialism alike in theology and philosophy, 
 and admitting that anathemas are powerless to dispel error in 
 days Hke ours, he asks from the Council about to be assembled 
 at Eome a correction of disorders and amendment of discipline 
 in the Church on the one hand, and a frank recognition of what 
 is true in modem thought on the other — making all possible 
 concession in this direction ; he calls on it to pay a just tribute 
 to the philosophers who have struggled after truth, fi-om Aris- 
 totle to Leibnitz — to establish the true relation of Science and 
 Faith, limiting the sphere of the former by its proper condi- 
 tions, and giving to the latter its needed imjmlse through the 
 scientific study of theology — and, finally, to i^romote reconcilia- 
 tion between the Church and the laity, religion and liberty, 
 striking the equitable mean so as to bring religion and the 
 civil and political life of the time into harmony — modifying the 
 canon law where obsolete — and, in a word, recognising as an 
 accomplished fact, the state of things in which Providence has 
 placed the Church in the nineteenth century .t 
 
 * Tlie very fact too of the interjiolation and falsification practised upon 
 many of the Fathers by Rome, and which have been detected, venders it 
 doubtful (as mutter o{ juo siimjdio) whether other passages similarly spurious 
 have not eseajied iktoctiim. Jlomc possessed almost eutire control over the 
 MSS. during the earlier and uncritical a;j;cs. 
 
 t See the Preface to Mgr. Maret's work, passim. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 125 
 
 Some further remarks suggest themselves, but I reserve them 
 for the present and sliall produce them as they naturally occur 
 in commenting upon the jiropositions or articles above spoken 
 of — twelve in number — into which tlie Galilean theory, as 
 before us in Mgr. Maret's book, naturally falls. I shall meet 
 them as far as possible (although not exclusively) by the 
 evidence adduced by Mgr. Maret himself, believing that evi- 
 dence to be sufiFicient to vindicate the Anglican remonstrance, 
 as grounded upon (Ecumenicity. The 'Du Concile General' 
 is accessible to every one, so that it will be easy to check the 
 two arguments. The twelve propositions are as follows, — I give 
 them as nearly as possible in Mgr. Maret's own words, as scat- 
 tered over the two first volumes of his work. 
 
 I. 
 
 Gallican theory ; followed hy the Ohjedions from the point of 
 view of the (Ecumenical Church and that of England. 
 
 1. — THE TWELVE PROPOSITIONS. 
 
 I. That the test of Truth, the voice of Infallibility, resides — 
 not in the Private Judgment of individuals or of sectarian com- 
 munions (such private judgment being the parent of exclusive 
 systems, such as Ultramontanism, within the Church, and here- 
 sies without); but, 1. In Scripture; 2. In Tradition, according 
 to the rule ' Quod ubique,' &c. ; and 3. In the General Life of 
 the Christian Society — of the Church as a whole — uttering 
 itself through that " sens traditionncl," that " gout Chretien," 
 that "sens Chretien," that "sens doctrinal," that delicate and 
 deep sense of the verity deposited in the public dogma, which, 
 developed by the operation of evangelic, dogmatic, and trans- 
 mitted truth, through teaching and science, within the heart 
 and conscience of the Church — assimilating* to itself everything 
 analogous, and guaranteed from error by tlie infallibility in 
 doctrine and indefectibility in teaching promised to the Church 
 by Christ, and now limited to St. Peter's succession* — deduces 
 on the one hand, according to the demand of circumstances, 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, i, pp. 22 sqq. ; 2rt sqq., "1,32 sqq., and passim. I shall 
 not (as a rule) add these last t\vi> wor.ls liciciirter, but merely refer to leadiii.;;- 
 jiassa'ies whore the particular points dl (l.H ii ini' are enforced. 
 
126 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 evident consequences from revealed tniths (although not as yet 
 clearly recognised), and formularises and proposes (if called for) 
 to the faith of the Church particular) points of doctrine which 
 have been left undecided and floating in the univers<il tradi- 
 tion ;* wliile, on the other hand, this subtle sense and life is 
 wounded by, resents, revolts from, protests against, and rejects 
 every false and novel doctrine resulting from the mixture of 
 human thought with the divine tradition, in fiivour of antiquity 
 and truth.t The witnesses of this tradition and of the life of 
 Christendom thus informed by it, are Christian history" and its 
 monuments, the Creeds, the acts and decrees of General 
 Councils, the liturgy and practice of the Church, ecclesiastical 
 writers, works of art — everything, in short, by which a Society 
 manifests its internal life, thoughts, and sentiments. J 
 
 II. That, 1. Our Saviour appointed St. Peter Chief of the 
 Apostles, Primate and Head of the Christian Church, and his 
 Vicar upon earth, investing him thus with Universal Juris- 
 diction, Sovereign Power, over the whole Church — the entire 
 constitution of the Church reposing upon Peter — unity with 
 Peter being the mark of Catholicity ;§ and, 2. It would be 
 strange if this Primac}', Headship, Supremacy, Jurisdiction, and 
 Vicariate vested in St. Peter did not descend to his successors ; 
 and it is, in fact, so vested, in full, in those successors, the 
 Bishops or Popes of Eome,|| inferring the right and duty of 
 appeal to the Popes as the supreme judges of controversy** — in- 
 defectibility attaching to their doctrine and judgment, not 
 individually but as a succession, inasmuch as there will always 
 be Popes teaching the pure faith.tt The proofs of this Primacy 
 and Supremacy are found, i. In Our Saviour's will and prayer 
 that the Church should be One,tt and the correlative impossi- 
 bility that Unity should be found in the Apostolic Churches 
 considered as a nuitiber of little aristocratic republics, without * 
 a visible chief; §§ ii. In the words in Scripture addressed si^ecially 
 to St. Peter, " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build 
 my church, . . and I will give unto thee the keys of the 
 
 * Du C. 0., torn, i, p. 39. || Ibid., torn, i, p. 99. 
 
 t Ihid., torn, i, p. 30. ** Ibid., torn, ii, p. 19. 
 
 i Ibid., torn, i, p. 35. ft Ibid., torn, ii, p. 105. 
 
 § Ibid,, torn, i, p. xxi, pp. 94 sqq., Ibid., torn, i, pp. 45, 90 sqq. 
 
 369. §§ Ibid., torn, i, pp. 92 sqq. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 127 
 
 kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever thou slialt bind on earth 
 shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on 
 earth sliall be loosed in heaven," — and, again, " Simon, Simon, 
 behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as 
 wheat : But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not : and 
 when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren," — and again, 
 " Feed my sheep."* iii. In the inference that on this view St. 
 Peter will be always first named, and will preside at the Council 
 of Jerusalem recorded in the Acts of the Apostles ; f iv. In the 
 testimony of the early Fathers to St. Peter's Primacy and that 
 of his successors ;t v. In the testimony of facts during the first 
 three centuries to the Primacy and Supremacy of the See of 
 Rome ; § and, vi. In the testimony of the Oecumenical Councils 
 to the same effect, — this testimony being equally in favour (it 
 is contended) of the present and of the succeeding proposition.! 
 
 nr. That Our Saviour nevertheless conferred the keys on 
 the Apostles other than St. Peter likewise, addressing them 
 in similar words subsequently to his address to Peter, the 
 earlier words not effacing the force of the later ones, — that 
 the fullest powers of all, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost," &c. 
 were conferred upon all the Apostles collectively, the founders 
 of tlie Apostolic Churches, of which Eome was one,** — that the 
 Apostles were consequently invested with all the power that 
 Christ received from His Father, and exercised that power, 
 being substituted as lieutenants " for His person, for the con- 
 tinuance of His mission, with assurance of His presence and aid 
 to them and (by implication) to their successors to the end of 
 the world; they are qualified as the "chiefs" whom the flock 
 are bound to obey, and they form collectively the supreme 
 tribunal of the Church.ft The absolute monarchy of St. Peter, 
 contended for by the Ultramontanes, has thus no authority in 
 Scripture — St. Peter was not the only founder of the Episcopate ; 
 the other Apostles and the Bishops descended from them had 
 originally their jurisdiction directly from Christ — yet with no 
 impeachment to the Primacy of St. Peter and the Apostolic See ; 
 
 * Du C. O., torn. i. pp. 94 sqq. 
 t Ihid., torn, i, p. 96. 
 t Ibid., torn, i, pp. 96 sqq. 
 § Ihif?., torn, i, p. too. 
 
 II Ibid., torn, i, pp. 142 .sqq. 
 ** ]bid., torn, i, pp. 132 sqq. 
 tt Ibid., torn, i, pp. 4.5, 76 sqq. 
 
128 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 and the Bishops within the Koman pale still possess this same 
 direct jurisdiction, under the like reserve.* It is not to be 
 denied that the Fathers, in teaching the Primacy of Peter 
 afiSrm the equality of all the Apostles between each other and 
 with St. Peter; and the explanation is easy, — they were eqtial 
 and unequal, equal in order, unequal in jurisdicfion.f The 
 Bishops succeeded to the transmissible part of the universal 
 jurisdiction of the Apostles.^ But they receive the divine 
 privilege only so far as they are in union with the Pope. § 
 
 IV. That St. Peter and the other Apostles, the collective 
 imity of St. Pet<-r and the other Apostles, and. (in post- 
 Apostolic times) the Pope and the Bishops, as representing St. 
 Peter and the other Apostles, constitute the governing power of 
 the Catholic Church || — which is thus, once more, not an Abso- 
 lute (as contended by the Ultramontanes) but a Tempered, 
 that is, a Mixed or Constitutional Monarchy, the Pope repre- 
 senting the King, the Bishops the Aristocracy, conjointly ruling 
 the flock of Christ.** 
 
 V. That the Oecumenical character, and consequently the dog- 
 matic authority, of the Seven Great General Councils depended 
 on this coequal concurrence of the Pope and the Episcopate, 
 that is, of St. Peter and the other Apostles, — the dissent of 
 Rome, if persisted in, being sufiBcient to invalidate any Council.tt 
 
 VI. 1. That the great Patriarchates of Antioch and Alex- 
 andria were emanations from the Primacy of St. Peter, having 
 been founded, Antioch by St. Peter himself, Alexandria by his 
 disciple St. Biark, in obedience to his authority — in both cases 
 before he transferred his See to Rome, — this being matter of 
 general recognition by the Fathers and ecclesiastical historians, 
 and especially witnessed to by Pope Gelasius ; t| not that St. 
 Peter was the veritijble author of the great metropolitan divi- 
 sions of Eome, Alexandria, and Antioch, or that they were of 
 his personal institution, but it was a disciplinary order, result- 
 ing from the necessity of things, and finding its basis in the 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, ii, pp. 9 sqq., 57, || Ibid., torn, i, p. 136 sqq. 
 58, 281 sqq. ** Ibid., torn, i, pp. 129 sqq., and 
 
 t Ibid., torn, i, p. 99. puKsim. 
 
 i Ibid., torn, ii, p. 281. tt Ibid., torn, i, pp. 144 sqq. 
 
 § Ibid., torn, ii, }). 103. XX Ibid., torn, i, 99; ii, 20 sqq. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 129 
 
 Primacy of the Apostolic See : * And, 2. That, although there 
 were Patriarchates and Churches not directly founded by 8t. 
 Peter, but — as those of Jerusalem, Ephesus, Cyprus, Ciesarea, 
 &c. — founded by other members of the Apostolate, and whicli 
 thus could not be considered as an emanation from the Primacy, 
 and which, by the Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice, preserved 
 their indei>endent privileges of ordination and otherwise, (i. e. 
 did not receive canonical institution direct from Eome, or indi- 
 rectly through the patriarchates of Antioch or Alexandria) t — 
 still, these Patriarchates and Churclies held their privileges, 
 without doubt, ("sans doute " ), by consent of the Sovereign 
 Pontiffs.} The doctrine of Pope St. Leo, that if Christ has 
 willed the other princes (i. e. Apostles) to have something in 
 common witli Peter, it is still by Peter that He has given them 
 what He has not refused them ; and that the divine gifts 
 diffused through the body of the Church, the Apostles, are 
 derived from Peter as its Head — is, it must be admitted, 
 against Scripture, § — and the Ultramontane doctrine that all 
 powers proceed from the " gracious concession of the Papacy " 
 is untenable,!! — it is difficult too to derive the rights of the 
 small Patriaichates from St. Peter unless all the rights of the 
 other Apostles were derived from him, which was not the case:** 
 — P>ut still, St. Peter, as chief of the Apostolate, had the greatest 
 share in founding and governing Churches ; by the creation of 
 the great IMetropoles of Antioch, Alexandria, and Eome, almost 
 the whole Episcopate emanates from him directly or indirectly ; 
 and his authority extends itself over those very Churches them- 
 selves whose origin, according to the Council of Ephesus, may 
 be, or ought to be, attached to the other Apostles.tt The 
 Ejnscopal rights which did not jjroceed from the Holy See, 
 either directly from itself (i. e. from Rome) or indirectly 
 through Alexandria or Antioch, were never independent of its 
 supreme and universal authority.}! Peter was estab- 
 
 lished by Christ as chief of the Apostles, his successor the Pope 
 is chief of the whole Episcopate, and all in the Church is sub- 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, ii, p. 21. || IbirL, ton,, ii, p. f). 
 
 t Ihirl., torn, ii, pp. 21 rii(1. ** Jhirl., torn, ii, p. 30. 
 
 i Jhid., torn, ii, p. 29. ft Jbir/., torn, ii, p. 42. 
 
 § Jhul., torn, ii, p. 40. it Jhi'!., torn, ii, p. 4?,. 
 
 K 
 
130 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 jected to hira ; consequently the Bishops establislied in the early 
 Apostolic Churches were not, could not, be independent of the 
 Holy See. How this universal superiority was, and is, exer- 
 cised (by confirmation) will be stated presently.* 
 
 VII. That, with whatever qualification, all power in the 
 Church thus emanated from tlie Primacy of St. Peter, — that if, 
 through schism and the conquests of the infidels, the inde- 
 pendent rights of the Churches not directly derived from the 
 Apostolic See have cease 1 to be exercised, they are not extinct, 
 inasmuch as no divine right can be lost in the Church, and 
 (according to the doctrine of Thoraassin) they have returned 
 ("ont fait retour ") to the Universal Church, and are confided to 
 the guardianship of the Apostolic See and deposited in the 
 hands of the Sovereign Pontiff, and may some day revive : t — 
 And. more than this; without the slightest wish on the part of 
 the Popes to usurp rights not pertaining to them — the Popes 
 being, on the contrary, always studious to defend such, still the 
 rights formerly exercised by Primates, IMetropolitans, Councils, 
 Popes, and General Councils have now, without reserve and 
 throughout the world, by little and little, through great political 
 changes and disciplinary transformations, and in obedience to 
 the march and will of Providence, become concentrated in the 
 Apostolic See.J 
 
 VIII. That the return and reabsorption of emanated power 
 above spoken of — tlie concentration of the riglits of Primates, 
 Metropolitans, Councils, Popes, and General Councils in the See 
 of Home — was in consequence, in part, of the schism between 
 East and West, the blame of which necessarily and entirely 
 attaches to the East, inasmucli as the West, as represented by 
 the Apostolic See, is the centre of unity and standard of truth.§ 
 Subsequently to the schism, the seat of CEcumenical Councils 
 and of Q^cumenicity was traiisi^orted to the West.|| 
 
 IX. That Kome is thus now the Qilcnmenical or Catholic 
 Church, alone upon the eartli, in exclusion of the Churches of 
 
 * Da V. (f., torn, ii, p. 43, 44. f -^*tf/., torn, ii, pp. 31, 57 sqq. 
 
 X These six words must be added, to complete the context. — Jbid., torn, ii, 
 pp. 53, 56. § IbitL, torn, ii, p. 31, and passim. \\ Ihi<J., toni. i, p. 345. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 131 
 
 the East, and all others ; all power, as has been seen, proceeds 
 from her, all power returns to her, all power reissues from her ; 
 her jurisdiction is thus (since the schism) universal ; tliis uni- 
 versal jurisdiction permits not a single bishop throughout the 
 Catholic world to be created apart from its authority,* — and 
 tlie jurisdiction is exercised and legitimacy conferred upon the 
 Episcopate (beyond the limits of the special Roman See) by 
 that Confirmation of elections and canonical ordinations which 
 results from the acceptance by the Popes of those letters of 
 communion which all Patriarchs, Exarchs, and Primates are 
 bound to write to the Sovereign Pontiff at the moment of their 
 installation, — by accepting which letters he confirms, while by 
 refusing to accept such letters he would invalidate, the entire 
 authority and rights of each such several prelate, as well as the 
 ordinations of the inferior ranks of the clergy which have their 
 source in those rights, t It is not necessary, according to the 
 doctrine of Thorn assin, that the letters in question should con- 
 tain an express demand for confirmation of the dignities in ques- 
 tion, — even as simple letters of civility and respect, they give 
 full scope for the exercise of the Pontifical Supremacy, t In a 
 word, every superiority of one Bishop over another throughout 
 the Catholic world proceeds either by emanation or by imitation 
 from the Primacy of St. Peter ; § and there has never existed 
 a legitimate Bishop but such an one as has been accepted 
 expressly or tacitly by the Pope. || 
 
 X. That the Pope, as Supreme Governor of the Church, has 
 the right to convoke, preside over, direct, suspend, transfer, and 
 dissolve QEcumenical Councils, and must confirm them** — 
 although (as afterwards stated and shewn) such confirmation, 
 however useful, is not necessary, ft the simple adhesion of the 
 Pope to a General Council giving it the requisite confirmation 
 and validity.Jt But he cannot pronounce definitively in matters 
 de fide apart from such Councils. Councils held by the Pope 
 as heir of St. Peter, and as the centre to which the powers 
 
 * Dii a. G., torn, ii, p. 47. 
 
 t Ihicl., toiii. ii, pp. 48, 49. 
 
 X Ibid., torn, ii, p. 48. 
 
 § Jhirl., torn, ii, p. .55. 
 
 II Ibid., torn, ii, p. 58. 
 ** Ibid., torn, ii, p. 157. « 
 ft Ibid., torn, ii, pp. 163, 170 sqq. 
 it Ihid., torn, i, pp. 266, 459. 
 
 K 2 
 
132 
 
 AITEXDIX. 
 
 formerly diffused through the Church by emanation from St. 
 Peter have returned since the schism, are (Ecumenical Councils, 
 and invested with the same prerogative of Infallibility as those 
 held before the separation of the East and West.* 
 
 XI. That Infallibility resides, 1. Not in the Pope, solely and 
 personally, as held by the Ultramontanes — a doctrine which 
 can only be supported by isolation of texts, abstract reasonings, 
 and subsequent interpretation of other texts through the appli- 
 cation of those reasonings — a doctrine unheard of during the 
 first ten centuries — which extends the privilege to all the Pope's 
 dogmatic teachings, implies personal sanctity and philosophical 
 impeccability, and requires a standing miracle, all historical 
 experience being against such assumptions; and which, more- 
 over, deprives the Bishops of their character as judges in 
 Council, and would render Oecumenical Councils useless, 
 whereas, conversely, Councils being necessary, the personal 
 Infallibility of the Pope is useless, t — 2. Nor in the Council 
 alone, apart from the Pope, as urged by the leading doctors at 
 the Council of Constance, under whose influence the Decrees of 
 the fourth and fifth Sessions were passed, t — But, 3. In the 
 Pope conjoined to the Council, as representing St. Peter plus 
 the Apostles, the See of Eome plus the Episcopate, meeting 
 and acting in General Council, which General Council is the 
 ultimate tribunal of the Church, § — the Pope, nevertheless, 
 being constrained, by the decrees of Constance, not to separate 
 himself from the moral unanimity or great majority of the 
 Council in any matter which concerns the faith, the extinction 
 of schism, and the reformation of the Church, — in other words, 
 he must submit his judgment to theirs, and pronoimce sentence 
 accordingly, — thus necessarily excluding the dogma of his 
 personal and absolute Infallibility. || During times of the 
 dispersion of the Church, that is, when a General Council is 
 impossible, the Pope has it always in his power to consult the 
 Episcopate, and by this means, fortified by their opinion, as 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, i, pp. 345 sqq., and passim. 
 t J bid., torn, ii, pp. 152 sqq., 227, 9.iid passim. 
 * X Ibid., torn, ii, p. 1.53, &nd. passim. 
 
 § Ibid., torn, ii, p. 153, and passim. 
 II Ibid., torn, i, 424 ; ii, p. 134. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 133 
 
 Councillors although not Judges, and acting in deference to 
 their moral imanimity or pronounced majority, he has the 
 assurance of Infallibility in his dogmatic and moral judgments.* 
 For it is not to be supposed that the Pope will separate himself 
 from the general opinion of the Church, whether manifested in 
 a General Council or privately through the Bishops during the 
 intei-vals between such Councils.! The Pope is in this sense 
 Infallible that God gives liim a certain means to be Infallible, 
 — he alone has the right to consult the Church by Council and 
 ascertain truth ; he alone possesses and can exercise the power, 
 not only of consulting the Episcopate, but of convoking and 
 consulting the supreme tribunal which, in concert with him, 
 pronounces with Infallibility — thus giving Infallibility to his 
 dogmatic judgments. This is the last secret (" le dernier 
 secret ") of this divine economy.^ He thus disposes of Infalli- 
 bility on earth.§ The Ultramontane or rather Papal doctrines 
 that, i. The Pope is absolute lord over the Church in Council ; 
 that, ii. He is above all ecclesiastical law ; and that, iii. He is 
 above any earthly judge, are thus untenable. || The Pope may 
 be deposed by an Oecumenical Council, and not for heresy 
 — in fact, for contumacy — as fixed by the action of the Council 
 of Constance. If persistently contumacious, he would separate 
 himself from the Church and thus i]^so facto cease to be 
 Pope.** 
 
 XII. That decisions and dida of the Pope are valid ad in- 
 terim during the intervals between General Councils, the assent 
 of the Episcopate, even although expressed by mere taciturnity, 
 being sufScient, and yet of necessity, to stamp them with appro- 
 bation and authority, — and yet only vahd until the supreme 
 tribunal, an QScumenical Council, pronounces upon them with 
 Infallibility :tt — On the other hand, the theory of Papal judg- 
 ments ex cathedra, as distinguished from judgments that are not 
 ex cathedra — the pivot on wliich the doctrine of Papal (as 
 opposed to Conciliar) Infallibility turns — has no foundation in 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, i, p. 540; ii, p. 298. 
 t Ibid., torn, ii, p. 298. 
 t Ibid., torn, ii, pp. 292 sqq. 
 § Ibid., torn, ii, p. 298. 
 
 II Ibid., torn, ii, pp. 153, 181, 201. 
 *• Ibid., torn, i, p. 424 ; ii, pp. 204, 
 205, 540. 
 ft Ibid., torn, i, pp. 516 sqq., 539. 
 
134 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Scripture, no relation to the promises to St. Peter ; it is un- 
 known to all antiquity ; no trace of it is to be found in the law 
 of the Church ; no precise idea is attached to it ; it has been 
 the subject of divers explanations, but never of distinct defini- 
 tion. It is impossible that a privilege so abnormal, so essential 
 to the maintenance of the Catholic faith, as Infallibility, should 
 have been attached to conditions of utterance which are still 
 absolutely undetermined, even in modern times.* It is clear 
 as the day that the only veritable judgments ex cathedra are 
 those which have the consent of the Church in their favour, j 
 
 2. Objections to the preceding Propositions. 
 I. To the 2^^'oposition that Scripture, Tradition, and tJie 
 Christian, Traditional, and Doctrinal Sense, or Taste, evolved hy 
 the General Life of Christendom, constitute the test of Truth, the 
 voice of Infallihility. — To the two first touchstones of the faith 
 as here laid down, the Anglican appeals equally with the 
 Gallican. But against the third he protests as being unknown 
 to antiquity. If Mgr. Maret's ' Christian sense,' or ' taste,' could 
 be understood as the simple application of historical criticism to 
 traditioii towards the ascertainment of the precise teaching aud 
 mind of the Apostles, as exercised by the Nicene Fathers, and 
 subsequently at Constantinople, Ephesus, or Chalcedon, there 
 would be nothing to complain of. But the test cannot be so 
 limited. The understanding and practice of the primitive 
 Church, as witnessed to by the especial testimony of Tertullian, 
 by the rule ' Quod ubique,' &c. and the teaching of Vincent of 
 Lerins, and by the practice of the (Ecumenical Councils, knows 
 nothing of this ' Christian Sense ' which Mgr. Maret associates 
 with Scripture and the Apostolic Tradition as their flower and 
 quintessence. It is a novelty — and barely orthodox, its effect 
 
 * Du C. G., toni. ii, pp. 210 sqq. 
 
 t In the ' Deinitis Eclaircissements,' appended to Mgr. Maret's second 
 volume (pp. 553 sqq.), he states that the ' Constitutum ' aud the dogmatic 
 letters ol'tlie Popes Vigilius and Honorius, respectively condemned by the Fifth 
 and Sixth (Ecumenical Councils, and the solemn Bulls of Eugene IV. directed 
 against the Council of Basle, and which that Pope revoked, although judg- 
 ments ex cathedra according to the usual theory, were not such according to 
 his own, as having been issued in isolation froro the Episcopate. He therefore 
 concludes, broadly, that no Papal judgments which really deserve the name of 
 judgments ex cathedra ever were erroneous. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 135 
 
 being to reduce the presence and testimony of Christ in the 
 midst of the Church to the private judgment of Christendom 
 developing truth. The association of this ' Christian Sense ' 
 with the ancient tests is tantamount to the superiinposition of 
 a cryptogamous and mutable overgrowth, subjectively evolved 
 from the Christian consciousness, upon the original testimony 
 of the Apostles, the faith once delivered to the saints, openly 
 handed down from the beginning in the Apostolic Churches, 
 and objectively set forth before the entire Church by the Great 
 Councils — the canon of the faith having, moreover, been de- 
 finitively closed by Providence through the necessary cessation 
 of those Councils after the schism. Tiiat the Anglican objection 
 is valid is clear from the extension (at once) and limitation of 
 the exercise of this ' Christian Sense ' to the Eoman Catholic, 
 considered as the Catholic or Universal Church ; inasmuch as, 
 it being a fallacy to hold that either the Eastern or Western 
 Church is more than a branch or province of the Oecumenical 
 Church subsequently to their sepai-ation, it follows that dogmas 
 developed by the ' Traditional Sense ' of Christianity, as above 
 stated, in whatever communion, subsequently to that event, 
 cannot bear the stamp of (Ecumenicity, nor may be imposed as 
 articles of faith upon mankind — unless on penalty of schism on 
 the part of those who seek so to enforce them. All such dogmas 
 are of the nature of ' pious opinions,' which may be right or 
 may be wrong. Tliis ' Sense ' or ' Taste ' of Christendom — the 
 * disciplina arcani ' of the West — is, in fact, neither more nor 
 less than the old yva)cn<;, or occult wisdom, of Alexandria, that 
 knowledge of things past, present, and to come, which, according 
 to St. Clement of that city. Our Saviour after his Kesurrection 
 imparted, first to Peter, John, and James, whom he had placed 
 at the head of the Apostolate, and which they delivered to the 
 other Apostles (including St. Barnabas), and the Apostles to 
 the Seventy ; and which thus descended as an esoteric doctrine 
 in the Church — a statement totally unsupported by authority, 
 and indeed implicitly contradicted by all other Christian writers, 
 Neo-Platonism and the mystical traditions of Egypt are the 
 palpable parents of this doctrine ; it crept insensibly into the 
 constitution of the Roman-Catholic Church in the early ages, 
 there to meet and probably coalesce with the Etruscan discipline, 
 
13(3 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 lingering on, at least in spirit, at Rome.* All the doctrinal 
 innovations which England condemns, and that last and worst, 
 the dogma of Papal Infallibility, which Mgr. Mavet's book is 
 directed against, have sprung from this root of bitterness. The 
 Anglican doctrine, on the other hand, wliich is that of (Ecu- 
 menicity, is drawn, as lias been said, from the joint and con- 
 sentient testimony of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, — in 
 accordance with the rules laid down by Irenaeus in the East and 
 Tertullian in the West (to say nothing of St. Vincent) Avith 
 great precision. I shall have occasion to refer to Irenaeus 
 presently, but a few lines from Tertullian will illustrate the 
 present remonstrance. His argument is, that, whereas the 
 heretics assert their competence to interpret Scripture inde- 
 pendently of tlie Church by private judgment, the only sure 
 criterion between truth and error in sucli interpretation is the 
 Tradition of what Christ delivered to the Apostles and the 
 Apostles actually taught in their Churches upon the contro- 
 verted points. After shewing that the Churches, many and various, 
 are all One in Apostolic imity by the " communicatio pacis, 
 et appellatio fraternitatis, et contesseratio hospitalitatis, quae 
 jura non alia ratio regit quam ejusdem sacramenti una traditio," 
 he proceeds, — " Hinc igitur dirigimus prsescriptionem, si Dominus 
 Jesus Christus Apostolos misit ad prsedicandum, alios non esse 
 recipiendos praedicatores quam Christus instituit; quia nec 
 alius Patrem novit nisi Filius, et cui Filius revelavit, nec aliis 
 videtur revelasse Filius quam Apostolis quos misit ad praedi- 
 candum, utique quod illis revelavit. Quid autem praedicaverint, 
 id est, quid illis Christus revelaverit, et hie praescribam non 
 aliter probari debere nisi per easdem Ecclesias quas ipsi 
 Apostoli condiderunt, ipsi eis praedicando, tarn viva, quod aiunt, 
 voce quam per epistolas postea. Si haec ita sunt, constat 
 proinde omnem doctriuam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis, 
 matricibus et originalibus fidei, conspiret, verituti deputaudam, 
 sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesiae ab Apostolis, Apostoli a 
 Christo, Christus a Deo accepit : Omnem vero doctrinam de 
 mendacio praejudicandam, quae sapiat contra veritatem Ec- 
 clesiarum, et Apostolorum, et Christi, et Dei. Superest ergo 
 
 * St. Clement, as quoted by Eusebius, Hist. EccJes., lib. ii. cap. 1. 
 
Ari'ENDIX. 
 
 137 
 
 uti demonstreraus an h?ec nostra doctrina, cujus regulam supra 
 edidimus, de Apostolorum traditione ceuseatur, et hoc ipso, an 
 C8etera3 de meiidacio veniant. Comnuiuicamus ciim Ecclesiis 
 Apostolicis, quod nulli doctrina diversa. Hoc est testimonium 
 veritatis." — De Pnescrijpi. Hwret., cap. 20, 21. — And thus, writing 
 against Marciou, lie asks, " Ego meum dico verum, Marcion 
 suum ; ego Marcionis adfirmo adulteratum, jMarcion meum. 
 Quis inter nos determinabit nisi temporis ratio, ei prgescribens 
 auctoritatem, quod antiquius reperietur, et ei prtejudicans vitia- 
 tioncm quod posterius revincetur ? In quantum enim falsum 
 corruptio est veri, in tantum praecedat necesse est Veritas 
 falsuni." — Adv. Marcion. lib. iv., cap, 4. — I need not multiply 
 citations here; for the above will sufficiently support the 
 distinction between the Catholic and Apostolic, or Oecumenical 
 Tradition acknowledged by the Church of England, and the 
 sectarian 71/0)0-69 against which she protests as the prolific 
 mother of mischief. 
 
 II. To the proposition, that St. Peter received from Our Lord 
 Primary, Headship, Supremacy, and Jurisdiction, as Vicar of 
 Christ, over the tvhole Church ; and that this poiver has descended 
 to and is vested, in full, with all its accessaries, in his successor, 
 the Pope, the centre of unity. — All this — including even the 
 Primacy, in the supernatural sense attributed to it by Eome, is 
 denied by the Anglican Church. That Christ is the Head, the 
 Apostolic Churches the members — those Churches One in Him, 
 not in Peter — such was the view of the early Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church, as witnessed by the (Ecumenical Councils and 
 (testimony of less authority) by many of the Fathers. Our 
 Saviour's promise to be present with the Apostles and their 
 successors till the end of the world was entirely independent of 
 his pledge to guide them by his Spirit into all truth ; and that 
 promise implies fulfilment in accordance with tlie limitations 
 uuder which it was given. The Gospels in the midst of the 
 OEcumenical Councils symbolised this real but unseen presence. 
 The promises to St. Peter were not understood by those Coun- 
 cils in the sense impose l upon them by Rome. The See of 
 Rome (the term ' Apostolic See ' as applied per excellentiam to 
 Rome is — Qilcumenically speaking— a novelty) — the Roman 
 
138 
 
 AITENDIX. 
 
 See, or Patriarchate, had the first place iu honour, and in that 
 sense a Primacy, in the Church — we shall presently see to what 
 extent, why, and whether from the beginning, or no. But, 
 with great and deserved weight and influence, it had no exclu- 
 sive privilege ; tlie independent and often aggressive action of 
 the Popes was invariably checked by the Great Councils within 
 the period of (Ecumenicity, tliat is, before the schism ; and the 
 Supremacy, Universal Jurisdiction, and Vicariate dimly sug- 
 gested to the imagination by those aggressions, but only after- 
 wards elaborated into system, together with the idea of a 
 standing court of appeal at Kome, were then unthouglit of. 
 
 in vindication of these views, and in illustration of the true 
 interpretation of the proofs alleged by Mgr. Maret, I would 
 submit as follows : — 
 
 i. The argument from Our Saviour's prayer for Unity, and 
 from tl)e ajiparent necessity of a visible Head, Chief, or King on 
 earth, in the person of the Pope, has been answered in a former 
 page of this volume : Christ's kingdom " cometh not with obser- 
 vation," " is not of this world," and the Head of that kingdom 
 cannot be a temporal or mundane ruler. Our Anglican founder 
 Pope Gregory the Great thus wrote to John, Patriarch of Con- 
 stantinople in deprecation of his assuming the title of '(Ecu- 
 menical Patriarch,' as an infringement (as he erroneously 
 supposed it) on the rights of all the other patriarchs : — " Certe 
 Petrus, Apostolorum primus, membrum Sanctae et Universalis 
 Ecclesiae, Paulus, Andreas, Johannes, quid aliud quam singu- 
 larium sunt plebium capita ? Et tamen sub uno Capita omnes 
 membra." Opera, edit. Bened. tom. ii., col. 743. — It would be 
 impossible to sum up the Anglican and (Ecumenical doctrine 
 more correctly. 
 
 ii. The words addressed specially to St. Peter have been con- 
 sidered in connection with those addressed to the Apostles 
 collectively, with the description of the New Jerusalem in the 
 Apocalypse, and with St. Paul's testimony to the absolute 
 equality of his own Apostleship, in my Letter entitled ' England 
 versus Kome,' supra. I need only here refer to it. 
 
 iii. Mgr. Maret's inference, logically derived from his pre- 
 mises, that St. Peter will always be first named, and will preside 
 
APi'ENDIX. 
 
 139 
 
 in tl)e first Council at Jerusalem, is not borne out by the 
 evidence — and that evidence is paramount. St. Peter un- 
 doubtedly was the first to proclaim the Gospel to Jews and 
 Gentiles, but St. Paul ranks James first — "James, Cephas, and 
 John," in Acts, ii. 9 ; and it was St. James, and not St. Peter, 
 who presided at Jerusalem. I have shewn this in the Letter 
 above referred to, as also that St. Paul acted towards St. Peter 
 m a manner incompatible with the idea of a Supremacy and 
 Vicariate vesting in that Apostle, and absolutely irreconcileable 
 with any theory of his personal Infallibility. This inference is 
 further strengtliened by the observation (which had escaped me 
 when I wrote the Letter in question) that it was under St, 
 James's influence, as by Galat. ii. 12, that St. Peter lapsed 
 fi-om his original and right judgment. Mgr. Maret candidly 
 abstains from affirming that St. Peter presided at Jerusalem, 
 although his words suggest that such must have been the 
 fact. He appears rather to acquiesce in the qualified language 
 of the Eeport to the Gallican clergy in 1682, — "C'est le pre- 
 sident qui propose les matiferes qui doivent etre examinees, qui 
 a droit de les expliquer, de deraander les suffrages, de les 
 recevoir, de conclure," i.e., in General Councils ; " et quoique 
 r^criture marque que St. Jacques parla le dernier au concile 
 des Apotres, n^anmoins il est aise de voir que St. Pierre y eut 
 la principale part." * 
 
 A passage from St. Clement of Alexandria, preserved by 
 Eusebius, suggests a diflferent view of the matter here in ques- 
 tion : — " Although the Lord had preferred Peter, James, and 
 John before the other Apostles, they did not in consequence, 
 after Our Saviour's Ascension, contend among each other for the 
 fii'st place of honour, but elected James, surnamed the Just, as 
 Bishop of Jerusalem." t It thus appears that in the belief of 
 Alexandria, about the beginning of the third century, Peter, 
 
 * Die 0. G., torn, i, p. 418. Ho even observes, in the interest of the Episco- 
 pate, " Nous ne craiguoiis pas de le dire, co nV'St pas dans le concile de Jerusalem 
 qu'il faut chercher line preuve en favtur de la monarcLie pure et absolue de 
 Saint Pierre." Ibid., p. 142. 
 
 t The words are as follows: — KXij^r)? 8e iv cktco tCov VTrorvwacrewv ypafjxav 
 wSc Trapl<TTr](Ti. UfTpov yap <^r)(Ti Ka\ 'Iqk&)/3oi' koI 'Imavvrjv pcru rfjv dvaAr]\j/tv 
 Tov 2<ur^pos, i>s av Kai vtto tov Kupi'ov TTpOT(Tip.r}pivnvs, prj eniSiKa^faGai 
 8d^ijr, aW 'laKio^ov rnv AiKaioc (nlaKonov '\€po(To\vpa>v eXiuOai. — L'uscbius, 
 Hist, Eccles., lib. ii., cap. 1. 
 
140 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 James, and John were on sueli terms of equality that either 
 of them might have contended for the post of dignity — that 
 post being, not the Supremacy or Vicariate now claimed exclu- 
 sively for Peter, but the Bishopric of the Holy City, Jerusalem, 
 which thus represented the Primacy in the Christian Church at 
 that time. Had Peter been Vicar and Head of the Cliurch, 
 that post would have been his by Divine right, without the 
 possibility of doubt or cavil. But it was not his, — it was 
 assigned to another — not by the bequest of Our Saviour, but by 
 the free election or choice of St. Peter and St. J ohn, if not (for, 
 as already suggested, I am sceptical as to the alleged trium- 
 virate) by the entire body of the Apostles. This is in strict 
 keeping (as the view of St. Peter's Divine Vicariate would be 
 incompatible) with the action and testimony of the CEeumeuical 
 Council of Chalcedon, presently to be adduced. I have sug- 
 gested the process by which the Primacy thus originally esta- 
 blished at Jerusalem was transferred to Eome, supra, p. 38. 
 
 iv. Mgr. IMaret, in quoting passages from the early Fathers, 
 admits that, while teaching the Primacy of St. Peter, they also 
 affirm the equality of all the Apostles between each other and 
 with Peter ; a fact ^vhich he explains by asserting that they were 
 equal and unequal, equal in order, unequal in jurisdiction — a 
 modern retrospective assumption, rendered necessary by the 
 Eoman-Catholic confusion of the Primacy of St. Peter's See at 
 Rome with a Vicariate or sovereign Supremacy. The equality 
 admitted sufficiently proves that the Primacy was not Supremacy; 
 and the citations by Mgr. Maret in support of the personal pre- 
 eminence of St. Peter, M'hen balanced by those subsequently 
 given by him in support of what he is equally (as we shall see) 
 intent to prove, viz. the independent dignity of the other 
 Apostles, may be said to kill eacii other — the usual effect of 
 exaggeration on either side of any question. It must be remem- 
 bered here as canons of criticism in dealing with the Fathers 
 (in addition to the cautions already suggested), 1. That the 
 testimony of Latin Fathers and d fortiori of the Popes them- 
 selves, iu favour of Roman Supremacy and exclusive privilege 
 is suspicious and weak in proportion to the temptation they had 
 to uphold it against the East, and that their words must not be 
 interpreted retrospectively and thus exaggerated by modern 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 141 
 
 theories of Papal right, but by the historical standard of the 
 times ; 2. That their frequent testimony or mere admissions in 
 favour of CEcumenicity against Rome (such as tliat of Pope 
 Gregory, above cited) are of correspondently greater value, as 
 extracted from them by conscience and truth ; and, 3. That the 
 honorary qualification of St. Peter and Pome, found in some of 
 the Greek Fathers, must not be understood in any sense wliicli 
 can derogate as evidence from the equality asserted by St. Paul 
 for himself in Scripture, and fully recognised in the East, or 
 from the uniform subordination and restraint imposed upon the 
 independent action of Rome by the Great Oecumenical Councils 
 held in the East. All the Latin translations, moreover, of the 
 Greek Fathers must be carefully compared with the Greek 
 texts before dependence can be placed on them, as they fre- 
 quently bear the unniistakeable stamp of Western prejudice.* 
 Most, it may be added, of the passages cited by Mgr. Maret and 
 others in the controversy will be found, when closely looked 
 into, and taken in their context, and under the critical condi- 
 tions which must be applied to them as to any other source of 
 history, either to shrink into insufficiency or to tell positively in 
 i'avour of the CEcumenical and against the Roman argument. 
 Of all these passages the one which is most relied on, and has 
 perhaps been most misunderstood, is that from Ireufeus, in 
 which the writer is represented as asserting the necessity of 
 union for all the fiiithful with tlie Church of Rome, — "ad hanc 
 enira Ecclesiam propter potiorem " [al. potentiorem) " princi- 
 palitatein necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam, hoc est, eos 
 qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab his qui sunt undique 
 conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolis traditio." Adv. Hmreses, 
 lib. iii. c. 3. Irenteus had been complaining (like TertuUian) 
 tliat the lieretics interpreted the Scriptures, not according to the 
 Apostolic Tradition, but by their private judgment ; and in lay- 
 
 * The iia>-sa2;o from Euseliius, for exnmiilo, tnuislatod " fuitissimum et 
 iiiaxiiimm inter Apostolus, et virtutis rncrito leliquonnn omnium iirincipcm 
 ac patronum," is in the Greek simply, rov Kaprepuv Kai fxtyav rwv Attoo-to'Xo)!/, 
 TTji up^TijS 'iveKarwv'KoLTTcav iiTTavTav TTpcirjynpov, ITfr/joi', — " liini who, on aconunt 
 of his manly virtue, was Ihc lendrr (moiv convnly (lir rniviiM.st V'l' all tin' n^sC 
 
 of the Apostles,"— leailer, cliiuii|..-ii, il J: I !•><•.•.. •-. i,. .1 - \:ui ..f iIk- 
 
 Apostolic band, and fighlin-, in ll,.- mi-Ummt ivlm.d l.. I.y I ...m'I.ius, :l;;uiiisl 
 Simon Magus at iiome, — woids inipl_iin:; no ollieial snpo inriiy, as the l.atin 
 version would suggest. — Lib. ii, cap. 14. 
 
142 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 ing down the rule that the truth is only to be ascertained by 
 having recoui'se "ad earn . . Traditionem quae est ab Apostolis, 
 quae per successiones presbyterorum in Ecclesiis custoditur," 
 (ibid. c. 2,) he points, not to Rome exclusively, but to the three 
 Churches, first, of St. Peter and St. Paul at Eome, secondly, of 
 St. John in Asia, and thirdly, of St. Paul at Ephesus, as custo- 
 dians, among otliers, of the said Tradition ; but, inasmuch as it 
 would be tedious (he says) to deduce the succession of bishops 
 in all the Churches, he will content himself witii rehearsing 
 the succession in the Church of Eome, as the greatest, the most 
 ancient, and familiarly known to all men, — after which follow 
 the words above cited ; the signification being that, as the faith 
 professed at JRome was the true Apostolic faith as held by all 
 the Apostolic Churches, therefore the faithful must necessarily 
 hold as Eome does, — words which might have been said of 
 Asia or Ephesus with just as much accuracy on the conditions 
 laid down, although those Churches would not have afforded tlie 
 same scope for hyperbole. The passage from Cyprian cited by 
 Mgr. Maret has long been recognised as, if not a forgery, the 
 result of the insertion of marginal glosses into the text of the 
 author,* the oldest MSS. not exhibiting them, as by the testi- 
 mony of Baluze himself in his notes, although the text in his 
 edition preserves the jiassage in its corruption. Mgr. Maret, 
 with his usual good faith, admits tliat it is suspected, but founds 
 upon it on the ground that it is in perfect accordance with the 
 doctrine and spirit of Cyprian in the treatise cited. 
 
 It remains for me merely to point out the palpable argument, 
 that if the Headship, Supremacy, Jurisdiction, and Vicariate 
 over the Church was given to St. Peter and to his See, as 
 asserted, it would not only have been expressly stated in Uolj'^ 
 Scripture but clearly affirmed throughout the literature of the 
 Primitive Church ; whereas it is to be found in neither the one 
 nor the other. On the contrary, utter silence surrounds, utter 
 darkness shrouds, the CEcumenical pilgrim as his steps approach 
 the city of the Popes, looking for the Apostolic signs of its 
 
 * 'J'his seems to have been a not micommon practice. We may see (if I 
 mistake not) an example of it in the five words, "eos qui sunt undique 
 fidelcs," in tlie extract above given from Iren»us. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 143 
 
 media5val grandeur and authority. If, moi-eover, the Vicariate 
 was in St. Peter and his See without specification of locality, as 
 is the tendency of Mgr. Maret's argument, it is difficult to divine 
 by what rule or right it became settled at Rome to the exclusion 
 of Antioch, a See of St. Peter's creation likewise, and (with 
 submission to Irenaeus) older than that of Rome, and which still 
 boasts of ' St. Peter's Chair.' But no claim to Supremacy on 
 such behalf was ever made by Antioch, whicli could not have 
 been the case had the Vicariate been recognised as personally in 
 St. Peter. Neither in the case of Antioch, of Rome, nor of the 
 Church at large, could such a light have been hid under a 
 bushel. 
 
 V. The facts adduced by Mgr. Maret in proof of the Primacy 
 and Supremacy of Rome during the first three centuries do not 
 confirm his thesis. He alleges, 1. Tiie apjieal from the Church 
 of Corinth to St. Clement of Rome for his intervention towards 
 the appeasing of her intestine troubles.* Tl;e date of this 
 appeal and of what followed, a.d. 67-70, renders the circum- 
 stances peculiarly important in this argument. Tiiat it was no 
 appeal in a judicial sense to a supreme tribunal invested with 
 universal authority is sufficiently clear from tlie fact that such 
 appeals were first recommended by Osius of Cordova at the 
 Council of Sardica in Illyricum, a.d. 347, sliortly after the 
 Council of Nice, — a fact which proves (what equally appears 
 from the memoranda of the speeches made at that Council) that 
 appeals to Rome were at all events not common or a matter of 
 usage, and still less of obligation, in that country, although a 
 province of the West ; while it is to be remembered tliat, as an 
 invariable rule, all interventions and judgments of the Roman 
 bishops, however solemnly made and backed by excommuni- 
 cation from the fraternity of Rome, were held in susjjense, and 
 those excommunicated received with undiminished honours, by 
 the CEcumenical Councils till the judgments had been reviewed, 
 after hearing of botli parties, and eitlier affirmed or rejected, — 
 a rule that would equally have applied in the case of such 
 judgments as those which condemned Pelagins, tor example, 
 had they been thus appealed against. Put it is impossible for 
 
 * Du C. (!., tdill. i, \>]>. ]nO sqq. 
 
144 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 any one to read tliat invaluable document, St. Clement's first 
 epistle to the Corinthians, written in a.d. 70, and not perceive 
 that the st3'le, tenour, and ecclesiastical status of the writer is 
 as different from that assumed by any of the later Popes, as 
 exhibited in their official writings, as light is from darkne.ss. 
 "The Clmrcli of God at Eome to the Church of God at 
 Corinth," such is the opening of the epistle. St. Clement 
 recognises other churches on the footing of equality, — he 
 attempts to exercise no authority ; he asserts no superiority ; 
 and, most singularly for a Eoman bishop, in speaking of St. Peter 
 and St. Paul, he names St. Peter first indeed, but passes briefly 
 over him, to enlarge with far more emphasis and exaltation upon 
 St. Paul — as if St. Paul had really been the principal foimder 
 of the Eoman Church, and St. Peter merely his associate. That 
 Corinth should have sought the intervention of Eome, an 1 not 
 of Antioch, Alexandria, or Ephesus, is easily to be understood 
 when we reflect that the Corinth in question was, properly 
 speaking, the Eoman colony so named, not the ancient Greek 
 city, and that Eoman influence prevailed there rather than the 
 Asiatic — St. Paul himself, moreover, having been a Eoman 
 citizen, and as much of an European by culture as a Jew. St. 
 Clement's own character for holiness and moderation doubtless 
 had its rightful influence. — 2. Mgr. Maret's second proof in 
 favour of the jurisdiction of Eome over the whole Church is 
 from the menace of excommimication fulminated by Pope 
 Victor against Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus and the Bishops 
 of Asia Minor, a.d. 196, for celebrating Easter on the same day 
 as the Jews. Ireuceus interposed, and peace was restored. No 
 excommunication followed, and the ancient U-sage continued to 
 be practised in the East ; and the proof of Supremacy rests 
 upon the fact that Irenoeus "did not dispute the pontifical right, 
 but merely counselled the Pope not to use it! " * No argumeut 
 can be founded on the reticence of fallible mortals, who cannot 
 foresee what the consequences of their inaction will be, nor can 
 be credited, however holy, with that unfailing moral courage 
 
 * Du C. G., torn, i, pp. 101 sqq. Ircnseus wrote, not only to Pope Victor 
 but to many other bishops, imp r^s tS>v eKKkria-lav eipT]vris, " for the peace of 
 the churches," thus at vnriancr. — Hist. Fccles., lib. v, cap. 24. 
 
Al'PENDIX. 
 
 145 
 
 which confronts and puts dovra assumption. It was, moreover, 
 and is, the invariable usage of Orientals to give assumption the 
 go by — with politeness, but without yielding an inch. And thus 
 they acted towards Rome in innumerable instances, some of 
 which are incidentally exhibited by Mgr. Maret. Mgr. Maret 
 himself draws attention to the fact that Polycrates and many of 
 liis adherents are honoured as Saints in the Greek Church, 
 notwithstanding their opposition to Rome ; and that it was 
 reserved for the Council of Nice to terminate the question of 
 the time of keeping Easter by its own supreme authority.* 
 — 3. Mgr. Maret's third proof is from the action of Pope 
 St. Stephen, c. a.d. 255, in commanding St. Cyprian of Carthage 
 and the African Churches, St. Firmilian of Csesarea, and the 
 Churches of Asia to conform to tradition and not reiterate 
 baptism administered by heretics in the legitimate form — 
 a mandate actually followed up by excommunication of St. 
 Firmilian and the Eastern Churches. The Churches and 
 St. Cyprian refused compliance, "but, in refusing their sub- 
 mission, did not deny the Roman primacy," f — consequently that 
 primacy existed, in the Roman-Catholic sense of supremacy 
 and jurisdiction. St. Cyprian's comments on this conduct of 
 the Roman Bisliop — qualifying it as tyrannical, and that of 
 one who constitutes himself a "bishop of bishops" over Ids 
 biethren — cannot, according to Mgr. Maret, be understood 
 apart from former writings of Cyprian in wliieh he speaks 
 otherwise of Rome ; but I have pointed out already tliat tliis 
 principle of interpretation would place the writings of a Father 
 on the same level with Scripture, and the earlier passage 
 referred to is that wiiich is admitted, even by Roman-Catholic 
 writers, to have been interpolated. Here again Mgi-. Maret, in 
 view of the constitutional limitation of the Papal Supremacy, 
 remarks on the singularity that, although excommunicated by 
 Rome, Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea is a Saint in the Greek 
 Calendar ; and it was not till the Coimcil of Nice that the 
 views (rightly in this case) maintained by Rome were de- 
 tmitively sanctioned.^: — 4. Again, and still in the third century, 
 St. Dionysius Archbishop of Alexandria having been calumniated 
 
 * Dit C. G., torn, i, ]). 153. f Ihid , torn, i, pp. 105 sqq. 
 
 J Ibirl; toni. i, j.p. ir>() sfiq. 
 
14G 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 before Pope St. Dionysius as guilty of heresy, and the latter 
 having sent to ask an explanation, the Alexandrian patriarch 
 did not decline the Pope's competence to enquire, but justified 
 himself — and letained his seat.* This last phrase is, of course, 
 a pure gloss. Because a high and independent prelate, the 
 Pope's brother patriarcli, one of the most learned and illus- 
 trious champions of the truth, and whose learning and piety 
 were equalled by bis charity, as evinced, like that of "Marseilles' 
 good Bishop " by his good works to the sick and dying 
 
 " When nature sicken'd and each gale was death " 
 
 at Alexandria — because this great and good man, whom St. 
 Basil actually styles 'the Great Dionysius,'! and St. Athanasius 
 the 'Doctor of the Catholic Church,'} acted with Christian 
 humility and did not repel his brother Pope's demand with 
 anger (for the patriarch of Alexandria was 'Pope' per esxel- 
 lentiam as well as the Bishop of Rome) — Rome is proved to be 
 supreme ! And these are the sole proofs alleged by Mgr. Maret 
 of the Supremacy of the Apostolic See, as manifested in action, 
 during the first three centuries — to which he confines himself, 
 on the ground that Protestants only contest those centuries, the 
 proofs being clear, in favour of Rome, in the fourth, fifth, and 
 later ages,§ It is further self-evident that if Rome had been 
 a court of appeal (were it but in the first instance only) open to 
 all the churches, there would have been rules and canons for 
 the conduct of such appeals ; but not a trace of such legislation 
 exists ; and that silence would afford absolute proof to the 
 contrary, and that appeals were voluntary and the decisions of 
 the popes, or other patriarchs merely ad interim, even if no 
 (Ecumenical Councils had ever defined the true character of 
 the ecclesiastical primacy of Rome, or acted in disallowance 
 of her usurpations. 
 
 vi. Passing to the testimony of the great (Ecumenical Coun- 
 cils, and of the Council of Nice to begin with, " all the divine 
 rights of the Apostolic See," according to Mgr. Maret, " appear " 
 in it. II The Council was presided over, he states, by Osius, 
 
 * Du C. O., twn. i, pp. 107 sqq. t Opera, edit. Bened., 1722. 
 
 torn, iii, p. 269. f Opera, edit. Cened., 1G98, torn, i, p. 247. 
 
 § Du C. G., torn, i, p. 100. || Ibid., torn, i, p. 148. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 147 
 
 Bisliop of Cordova, and by two Koman presbyters, all three in 
 the name of Pope Sylvester. There is, however, no proper 
 evidence for this allegation, but the contrary. It is true that 
 Osius signs first, before the legates, but he does not sign in the 
 Pope's name, — had he presided as the Pope's representative, he 
 would have said so, — not saying so, and the legates being post- 
 poned to him, the presumption is against Rome having presided. 
 Osius was, in fact, by far too great a man to occupy a subor- 
 dinate post. The probability is tliat it was he who presided. 
 The historian Eusebius, after enumerating the various Churches 
 whicli appeared at the Council by their representatives, even 
 from very distant lands, adds, " Even from Spain that imiver- 
 sally celebrated man " — Osius — " sat togetlier with the rest; the 
 bishop of the Imperial city " — Kome — " was absent througli age ; 
 but his priests being present filled his place," or represented 
 him. Mgr. Maret's assertion is thus unsupported by this prime 
 authority ; and a solitary passage from Gelasius of Cyzicus, 
 writing at the end of the fifth century, in which he quotes the 
 words of Eusebius thus, " Ipse etiam Hosius, . . qui Sylvestri 
 episcopi maximse Romse locum obtinebat, una cum Eomanis 
 presbyteris Bitone et Vincentio, cum aliis multis in consessu 
 illo adfuit," is contradicted by, and in fact irreconcileable with 
 the genuine text, and is consequently treated by Tillemout as 
 spurious, and the supposed legation of Osius as imaginary.* I 
 state this in the interest of truth; for there \\ould have been 
 nothing wonderful in the first in rank of the patriarchs presiding 
 at the Council, or at any Council, even by his legates ; but the 
 evidence is unfortunately against it on this occasion. That 
 the legitimate influence of Rome was powerfully and rightfully 
 felt in the Council need not be disputed ; on the contrary, it 
 is a subject for just satisfaction to Anglicans. What is really 
 important is, that when, among the collateral matters which 
 occupied the attention of the Council, the questions between 
 
 * " U est mesme visiblo qu'on ne pent lire le tcxtc do cet historien cotnme 
 k' rapporte Gelase sans une conuptiou et- un vcnverscment nianifeste de son 
 sens." — Hist Ecdes., toni. vi, ]). S()7, ami sec ]i. (io7. — 'J'hc oiiijinal text is as 
 follows: — AvTcov TC ^TTUVuiv 6 ndvv /i.H.i^f mv fis rfv roit TroXXoIr afm trvvf- 
 SpevQiv' Trjs be ye ^acrt\evuv(TrjS TrdAews- o fxtv TctijXtTTuis varepet 6ta y^pas' TTp«T- 
 fivTtpoi S'avToii napovres rqvavTov ru^iv inXr^povv. — De Vita Const., lib. iii, c. 7- 
 — I give the passage from Gelasins in the Latin version, as cited by M'^r. Maret. 
 
 L 2 
 
148 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 tlie Asiatic and African Churches and Popes Victor and Stephen 
 as to tlie time of keeping Easter and the rebaptism of persons 
 baptized in the proper form by heretics were brought before it, 
 on botli of which points the Popes (as we have seen and as is 
 affirmed by Mgr. Ma ret) had spoken with the whole weight of 
 their authority — the Council held itself supreme, allowed no 
 weight to the dicta and threats of the Eoman Pontiffs, treating 
 them as non avenus, and acted in entire independence; pro- 
 viding by its Eighth and Nineteenth Canons, but only indirectly 
 and as matter of discipline, that baptism administered by 
 heretics in the correct maimer should be recognised as valid, 
 and by a separate ordinance that Easter should be kept hence- 
 forward, for the sake of uniformity, everywliere on the same 
 day, as the Christian not the Jewish Passover, — in both these 
 cases judging in conformity with Eome, but not in submission 
 to her, and in the latter instance studiously couching their 
 language, as remarked by Dean Stanley, so as " to avoid the 
 necessity of imposing penalties on those who were at first 
 reluctant to give up their ancient customs."* It is impossible to 
 imagine a more absolute disproof of the entire theory of Eoman 
 supremacy than is afforded by the simple fact, that the solemn 
 decrees of Eome on the important subjects of Easter and re- 
 baptism, backed by excommunication in the one instance and 
 the threat of it in the other, remained a dead letter from the 
 moment of their pronunciation ; and that the regulations which 
 the Church ultimately adopted on the respective subjects pro- 
 ceeded from the general assembly of the representatives of the 
 entire College of the Apostles, and not from the single see of 
 Rome, whose slightest word, if really the seat of the Vicar 
 of Christ, should have at once determined the disputed ques- 
 tions.t After this practical proof, it is hardly necessary to refer 
 to the provision made in the Sixth Canon of Nice, that the 
 ancient customs shall prevail in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, 
 
 * liefereuce may be made to the ' Canons of the First Four Councils,' lately 
 published in Greek and English, by Messrs. Parker, — a veiy convenient little 
 manual. The Acts and other documents connected with tliese Coimcils may 
 be seen in the great collections of LabLc, Mansi, and others. 
 
 ■f This is readily admitted, or rather, founded ujwn by Mar. Maret, tom. i, 
 p. 103; and compare also p. 1G9. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 141) 
 
 and that the Bishop of Alexandria shall exercise jurisdiction 
 over them all, " because thus it is also customary for the Bishop 
 in Eome ; and that the honours, or precedence, (ra irpea^ela) of 
 Antioch and other Churches be preserved inviolate," — words 
 which distinctly athrm the relative independence of the three 
 patriarchates. All this, of course, was very distasteful to the 
 Popes ; and thus, in the Latin copies of the Niceue canons, the 
 words " Quod Ecclesia Eomana semper habuit primatum " were 
 added to the Sixth Canon (just cited) during the interval 
 between a.d. 325 and a.d. 451, the date of the Council of Chal- 
 cedon, or Fourth Qicumeuical Council, at which they were 
 alleged to the Council in proof of the Eoman Supremacy — to 
 the astonishment of the Oriental prelates and the confusion 
 of the Papal emissaries, wlien the original Greek record was 
 referred to and the interpolation exposed. I have to add, very 
 shortly, that in the Second (Ecumenical Council, that of Con- 
 stantinople, in the Thiid, that of Ephesus, in the Fifth, in 
 which Pope Vigilius was overruled and condemned, arid in the 
 Sixth, in which the Monothelite writings of Pope Hoiiovius were 
 burnt as heretical, the solemn decrees and judgments of the 
 Eoman See in matters dejide brought before the Council were 
 treated with the same uniform independent action by the 
 respective Councils, which received none without examination, 
 and rejected all which they disapproved of, as the Supreme 
 Tribunal, to which, as composed, in the words of the Emperors 
 Theodosius and Valentinian addressed to St. Cyril when sum- 
 moning the Council of Ephesus, of " the bishops of the Uni- 
 versal Church, judgment in matters of doctrine rightfully 
 belongs." Mgr. Maret himself cites most of these various 
 instances in disproof of the dogma of Papal Infallibility ;* but 
 they require distinct allegation here as disproving that supposed 
 Headship, Supremacy, Universal Jurisdiction, and Vicariate, 
 inherent in the Papacy as the heir of St. Peter's primacy, 
 which, once allowed, renders it difficult, if not impossible, to 
 deny the Infallibility of the Pope, or assert it for the Church, 
 except by cutting off the Eastern Church as heretical and 
 concentrating the entire jurisdiction of the Church in Eome. 
 
 * Da C. G., torn, i, pp. 106 sqq., 172 sqq., 254 sqq., 285. 
 
150 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 It is thus impossible, under the present head, to recognise 
 in Eome the .Supremacy contended for. I'he Councils were 
 supreme, not the Pope. Had the Pope been supreme, the 
 Councils would have simply registered liis decrees, whereas the 
 reverse obtained ; the Pope registered the decrees of the Coun- 
 cil, — had he not done so, he would have become ipso facto a 
 schismatic. 
 
 Finally, that the primacy or precedence enjoyed by the 
 Popes as the first bishops of the Church was not theirs by 
 the direct appointment of Our Saviour in the person of St. 
 Peter, or even in the dignified character of St. Peter's successors 
 (although no one denied them that exalted character as his 
 representatives in the West), but by the concession of the 
 Church, and on political considerations, is clear from the most 
 cogent of all testimony on such a point, that of the Fourth 
 Oecumenical Council, or of Chalcedon, which, in its Twenty- 
 eighth Canon or Decree, confirms the precedence of the See of 
 Constantinople as next after Rome, in tliese remarkable words : — 
 " Following in all things the definitions (opoi/?, landmarks, or 
 boundaries) of the holy Fathers, and the rightfully acknow- 
 ledged canon of the one hundred and fifty Bishops assembled 
 by the Great Theodosius in the City of Constantinople, or 
 New Kome," that is, of the Second GEcumenical Council, " the 
 same we also define and vote with respect to the honours of 
 seniority " (to irpea^ela — primacy in the sense of precedence 
 through eldership, for simple 'primacy' would have been to, 
 TrpcoTeia) " of the most holy citj"- of the same Constantinople. 
 For the Fathers rightly gave the irpea^ela to the throne of 
 the senior Kome " (ttj? ■7rpecrfivTepa<; 'Pajyu.???) " because that 
 city ruled," (was the Imperial City, or Capital,) " and the one 
 hundred and fifty Bishops, moved with that intent, assigned 
 equal Trpea-^eia to the most holy throne of the Xew Eome" 
 (Constantinople), " judging with reason that the City which 
 had been honoured with the rule " (as the seat of civil govern- 
 ment) " and senate, and which enjoys equal irpea-^eta with the 
 senior and royal Kome, should be exalted in ecclesiastical 
 matters also, taking precedence" {vTrap')(ov(Tav, either from 
 apxh^ beginning, or ap'xri, rule) " as second after that city : " — 
 Words which testify that the primacy, or precedence, whatever 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 151 
 
 it may be called, enjoyed by the Bishops or See of Kouie, had 
 beeu a concession, a gift, by the Fathers assembled previously 
 in CEcumenical Coimcil at Constantinople, and which that of 
 Chalcedon recognised — but of honour only, and in virtue of 
 Rome being the metropolis of the whole Koman empire — not 
 of supremacy or jurisdiction.* And the canon of the Council 
 of Constantinople, thus confirmed, although much shorter, is 
 equally explicit as to the precedence or primacy being that 
 of honour, styling it ra irpealSeia t?}9 Tt/ii^9 — " that the Bishop 
 of Constantinople shall have precedence of honour after the 
 Bishop of Eome, because she " (Constantinople) " is New 
 Home." t 
 
 It may, of course, be replied to this demonstration, that 
 Pope Leo, in expressing his approbation and acceptance of the 
 decrees of Chalcedon in writing to the Fathers of the Council, 
 limited it to their decrees in matters de fide, admonishing them 
 to observe the canons of Nice and respect the rights of tiie 
 Churches as there defined (including, it must be presimied, 
 the spurious addition to the Sixth Canon, in favour of Kome, 
 already spoken of) — thus protesting against the promotion of 
 the See of Constantinople above the heads of the other three 
 patriarchates, his o«ti precedency not being touched by it. 
 The Sixth Canon of Nice undoubtedly orders (as I have shewn) 
 that the Trpea-jBela of Antioch and the other eparchies or 
 provinces shall be protected. What the Council of Constanti- 
 nople had done was to promote the Bishop of Constantinople 
 over the heads of Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem to the 
 next seat after Rome. It would be difficult to say that in a 
 point of order, not de fide, an (Ecumenical Council has not the 
 right to modify precedence, as well as other arrangements of 
 
 * The learned Patriarch Theodore Balsamon contends, or rather affirms, 
 that the Trpecr^cta assigned bj' the Fourth Council (and renewed, I may add, 
 by the Sixth) to Constantinople, as next to Rome, were nut of honour but of 
 mere precedence, in point of antiquity, — that the irpudfcnv tov xpoww f'rai 
 Sr/XuriK^j', aXX' oh r^s Tip^r. He supports this by tiie argument that, the 
 avowed design being to place Kome and Constantinople on an equality, there 
 could be no inferiority on the part of the see wliich occupied the second place. 
 It may be difficult to reconcile the reasnn witli the words which give effect to 
 the action grounded on the reason ; but in m iilicr ]ioiiit of view is there any 
 hint of Roman Supremacy. — Hi-r i-i.J.i, \ S:i, ,,,./,, \\,\. i, pp. sO, liM). 
 
 t So too, in the Seventh Xicnir CaiKni, llm words are that tlie L5ishop of 
 JEUa (or Jerusalem) fp^/Tw ri)v ciKoXnvdiai' rrjs Ttfiijs. 
 
152 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 expediency, according to the times, — it was through a similar 
 modification that Jerusalem, originally the seat of primacy or 
 honour, yielded to Rome ; and when Constantinople became 
 the Second Eome, and the Empire was practically divided, it 
 may have appeared as reasonable that there should be two 
 equal Bishops of the twin seats of government as that there 
 should be (as had been the case more than once) two Emperors. 
 The question may bear discussion, but is immaterial here ; and, 
 as matter of fact, the Pope's protest was disregarded. But the 
 point of the above evidence, as bearing on the present question, 
 stands out on its own merits, wholly untouched by Pope Leo's 
 dissidence ; and that point is, the deliberate testimony of the 
 Council — which had all the traditions of the (Ecumenical 
 Church and all other means of information in its hands — 
 that the primacy of the Roman Bishop was one of honour only, 
 granted to him on the purely political ground of his being the 
 eciilesiastical representative of the Ruling City, Imperial Rome. 
 It was on this account, doubtless, that the title of ' Oecumenical 
 Patriarch ' is given (as lias been elsewhere stated in this volume) 
 to the Bishops of both Romes, Old and New, but upon them 
 exclusively of the other three patriarchs — although the Popes 
 abstained from using the title, probably as imposing a political 
 reading upon the character of their jui'isdiction. 
 
 What has been thus shewn tallies with the evidence afforded 
 by the tone and teuour of Pope St. Clement's epistle to the 
 Corinthians, and with the statement of Clement of Alexandria, 
 cited by Eusebius, respecting the election of St. James to the 
 Bishopric of Jerusalem as the seat of honoury and the inferences 
 deducible from it. 
 
 No one can deny that Rome asserted, and, I doubt not, very 
 soon after Pope Clement's time, preeminent privileges, which 
 became the germ of the superhuman powers since ascribed to 
 her ; but when claims asserted are not recognised by a superior 
 and the only competent tribimal, and on the contrary, are uni- 
 formly disregarded or rebutted by that tribimal, such claims 
 must be regarded as visionary. Moreover, the tribunal in ques- 
 tion actually defines tlie nature of the seniority or primacy 
 enjoyed in such terms as to shew that it rested on a totally 
 different foundation from that contended lor. 
 
Ari'ENUIX. 
 
 153 
 
 One point only remains to be noticed in the evidence afforded 
 by the CEcumenical Councils, — that, viz., bearing on tlie ques- 
 tion of appeals to Rome. The Council of Sardica, as has been 
 mentioned, recommended such appeals, as to a wise and impartial 
 foreign umpire, on grounds of expediency in the presence of 
 domestic dissensions ; but the very fact of the recommendation 
 proves the novelty of the idea, and the Council which enter- 
 tained it never obtained general acceptance even in the West. 
 In Africa such appeals wtre expressly forbidden by the canon 
 " Ut nullus ad transmarina audeat appellare," cited (from 
 the ' Book of the Canons ') in the proceedings of the Synod 
 of Carthage held under Bishop Boniface, a.d. 525.* But the 
 limit of appeal was laid down clearly by the Council of Chal- 
 cedon in its Ninth Canon, which rules first, that a cleric at 
 variance with another cleric shall resort to his bishop, or (under 
 his sanction) to an impartial commission, whose judgment shall 
 be final, — that a cleric having complaint against a bishop 
 shall resort to the synod of tlie province, which shall decide the 
 question, — but that a bishop or cleric having controversy with 
 the Metropolitan of the province itself shall resort either to the 
 Exarch (or Patriarch) of the Stot/cjjcrt?, or — not to the throne of 
 Rome, as might be expecte 1, but "to the throne of the Imperial 
 (city) Constantinople," for judgment, — this being the only allow- 
 ance of appeal beyond the province, the scene of controversy. 
 In matters of faith and large questions of ecclesiastical order 
 the appeal was doubtless, as shewn in the cases above men- 
 tioned, to the General Council. 
 
 vii. It results therefore, from all these proofs— from Scrip- 
 ture, from history, and from the action of the CEcumenical 
 Councils — proofs concurring in one tale, and without incon- 
 sistency or prevarication, — 1. That St. Peter, however highly 
 distinguished by Our Lord, and constantly styled by the Fathers 
 the " first " of the Apostles, received no privileges which the 
 other Apostles did not receive equally, nor was endowed with 
 rank in any way superior to that of St. James, wliile St. Paul, 
 at all events, by the testimony of the Holy Ghost, was in no one 
 respect his inferior: — And, 2. That the Primacy of the See of 
 
 * Sec Labbv's Vouudls, torn, iv, col. 1637. 
 
154 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Rome was accorded to it by the Fathers as representing the 
 capital of the Roman Empire in the ecclesiastical polity of the 
 Church — a Primacy of honour and precedence only, not of pecu- 
 liar privilege, much less of universal jurisdiction, supremacy, and 
 sovereign power over the whole Church, as affirmed in modern 
 times. Nor did the place of honour belong to St. Peter and to 
 Rome from the beginning, but to St. James and to Jerusalem, 
 and that by the free election of St. James's brother Apostles. 
 
 III. To the froposition, that the imvers conferred upon St. 
 Peter were conferred hij Christ in the same ivords on tlie other 
 Apostles, who ivere thus equal to St. Peter in order, hut tmequal in 
 jurisdiction, the Bishops, their successors, having thus no divine 
 privilege apart from St. Peter and the Pope. — It would be some- 
 what difficult to reconcile the privileges claimed for the 
 Apostles other than St. Peter in the first part of the present 
 proposition with the limitation imposed upon them in the latter 
 in conformity with the theory of the Petrine Vicariate and 
 Supremacy. That those Apostles and the Apostolic Churches 
 founded by them were equal in all respects to St. Peter and tlie 
 Church of his successors, all of them governing their flocks 
 under their One, invisible, but present Pastor, Head, and King, 
 Our Saviour — (in accordance with the words of St. Jerome, cited 
 by Mgr. Maret, " Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus, sive Roma?, sive 
 Eugubii, sive Coustantinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriae, sive 
 Tanis, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est et sacerdotii . . Omnes 
 Apostolorum successores sunt ") — is sufficiently established by 
 the evidence (already cited ad nauseam) of the independent 
 action of the Apostles in the Council at Jerusalem, of the 
 appointment of James to the primacy subsequently transferred 
 to Rome, of St. Paul's vindication of the eqiiality of his own 
 Apostolic office, of the procedui-e of the Oecumenical Councils, 
 of (I may add) the Emperor Constantine (cited by Mgr. Maret) 
 at the Council of Nice, that " the words of three Imndred bishops 
 were the word of God," and of the Emperors Theodosius and 
 Valentinian already quoted, when writing to St. Cyril at the 
 time of the Council of Ephesus, — to say nothing of the dicta of 
 particular Fathers, and especially those of Pope Gregory, which 
 I have already given. But the restrictions and limitations of 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 155 
 
 the rights of the Apostolic Churches and of the Bishops through- 
 out the world in fevour of the Bishop of Eonie as representing 
 St. Peter (all, in fact, that follows the words "yet with no 
 impeachment" in the proposition supra, p. 127) are supported by 
 no proof and stand in evident inconsistency with the foregoing 
 testimony, being mere deductions from tlie dogma of Papal 
 Supremacy applied i-etrospectively to the testimony of CEcu- 
 menic times in order to bring it into conformity with modern 
 theory. So argues not the Church of England. 
 
 IV. To the froposition, that the Pope and the Bishops, as 
 representing St. Peter and the other Apostles, constitute the 
 governing poiver of the Church ; which is thus a constitutional, 
 not an ahaolute monarchy, the Pope representing the King, the 
 Bishops the Aristocracy. — This proposition results from the con- 
 ciliation of the two preceding ones. But neither the dogmatic 
 teaching of Scripture, nor the practice of the Church at Jeru- 
 salem as recorded in the ' Acts of the Apostles,' nor the practice 
 of the Oecumenical Councils, nor the dicta of many of the 
 Fathers (some of which have been already quoted), justify the 
 proposition — which practically asserts that the Church consisted 
 originally, and consists now, of two co-ordinate powers, one of 
 them being St. Peter or his representative. The conjunction 
 'and' as thus used throughout Mgr. Maret's work is wholly un- 
 sujiported by evidence, and stands on pure hypothesis. I have 
 already stated in what sense the Church is a Kingdom " not of 
 this world." Mundane analogies are here at fault. The King 
 is absent from our bodily sight, withdrawn for a time " to a far 
 country," but He is not the less a king, and His " lieutenants " 
 not one but many, are with us in His stead as in Apostolic times, 
 administering under His eye, each in his own province, and 
 watching till He come. 
 
 V. To the proposition, that the G^lcumenicity, and consequently 
 the dogmatic authority, of the Seven Great General Councils 
 dej)ended on tJie concurrence of the Pope and the Episcopate, iJiat 
 is, of St. Peter AND the other Apostles; the dissent of Borne, if 
 persisted in, being sufficient to invalidate any Council. — This 
 proposition follows by deduction from the preceding one, that 
 
156 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 preceding one being itself a theory framed to reconcile two 
 extreme and (as the Church of England holds) irreconcileable 
 positions. The extent the present proposition (and tlie last 
 likewise) covers may be estimated by the consideration that the 
 Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jeru- 
 salem are here weighed in one scale against the Patriarch, or 
 Pope, of Eome, the solitary tenant of the other — the first 
 kicking the beam. The untenability of the view thus pro- 
 poun'^led is established by the simple fact that the (Ecumenical 
 Councils held the reverse, as by the illustrations already given. 
 Their views were thus expressed by the Fathers of the Fifth 
 QEcumenical Council (the Second of Constantinople), in their 
 epistle to Pope Vigilius (quoted by Mgr. Maret) when that Pope 
 refused to take part in their deliberations : — " It is not fitting 
 that our assembling should be put oflf on account of the 
 Occidentals. In the four Holy Councils there were but few 
 Bishops to represent the West, — now, not only your Holiness, 
 but many other Bishops from Italy, from Africa, from Illyricum, 
 are present, amply sufficient for our joint action. But if you 
 will not come, we will assemble of ourselves," and — such is the 
 inference, 'act without you,' — which they did, and the Pope 
 afterwards submitted. Not the sanction, but the adhesion of 
 the Western Church to the Eastern — or rather, in the view of 
 the Fifth Oecumenical Council as just cited, of the See of Eome 
 as representing St. Peter — was required, or at least desirable, to 
 complete OEcumenicity, — unless, indeed, it were argued that 
 since St. Peter founded Antioch, he was sufficiently represented 
 by that great see for QEcumenical jrarposes. But however 
 desirable the accession of the actual Bishop of Home was, it 
 was not indispensable. The Fathers of the Fifth (Ecumenical 
 Council evidently held that if the Bishop of Home would not 
 himself come, or cooperate, "the other Bishops" of Italy, 
 Africa, and Illyricum would sufficiently represent the tradition 
 of St. Peter and the Western Church in his default. 
 
 VI. To the p-oposition, that the Patriarchates of Antioch and 
 Alexandria were emanations from the Primacy of St. Peter ; and 
 tJie Patriarchates and Churches not directly founded hy Peter 
 held their jjrivileges, ivithout doubt, hy consent of tlie Sovereign 
 
ArPENDlX. 
 
 157 
 
 Pontiffs, and were never independent of their supremacy : — And 
 that if St. Peter tvas established by Christ as Chief of the 
 Apostles, his successor, the Pope, is Chief of the whole Episcopate, 
 and all in the Church is necessarily subject to him. — Witliout 
 offence may I say it ? there is " great virtue in if," — and 
 'ifs' are plentiful (not on the Anglican side) in the debate 
 with Rome. I feel almost tempted to take a leaf out of 
 Mgr. Maret's book, and reply, *If St. Peter was not the 
 appointed Head of the Church and Absolute and Supreme 
 Judge as Vicar of Christ, the entire edifice of your argument 
 falls to the ground. If, on the other hand, he was, how can 
 you resist the ultimate argument of the Ul tramontanes, which 
 is consistent with its theoretic if, while yours, the Galilean, is 
 not ? ' The present j^roposition takes up new and positive 
 ground, thus differing from the two last ; but they will be found 
 to cohere together, although the fact may not be at first 
 apparent. Meanwhile, in proof of the fact of the emanation of 
 Antioch and Alexandria from tbe Primacy of St. Peter, that 
 Primacy ultimately centering in Eome — represented as familiar 
 to all the world and witnessed by the general accord of Fathers 
 and historians — Mgr. Maret only quotes Gelasius, a Pope of the 
 fifth century, and whose evidence is of little account, if other- 
 wise unsupported, in his own favour. The passage is given 
 below.* The idea of emanation may have been present to the 
 Pope's mind, but it is rather a deduction from the passage than 
 a legitimate reading of it ; and the statement is altogether so 
 extravagant that Mgr. Maret qualifies it as may be seen in the 
 full text of the proposition, supra. It is not necessary to 
 question the assertion that St. Mark was sent by Peter to 
 Egypt to found the Alexandrian Church, or that St. Peter 
 personally founded that of Antioch. But neither Alexandria 
 nor Antioch ever acknowledged, and on the contrary both 
 
 * "Est ergo )3i-ima Petri Apostoli sedes Roniana Ecclesia . . . Secunda 
 autem sedes apud Alexandriam, B. Petri nomine, k Marco ejus et discipulo et 
 evangelists, consecrata est ; ipseque h Petro Apostolo in ^gyptiim directus 
 vertum veritatis prjedicavit . . Teitia vero sedes apud Antiocliiam ejusdem 
 Beatiss. Petri Apostoli nomine habetur honorabilis, eo qnod illic, ]iriusquam 
 Eomam venisset, liabitavit, et illic iMinium nomen Christianorum novellfe 
 gentis exortum est." — J.ablx's Councils, torn, iv, col. 12G2. 
 
158 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 repudiate, any depeiulence thence arising as due to Rome 
 (a dependence which would, moreover, be quite inconsistent 
 with the Sixth Canon of Nice, above cited); and they acted 
 accordingly in the (Ecumenical Councils on equal terms with 
 Rome. Among the lesser Churches, that of Cyprus (or of 
 St. Barnabas) was maintained by the Council of Ephesus (the 
 Third CEcumenical Council) in its rights of ordination, as an 
 autocephalous and independent Church, against the decision of 
 Pope Innocent I. to the contrary on appeal from the Archbishop 
 of Antioch ; and the Cypriotes maintained their independence 
 afterwards — a fact instanced by Mgr. Maret to support his 
 argument against the absolute power of the Papacy as main- 
 tained by the Ultramontanes. I need not dwell on the saving 
 clauses, reservations, and (I must be permitted to think) incon- 
 sequences by which, after this decisive evidence. Mgr. Maret 
 recovers for Rome the extra-Roman prestige which at first he 
 seems to abandon. I pass over for the moment the doctrine of 
 emanation, a suspicious word to Catholic ears. 
 
 VII. To the proposition, that, aJl power in the Church having 
 emanated from the Primacy of St. Peter, the rights of the 
 Churches not directly derived from the Apostolic See have, 
 through schism and the conquests of tlie infidels, rettirned to the 
 Church and are deposited in the hands and guardianship of the 
 Sovereign Pontiff ; and, further, that the rights formerly exercised 
 hy Primates, Metropolitans, Councils, Popes, and General Councils 
 have now, hy little and little, through political changes and tlie 
 disposition of Providence, hecoms concentrated in the Apostolic See. — 
 One practical consequence of this pro^jositioa is the justification 
 which it affords of the Papal practice of planting soi-disani 
 Churches — intrusive colonies of its own — within the limits of 
 independent Churches, as throughout the East, in violation of 
 the Nicene canons, — a system of intrusion of which the Anglican 
 Church, it must be confessed has not (in one or two instances) 
 been guiltless. But this doctrine of enumation and reabsorption 
 of deputed power is totally unsusceptible of proof from history ; 
 the evidence of the (Ecumenical Councils is totally against it ; 
 it rests upon pure inference and hypothesis ; and more than this, 
 it is neither more nor less than simple Gnosticism — I do not 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 159 
 
 mean theologically, but philosophically peccant; an effluence, 
 in fact, from the discipline of Neo-platonic and Orientalised 
 Alexandria, and so closely akin to doctrines absolutely heretical 
 that those who adopt it will find themselves near neighbours 
 to very suspicious characters. It was an analogous doctrine, 
 equally derived from tlie East, the procession of all things 
 originally from God and their reabsorption into Him, that 
 induced tlie Eoman-Catholic Church of the middle ages to 
 stand so distrustfully and wisely aloof for centuries from one of 
 her greatest men, John Scotus Erigena. 
 
 VIII. To the projjosition, that the concentration of all jpoiver in 
 Rome {as laid down in the preceding proposition) is in consequence 
 {in part) of the schism between the East and West, the Name of 
 which attaches solely to the East, inasmuch as the West, that is 
 Borne, is the centre of unity. Suhsequently to the schism, the seat 
 of (Ecumenical Councils and of (Ecumenicity is exclusively in the 
 West. — This proposition once more uncovers the roots of the 
 matter, and brings us to the crucial test of QEcumenicity. Not 
 Rome, nor St. Peter, no one Church, no one Apostle, however 
 distinguished, but Christ Our Lord, in the midst of the Church 
 in Universal Council assembled, was and is the Centre of Unitj'', 
 as proved by tlie action of the Apostolate in the Council of 
 Jerusalem, and by that of the great CEcumenical Councils before 
 the separation of the East and West, and witnessed to by 
 repeated acknowledgments of tlie Fathers — who, however dazzled 
 by the dignity of Rome, and tempted to trust in the arm of 
 flesh rather than the unseen power of God, were never slow 
 to vindicate the Unity of the Church under Christ, her Head 
 and Master in heaven. The Gospels in the midst (it is impos- 
 sible to avoid repetition in argument like this) and not the 
 presidential chair, whether occupied by the legates of Rome or 
 otherwise, were the tokens of His presence as the Head and 
 Heart of the Ciiurch in the Ecumenical Councils. That the 
 West, that Rome, that the Pope, is the centre of unity is thus 
 contradicted by the Universal consent of Antiquity. The very 
 consideration of the facts, that Our Saviour promises to be with 
 the Apostles, with all of them, to the end of the world — that a 
 schism exists — and that the Apostles cannot meet together 
 
KiO 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 wliile that scliism lasts, is enough to prove that Rome, the seat 
 of one Apostle only, cannot be the centre of unity; nor can 
 the Catholic Church be confined to those only who compare the 
 Roman communion. It follows from this evidence, alike from 
 the words of Christ and the voice of Antiquity, that, notwith- 
 standing misunderstandings and lapse of brotherly intercom- 
 munion, schism proper — and, d fortiori, heresy — cannot be 
 predicated of any Church holding the common and central faith 
 of (Ecumenicity, unless it attempts to impose its o\vn private 
 opinions, not so sanctioned, as conditions of union and necessary 
 to salvation. Rome thus prescribes her private opinion — that 
 of the exclusive Primacy, Vicariate, and Supremacy of St. Peter, 
 centering in Rome as the ' Mother and Mistress of all Clinrches,' 
 and impersonated in the Pope — to the acceptance of the East as 
 her condition of unity. The East protests, and the witness of 
 the Oecumenical Councils sustains the protest. Rome insists, 
 and in so doing secedes and isolates herself in the West, the 
 East retaining her ancient CEcumenical position unchanged — a 
 schism is the consequence, and the blame of it necessarily rests 
 with Rome. The Roman argument thus resolves itself into 
 this : — Rome cannot err ; the Pope alone is right ; all who differ 
 from her and him are wrong, and ipso facto in schism, conse- 
 quently in heresy. Rome supports this baseless, and, I must 
 add, audacious pretension by excommunication, as in the case 
 of England, and by stigmatising all who differ from her as 
 ' aCathoUci ' ; but her exclusive arrogation of Catholicity can- 
 not stamp other Churches with aCatholicity ; and private or 
 particular excommunication of a single province of the Church 
 — by Rome herself, as proved by the action in such cases of the 
 CEcumenical Councils — merely excludes the offending parties 
 from her own communion, not from that of the Church (Ecu- 
 menical or Universal, whicli, as at Nice and now (for no length 
 of interval between CEcumenical Councils detracts one jot from 
 her privileges ; there is no prescription against the Church), 
 holds such excommunications in suspense and as Twn avenus 
 till she has herself considered and decided the matters in 
 dispute. The denunciations of Rome against Greece and 
 England (for example) are thus hruta fulmina, which play 
 innocuously among tlie Papal clouds below the serene heights of 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Ifil 
 
 (Ecumenicity. AVhenever, once more, an (Ecumenical Council, 
 properly such, can be assembled, the question will be decided 
 between Rome and her remonstrant sisters. It is incorrect 
 then (strictly speaking) to say, in the meanwhile, that a schism 
 exists between the East and the West ; tlie schism is between 
 Rome and Universal Christendom ; and if (Ecumenicity is the 
 law, and the practice of the (Ecumenical Councils exhibit the 
 application of that law, the blame rests with Rome alone— she 
 is the schismatic communion. England, meanwhile, holding 
 to (Ecumenicity, is in good company. The causes which led to 
 the scliism may be seen iu part, and great part, in the series of 
 w^arrantless assumptions and arrogant interferences with ecclesi- 
 astical right, persistently reiterated by the successors of St. 
 Clement, which the (Ecumenical Councils invariably disre- 
 garded and not unfrequently condemned, always protecting the 
 rights of the Apostolic Churches other than the see of Rome, and 
 vindicating their own supreme authority. No other evidence in 
 the matter can compete with this ; for the judgment of those 
 Councils in such matters was only inferior to their dicta *de 
 fide ' — supremely authoritative, although of course far short of 
 infallible. History comes in to complete the tale, and account 
 for the unhappy results that followed. Even were it argued 
 that both Churches weve to blame, suspension of intercourse 
 would not {ut supra) justify the imputation of heresy ; and, 
 short of heresy, nothing could vindicate the position that Rome 
 alone conserves the true faith, and concentrates now the Apos- 
 tolic power. But the presumption from the relation held by 
 Rome towards the (Ecumenical Councils is in favour of the 
 East and against Rome; and that presumption is warranted, 
 not merely by her unauthorised insertion of the non-CEciunenical 
 clause 'filioque' in the Kicene Creed, but by the long and 
 miserable tale of the aggressions, falsehoods, forgeries, and guile 
 of the Papacy in subsequent ages — -crimes which caimot be 
 imputed to the East. The East, equal in her rights and claims, 
 stood on her defence till she was compelled to give up all hopes 
 of a reunion which could only have been effected, as shewn by 
 what took place in the abortive Councils of Lyons and Florence, 
 by absolute submission on her part. It has been, throughout, 
 the fable of the wolf and the lamb enacted on a large scale on 
 
182 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 the theatre of tlie world, — but, fortunately, the Roman wolf has 
 not as yet succeeded in devouring his (Ecumenical neighbour. 
 The assumed concentration of the power of the Oecumenical 
 Church into the Papacy, and the inferential brand of i schism 
 stamped on the Eastern Church, wither away before the frown 
 of history, as thus exhibited. 
 
 IX. To the proposition that, Borne heing thus the (Ecumenical 
 or Catholic Church, alone upon the earth, all power proceeding 
 from her, all power returning to her, no single Bishop throughout 
 the Catholic world can he created apart from her authority, — this 
 authority heing exercised and legitimacy conferred hy the Papal 
 confirmation of elections and ordinations which results from ac- 
 ceptance hy the Pope of the letters of communion which all 
 patriarchs and primates are hound to address to the Apostolic See 
 on their installation — even although the said letters are merely of 
 courtesy and malce no demand for confirmation : — And, that every 
 superiority of one Bishop over another throughout the Catholic 
 world proceeds either hy emanation or imitation from the Primacy 
 of St. Peter : and no legitimate Bishop ever existed hut such as 
 has heen accepted expressly or tacitly hy the Pope. — It is difficult 
 to treat this ninth proposition with becoming gravity. No 
 man can prevent another from 'blessing' him if so inclined, 
 however aggravating the benediction may be. But that a 
 patriarch, by simply addressing letters of communion — or, as 
 Thomassin extends it, of mere civility — to a brother patriarch, 
 the Po[)e, on his installation, should draw down upon himself 
 a perfect showerbath of benefit through the constructive con- 
 firmation of his dignity which tlie acceptance of his letters by 
 the Pope bestows upon him at his election, and this in spite of 
 his absolute insensibility to the blessing conferred, is a doctrine 
 which would much astonish our Oriental fathers in the Church. 
 Seriously speaking, the doctrine is one of tliose ' stumbling- 
 blocks ' which we are forbidden to place in our brother's way, 
 eminently calculated, as it is, to perpetuate schisms between the 
 Churches and prevent reunion on terms of CEcumenicity. The 
 proofs of such confirmation cited by Mgr. Maret are of the 
 most shadowy description, dependent on the testimony of the 
 Popes themselves and of Pope St. Leo, «hose accunvcy the Gal- 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 163 
 
 lican prelate has himself declined to warrant. The first in date 
 is the confirmation, or rather "roboratio," demanded by the 
 Emperor Theodosius from Pope Damasus of the appointment of 
 Nectarius to the patriarchal throne of Constantinople — an act 
 for which the Emperor might well seek the recognition of the 
 Pope, Nectarius not having at that time even been baptized. 
 St. Leo's statement that he had, for the sake of peace, approved 
 the elections of Anatolius for Constantinople and Maximus for 
 Antioch altliough each election had some canonical flaws, 
 implies, of course, mere recognition of elections the validity of 
 which was open to question. The Popes constantly exercised 
 their asserted or suggested rights by the confirmation even of 
 CEcumenical Councils — which Mgr. Maret himself admits not to 
 liave been necessary, however useful — ^just as they frequently 
 determined questions ' de fide ' ex jproprio mohi, and excom- 
 municated those they condemned beyond their own province, — 
 the CEcumenical Councils treating eitlier assertion of power 
 with the same diguified indifference. The simplest answer, 
 however, to make to this claim of an universal arch-episcopate 
 (dating, as the proofs alleged by Mgr. Maret shew, from CEcu- 
 menical times) is to cite the canons of the Councils of Constan- 
 tinople and Ephesus, which, in conformity with the general 
 rules of Nice, expressly forbid any one Bishop or Patriarch to 
 intrude into the diocese or exarchy of another Bishop or Patri- 
 arch. By the Second Canon of Constantinople, the Patriarch 
 of Alexandria is confined to Egypt and its dependencies, the 
 Bishops of the East to the East, those of Ephesus to Ephesus, 
 those of Pontus to Pontus, those of Thrace to Thrace, and so 
 on. And by the Eighth Canon of Ephesus, occasioned by the 
 unwarranted interference of the Patriarcli of Antioch with 
 the rights of independent ordination in Cyprus, it is ordained 
 in the most explicit and comprehensive terms, and without any 
 reservation in favour of Rome, that no Bishop shall interfere 
 witli the ordinations of other dioceses and provinces, and if he 
 hath so " laid hands upon " any province which has not been under 
 his see from the beginning, he shall restore it, " lest " — and the 
 ■words that follow are almost prophetic — "lest the insolence of 
 worldly power should creep in under tlie colour of sacred ofiice, 
 and we lose imperceptibly, by little and little, the liberty which 
 
 M 2 
 
164 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Our Lord Jesus Christ, the giver of liberty unto all naen, hath 
 bestowed upon us through His own blood." 
 
 X. To the proposition that the Pope, as Head of the Church, 
 has the right to convoke, preside over, direct, suspend, transfer, 
 and dissolve (Ecumenical Councils, and must confirm them, although 
 such confirmation is not necessary, the simple adhesion of the Pope 
 to an (Ecumenical Council giviiig it the requisite confirmation and 
 validity ; hut he cannot pronounce definitively in matters ' de fide ' 
 independently of such Council : — And that Councils held hy the Pope, 
 as heir of St. Peter and the centre of unity, are (Ecumenical Councils, 
 with all the prerogatives attaching to them as before the separation 
 of the East and West. — To this it must be replied, that no 
 individual patriarch has the right to convoke an CEcumenical 
 Council ; he can only invite his brother patriarchs to meet in 
 conference. It is the province of Caesar, of the Emperor, of 
 the Civil Power, to convoke QEcumenical Councils at discretion ; 
 and this right was exercised by the Emperors from Constantino 
 to (in non-CEcumenical times) Charles V, — by Theodosius at 
 Chalcedon against the wishes of the Pope St. Leo, to name no later 
 instances. Tlie legates of the Pope sometimes (but not always) 
 presided, as might be expected from the precerlence of Eome. 
 None of the other privileges as above claimed were exercised in 
 the Seven Great Councils. And, in a word, whatever influence 
 the Roman See exerted in CEcumenical Council was, first, 
 through the primacy of Eome as the first city in the empire, a 
 pui-ely political rank ; secondly, through the prestige attaching 
 to St. Peter's succession (wliich no Anglican would wish to 
 depreciate); thirdly, through the personal cliaracter of indi- 
 vidual Popes. In the Fifth Ecumenical Council, the Second of 
 Constantinople, the Pope (as we have seen) refused to take part 
 at all ; and yet the Council was esteemed CEcumenical and 
 recognised ultimately as such by tlie Pope himself, Vigilius, as 
 has been stated. The effect of Papal adhesion in contributing 
 to the completion of the CEcumenicity of a Council has been 
 already shewn to have been a distinct thing from legislative 
 sanction. It is allowed that Papal confirmation is xmnecessary ; 
 and Mgr. Maret himself points out that the Councils of Nice, 
 Ephesus, and Chalcedon made no demand for such ; that when 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 165 
 
 Pope St, Leo confirmed the decrees de fide in the latter Council, 
 it was unasked for ; and that the Sixth (Ecumenical Council con- 
 sidered its decrees irrefragable before the Pope's confirmation. 
 The great Council of Constance, moreover, which believed itself 
 (Ecumenical, demanded no such confirmation.* The restriction 
 upon the Pope's action in regard to dogmatic teaching will be 
 noticed in reply to the next proposition. That the Councils 
 held by the Popes subsequently to the schism are esteemed by 
 Home as (Ecumenical Councils and on an equality with those 
 before the schism is clear from every page of the work now 
 before us. But it is equally clear from tlie evidence above 
 given that such Councils are only Councils of the Latin Church, 
 and thus of one half only (if so much) of Catholic and Apostolic, 
 or (Ecumenical Christendom. 
 
 XI. To the 'proposition that Infallibility resides, not in the Pope 
 alone, nor in an (Ecumenical Council alone, but in the Pope PLUS 
 the Council, as representing St. Peter plus the Apostles, — the 
 Pope, nevertheless, being constrained (by the decrees of Constance 
 and Basle) to submit himself to the moral unanimity or great 
 majority of the Council, — thus excluding the Ultramontane doc- 
 trine of Sole Personal Infallibility. The Pope is so far Infallible 
 that he can convoke the tribunal which pronounces with Infalli- 
 bility, and, during the intervals between General Councils, can, by 
 assent of the Episcopate, give Infallibility to his dogmatic judg- 
 ments. — That Infallibility resides in a General, that is, an (Ecu- 
 menical Council, is not disputed, or rather, is asserted, in con- 
 formity with the historical (that is, the anti-Roman) view of 
 (Ecumenicity. But no (Ecumenical Council has ever been held 
 since the schism, nor can such be held till that schism be healed. 
 The privilege of Infallibility, pledged by the promise of Christ, 
 not to one but to all the Apostles and to the Church in their 
 personality, to lead them into all truth, is thus by necessity 
 dormant as regards present action, as shewn in my letter 
 ' England v. Rome.' The argument for Roman Infallibility as 
 vested in the Pope plus the Church halts at this point, and it 
 is unnecessary to deal with the question of the qualified or con- 
 
 * Dii U. G., torn, ii, pp. 106 sqq. 
 
166 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 stitutioual Infallibility allowed to the Pope personally by Mgr. 
 Maret. All the Councils subsequently to the schism, esteemed 
 (Ecumenical by the Eoman-Catholic Church, are thus without 
 (Ecumenical authority — mere councils, as has been said — (I 
 will not call them ' Conciliabula,' although usurping a sanction 
 which is not tlieir own) — of the Latin Church — without autho- 
 rity to impose fresh articles of faith on mankind, although 
 entitled, some of them, such as Constance and Basle, to high 
 respect, and binding alike on Pope and Bishops within the 
 Eoman fold. And if such Councils be not infallible, much less 
 can the action of the Popes plus the Episcopate, apart from 
 such Councils, be in any degree held to be so. It is hardly 
 necessary to add that the validity of the decrees of the fourth 
 and fifth Sessions of Constance, which affirm (inter alia) " Quod 
 ipsa in Spiritu Sancto legitime congregata. Concilium Generale 
 iaciens, et Ecclesiam Catholicam repraesentans, potestatem a 
 Cliristo immediate habet, cui quilibet cujuscunque status vel 
 dignitatis, etiamsi papalis existat, obedire tenetur in his quae 
 pertinent ad fidem, et extirpationem dicti schismatis, et reforma- 
 tionem dictse Ecclesise in capite et in membris " — is recognised 
 and enforced by Mgr. Maret in opposition to the TJltramon- 
 tanes,* who maintain that, not having been recognised by the 
 Popes, the decrees in question have no dogmatic value. And 
 he points out, as I have done supra, p. 92, but stopping short 
 of my ultimate conclusions, that if these decrees be questioned, 
 the Pope invalidates the autliority of the Council by which 
 alone his predecessor Martin V. held his Pontificate legiti- 
 mately.! — Lastly, 
 
 XII. To file p-oposition, that the decisions of the Pope are valid 
 ad interim during the intervals hettveen (Ecumenical Councils, if 
 supported hj tJie assent of the Episcopate, even aWwugh that 
 assent he merely expressed by taciturnity ; but that the theory of 
 Infallible judgments ' ex catJiedrd ' is untenable, as unknown to 
 Antiquity. — In regard to this final proposition there is nothing 
 to observe beyond what has been said under the preceding and 
 former heads. But one closing remark cannot be withheld, 
 
 * Dm C. O., turn, i, pp. -101? sqq. 
 
 t Ibid., turn, ii, p. 137. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 167 
 
 viz., that, in spite of the determination to accumulate power in 
 the abstract in the hands of the Pope as Supreme King and 
 Governor of the Church, this Gallican theory, as set forth by 
 Mgr. Maret, places the whole real and substantial power in the 
 hands of the Episcopate, or Aristocracy, — and that the scheme 
 thus elaborated, and to be presented to the Pope at the Council 
 of the Vatican, might be summed up in the proverbial English 
 address, ' You shall be King, and I will be Viceroy over you ! ' 
 
 II. 
 
 Extent of agreement and ])oints of disagreement between the 
 Gallican Church and the Anglican. 
 
 Let me now endeavour, as I promised, to estimate the extent 
 of agreement, and fix the point where disagreement begins, 
 between the Gallican Church (as represented by Mgr. Maret) 
 and the Anglican. 
 
 The two Churches agree so far as to place the test of truth, 
 the voice of infallibility — not in the Private Judgment of the 
 individual man or Christian communion, as the Pi-otestauts prac- 
 tically do, nor in the Personal Judgment of the Pope, speaking 
 ex cathedra, as the Ultramontanes avowedly do; but in the 
 Historical and Objective evidence of Scripture and Tradition — 
 the tradition of dogma derived from the Apostles, witnessed to 
 everywhere, at all times, and from the first by the Apostolic 
 Churches, and uttered through the voice of the entire Church 
 in (Ecumenical Council assembled. They thus accept the three 
 Creeds, the Nicene, the Athanasian Creed, and the Apostles' 
 Creed without reservation. The Churches agree in recognising 
 a Primacy of honour in the See of Kome. They agree, also, 
 in holding that Our Saviour conferred powers on the Apostles 
 other than St. Peter similar to those which He originally con- 
 ferred on St. Peter, His earlier words not effacing the later. 
 
 But beyond tliis point the Churches disagree ; and indeed the 
 divergence begins in principle almost ab ova : — 
 
 1. The Anglican Church protests (in accordance with the 
 doctrine of Irenoeus, Tertullian, St. Vincent, and the prac- 
 tice of the CEcumenical Councils) against the Gallican 
 and Roman doctrine of a Christian Sentiment, Taste, or 
 
1G8 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Instinct, created by Scripture and Tradition in the con- 
 science of the Church, and which supplements and 
 developes the Christian dogma as circumstances may 
 call for such development, — recognising in this doctrine 
 the 7i/<Mo-t? of Alexandria, the ' disciplina arcani ' of 
 Europe, unwarrantably superimposed upon the Apostolic 
 and CEcumenical Tradition. The concentration in the 
 Komau See (as alleged) of this Christian Instmct as 
 descending in unbroken continuity from A] ostolic times 
 proves jper se that the test is not primitive, nor Apostolic, 
 nor CEcumenical. The Ultramontane is more consistent 
 in carrying it out to its legitimate consequence in tlie 
 doctrine of personal Papal Infallibility than the Gal- 
 ilean. 
 
 2. The Anglican Church refuses (in accordance with the 
 
 Council of Chalcedon, with the CEcumenical practice 
 generally, and with the historical evidence of Scripture) 
 to recognise the Primacy of St. Peter or of the Eoman 
 See as more than a Primacy of honour. She holds the 
 Patriarch of Constantinople, e.g., to be fully equal, with 
 the single exception of precedence, to the Pope. 
 
 3. The Anglican Church dissents from the Galli'. n in so 
 
 far as the latter holds the Apostles other than St. Peter, 
 and the Apostolic Churches other than the Eoman See, 
 to form a distinct and aristocratic element in the Chris- 
 tian commonwealth, as distinguished from St. Peter 
 and the Popes of Rome, his successors, these last being 
 invested as Kings with sovereign (although constitu- 
 tionally limited) power over their brethren. She holds 
 with Pope Gregory the Gi'eat, her founder, that Peter, 
 Paul, Andrew, John, and their brethren, were but heads, 
 each of them, of the several Christian glebes, or com- 
 munions — members, all of them, of the Universal 
 Church — members, all of them, of One Body, under One 
 Head, that Head being Christ, — the centre of unity 
 being thus, necessarily, not the Pope at Rome, but Our 
 Lord and Saviour in Heaven. She therefore protests, 
 i. That every act of authority exercised by Rome 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 169 
 
 from the very first beyond the limits of her 
 own patriarchate (to whicli, like the othei* 
 patriarchates, she is limited by the Niceue 
 canons) has been an act of usurpation : — 
 
 ii. That the Greek and other Churclies holding the 
 
 (Ecumenical faith, -between which Churches 
 and Eome intercommunion has ceased, are not 
 through such cessation of intercourse in a state 
 of schism before God ; but One still, under the 
 sanction of a higher Unity than is marked by any 
 visible centre upon earth ; while the telescope of 
 truth, traversing the night of antiquity, reveals 
 the fact that Greece has been in the right and 
 Rome in the wrong in regard to the two causes 
 which mainly provoked and embittered the 
 disruption, the matter of the ' filioque,' and 
 the aggressive policy and outrecuidance of the 
 Lateran and Vatican. 
 
 iii. That, consequently, the claim of Eome to the 
 
 prestige of exclusive (Ecumenicity, in virtue of 
 St. Peter's Chair, subsequently to the schism, 
 is utterly unwarranted, and of itself schismatic ; 
 and the Councils held in the West since the 
 disruption have thus been merely Latin Councils, 
 and however entitled to respect, (as, for example, 
 Constance, which may be styled the basis of 
 the Anglican Reformation,) still Infallibility 
 does not reside in their utterances : — And 
 
 iv. That, such being the case, the dogmas asserted 
 
 and the practices authorised by Rome subse- 
 quently to the schism have no warrant from 
 CEcumenical authority — rank as 'pious opinions' 
 which may be held or dissented from without 
 peril of salvation — and any penal enactments 
 by which Rome has attempted to enforce their 
 acceptance as such have been in violation of 
 (Ecumenicity, tyrannical and unjustifiable. 
 
 The point of original divergence between the two Churches 
 
170 
 
 APrENDIX. 
 
 may be fixed, in priucii)le, at the superinduction of the sub- 
 jective and mutable Traditional Instinct upon the ancient 
 standard of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, objective and 
 immutable, as a test of truth ; and in practice, at the moment 
 when the schism between the East and West was consummated, 
 Kome throwing the blame of it exclusively on the East, and 
 assuming that the character of the Catholic Church jper excel- 
 lentiam, of the centre of Unity, the ark, the one fold out of 
 which there is no salvation, belongs to herself alone subse- 
 quently to the disruption. Wlien England, at her Eefonnation, 
 rejected the novelties of Rome, she i])so facto and by imjjlication 
 reconciled herself with Greece ; and accordingly, in her Nine- 
 leenth Article, which declares that the Churches of Jerusalem, 
 Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome have erred — (confusing, as I 
 have already pointed out, the subsisting although pei-secuted 
 Catholic and Orthodox churches of the three former sees with 
 the Monophysite and Nestorian communions which usurp their 
 style and name) — she specially excepts the Church of Greece 
 from censure. But the Galilean Church makes no such ex- 
 ception. 
 
 III. 
 
 Wliich of the two Churclies, the Galilean or the Anglican, 
 is (Ecumenical. 
 
 If I ask, in conclusion, ' Which of the two Churches, the 
 Galilean or the Anglican, adheres to, and whicli disowns, the 
 CEcuuienical standard after parting company at the point of 
 dissidence ? ' it is merely to ground a moral upon the answer 
 which I lay claim to in favour of England. The materials for the 
 answer have been already given, in the evidence of CEcumenical 
 Councils, of history, of antiquity. The moral I would draw 
 from what precedes (and which I have in part anticipated in 
 one of my Letters in this volume) is as follows : — 
 
 1. It is not for England to move towards Rome from the 
 
 standard of (Ecumenicity, which it seems her especial 
 province to protect in the West : — 
 
 2, It is impossible for Rome, whether represented by Ultra- 
 
 montane or Galilean, to approximate to us while she 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 171 
 
 maintains the partial, provincial, iinhistorical, and ex- 
 clusive theories above exhibited, as set forth even in the 
 mitigated statement of Mgr. Maret : — 
 3. But, while Ultramontane Rome is committed blindly and 
 absolutely to the dogma of Papal Supi'emacy, which 
 forms one balanced half only of the Gallican theory — 
 subordinating to it every other principle, and logically 
 carrying it out to its extreme conclusion in the doctrine 
 of Personal Papal Infallibility, with which the party is 
 prepared to stand or fall ; the Gallican Church, on the 
 contrary, is not so committed ; it qualifies the Pajial 
 Supremacy by assigning co-ordinate authority to the 
 Episcopate, and even a supremacy in the last resource 
 over the Pope himself ; and yet the two principles thus 
 attempted to be reconciled are thoroughly opposed to 
 each other ; and the graceful workmanship of Mgr. 
 Maret cannot conceal the running and narrow line which 
 betrays the flaw in the welding of his argument — an 
 argument which must split asunder in discomfiture, like 
 an imperfect sword-blade, when opposed to the consistent 
 steel either of Ultramontanism on the one hand or of 
 CEcumenicity on the other. This cannot but be dis- 
 covered at last ; and then it will only require one 
 vigorous and sustained effort on the part of Gaul and 
 Gallican Germany to dismiss modern prejudices — to 
 throw themselves back into the age and atmosphere of the 
 great CEcumeuical Councils, of the Council of Nice in 
 particular, of Pope St. Clement addressing himself to 
 the Corinthians, and better still, of the Apostles in their 
 Council -chamber at Jerusalem — and to revise their faith 
 accordingly — independently of the Papacy, if necessary, 
 (as England did in the sixteenth century, under the 
 supreme authority of Christ, the centre of Unity, above 
 her,) and with the supjiort (it may be hoped) of the 
 Civil Power, as in the times of Constantine and Theo- 
 dosius — and then, thus reformed, to hold out the hand of 
 fellowship to ourselves and to Greece, which both of us 
 will, I doubt not, readily grasp. The Gallican Church 
 would thus accomplish the aspirations inherent in the 
 
172 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 protests and manifestoes of so many generations of her 
 great men in former times — she would give that full 
 effect to the monitions of Constance which Gerson and 
 D'Ailly would have rejoiced to see had they lived in 
 our own day — and she would do much, it is impossible 
 to say how much, towards that reunion of Christendom 
 which we all pray for — and none more earnestly I 
 devoutly believe, tlian Pope Pius himself, although he 
 seeks after it by very different means. It is, we may 
 hope, in this as in other matters, the object we set in 
 view, and not our shortcomings and errors in struggling 
 to accomplish it, tliat our merciful Judge will take 
 account of at the Last Day. 
 
 POSTSCRIPTUM. 
 
 It has been more than once suggested to me that an acceptance of 
 the views I contend for in the present and previous writings would 
 tend to promote scepticism and neutralise action by rendering each 
 person doubtful of his own views and desirous of modifying them 
 by those of the opposite party — thus inducing IndifTerentism. It 
 has also been objected, with great earnestness, that I appear to 
 represent it as desirable that there should be two sides or parties 
 in fierce antagonism within the Church, the banner suspended over 
 which is that of love. My friends would not disagree with me, they 
 say, if I argued, ' Do not be disheartened ; do not suppose that the 
 Church is in danger because two great powers of nature struggle 
 within Eachel's womb for mastery ; this antagonism cannot be vin- 
 dicable as from God ; truth is a diamond without flaw ; contention 
 is in itself wrong, not right ; but God brings good out of evil ; and 
 that good is in the present instance progi-ess and advancement in 
 the recognition of truth.' This however, they think, is more than 
 I would allow; I seem to them, like a follower of Ahriman, to 
 make 'antagonism' my God — to say to the spirit of strife and dis- 
 cord, ' Evil, be thou my good ! ' I can perfectly enter into these 
 criticisms, and am grateful to all who enable me by such to test the 
 strength of my position. I do not think indeed that I have failed to 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 173 
 
 express myself clearl}' on the point in question ; but, that there may 
 be no mistake, I wonUi here state that I do not consider it desirable 
 in itself that such antagonism should exist ; but that, viewinp; human 
 nature (as it is) from without, it appears to me that the Almighty 
 has so disi)osed; or I may say permitted, the interaction of opposing 
 forces within the mind, that through and hy means of thi.s anta- 
 gonism the spiritual eye of man is educated and strengtlieiied 
 towards the ever clearer perception of absolute and undivided 
 Truth. It was through the Fall of Man that his Spirit, his Sense 
 (or Material Being), and his Intellect, together with the two domi- 
 nant elements of Intellect, Imagination and Reason, were dislocated 
 and brought into discord. It is through the Incarnation and healing 
 power of Our Saviour that these dislocated and hostile members are 
 brought once more, in Ilini, into harmony and union. In His 
 perfect Being, as the Man Christ Jesiis, Imagination and Reason 
 are in equal balance, and the corresponding powers of Order and 
 Liberty dwell in reconciliation. The Church Triumphant, as the 
 Mystical Body of Chiist, will, in Him, her Head, hereafter accom- 
 plish this union ; but in the mean-while. Militant below, she is 
 subject, through that very militancy, to the normal conditions of 
 her humanity. Order and Liberty, the motive powers of the created 
 world, and in whose vicissitude consists our mortal life, are thus 
 the watchwords of the Church on earth. One indeed in Christ, but 
 diveise in the development of her human and fallen, although re- 
 deemed conditions ; and it is out of this very diversity, this anta- 
 gonism, this churning of the waters, that, from my point of view, 
 she rises, lilte the fabled goddess of the Hindoos, bearing the Amrita, 
 the cup of immortality, to the skies. It is not therefore what may 
 be considered desirable, but what actually is, that I contemplate and 
 vindicate as a grand process through which the Church is disci- 
 plined, as an athlete, for running her course and winning her crown. 
 I have more than once suggested whether it is not probable that 
 such has been ordained by the wisdom of God as the best means for 
 effecting the object in view. The mere fact of antagonism should 
 not, I think, occasion distress or doubt, as if it partook of the nature 
 of evil, — that character only attaches to it when the struggle is 
 for selfish objects, whereas, here, it is for the recognition of truth. 
 Meanwhile (if I mistake not) all such complaint of antagonism 
 as existing within the Church is the expression of that weariness of 
 and disgust for our working-day world which impels so many to the 
 cloister in one direction, and into the visionary Utopia of the Fifth- 
 Monarchy-men in the other, in vain endeavours to i-ealise the 
 ' Kingdom of God ' before its time. It is a form of Mysticism in 
 
174 
 
 APPENDIX, 
 
 disguise — arising from that jealoTisy and distrust of the Material 
 world and of Intellect which is the peculiar characteristic_of that 
 development of error. 
 
 For these reasons I venture to think that my views, rightly 
 understood, and as I have myself stated them, would not lead to 
 Indififerentism — whether as implying the phase of scepticism kno%vii 
 by that name, originating in minds weary with controversy, anxious 
 for peace, and disposed to purchase it at almost any price, even at 
 the saci-ifice of Catholic truth — or as suggesting the impression that 
 it matters little to what side we belong, because all sides are right. 
 To this latter suggestion I would replj-, as I did long ago on the 
 question of politics, that the duty of adherence varies with times 
 and circumstances, — when the tendency is to despotism, either in 
 the Church or the State, the vocation of the patriot and the church- 
 man is to fight for Protestanti.-m and Liberty ; when the tendency 
 is to licence and anarchy, the counter call is to the banner of Catho- 
 licism and Order — always of course within the Catholic Church 
 as within the Constitutional State. And as respects the other 
 phase of Indifference, I would say that in vindicating the equal 
 claims of Imagination and Eeason, Order and Liberty, Catholicism 
 and Protestantism, I do not give up a single iota of the Catholic and 
 (Ecumenical faith. I merely demand that our right eye and our left 
 should gaze on Objective Truth with co-equal directness and power. 
 It is from a distortion of vision, incidental to the vai-ying constitu- 
 tion of intellectual nature in individuals and nations, (arising, I 
 readily admit, from our primal Fall,) that all our aberrations from 
 the central path of Christian orthodoxy, sound philosophy, and con- 
 stitutional polity take their rise. None of us can absolutely attain 
 to this equal and just view while here below ; but the nearer we 
 attain to it, the more clearly shall we discern Truth, in her calm 
 beauty, sitting at the gates of heaven ; and the more practically shall 
 we combine to work out that harmony which is Truth's accomplish- 
 ment, and in which consists that " peace of God which passes all 
 understanding." There wiU be no lack of motive power, even on 
 earth, through such attainment, par'.ial although it must at present 
 be ; for what we lose in bitterness against our neighbours we shall 
 gain (so to speak) in the concentration and strength of our love 
 towards Him who is Truth, — and when love is the ruling principle, 
 there can be no Inditferentism. 
 
 Perhaps I should stop here ; but I may be pardoned for vindicating 
 once more an old argument, viz. that Philosophy, rightly so called, 
 must be invited to our aid before we can come to a safe judgment 
 on these important theological matters. It is not that 1 wish to 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 175 
 
 rationalize Christianity,— God forbid ! but Philosophy and Theology 
 are two sisters mutually dependent upon each other ; and, as without 
 Theology there can be no complete Philosophy, so without Philo- 
 sophy there can be no sound Theology. The great problem to be 
 solved in the future is the reconciliation of Theology and Philosophy 
 on the basis of an accurate adjustment of the bounds of their 
 respective provinces. These provinces consist of the ' World of 
 Knowledge,' or of human experience in matters finite, and the 
 ' World of Faith,* embracing those great truths, essential to man's 
 salvation, which are known to him only through Pevelation. There 
 is no discord between these provinces, these powers, rightlj- under- 
 stood ; and the Philosophy I plead for (as a humble follower 
 of Socrates — the ' Neo-Socratic Philosophy' as I would presume to 
 name it) leads us by the hand, not away from, but to the steps of 
 the Christian altar. This may appear from the following extract 
 fiom ' Scepticism and the Church of England,' and which will 
 further illustrate my stand-point throughout the present volume. I 
 will merely preface it by one more and an earnest protest against yet 
 another sxapposition which has been objected to me, that I make the 
 intellect of man evolve truth. I have never held this, but have 
 constantly maintained that the obliquities of intellect incidental to 
 a maimed or imperfect growth of our being prevent us from dis- 
 cerning Truth in her divine and objective simplicity. My words on 
 this subject are as follows : — " While Tmth is One and Universal, 
 subsistent with all that is, and with God Himself, Human Nature, 
 constituted as it is since the Fall, has a tendency to perceive and 
 recognise Truth partially, imperfectly, and antagonistically, accord- 
 ing to the predominance respectively of the Imaginative or lieasoning 
 element of Intellect in the Individual or the Society : — In other 
 words, Truth, viewed through the Imagination, and Truth, viewed 
 through the Eeason, presents to the observer, in either case, a par- 
 tial aspect, a half (as it were) of Universal Truth, — Truth Universal, 
 in so far as it is apprehensible by man, residing" — or I should rather 
 say, becoming visible to him — "at the point where the antagonistic 
 elements of Intellect, Imagination and Eeason, intersecting and cor- 
 recting each other, meet in equipoise and i-ecunciliation — this being 
 the highest point to which Man can ascend to meet his Maker." It 
 is^at this point that, "in guidance and assistance to man, rising 
 towards Truth and Perfection through the antagonism thus pro- 
 vided between the constituent elements of his intellectual being, the 
 Almighty meets him, to reveal the knowledge of Truth Universal, 
 so far as necessaiy to his salvation, as summed up in Christianity." 
 
176 
 
 APPENDIX.. 
 
 Extract from ' Scejjticism and the Church of England,' 
 pp. 130 sqq. 
 
 " All this philosophy" (that of the last three centuries), " I need scarcely 
 say, however acute in speculation, and, in many instances, sound in 
 morals, is, as a general rule, puny, weak, and ineflBcient, in comparison 
 with what it might otherwise he, in so far as, in self-complacency, it 
 attempts to comprehend and solve the problems of himaanity, and of the 
 world of Faith as distinguished from that of Picason, apart from or in 
 contradiction to the truths of Eevelation and of Clu-istianity. 
 
 " There are two postulates essential to the existence of a true philo- 
 sophy, — it must, in the iirst place, recognise the realms of Faith and 
 Knowledge with impartial justice, bearing relation equally to both ; and it 
 must, in the second, rest as its basis on the entire world of human nature, — 
 on Sense, or Matter, the animal frame, with its instincts and passions — on 
 Spirit, or the immortal principle, ruhng through the will — and on Intellect, 
 or Mind, in her entii-e breadth, as interposed between Spirit and Sense ; 
 but, more especially, on the two predominant and antagonistic elements of 
 Intellect, Imagination and Reason, which by their several predominance 
 determine what I may tern, in the full sense of the expression, the politi- 
 cal action of the individual, and by their antagonism generate the collective 
 progress of human nature ; so that, in effect, the philosophy I speak of may 
 represent, embrace, and be co-extensive with consummate humanity, and 
 possess, in consequence, those checks and coimter-checks which, like 
 balanced muscles in the corporal frame, obedient to the directing spirit 
 within, will preclude excess, prevent eccentricity, insure unity of action, 
 and produce harmonious and onward progress towards the common goal of 
 theoretic truth and practical wisdom. But tliis last postulate, important 
 as it is, would be inoperative without the former. Every true conception 
 springs from human nature as a whole ; but there is a principle of discord, 
 of divergence, of evU in om being which leads us astray in tliought as 
 in deed, unless removed or corrected by the Grace of God. Eevelation as 
 embodied in Scripture, and Eegeneration as accomphshed, whether by the 
 Divine means provided within the Catholic Church or by God's special 
 (but uncovenanted) blessing out of it, are respectively the lamp to guide 
 and the staff to assist us in our heavenward pilgrimage ; and it is only 
 after the whole man has become Christianized, after Manhood has been 
 taken into God, and Christ has spoken tlirough the lips of humanity, that 
 the chords of hiunan nature render an harmonious response to the touch 
 of Apollo — that the true idea leaps forth, perfect, virgin, and imdefiled, 
 as from the brain of .Tiipiter. This may be termed mysticism by those 
 who shut their eyes to experience and dogmatise upon theory ; but the 
 principle of evU in the human heart is not a discovery of to-day or yester- 
 day ; and the Grace of God, that stills the waters of rebelhon, and settles 
 like the sister fires of the Dioscuri on the mast of our intent, to strengthen 
 our hands weary with the oar, inspire our course, and bring us safely into 
 port, is no cunningly devised fable or dream of mythology, but a solier 
 fact, as real and constant as light to those that have eyes to see, or the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 177 
 
 song of the early lark to those that have ears to hear, ximlcv the common 
 vault of heaven. 
 
 " We cannot, then, afford to i^hilosophize (beyond the mere and indispen- 
 sable stepping-stone of Natural Theology) apart from Eevclation, on points 
 pertaining to the Infinite or Absolute world ; nor can wc, on the other 
 hand, either in Metaphysics, in Morals, in Politics, in Eeligion, or in 
 Pliilosophy, disregard any one element of human nature or give it undue 
 predominance above its fellows without paying the penalty in philosophic 
 and theological error and extravagance. Slost of the gi-eat systems of 
 philosophy which have hitherto professed to lead us to truth have broken 
 down through neglect of one or both of these two postulates. Their ulti- 
 mate tendencies betray this fact. If we start from Sense only, shutting 
 out Intellect and Spirit, and excluding Eevelation (the voice of God to 
 Man, whether heard in the still chambers of conscience or through the 
 special mission of the Gospel), we end, like the Cyrenaics of old, in bestial 
 materialism, practical atheism, as worshippers of Comus, Bacchixs, and 
 Venus : — If from Spii-it only, in mere antithesis to the sensualist, we attain 
 a monstrous mysticism, a self-idolatry, such as that of the nobler Cynic or 
 the Yoghi of Hindostan : — If, starting from the gi-oundwork of Sense, wc 
 live and act thi-ougli the Imagination only, neglecting Eeason, and irre- 
 spectively of Eevclation, we arrive, like the Epicureans, the French 
 Encyclopedists, and Comte, at speculative materialism and theoretic 
 atheism, barely distinguishable from the lower sensualism : — If, rmder 
 similar conditions otherwise, we give the prominence to Eeason, we lose 
 ourselves, like Leibnitz and the successors of Kant, in a nobler but 
 equally visionary nebula of speculative idealism and pantheism : — If, 
 again, starting fi-om the groundwork of Sense as before, we take oui- stand 
 on the point where Imagination and Eeason, equally developed, meet in 
 compromise, but still ignoring Eevclation, we find ovu'selves in a dead lock, 
 at a non-plus of progress, — Imagination and Eeason check each other, it is 
 true, and we are saved from materialism on one side and idealism on the 
 other; but we gaze from the pinnacle aloft on the abyss beyond and 
 beneath in blank and helpless ignorance as to everything which concerns 
 the Infinite world and oui' immortal interests. This was, to a certain 
 degree, Kant's position on completing Ms Critick of Piu-e Eeason— and it is 
 at this point, the highest to which rinassisted man can rise £i-om earth, that 
 God descends from heaven to meet him, and reveal Himself, through the 
 Incarnate Son, as a Eedeemer from evil, and an Instructor in what it 
 concerns us to know and beheve regarding Infinite and Absolute existence, 
 otherwise beyond our ken and apprehension. The fate of Philosophy 
 depends on herself from this moment. If she looks upward from the 
 giddy apex on which she stands, and welcomes Theology descending with 
 healing on her wings to fallen mankind, she is saved— she is transfigured — 
 she takes wing along with her, and, with the Bible in her hand, penetrates 
 the veil that obscures mfinity; but if she looks olistinately down and 
 shuns the interview, she declines by necessity, tlirough the requirements 
 of practical action and natural gravitation, into low materialism or vague 
 idealism, and takes her rank accordingly, by her own choice, among the 
 categories of inferiority, imperfection, and retrogression, above specified. 
 Pliilosophy must, in a word, at this culminating point of unassisted 
 
 X 
 
178 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Immau attainment, associate herself with Theology if she -would fulfil the 
 objects of her destiny, — it is then only that she becomes that 
 
 " Divine Philosophy, 
 " More musical than is Apollo's lute," 
 
 of which the poet sings. Dui-ing the earlier days of the Church, and in the 
 days of her greatest sons, she to a considerable extent fulfilled this destiny, 
 and walked with Theology, hand in hand, in cordial amity, each l^enefiting 
 by the converse of the other. But for the last few centimes she has taken 
 her sei^arate path, and has wandered farther and farther fi-om the right 
 road, enamoured of error, and unconscious of the gulf to which she tends : 
 and Theology, comparatively young and inexperienced in worldly wisdom, 
 has been compelled to imdertake and head the progress of humanity, 
 imaided by the counsel and assistance which she might have expected 
 from her elder but truant sister— and, in fact, continually embaiTassed by 
 the errors and eccentricities into which the distant and alluring song of 
 the estranged syi"en, coming ever and anon by snatches on the breeze, 
 betrays her followers. The jealousy will in time subside, the estrangement 
 cease, and hearts predestined for love will be reunited ; but in the mean- 
 while, not Philosophy and Theology alone, but humanity, ia general, 
 suifers through the disunion. 
 
 "It is then from the advent of Clu-istianity as a guiding-star to Man, 
 that the higher categories of thought and action develope themselves, ia 
 gradual ascent, towards the empjTcan of Divine Philosophy. And these 
 categories rank ia moral and intellectual elevation, and approximate to 
 truth or decline towards error, in exact proportion as the two postulates 
 above laid down are fulfilled or neglected, one or both of them, ia their 
 philosophical constitution. If we start, for example, from Sense and 
 Spirit in immediate contact, imder thegiiidance of Revelation, but shutting 
 out Intellect, we end in the holy but fanatic mysticism of the hermit of 
 the desert, the monk of La Trappe ; and of which the extreme type, as 
 exhibited in the Pillar Saints of the East, has been portrayed with surpass- 
 ing power and wonderful metaphysical as well as liistorical truth by 
 Tennyson, in his poem of 'St. Simeon Stylites : '—If again, starting from 
 Sense and Spmt, we introduce an iutergi-owth of Intellect, predomiaaatly 
 in the Imagination, always (remember) in this latter series imder the 
 auspices of Christianity, we arrive, like the Latin-speaking races of Europe, 
 at Popery in religion, the phase corresponding to Absolute Monarchy in 
 politics, and tending to grovelling, materialistic. Superstition : — If, on the 
 other hand, under similar conditions otherwise, we give absolute promin- 
 ence to the Eeason, we lose ourselves, like several of the Teutonic races, in 
 unbridled and vague Protestantism, corresponfliug to Democracy, and 
 tending to Eationalism, stopping barely short of Infidelity : — It is only, in 
 fine, when Philosophy, starting from the groundwork of Sense and Spirit, 
 with Intellect interposed between them, and standing on the point of com- 
 promise between Imagination and Eeason, as above described, welcomes 
 Theology descending, as I have said, as a sweet Lris from heaven to bear 
 her company on her further progress, that we attain to Clu-istianity as 
 constitutionally embodied in the CathoUco-Protestant Church of ancient 
 times, and of England in Ihc present day— in parallel development, in the 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 179 
 
 latter case, to that constitutional government of which we boast the highest 
 approximative example in the iiolity of Great Britain,— feeble images, 
 indeed, both of them, of consummate truth, and liable to human deficiency 
 and decay, but still types to man of that ideal which exists in living per- 
 fection in the Person of Christ — which will be accomplished in humanity 
 when mankind are gathered into His Mystical Body, the Church of 
 Chi-istianity —and which will be manifested forth to the glory of God, as 
 the consummation of creation, in the 'Kingdom' of the Father. This is 
 the liigher philosophy, theoretical at once and practical, human and divine, 
 to which all other is ancillary and preparative, and of which Socrates laid 
 the foundation, as a wise master-builder, more than two thousand years 
 ago— existing as yet in Httle more than potentiality, but to be verily exlii- 
 bited in actuahty and power in times to come — the pliilosophy that can 
 alone inspire us rightly in metaphysics, morals, politics, and religion — and 
 by conformity to which the plulosopliical systems of Germany, France, 
 and England, and the influences they collaterally exert \\\)0u theology, 
 must stand or fall as by an exact criterion— a philosophy, in fine, wliicli, 
 springing from that machinery I contend for of cheek and countercheck, 
 of life and progress, by which Spirit purifies Sense and Sense humanises 
 Spirit, by which Imagination informs Eeason, and Eeason chastens 
 Imagination, and by which Spirit, tlu'ough her quintessence. Will, healed 
 and invigorated by the Holy Ghost, rules over the world of human nature 
 — will hereafter, I believe, prevail on earth, to the effect of creating 
 harmony in the Individual, concord in the Community, constitutional 
 government in the State, and Christianity in the Church, the aggi-egate 
 polity of mankind. On many a summers morning in my younger days, 
 while wandering in Lc bannn, I have seen lerraccs beyond terraces ascend- 
 ing from the valh y i>vi r .ii^Miiist me, like giant steps rising to a shrine of 
 glory in the skits, Inil wliicli were abruptly closed and terminated by 
 heavy clouds hanging on the mountain's brow, — steps that might fittingly 
 liortray the daring ascent of human speculation to the edge of the thick 
 darkness within which the Infinite, Absolute, Unknown, Uncovenanted God 
 dwells. But I have also seen there the cloiids suddenly parted, and the 
 Cross of Christ, Tipreared by pious men on the summit of some lioary 
 jieak, siiddenly revealed, like that of Constantine, on the blue and un- 
 dirmned ether, to the restoration of visible communication between those 
 giant steps and the goal to which they led, and to the joy of the heart 
 beholding it in that silent but holy solitude, — an image not unmeet where- 
 with to contrast the categories of pre-Christian imperfection and short- 
 coming, above described, with the 'Divine Philosophy' for which I 
 plead." 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 I.D.MKIX: yRlNTKD bV VILLIAM CLOH KS AXD SOSS, WIKK SIBKET, ST.VMl-Oi:i> SlUEKT, 
 
ALBE31ARLE STREET, LONDON, 
 
 November, 1S09. 
 
 MR. MURRAY'S 
 
 GENERAL LIST OF WORKS. 
 
 ALBERT'S (Prince) SPEECHES AKD ADDRESSES ON 
 
 PUBLIC OCCASIONS; with an lutroduction. Portrait. 870. 10s. 6cZ.; 
 
 or Cheap Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 ABBOTT'S (Rev. J.) Philip Musgrave ; or, jremoirs of a Church of 
 
 England Missionary in the North American Colonies. Post 8vo. 2s. 
 ABERCROMBIE'S (John) Enquiries concerninjr the Intellectual 
 
 Powers and the Investigation of Truth. Eigklceidh Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 
 
 3s. M. 
 
 Philosophy of the Moral Feelings. Fowleenlh 
 
 Editim. Fcap. Svo. 2s. W. 
 
 ACLAND'S (Rev. Charles) Popular Account of the Manners and 
 
 Customs of Indi.a. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 JISOP'S FABLES. A New Translation. 'VVith Historical 
 
 Preface. By Rev. Thomas James. Witli 100 Woodcuts, by Ten.niel 
 and Wolf. 6.3i-d Tlioiusand. Post Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL (The Royal) SOCIETY'S JOURNAL. Svo. 
 
 Published half-yearly. 
 
 AIDS TO FAITH : a Series of Theological Essays. By various 
 Writers. Edited by William Tuumso.v, D.D., Arclibishop of York- 
 Svo. 9s. 
 
 AMBER-WITCH (The). A most interesting Trial for Witch- 
 craft. Translated from the German by Ladt Duff Gordon. Pos- 
 8vo. 2s. 
 
 kViWI U&'S {'in%).FuhlMeil Monthhjhy Authorihj. 18mo. Is.Qd. 
 ARTHUR'S (Little) History of England. By Ladt Calloott. 
 
 New Edition, continued to Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6i. 
 
 ATKINSON'S (Mrs.) Recollections of Tartar Steppes and their 
 
 Inhabitants. Illustrations. Post Svo. 12s. 
 AUNT IDA'S Walks and Talks ; a Story Book for Children. By 
 
 a Ladt. Woodcuts. 16mo. 5s. 
 
 AUSTIN'S (John) Lectures on General Jurisprudence ; or, the 
 Philosophy of Positive Law. Third Edition. Revised and Edited br 
 RoBKKT Campbell. 2 Vols. Svo. 32s. 
 
 (Sarah) Fragments from German Prose Writers. 
 
 With Biographical Notes. Post Svo. 10s. 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 .and N.P.D. Ui. 
 ; P.D. j 
 
 ADMIRALTY PUBLICATIONS ; Issued by direction of the Lords 
 
 Commissioners of the Admiralty: — 
 A MANUAL OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY, for the Use of Travellers. 
 Edited by Sir John F. IIebschel. Third Edition. Ee?loed by 
 Rev. Robert Main, M A. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 AIRY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS made at Gkkejtwich. 
 1836 to 1847. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL RESULTS. 1818 to 1858. 4to. 8».eacb. 
 
 APPENDICES TO THE ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVA- 
 TIONS. 
 
 1836. — I. Bessel's Refraction Tables. 
 
 II. Tables for converting Errors of R.A 
 into Errors of Longitude and Ecliptic 
 
 1837. — I. Logarithms of Sines and Cosines to every Ten ) 
 
 Seconds of Time. Lss. 
 
 II. Table forconverting Sidereal into Mean Sola.r Time. I 
 1842.— Catalogue of 1439 Stars. 8s. 
 1S43.— LoHKitude of Valentia. 8s. 
 1831.— Jla.skelyne's Ledger of Stars. 6s. 
 1S52.— I. Description of the Transit Circle. 53. 
 
 II. Regulations of ihe Royal Observatory. 2s. 
 
 1853. — Bessel's Refraction Tables. 3s. 
 
 1854. — I. Description of the Zenith Tube. 3». 
 
 II. Six Years' Catalogue of Stars. 10s. 
 1856.— Description of the Galvanic Apparatus at Greenwich Ob- 
 servatory. 8s. 
 1862.— I. Seven Years' Catalogue of Stars. 10s. 
 
 II. Plan of the Building and Ground of the Royal Ob-) 
 
 " servatorv, Greenwich. > 3j. 
 
 III. Longitude of Valentia. ) 
 1864.— I. Moon's Semidiameter. 
 
 II. Planetary Observations, 1831 to 1S35. 
 
 MAGNETICAL AND METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVA- 
 
 TIONS. 1840 to 1847. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL, MAGNETICAL, AND METEOROLO- 
 GICAL OBSERVATIONS, 1848 to 1866. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL RESULTS. 1848 to 1866. 4to. 
 
 MAGNETICAL AND METEOROLOGICAL RESULTS. 
 
 1848 to 1866. 4to. 8s. each. 
 
 REDUCTION OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF PLANETS. 
 
 1750 to 1830. Royal 4to. 50s. 
 
 LUNAR OBSERVATIONS. 1750 
 
 to 1830. 2 Vols. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 
 ^ 1831 to 1851. 4to. 20». 
 
 BERNOULLI'S SEXCENTENARY TABLE. Lmtdon, 1779. 4to. 
 
 BESSEL'S AUXILIARY TABLES FOR HIS METHOD OF CLEAR- 
 ING LUNAR DISTANCES. 8vo. 
 
 FUNDAMENTA ASTRONOMIC: .Bfyiomondi, 1818. Folio. 60s. 
 
 BIRD'S METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING MURAL QUADRANTS. 
 London, 1768. 4to. 2s. Gd. 
 
 METHOD OF DIVIDING ASTRONOMICAL INSTRU- 
 MENTS. London,\-im. 4to. 2s. 6d. 
 
 COOK, KING, AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 
 London, 4to. 21s. 
 
 ENCKE'S BERLINER JAHRBUCH, for 1830. Berlin, 1828. 8vo. 8s. 
 
 GROOMBRIDGES CATALOGUE OF CIRCUMPOLAR STABS. 
 4to. 10s. 
 
 HANSEN'S TABLES DE LA LUNE. 4to. 20s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 Admiralty Pdblications — continued. 
 
 HARRISON'S PRINCIPLES OP HIS TIME-KEEPER. Plates. 
 1797. 4to. 5s. 
 
 JI.VCLEAIt ON L.\CAILLE'S ARC OF MERIDIAN. 
 
 LAX S TABLES FOR FINDING THE LATITUDE AND LONGI- 
 TUDE. 1821. 8vo. 10a. 
 
 LUNAR OBSERVATIONS at GREENWICH. 1783 to 1819. Compared 
 with the Tables, 1821. 4to. 7s. 6rf. 
 
 MACLEAR ON LACAILLE'S ARC OF MERIDIAN. 2 Vols. 2Cs. 
 
 MASKELYNE'S ACCOUNT OP THE GOING OF HARRISON'S 
 WATCH. 1767. 4to. 2s. 
 
 MAYER'S DISTANCES of the MOON'S CENTRE from the 
 PLANETS. 1822,3.-.; 1823, 4s. 6J. 1824 to 1835, 8vo. 4s. each. 
 
 THEORIA LUN^ JUXTA SYSTEMA NEWTONIANUM. 
 
 4to. 2s. 6d. 
 
 TABULA MOTUUM SOLIS ET LUN^. 1770. 
 
 ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE AT GOT- 
 
 TINGEN, from 1756 to 1761. 1826. Folio. 7j. 6d. 
 NAUTICAL ALMANACS, from 1767 to 1873. 8vo. 2s. 6d. each. 
 SELECTIONS FROM THE ADDITIONS 
 
 np to 1812. 8vo. 5s. 1S34-64. 8vo. 5s. 
 SUPPLEMENTS, 1828 to 1833, 1837 and 1838. 
 
 8to. 2s. each. 
 
 TABLE requisite to be nsed with the N.A. 
 
 1781. 8vo. 5s. 
 
 POND'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1811 to 1835. 4to. 21s. 
 each. 
 
 RAMSDEN'S ENGINE for DiviDixo Mathematical I.n-steuuests. 
 4to. 5s. 
 
 ENGINE for Dividing Stbaioht Lines. 4to. 5s. 
 
 SABINE'S PENDULUM EXPERIMENTS to Detekmise the Figubb 
 
 OF the Earth. 1825. 4to. 40s. 
 SHEPHERD'S TABLES for Coeeecting Lonae Distances. 1772. 
 
 Royal 4to. 21s. 
 
 TABLES, GENERAL, of the MOON'S DISTANCE 
 
 from the SUN, and 10 STARS. 1787. Folio. 5s. 6d. 
 TAYLOR'S SEXAGESIMAL TABLE. 1780. 4to. 15s. 
 
 TABLES OF LOGARITHMS. 4to. 31. 
 
 TIARK'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS for the Longitude 
 
 OfMADEIEA. 1822. 4to. 5s. 
 CHRONOMETRICAL 0BSERV.4TI0NS for Diffbeences 
 
 of LoNGiTODE between Doveb, Poetsmouth, and Faliiodth. 1823. 
 
 4to. 5s. 
 
 VENUS and JUPITER: Obbeevations of, compared with the Tables. 
 
 Lmdon, 1822. 4to. 2s. 
 WALES' AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 
 
 1777. 4to. 21s. 
 
 WALES' REDUCTION OP ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS 
 MADE IN THE SOUTHKEK Hkuibpheee. 1764—1771. 1788. 4to. 
 
4 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 BARBAULD'S (Mrs.) Hymns in Prose for Children. With 112 
 Original Designs. Small 4to. bs. ; or Fine Taper, 7s. 6d. 
 
 BARROW'S (SiK John) Autobiographical Memoir. From Early 
 Life to Advanced Age. Portrait. 8to. 16». 
 
 — (John) Life, Exploits, and Voyages of Sir Francis 
 
 Drake. With numerous Original Letters. Post 8vo. 2s. 
 
 BARRY'S (Sir Charles) Life. By ALrHED Barby, D.D. With 
 
 Portrait, and Illustrations. Medium 8vo. 
 BATES' (H. W.) Records of a Katuralist on the River AmazoDB 
 during eleven j-ears of Adventure and Travel. Second EdUion. lUus- 
 tratious. Post 8vo. 12s. 
 
 BEAUCLERK'S (Lady Di) Summer and Winter in Norway. 
 
 Third Edition. With Illustrations. Small 8vo. 6s. 
 
 BEES AND FLOWERS. Two Essays. By Rev. Thomas James. 
 Reprinted from the " Quarterly Review." Fcap. 8vo. Is. each. 
 
 BERTHA'S Journal during a Visit to her Uncle in England. 
 
 Containing a Variety of Interesting and Instructive Information. Seventh 
 Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. 7.<. 6J. 
 
 BERTRAM'S (Jas. G.) Harvest of the Sea : a Contribution to the 
 Kafural and Economic History of British Food Fishes. Second Edition. 
 With 50 Illustrations. 8vo. 12s. 
 
 BICKMORE'S (Albert S.) Travels in the Eastern Archipelago 
 
 18'i5-6 ; a Popular Description i f tlie Islands, with their Natural His- 
 tory, Geography, Manners and Cu^tums of the People, &c. With Maps 
 and Illustrations, 6vo. '.lis. 
 
 BIRCH'S (Samuel) History of Ancient Pottery and Porcelain : 
 
 Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan. With 200 Illustr*- 
 tions. 2 Vols. Medium Svo. 42s. 
 
 BISSET'S (Andrew) History of the Commonwealth of England, 
 from the Death of Charles I. to the Expulsion of the Long Parliament 
 hy Cromwell. Chiefly Irom ihe MSS. in tLe SUte Paper Office. 2 vols. 
 Svo. 30s. 
 
 BLAKISTON'S (Capt.) Narrative of the Expedition sent to ex- 
 plore the Upper Waters of the Yaug-Tsze. Illustrations. Svo. IBs. 
 
 BLOMFIELD'S (Bishop) Memoir, with Selections from his Corre- 
 spondence. By his Son. Second Edition. Portrait, post Svo. 12s. 
 
 BLUNT'S (Rev. J. J.) Undesigned Coincidences in the Writings of 
 theOld and NewTestamenl, an Argument of their Veracitv : containing 
 the Books of Moses, Hist.nical and Prophetical Sciiptures, and tha 
 Gospels and Acts. X.,.tl, EdUion. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 History of the Church in the First Three Centuries. 
 
 Fourth Edition. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 Parish Priest ; His Duties, Acquirements and Obliga- 
 tions. Ei/th Edition. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 Lectures on the Right Use of the Early Fathers. 
 
 Third Edition. Svo. 9s. 
 
 Plain Sermons Preached to a Country Congregation. 
 
 Fifth Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 12,'!. 
 
 Essays on various subjects. Svo. lis. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 5 
 
 BOOK OP COMMON PRAYER. Illustrated with Coloured 
 
 Borders. lultial Letters, and Woodcuts. A new edition. 8vo. 18«. 
 cloth ; 31s. 6<i. calf; 36s. morocco. 
 
 BORROWS (George) Bible in Spain; or the Journeys, Adventures, 
 and Imprisonments of an Englishman in an Attempt to circulate the 
 Scriptures in the Peninsula. 3 Vols. Post 8vo. 273,; ot Fojiular Edition, 
 16mo, 3s. 6d. 
 
 Zincali, or the Gipsies of Spain ; their Manners, 
 
 Customs, Religion, and Language. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. IBs. ; or Fopular 
 Edition, 16mo, 3s. 6d. 
 
 Wild Wales : its People, Language, and Scenery. 
 
 with lutroductory Kemarks. Post bvo. 6s. 
 Lavengro ; The Scholar — The Gipsy — and the Priest. 
 
 Portrait. 3 Vols. Post Svo. 30s. 
 Romany Rye ; a Sequel to Lavengro. 2 Vols. 
 
 PostSvo. 21s. 
 
 BOSWELL'S (James) Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Includ- 
 ing the Tour to the Hebrides. Edited by Mr. Chokee. Portraits. Koyal 
 Svo. 10s. 
 
 BRACE'S (C. L.) Manual of Ethnology; or the Races of the Old 
 
 World. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 BRAY'S (Mrs.) Life of Thomas Stothard, R.A. With Personal 
 
 Reminiscences. Illustrated with Portrait and 60 Woodcuts of his 
 chief works. 4to. 21s. 
 
 Edinburgh, 1S50, 15s. 
 BROUGHTON'S (Lord) Journey through Albania and other 
 
 Provinces of Turkey in Europe anl Asia, to Constantinople, 1309—10. 
 
 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. 30s. 
 
 Visits to Italy. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 18«. 
 
 BROWNLOWS (Lady) Reminiscences of a Septuagenarian. 
 
 From the year 1802 to 1813, Ttiird Edition. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 BUBBLES FROM THE BRUNNEN OF NASSAU. By Sir 
 
 Francis B. Uead, Bart. 7lh Edition, with Illustrations. Post Svo. 
 
 7s. 6rf. 
 
 BUNYAN (John) and Oliver Cromwell. Select Biographies. By 
 
 KOBEBT SODTBET. PoSt SvO. 2s. 
 
 8vo. 
 
 Ipswich, 1851, 16s. Gd. 
 Bflfast,lS52, 15s. 
 Hull, 1853, 10s. 6d. 
 Liverpool, 1854, 18s. 
 GUssrow, 1855. 15s. 
 Clieltenham, 1856, 18s. 
 Dublin. 1857, li5s. 
 Leeils. 1838. 20x. 
 Aberdeen. 1859, 15a. 
 Oxford. 1860, 25s. 
 Manchester, 1861, 1.5». 
 Catnbrici^'e. 1862. 20s. 
 Newcastl... 1863, 25s. 
 Bath, 1864, ISs. 
 Birmingham, 1865. 25s 
 Nottingham. I8615, 24s. 
 Dundee. 1867. 26*. 
 Norwich, 1868, 25s. 
 
c 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 BURGON'S (Rev. J. W.) Christian Gentleman ; or, Memoir of 
 
 Patrick Fraser Tytler. Second Edition. Post 8to. 9«. 
 
 Letters from Rome. Post 8vo. 12«. 
 
 BURN'S (Col.) Dictionary of Naval and Military Technical 
 
 Terms, linglish aod French— French and English. Fourth Edition. 
 Crown 8vo. 153. 
 
 BURROW'S (Montagu) Constitutional Progress. A Series of 
 
 Lectures delivered before the University of Oxford. Post 8vo. 6«. Gd. 
 
 BUXTON'S (Charles) Memoirs of Sir Thomas Powell Buxton, 
 
 Bart. With Selections from his Correspondence. By bis Son. Portrait. 
 8vo. 16s. Or Fopular Edition. Fcap. bvo. 2i. 6d. 
 
 Ideas of tee Day on PoLicr, Tliird Edition. 
 
 8vo. 6j. 
 
 BYRON'S (Lord) Life, Letters, and Journals. By Thomas Moore. 
 
 Plates. 6 Vols. Fcap. 8vo. IBs. 
 
 Life, Letters, and Journals. By Thomas Moorb. 
 
 Portraits. Royal 8vo. 95. 
 
 Poetical Works. Portrait. 6 Vols. Svo. 45* 
 
 Poetical Works. Plates. 10 Vols. Fcap. Svo. 30«. 
 
 Poetical Works. 8 Vols. 24mo. 20«. 
 
 Poetical Works. Plates. Royal Svo. Qs. 
 
 Poetical Works. (Pearl Edition.) Crown Svo. 2s. &d. 
 
 Childe Harold. With 80 Engravings. Crown 4lo. 12.s. 
 
 Childe Harold. 16mo. 2s. Qd. 
 
 Childe Harold. Vignettes. 16mo. Is. 
 
 Childe Harold. Portrait. 16mo. M. 
 
 Tales and Poems. 24mo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Miscellaneous. 2 Vols. 24mo. 5s. 
 
 Dramas and Plays. 2 Vols. 24mo. 6s. 
 
 Don Juan and Beppo. 2 Vols. 24mo. 5s. 
 
 Beauties. Portrait. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6^. 
 
 BURR'S (G. D.) Instructions in Practical Surveying, Topogra- 
 phical Plan Drawing, and on sketching ground without Instruments. 
 
 Fourth Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 6*. 
 
 EUTTMAN'S LEXILOGUS ; a Critical Examination of the 
 
 Meaning of numerous Greek Words, chiefly in Homer and Hesiod. 
 Translated by Ker. J. K. FisHLAKE. Fifth Edition. Svo. 12s. 
 
 , CATALOGUE OP IRREGULAR GREEK VERBS. 
 
 With all the Tenses exiant— their Formation, Meaning, and Usage, 
 accompanied by an Index. Translated, witli Notes, by Rev. J. R. 
 FiSHLAKK. Fifth Edition. Revised by Rev. E. Tekablks. PostSvo. 6s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 7 
 
 CALLCOTT'S (Lady) Little Arthur's History of England. 
 
 Ntw Edition, brou'iht down to IBVl. With Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 CAMPBELL'S (Lord) Lives of the Lord Chancellors and Keepers 
 
 of the Great Seal of England. From the Earliest Times to the Death of 
 
 Lord Eldon in 1838. Fourth Editim. 10 Vols. Crown Svo. 6s. each. 
 Lives of Lord Lvndhurst and Lord Brougham. 
 
 Svo. 16s. 
 
 Lives of the Chief Justices of England. From the 
 
 Norman Conquest to the Death of Lord Tenterden. Second Edition. 
 3 Vola. Svo. 42s. 
 
 Shakspeare's Legal Acquirements Considered. 
 
 Svo. bs.ed. 
 
 Life of Lord Chancellor Bacon. Fcap. Svo. 2«. M. 
 
 (Sir Neil) Account of Napoleon at Fontainbleau 
 
 and Elba. Being a .Journal of Occurrences and Noies of his Conver- 
 
 sations, *c. Poitniit. Svo. 15s. 
 (George) Modern India. A Sketch of the System 
 
 of Civil Government. With Rome Account of the Natives and Native 
 
 Institutions. Second Edition. Svo. 16s. 
 (Thos.) Short Lives of the British Poets. With an 
 
 Essay on English Poetry. Post Svo. 3s. 6</. 
 CARNARVON'S (Lord) Portugal, Gallicia, and the Basque 
 
 Provinces. From Notes made during a Journey to those Conatries. 
 
 Third Edition. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 Reminiscences of Athens and the Morea. Ex- 
 
 tract-i from a .Journal during Travels in Greece in 18)9. With Map. 
 
 Crown Svo. 7s. 6.2. 
 
 Recollections of the Druses of Lebanon. With 
 
 Notes on their Religion. Third Edition. Post Svo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 CASTLEREAGH (The) DESPATCHES, from the commencement 
 of the official career of the late Viscount Castlereagh to the close of his 
 life. Edited by the Mabquis OF LoNDONDEREY. 12 Vols. Svo. 14s. each, 
 
 CATHCART'S (Sir George) Commentaries on the War in Russia 
 and Germany, 1812-13. Plans. Svo. 14s. 
 
 CAYALCASELLE and CROWE'S History of Painting in 
 
 Italy, from the Second to the Sixteenth Century. 1st Series. With 
 lOU Illustrations. 3 Vols. 8vo. 63,(. 
 
 History of Painting in North Italy, includ- 
 ing Venice, Lombardy, Fadna, Vicenza, Verona, Parma, Friuli, 
 Ferrara, and Bologna. With lUustra'ions. 2 Vols. Svo. (Xearly Btady.) 
 
 - Notices of the Lives and Works of the 
 
 Early Flemish Painters. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 125. 
 
 CHILD (G. Chaplin, M.D.) Benedicite ; or, the Song of the Three 
 Children; being Illustrations of the Power, Beneficence, and Design 
 manifested by the Creator in his works. Third Edition. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 CHURCH (The) AND THE AGE. A Series of Essays on the 
 
 Principles nnl Present Position ot the .\ngHcin Church, by the Bishop 
 of Gloi-cestf.r and Bp.istdi, ; Penn of Ciii. hi sn-i: : Kev. Dr. Iboxs; 
 Kev. Charles PiinrinRi) ; Hev. Dr. liAiiiiV ; Kev. M. F. Sadler; 
 Hev.A. W. IIaddan; Rev. W. Walsi.asi How; Kev. K. St. John 
 Tyrwhitt; Professor .Muxtagu Burrows. Edited by Rev. A. Weir, 
 and Rev. W. D. Maclagas. Svo. i,Se(irly Ready .) 
 
8 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 CHUETON'S (Archdeacon) Gongora. An Historical Essay on the 
 Age of Philip III. and IV. 01 Spain. With TranslatioDS. Portrait. 
 2 Vols. Small Svo. 
 
 CICERO'S LIFE AND TLMES. With his Character viewed 
 
 as a statesman, <)r..tor. and Friend, and a Selection from his Corres- 
 pondence and OratiuJis. By William PoBsvTH, Q.C. Third Edition. 
 With Illustrations. 8vn. 
 CLAEK S (Sir Jajif.s) Jlemoir of John Conolly, M.D., D.C.L. 
 Comprisinj; a sketch nt the Improved Treatment of the Insane in 
 Europe and .\tnerica. Willi Purirait. Post Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 CLIVE'S (Lord) Life. By 1!ev. G. E. Gleio.M.A. PostSvo. 3«.6rf. 
 
 CLODE'S (C. if.) Military Forces of the Crown : their Administra- 
 tion and UovHnmeut. V.ds. I.andll. bvo. L^l.-^. each. 
 
 COLCHESTER (The) PAPERS. The Diary and Correspondence 
 of Charles Abbott, Lord Colche.ster, Speaker of the House of Commons, 
 1802-1817. Portrait. 3 Vols. 8vo. 
 
 COLERIDGE'S (Samuel Taylor) Tahle-Talk. ^^ew Edilion. 
 
 Portrait. Fcap. Svo. 3s. f((. 
 COLLINGWOODS (Cutubert) Rambles of a Naturalist on the 
 
 Shores and Waters of ihe China Sea. Being Observations in Natural 
 
 History during a Vovajje to C hina, Formosa, Borneo, Singapore, &c., 
 
 during 1866— 6?. AVitU Illustrations. Svo. 16». 
 
 COLONIAL LIBEARY. [See Home and Colonial Library.] 
 COOK'S (Canon) Sermons Preached at Lincoln's Inn Chapel, 
 
 and on Special Occasions. Svo. 9s. 
 
 COOKERY (Modern Domestic). Founded on Principles of Economy 
 and Practical Knowledge, and adapted for Private Families. By a 
 Lady. A'eui ifiition. VVoodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 5s. 
 
 CORN'WALLIS (The) Papers and Correspondence during the 
 
 American War,— Administrations in India,— Union with Ireland, and 
 Peace of Amiens. Stamd Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 
 
 COWPER'S (Mart, Cucntess) Diary while Lady of the Bedchamber 
 
 to Caroline Princfss of Wales, 1714-20. Edited by Hon. Spesceb 
 CowrER. Second EdUiou. Portrait. Svo. 10s. 6i/. 
 CRABBE'S (Rev. George) Life and Poetical Works. Plates. 
 8 vols. Fcap. Svo. 21s. ; or Complete in 1 Vol. Plutcs. Eoyal 
 Svo. 7s. 
 
 CEEE'S (Eev. E. D.) Portrait of the Primitive Church. Fcap. 
 CROKER'S (J. W.) Progressive Geography for Children. 
 
 Fijth Edition. 18mo. Is. 6d. 
 Stories for Children, Selected from the History of 
 
 England. Fifteenth Edition. Woodcuts. 16mo. 2s. 6d. 
 .Boswell's Life of Johnson. Including the Tour to 
 
 the Hebrides. Portraits. Royal Svo. 10s. 
 
 Essays on the Early Period of the French Revolution. 
 
 8vo. 15s. 
 
 Historical Essay on the Guillotine. Fcap. Svo. 1«. 
 
 CROMWELL (Oliver) and John Bunyan. By Robert Sodthkt. 
 
 PostSvo. 2s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 CROWE'S AND CAVALCASELLE'S Notices of the Early Flemish 
 
 Painters. Woodcuts. PostSvo. 12s. 
 History of Painting in Italy, from 2nd to 16lh 
 
 Century. Derived from Hist .rical lie^earclips as well as I.ispertion of 
 the WorltK of Art iu tlmt Cniiiury. Ut Series. With 100 Illustra- 
 tions. 3 Vols. 8vo. 21s. each. 
 
 Second Series, including 
 
 Veuice, Lomhardy, Padua, Vioenzi, Verona, Parma, Friuli, Ferrara, and 
 Boiogna. With Illustrations. 2 Vols. 8vo. (Nearly Iteadtj.) 
 
 CUMMING'S (R. Gordon) Five Years of a Hunter's Life in the 
 
 Far Interior of South Africa ; with Anecdotes of the Chace, and Notices 
 of the Native Tribes. New Ediiiun. Woodcuts. Post 8yo. Ss. 
 
 CUNNINGHAM'S (Allan) Poems and Songs. Now first col- 
 lected and arranged, with Biographical Notice. 24mo. 2s. &d. 
 
 (Petek) London : Past and Pre.?ent. A Neiv 
 
 Edition. V\rith numerous Illustrations. 3 Vols. Svo. (In preparation). 
 
 CURTIUS' (Professor) Student's Greek Grammar, for Colleges 
 
 and the Upper Forms. Edited by Dk. Wm. Smith. Third Edition. 
 Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Smaller Greek Grammar for the Middle and Lower 
 
 Forms. 12mo. 3s. Gd. 
 
 CURZON'S (Hon. Robert) Armenia and'Erzeroum. A Year on 
 the Frontiers of Russia, Turkey, and Persia. Third Edition. Wood- 
 cuts. PostSvo. 73. 6d. 
 
 Visits to the Monasteries of the Levant. Fifth Edition. 
 
 Illustrations. Post 8vo. 7s. Hd. 
 GUST'S (General) Warriors of the 17t.h Century— The Thirty Years' 
 
 War— Tlie Civil Wars of Fi huch and Englaud— and Commanders of 
 
 Fleets and Armies befnre 1 lie Enemy. 6 Vtds. PostSvo. 
 Annals of the Wars— 18th & 19th Century, 1700— 1815. 
 
 Compiled from the most Authentic Sources. With Maps, a Vul^i. Post 
 
 8vo. 5s. each. 
 
 DARWIN'S (Charles) Journal of Researches into the Natural 
 History of the Countries visited during a Voyage round the World. 
 Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 - Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection ; 
 
 or, the Preservation of Favoured" Races in the Struggle for Life. Fijtk 
 Edition. PostSvo. lis. 
 
 Fertilization of Orchids through Insect Agency, and 
 
 as to the good of Intercrossing. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication. 
 
 With IlIu-,trations. 2 Vuls. 8vo. 2Ss. 
 
 Fact and Argument for Darwin. By Fritz Moller. 
 
 With numerous llluslraiions and Additions bv the Author. Translated 
 from the German by W. S. Dallas. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 DAVIS'S (Nathan) Visit to the Ruined Cities of Numidia and 
 
 Carthaginia. Illustrations. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 DAVY'S (Sir Hcmphrt) Consolations in Travel ; or, Last Days 
 of a Philosopher. New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6((. 
 
 Salmonia; or. Days of Fly Fishing. New Edition. 
 
 Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6i/. 
 
10 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 DELEPIERRE'S (Octave) History of Flemish Literature. From 
 the Twelfth Century. 8vo. 9.i. 
 
 Historical Difficulties and Contested Events. 
 
 Being Notes on some Doubtful Points of History. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 DENISON'S (E. B.) Life of Bishop Lonsdale, D.D. With Selec- 
 tions from hi, Wriiings. With I'urtrait. Crown 6vo. IDs. 6i. 
 
 DERBY'S (Earl of) Translation of the Iliad of Homer into 
 English HlHiili Verse. Fiiih Elilwn, 2 vols. 8to. 243.; or J'opulxr 
 Edilim. 2 Vols. PostSvo. 10s 
 
 TransUtions from tlie Poets, Ancient and Modem. 8vo. 
 
 3s. G.l. 
 
 DE ROS'S (Loed) Memorials of the Tower of London. Second 
 
 Edition. With Illustrations. CroAn Sto. 12.. 
 
 Young Officer's Companion ; or, Essays on Military 
 
 Duties and Qualities : with Examples and Illustrations from History. 
 
 Ktw Edition. Po»t8vo. 'Js. 
 
 DIXON'S (W. Hepworth) Story of the Life of Lord Bacon. Seccmd 
 
 Editirm. Portrait. Fcap. Bvo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 DOG-BREAKING ; the Most Expeditious, Certain, and Easy 
 Method, whetlier great e.xeellence or only mediocrity be required. With 
 a Few llinls for those who L .ve the Uog and the Gun. By Lieot.- 
 Gen. Hutchinson. Pi/ik Edition. With 40 Woodcuts. Crown Bvo. Ss. 
 
 DOMESTIC MODERN COOKERY. Founded on Principles of 
 
 Economy and Practical Knowledge, and adapted for Private Families. 
 New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Bvo 5s. 
 
 DOUGLAS'S (Sir Howard) Life and Adventures. By S. W. 
 
 FiTLLOii. Portrait. 8vo. 15s. 
 
 Theory and Practice of Gunnery. Fi/Oi Edition. Plates. 
 
 8vo. 21 s. 
 
 Military Bridges. TJiird Edition. Plates. 8vo. 21«. 
 
 Naval Warfare with Steam. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 Modern Systems of Fortification. Plans. 8vo. 12*. 
 
 DRAKE'S (Sir Francis) Life, Voyages, and Exploits, by Sea and 
 Land. By Jobs Baeeow. Third Edition. Post 8vo. 2s. 
 
 (W. Richard) Notes on Venetian Ceramics. Medium 
 
 Svo. 4s. 
 
 DRINKWATER'S (John) History of the Siege of Gibraltar, 
 
 1779-178.3. With a Description and Account of that Garrison from the 
 Earliest Periods. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 DUCANGE'S MEDIAEVAL LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY. 
 
 Translated by Kev. E. A. Dayjun, jM.A. timall 4to. 
 
 (//* preparation.) 
 
 DU CHAILLU'S (Paci, B.) EQUATORIAL AFRICA, with 
 
 Accounts of the Gorilla, the Nest-building Ape, Chimpanzee, Croco- 
 dile, &c. Illustrations. Svo. 21s. 
 
 — Journey to Ashango Land ; and Further Pene- 
 
 tration into Equatorial Africa. Illustrations. Svo. 21s. 
 
 DUFFERIN'S (Lord) Letters from High Latitudes ; an Account 
 of a Yacht Voyage to Iceland, Jan Mayen, and Spitzbergen. Fifth 
 Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 11 
 
 DYER'S (Thos. H.) History of Modern Europe, from the taking 
 
 of Constantinople by the Turks to the close of the War in the 
 Crimea. 4 Vols. Svo. 
 
 EASTLAKE'S (Sie Charles) Italian Schools of Painting. From 
 the German of Kugleh. Edited, with Notes. Tlnrd Edkim. Illus- 
 trated from the Old Masters. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30s. 
 
 New Series of Contributions to the Literature of 
 
 Art. With Memoir. l!y I.adv E.vstlake. Svo. 
 
 EDWARDS' (W. H.) Voyage up the River Amazon, including a 
 Visit to Para. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 ELDON'S (Lord) Public and Private Life, with Selections from 
 
 his Correspondence and Diaries. By Horace Twibs. Third Edition. 
 Portrait. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 21s. 
 
 ELGIN (The late Lord) Selections 'from Correspondence and 
 Despatches. Edited by Tiieouop.e Walrond. Svo. (Xearly Bendy.) 
 
 ELLESMERE'S (Lord) Two Sieges of Tienna by the Turks. 
 
 Translated from the German. Post Svo. 2s. 
 ELLIS'S (W.) Visits to Madagascar, including a Journey to 
 
 the Capital, with notices of Natural History, and Present Civilisation 
 
 of the People. Map and Woodcuts. Svo. 16s. 
 Sladagascar Revisited. Setting forth the Persecutions and 
 
 Heroic Sufferings of the Native Christians. Illustrations. Svo. 16s. 
 (Mrs.) Education of Character, with Hints on Moral 
 
 Training. Post Svo. 7s. 6.i. 
 
 ELPHINSTONE'S (Hon. Mountstuart) History of India— the 
 
 Hindoo and Mahomedan Periods. Fijlh Edition. Map. Svo. 18s. 
 ENGEL'S (Carl) Music of the Most Ancient Nations; particularly 
 of the Assyrians, Egyptians, and Hebrews ; with Special Reference to 
 the Discoveries in Western Asia and in Egypt. With 100 Illustrations. 
 Svo. 16s. 
 
 ENGLAND (History of) from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace 
 
 of Versailles, 1713—83. By Lord Mahon (now Earl Stanhope). Library 
 fA'fion, 7 Vols. Svo. 9Zs.\ ai Foindar Edition,! YoW Post Svo. 355. 
 
 From the First Invasion by the Romans, continued 
 
 to 1S65. By Mrs. Markham. New Edition, revised. Woodcuts. 
 12ma. 4s. 
 
 Prom the Invasion of Julius Csesar to the Revolu- 
 tion of 1688. By David Hume. Corrected and continued to 1868. 
 Edited by AVm. Smith, LL.D. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 (Smaller Historj' of). By AVm. Smith, LL.D. 
 
 New Edition, continued to 18Gb. Woodcuts. ISmo. 3s. U. 
 
 Little Arthur's. By Ladt Callcoti. New Edition, 
 
 continued to 1S62. Woodcuts. ISnio. 2s. (id. 
 
 ENGLISHWOMAN IN AMERICA. Post Svo. 10«. Qd. 
 ESKIMATJX and English Vocabulary, for Travellers in the Arctic 
 
 Regions. IBmo. 3s. Gd. 
 
 ETHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY'S TRANSACTIONS. New Series. 
 
 Vols. I. to VI. Svo. 10.!. 6(/. each. 
 
 EXETER'S (Bishop of) Letters to Charles Butler, on his Book of 
 
 the Roman Catholic Church. New Edition. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
12 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 ■ FAMILY RECEIPT-BOOK. A Collection of a Thousand Valuable 
 and Useful Receipts. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 
 
 FAERAK'S (A. S.) Critical History of Free Thought in 
 reference to the Christian Religion. Being the Eampton Lectures, 1832. 
 8vo. 16s. 
 
 (P. W.) Origin of Language, based on Modem 
 
 Researches. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
 
 FERQUSSON'S (James) Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolia 
 
 Restored. Woodcuts. 8vo. 16s. 
 History of Architecture in all Countries : from the 
 
 Earliest Times to the Pre-ent Hay. With 1201) Illustralions and au 
 
 Index. Vols. 1. and II. 8vo. 42s. each, 
 
 History of Architecture. Vol. III. — The Modem 
 
 Styles. With 312 Illustrations, and an Index. Svo. 31s. ed. 
 
 Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem; 
 
 being the Substance of Two Lectures delivered at the Royal Institu- 
 tion, 1862 and '65. Woodcuts. Svo. 7s. 6^. 
 
 FLEMING (Wm.) Student's Manual of Moral Philosophy. Post 
 
 FLOWER GARDEN (The). By Rev. Thos. James. Fcap. 8to. Is. 
 FONNEREAU'S (T. G.) Diary of a Dutiful Son. Fcap. Svo. 
 
 4s. 6d. 
 
 FORSTER'S (John) Arrest of the Five Members by Charles the 
 First, A Chapter of English Histoiy re-written. Post Svo. 
 
 Grand Remonstrance, 1641. With an Essay on 
 
 English freedom under the Flantagenet and Tudor Sovereigns. Second 
 Editim. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 Sir John Eliot: a Biography, 1590—1632. With 
 
 Portraits. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. SOs. 
 Biographies of Oliver Cromwell, Daniel De Foe, 
 
 Sir Richard Steele, Charles Churchill, Samuel Foote. Third Edition. 
 
 Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 FORD'S (Richard) Gatherings from Spain. Post Svo. 3s. M. 
 
 FORSYTH'S (William) Life and Times of Cicero. With Selections 
 from bis Correspondence and Orations. Thii d Edition. Illustratioas. Svo. 
 
 FORTUNE'S (Robert) Narrative of Two Visits to the Tea 
 Countries of China, 1843-52. Third Edition. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post 
 Svo. 18s. 
 
 Yedo and Peking. With Notices of the Agricul- 
 ture and Trade of China. Illustrations. Svo. 16s. 
 
 FOSS' (Edward) Judges of England. With Sketches of their 
 Lives, and Notices of the Conns at Westminster, from the Conquest to 
 the Present Time. 9 Vols. Svo. YlGs. 
 
 Tabulse Curiales ; or, Tables of the Superior Courts 
 
 of Westminster Hall. Sliowing the Judges who sat in them from 1066 
 to 1864 ; with the Attorney iinO Solicitor Generals of each reign. To 
 which is prefixed an Alpliabetical List of all the Judges during the 
 same period. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 13 
 
 FRANCE (History of). From the Conquest by the Gauls, 
 
 continued to 18S1. By Mrs. Markham. Ntw Jiditiou, nc'sai. Wood- 
 cutu. 12mo. 4«. 
 
 From the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the 
 
 S?c™d Empire, 1852. By W. H. Pearso.v. Edited by \Vm. Smith, 
 LL.D. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 FRENCH (The) in Algiers ; The Soldier of the Foreign Legion — 
 and the Prisoners of Abd-el-Kadir. Translated by Lady Dcff Gordon. 
 Post 8vo. 2s. 
 
 FRERE'S (M.) Old Dccean Days ; or, Hindoo Fairy Legends 
 
 Current in South'irn Iri'lia. Collected fnm Oral Tradition. Illustrated 
 by C. F. Frere. With au Introduction and Notes, by Sir Baetle 
 Frere. Crown 8vo. 12s. 
 
 OALTON'S (Francis) Art of Travel ; or, Hints on the Shifts and 
 
 Contrivances available in Wild Countries. Fourth Edition. Wood- 
 
 GEOGRAPHY (Ancient). A Manual for Students. By Rev. W. 
 
 li. Bevan. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. Ts.Gd. 
 (Modern). A Manual for Students. By Rev. W. 
 
 L. Bevan. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. 61. 
 Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of 
 
 London. 8vo. Annually, 20s. 
 
 GERMANY (History op). From the Invasion by Marius, continued 
 
 to 1837. By Mrs. Markham. New Edition, revised. Woodcuts. 12nio. 
 4s. 
 
 GIBBON'S (Edward) History of the Decline and Pall of the 
 
 Roman Empire. Edited by Milman and GuizOT. A N'W Edition. 
 Preceded by his Autobiography. And Edited, with Notes, by Dr. Wm. 
 Smith. Maps. 8 Vols. Svo. 60s. 
 
 (The Student's Gibbon) ; Being an Epitome of the 
 
 above work, incorporating; the Researches of Recent Commentators. By 
 Dr. Wm. Smith. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 GIFFARD'S (Edward) Deeds of Naval Daring ; or, Anecdotes of 
 the British Navy. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. &d. 
 
 GLADSTONE'S (W. E.) Financial Statements of 1853, 60, 63, 
 and 64 ; with Speeches on Ta.\-BiIU and Charities. Second Edition. 
 8fO. 12s. 
 
 Speeches on Parliamentary Reform. Third 
 
 Edition. Post Svo. 5s. 
 
 OLEIG'S (G. R.) Campaigns of the British Army at Washington 
 
 and New Orleans. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 Story of the Battle of Waterloo. Post Svo. 3«. Qd. 
 
 Narrative of Sale's Brigade in Aflghanistan. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 ■ Life of Robert Lord Clive. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Sir Thomas Munro. Post Svo. 3s. 6c7. 
 
 GOLDSMITH'S (Oliver) Works. A New Edition. Edited with 
 Notes by Pbteb Chnninoham. Vignettes. 4 Vols. Svo. 30s. 
 
14 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 GONGORA; An Historical Essay on the Times of Philip III. and 
 
 IV. of Spain. With Illustrations. By Aechdeacon Chdetok. Por- 
 trait. 2 vols. Post Svo. 
 
 GORDON'S (Sir Alex. Duff) Sketches of German Life, and Scenes 
 
 from tlie War of Liberation. From the German. Post 8to. 3s. 6d. 
 
 (Lady Duff) Amber- Witch : A Trial for Witch- 
 craft. From tie German. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 French in Algiers. 1. The Soldier of the Foreign 
 
 Lefrion. 2. The Prisoners of Abd-el-Kadir. From the French. 
 Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 GOUGER'S (Henry) Personal Narrative of Two Tears' Imprison- 
 ment in Burmab. Second Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 
 
 GRAMMARS (Latin and Greek). See Cdktics; MATiHlis ; Smith ; 
 King Edward VIth., &c. &c. 
 
 GREECE (History of). From the Earliest Times to the Roman 
 
 Conquest. By Wm. Smith, LL.D. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 (Smaller History of). By Wm. Smith, LL.D. Wood- 
 cuts. 16mo. 3». 6d. 
 
 GRENVILLE (The) PAPERS. Being the PubUc and Private 
 
 Correspondence of George Grenville, including his Pbivatb Dlabv. 
 Edited by W. J. Smith. 4 Vols. Svo. 16s. each. 
 
 GREY'S (Earl) Correspondence with King William IVth. and 
 Sir Ueibert Taylor, from November, IS30, to the Passing of the Keform 
 Act in 1S32. 2 Vols. Svo. 30s. 
 
 Parliamentary Government and Reform ; with 
 
 Suggestions for the Improvement of our Representative System. 
 Seco'td Eaition. Svo. 9s. 
 
 (Sir George) Polynesian Mythology, and Ancient 
 
 Traditional History of the New Zealand Kac«. Woodcuts. Post 
 Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 GRUNER'S (Lewis) Terra-Cotta Architecture of North Italy, 
 
 From careful Drawings and Restorations. With Illustrations, engraved 
 and printed in Colours. Small fulio. 51. 5s. 
 
 GROTE'S (George) History of Greece. From the Earliest Times 
 
 to the close of the generation contemporary with the death of Alexander 
 the Great. Fourth Edition. Maps. 8 Vols. Svo. 112s. Or, Popular 
 Edition, 12 Vols, Post Svo. 6s. each. 
 
 Plato, and the other Companions of Socrates. 
 
 Second Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 4js. 
 
 — ^ (Mrs.) Memoir of Ary Scheflfer. Post Svo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 GUIZOT'S (M.) Meditations on Christianity, and on the Religious 
 Questions of the Dav. Part I. The Essence. Part II. The Present 
 State. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 20s. 
 
 Jfeditations on Christianity. Part III. Its Relation 
 
 to the Present State of Society and of Opmion. Post 8vo. {Nearly 
 
 ReaJij.) 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY, 
 
 15 
 
 HALLAM'S (Henry) Constitutional History of England, from the 
 Accession of Henry the Seventh to the Death of George the Second, 
 Seventh Editimi. 3 Vols. 8vo. 30s., or 3 Vols. Post Svo. 18s. 
 
 History of Europe during the Middle Ages. 
 
 Tenth Edition. 3 Vols. 8vo. 30s., or 3 Vols. Post Svo. 18.?. 
 Edited. With Additional Notes and Illustrations. 
 
 By Wji. Smith, LL.D. Post Svo. Uniform with the " Stmleofs Hume." 
 
 (/« Pnparalion.) 
 
 Literary History of Europe, during the 15th, 16th and 
 
 17th Centuries. Fourth Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 365., or 4 Vols. Post 
 Svo. 'iis. 
 
 — — - Historical Works. Containing Hi.story of England, 
 — Middle Ages of Europe,— Literary History of Europe. Complete 
 in 10 Vols. Post Svo. 6s. each. 
 
 (Arthur) Eemains ; in Verse and Prose. With Pre- 
 face, Jlemoir, and Portrait. Fcap. Svo. Cs. Qd. 
 
 HAMILTON'S (James) Wanderings in Korth Africa. With Illustra- 
 tions. Post Svo. i-;s. 
 
 HANNAH'S (Rev. Dr.) Bampton Lectures for 1863 ; the Divine 
 and Human Elements in Holy Scripture. Svo. 10s. 6i. 
 
 HART'S ARMY LIST. (Quarterly and Annually.) Svo. 
 
 HAY'S (J. H. Drummond) Western Barbary, its Wild Tribes and 
 
 Savage Animals. Post Svo. 2s. 
 HEAD'S (Sir Francis) Horse andhis Eider. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 5s. 
 
 Royal Engineer. With Illustrations. Svo. 12.s. 
 
 Rapid Journeys across the Pampas. Post Svo. 2a. 
 
 Bubbles from the Brunnen of Nassau. Seventh Edition. 
 
 Illustrations. Post Svo. 7s. Sd. 
 
 Emigrant. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Stokers and Pokers ; or, the London and North Western 
 
 lUilway. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 (Sir Edmund) Shall and Will; or, Future AuxOiary 
 
 Verbs. Fcap. Svo. is. 
 
 HEBER'S (Bishop) Journey through the Upper Provinces of India, 
 from Calcutta to Bombiiy, nitli iin Arrnunt of a Journey to Madras 
 and the Southern Pruviuces. Tiailflh Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 7s. 
 
 Poetical Works, including Palestire, Europe, The Red 
 
 Sea, Hymns, &c. Xtw Edition. Portrait. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6 J. 
 
 Hymns adapted to the Weekly Church Service of the 
 
 Year. 16mo. Is. 6d. 
 
 HERODOTUS. A New English Version. Edited, with Notes 
 
 and Essays, historical, ethnographical, and geographical, by Rev. G. 
 R.iwussuN, assisted by Sir Hbnkt Rawlinson and Sia J.G.Wil- 
 kinson. Second Edition. Maps and Woodcuts. 4 '^ols. Svo. iSs. 
 
16 
 
 FOREIGN HANDBOOKS. 
 
 HAND-BOOK— TRAVEL-TALK. English, French, German, and 
 
 Italian. 18mo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 NORTH GERMANY,— Holland, Belgium, Frvs- 
 
 SIA, and the Rhine from Holland to Switzerland. Map. Post 8vo. 10s. 
 
 SOUTH GERMANY, Bavaria, Austria, Styria, 
 
 Salzberg, the Austrian and Bavarian Alps, the Tjrrol, Hungary, and the 
 Danube, from Ulm to the Black Sea. Map. Post 8vo. 10s. 
 
 KNAPSACK GUIDE TO THE TYROL. PostSvo. 
 
 6s. 
 
 PAINTING. German, Flemish, and Dutch Schools. 
 
 Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 24s. 
 
 LIVES OP THE EARLY FLEMISH PAINTERi?. 
 
 By Ceowk and CAVALCA3ELLE. Illustrations. PostSvo. 12s. 
 
 SWITZERLAND, Alps of Savoy, and Piedmont. 
 
 Maps. Post 8vo. 10s. 
 
 KNAPSACK GUIDE TO SWITZERLAND. Post 
 
 Svo. 53. 
 
 FRANCE, Normandy, Brittany, the French Alps, 
 
 the Rivers Loire. Seiue, Rhone, and Garonne, Dauphin^, Provence, and 
 the Pyrenees. Maps. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 CORSICA and SARDINIA. Maps. Post 8ro. 4s. 
 
 PARIS, and its Environs. Map and Plans. Post 
 
 8vo. 3s. 6i. 
 
 MuERAV's Plan of Paris, mounted on canvas. 3s. 6d. 
 SPAIN, Madrid, The Castiles, The Basque Provinces, 
 
 Leon, The Asturia^i, Galicia, F.^t^emadura, Andalusia, Konda, Granadu, 
 Murcia, Valencia. Catalonia, Arragon, Navarre, The Balearic Islands, 
 &C.&C. Maps. 2 Vola. PostSvo. 24s. 
 
 PORTUGAL, LisBOK, Porto, Cintra, Mafra, kc. 
 
 Map. Post Svo. 9j. 
 
 NORTH ITALY, Piedmont, Liguria, Venetia, 
 
 Lombardy, Parma, Modeua, and Romagna. Map. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 CENTRAL ITALY, Lucca, Tuscany, Florence, The 
 
 Marches, Umbria, and the Patrimony of St. Peter's. Map. Post Svo. 10.-. 
 
 — ROME AND ITS Environs. Map. Post Svo. 9s. 
 
 SOUTH ITALY, Two Sicilies, Naples, Pompeii, 
 
 Herculaneum, and Vesuvius. Map. Post Svo. 10s. 
 
 KNAPSACK GUIDE TO ITALY. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 SICILY, Palermo, Messina, Catania, Syracuse, Etna, 
 
 and the Ruins of the Greek Temples. Map. PostSvo. 12s. 
 
 PAINTING. The Italian Schools. Edited by Sir 
 
 Chaelks Eastlakk, R. A. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. PostSvo. 30s. 
 
 LIVES OF ITALIAN PAINTERS, from Cimabde 
 
 to Bassano. By Mrs. Jameson. Portraits. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 DENMARK, Sweden, and Norway. New Edition. 
 
 Maps. PostSvo. {Ill rr'paration.) 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 17 
 
 HAND-BOOK— KNAPSACK GUIDE TO NORWAY. Map. 
 
 Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 RUSSIA, St. PEiERSBURan, Moscow, Poland, and 
 
 FiSLASi). Maps. Post 8vo. 13s. 
 GREECE, the Ionian Islands, Albania, Thessaly, 
 
 and Macedonia. Maps. Post 8vo. {In preparation.) 
 TURKEY, Malta, Asia Minor, Constantinople, 
 
 Armenia, Mesopotamia, &c. Maps. Post 8vo. (/n prrparation.) 
 
 EGYPT, Thebes, the Nile, Alexandria, Cairo, the 
 
 Suez Canal, the Pyramids, &c. Map. Post 8vo. 15s. 
 
 HOLY LAND — Syria and Palestine, Peninsula 
 
 of Sinai, Edom, and Syrian Desert. Maps. 2 Vols. Post 8to. 24s. 
 
 INDIA — Bojibay and Madras. Map. 2 Vols. 
 
 Post. 8vo. 24s. 
 
 ENGLISH HANDBOOKS. 
 
 HAND-BOOK— MODERN LONDON. JIap. 16mo. 3s. 6d. ' 
 
 KENT AND SUSSEX, Canterbury, Dover, Rams- 
 gate, Sheerness, Rocliester, Chatham, Woolwich, Brighton, Chichester, 
 ■Worthing, Hastings, Lewes, Arundel, &c. Mnp. Post 8vo. IDs. 
 
 SURREY AND HANTS, Kingston, Croydon, Rei- 
 
 gate, Guildford, Winchester, Southampton, Portsmouth, and Isle of 
 Wight. Maps. Post 8vo. 10s. 
 
 WILTS, DORSET, AND SOMERSET, Salisbury, 
 
 Chippeuham, Weymouth. Sherborne, Wells, Bath, Bristol, Taunton, 
 &c. Map. Post 8vo. 10s. 
 
 DEVON AND CORNWALL, Exeter, Ilfracombe, 
 
 Linton, Sidmouth, Dawlish, Teignmoulh, Plymouth, Devonport, Tor- 
 quay, Launceston, Truro, Penzance, Falmouth, &c. Maps. Po8t8vo. 10s. 
 
 SOUTHERN C ATH EDRALS, Winchester, Salisbury, 
 
 Exeter, Wells, Chichester, Rochester, Canterbury. With 110 Illnstra- 
 tions. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo. 24s. 
 
 BERKS, BUCKS, AND OXON, Windsor, Eton, 
 
 Reading, Aylesbury, U.xbridge, Wycombe, Ilnnley, the City and Uni- 
 versity of Oxford, and the Descent of the Thames. Map. Post 8vo. 
 7s. 6d. 
 
 GLOUCESTER, HEREFORD, and WORCESTER, 
 
 Cirencester, Cheltenham, Stroud, Tewkesbury, Leominster, Ross, Mai 
 vern, Kidderminster, Dudley, Bromsgrove, Evesham. Map. Post 8vo. 
 
 WESTERN CATHEDRALS,Bristol,Gloncester, Here- 
 ford, Worcester, and Lichfield. With 60 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 16s. 
 
 CATHEDRALS OP GLOUCESTER, HERE- 
 
 roED, and Worcester. With lUuslratious. Post 8to. 6s. 6ti. 
 
 NORTH WALES, Bangor, Carnarvon, Beaumaris, 
 
 Snowdon, Conway, &c. Map. Post 8vo. 6s. 6rf. 
 
 SOUTH WALES, Carmarthen, Tenby, SwanBea. 
 
 and The Wye, &c. Map. PostSvo. 6s. 6rf. 
 
18 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 HAND-BOOK— DERBY, NOTTS, LEICESTER, & STAFFORD, 
 
 Matlock. BukewHll, Cliaisworth, The Peak, Buxton, Hardwick, Dove 
 Dale, Ashborne, Southwell, Mansfield, Relford, Burton, Belvoir, MMton 
 Mowbray, Wolverhampton, Lichfield, Walsall, Tamworth. Map. 
 Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 YORKSHIRE, Doncaster, Hull, Selby, Beverley, 
 
 Scarborough, Whitby, Harrogate, Ripon, Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford, 
 Halifax, Huddersfield, Sheffield. Map and Plans. Post 8vo. 12/. 
 
 NORTHERN CATHEDRALS, York, Ripon, Dnr- 
 
 ham, Carlisle, Chester, and Manchester. With 60 Illustrations. 2 Vols. 
 Crown 8vo. 21s. 
 
 DURHAM AND NORTHUMBERLAND, New- 
 castle, Darlington, Gateshead, Bishop Auckland, Stockton, Hartlepool. 
 Sunderland, Shields, Berwick-on-Tweed, Morpeth, Tynemouth, Cold- 
 stream, Alnwick, &c. Map. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 WESTMORLAND akd CUMBERLAND— Lan- 
 caster, FurncBS Abbey, Ambleside, Kendal, Windermere, Coniston. 
 Keswick, Grasmere, Carlisle, Cockermouth, Penrith, Appleby. Map. 
 Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 *»• MoERAY's Map of the Lake District, on canvas. 3j. 6<J. 
 EASTERN COUNTIES, Essex, SufiFolk, Norfolk, 
 
 and Cambridge. Map. Post 8to. (7ii tke Press.) 
 
 EASTERN CATHEDRALS, Oxford, Peterborough, 
 
 Norwich, Ely, and Lincoln. With 90 Illustrations. Crown Svo. 18s. 
 
 SCOTLAND, Edinburgh, Melrose, Kelso, Glasgow, 
 
 Dumfries, Ayr, Stirling, Arran, Tlie Clyde, Oban, Inverary, Loch 
 Lomond, Loch Katrine and Trossache, Caledonian Canal, Inverness, 
 Penh, Dunilee, Aberdeen, Braemar, Skye, Caithness, Eoss, Suther- 
 land, Ac. Maps and Plans. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 IRELAND, Dublin, Belfast, Donegal, Galway, 
 
 Wexford, Cork, Liuierick, Waterford, the Lakes of Killarney, Coast of 
 Munster, &c. Maps. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 HAND-BOOK OF FAMILIAR QUOTATIONS. From EngUsh 
 
 Authors. TItiril Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
 HATHERLEY (Lord) On the Continuity of Scripture. As declared 
 by the Testimony of our Lord and of the Evangelists and Apostles. 
 
 Fourth Edition. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 HESSEY (Ret. Dr.). Sunday— Its Origin, History, and Present 
 
 Obligations. Being the Bampton Lectures for 1860. Post Svo. 9». 
 
 HICKMAN'S (Wm.) Treatise on the Law and Practice of Naval 
 
 Courts-Martial. Svo. IDs. 6d. 
 
 HOLL WAY'S (J. G.) Month in Norway. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 
 HONEY BEE (The). An Essay. By Rev. Thomas James. 
 
 Reprinted from the " Quarterly Review." Fcap. Svo. Is. 
 HOOK'S (Dean) Church Dictionary. Tenth Edition. Svo. 16*. 
 
 (Theodore) Life. By J. G. Lockhart. Fcap. Svo. Is. 
 
 HOPE'S (T. C.) ARCHITECTURE OF AHMEDABAD, with 
 
 Historical Sketch and Architectural Notes by T. C. Hope, and James 
 Fkeoussdn, F.R.S. With 2 Maps, 120 Photographs, and 22 Woodcuts. 
 4to. 51. 5s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 19 
 
 HOME AND COLONIAL LIBBARY. A Series of Works 
 
 adapted for all circles and classes of Headers. havioK been selected 
 for their acknowledged interest, and ability of tlie Authors. Post 8vo. 
 Published at 2s. and 3s. 6d. eacli, aud arranged under two distinctive 
 beads as follows : — 
 
 CLASS A. 
 
 HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, AND HISTORIC TALES. 
 
 By I 11. THE SIEGES OF VIENNA. 
 By Lord Ellesmebe. 2s. 
 12. THE WAYSIDE CROSS. By 
 
 , CROMWELL AND BUNYAN. 
 
 By KOBEBT SOtlTHEY. 2s. 
 
 LIFE OF Sir FRANCIS DRAKE. 
 By John Barrow. 2s. 
 
 CAMPAIGNS AT WASHING- 
 TON. ByREV. G.R.Gleio. 2s. 
 
 THE FRENCH IN ALGIERS. 
 By Lady Duff Gordon. 2s. 
 , THE FALL OF THE JESUITS. 
 2s. 
 
 LIVONIAN TALES. 2s. 
 
 13. SKETCHES OP GERMAN LIFE. 
 
 By SiK A. Gordon. 3s. 6(1. 
 
 14. THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO. 
 
 By Rev. G.K. Gleio. 3s. 6d. 
 
 15. AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF STEF- 
 
 FENS. 2s. 
 
 16. THE BRITISH POETS. By 
 
 Thomas Campbell. 3s. 6ii. 
 
 17 
 
 19. NORTH - WESTERN RAIL- 
 
 WAV. By Sir F.B. Head. 2j. 
 
 20. LIFE OF MUNRO. By Rev. G. 
 
 CLASS B. 
 
 VOYAGES, TRAVELS, AND ADVENTURES. 
 
 15. LETTEKS FROM MADRAS. By 
 
 By 
 
 BER. 2 Vols. 7S. 
 
 5. TRAVELS IX THE HOLY LAND. 
 
 By Irbt and Mangles. 2s. 
 
 6. MOROCCO AND THE MOORS. 
 
 By J. Drummond Hay. 2s. 
 
 7. LETTERS FROM the BALTIC. 
 
 By a Lady. 2s. 
 
 8. NEW SOUTH WALES. By Mrs. 
 
 Meredith. 2j. 
 
 9. THE WEST INDIES. ByM. G. 
 
 Lewis. 2s. 
 
 10. SKETCHES OF PERSIA. By 
 
 SiB John Malcolm. 3s. 6d. 
 
 11. MEMOIRS OF FATHER RIPA. 
 
 2». 
 
 12. 13. TYPEE AND OMOO. B; 
 
 Hermann Melville. 2 Vols. 7s 
 14. MISSIONARY LIFE IN CAN 
 
 ADA. By Kev. J. Abbott. 2s 
 
 *,* Each work may be had separately, 
 
 16. HIGHLAND SPORTS. By 
 
 Charles St. John. 3f. 6d. 
 
 17. PAMPAS JOURNEYS. By SiB 
 
 F. B. Head. 2s. 
 18 GATHERINGS FROM SPAIN. 
 
 By Richard Ford. 3s. 6d. 
 19. THE RIVER AMAZON. By 
 
 W. H. Edwards. 2s. 
 
 23. BUSH LIFE IN AUSTRALIA. 
 
 By Rev H. W. Haygabth. 2s. 
 
 24. THE LIBYAN DESERT. By 
 
 St. John. 
 . SIERRA LEONE. By a Lady. 
 3s. 6d. 
 
20 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 HORACE (Works of). Edited by Dean Milman. With 100 
 
 Woodcuts. Cioivii 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 (Life of). By Dean Milman. Illustrations. Svo. 9?. 
 
 IICMB (The Student's), A History of England, from the Invasion 
 
 of Julius Cit'sar to the Kevolution of 1688. Corrected and continued 
 
 to 1868. Edited by Dii. VVm. Suixn. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7». 6rf. 
 HUTCHINSON (Gen.), on the most eipeditiou.?, certain, and 
 
 easy Method of Dog-Breaking. Vijth Edition. With 40 Illustratious. 
 
 Crown 8vo. 9s. 
 
 BUTTON'S (H.E.) rrincipiaGrseea; an Introduction to the Study 
 of Greek. Comprehending Grammar, Delectus, and Ezercise-book, 
 with Vocabularies. Sixth Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6i^. 
 
 IRBY AND MANGLES' Travels in Egypt, Nubia, Syria, and 
 
 the Holy Land. Post Svo. 2s. 
 JAMES' (Rev. Thomas) Fables of ^sop. A New Translation, with 
 
 Historical Preface. With 100 Woodcuts by Tesniel and Wolf. 
 
 Fi/lielh Thousand. Post Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 JAMESON'S (Mrs.) Lives of the Early Italian Painters— 
 
 and the Progress of Painting in Italy— Cimabue to Bassano. Kew 
 
 Edition. With 50 Portraits. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 JENNINGS' (L. J.) Eighty Years of Republican Government in 
 
 the United Slates. Posi Svo. 10s. M. 
 JESSE'S (Edward) Gleanings in Natural History. New Edition. 
 
 Fcp. Svo. 3.S. f.d. 
 
 JOHNS' (Rev. B. G.) Blind People; their Works and Ways. With 
 Sketches of the Lives of some famous Blind Men. With Illustrations. 
 Post Svo. 7s. 6('. 
 
 JOHNSON'S (Dr. Samuel) Life. By James Boswell. Including 
 the Tour to the Hebrides. Edited by Mb. Ceosbb. Portraits. 
 
 KoyalSvo. 10s. 
 
 Lives of the English Poets. Edited by Peter 
 
 CnNNlNOHAM. 3 vols. Svo. 22s. 6<J. 
 
 KEN'S (Bishop) Life. By a Layman. Portrait. 2 Vols. Svo. 18^. 
 
 Exposition of the Apostles' Creed. Fcap. 1«. M. 
 
 KENNEDY'S (General) Notes on the Battle of Waterloo. With 
 
 a Memoir of his Life and Services. Svo. 7s. 6rf. 
 KERR'S (Robert) GENTLEMAN'S HOUSE; or, How to Plan 
 
 EsGLi.SH Kesidences. fkom the Parsonage to the Palace. AVith 
 
 Tables and Cost. Views and Plans. Srcond Edition. Svo. Us. 
 Ancient Lights ; a Book for Architects, Surveyors, 
 
 Lawyers, and Laudlords. Svo. 5s. 6d. 
 (R. Malcolm) Student's Blackstone. A Systematic 
 
 Abridgment of the entire Commentaries, adapted to the present state 
 
 of the law. New Edition, \m. Post Svo. 9s. 
 KING'S (Rev. C. W.) Antique Gems; their Origin, Use, and 
 
 Value, as Interpreters of Ancient History, and as illustrative of Ancient 
 
 Art. Second Edition. Illustrations. Svo. 21s. 
 KING EDWARD VIth's Latin Grammar; or, an Introduction 
 
 to the Latin Tongue. Seventeenth Edition. 12mo. Ss. 6d. 
 . First Latin Book; or, the Accidence, 
 
 Syntax, and Prosody, with an English Translation. Fijih Edition. 12mo. 
 
 2s. 6d. 
 
 KING GEORGE THE THIRD'S CORRESPONDENCE WITH 
 
 LORD NORTH, 1769-S2. Edited, with Notes and Introduction, bv 
 W, BoDHAU Donne. 2 vols. Svo. 325. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 21 
 
 KIRK'S (J. Foster) History of Charles the Bold, Duke of Bur- 
 gundy. Portrait. 3 Vols. 8ro. 4jj. 
 
 KUGLER'S Italian Schools of Painting. Edited, ivith Notes, by 
 SiE Chakles Eastlakk. Third Edition. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post 
 8to. 30s. 
 
 German, Dutch, and Flemish Schools of Painting. 
 
 Edited, with Notes, by Dr. Waagen. Second Edition. Woodcuts. 2 
 Vols. Po>t8vo. 24s. 
 
 LA YARD'S (A. H.) Ninereh and its Remains. Being a Nar- 
 rative of Researches and Discoveries amidst the Ruins of Assyria. 
 With an Account of the Chaldean Christians of Kurdistan ; the Yezedis, 
 or Devil-worshippers; and an Enquii-y into the Planners and Arts of 
 the Ancient Assyrians. Sixth Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. 2 Vols. 
 8vo. 36s. 
 
 %♦ A PoPULAU Edition. With Illustrations. Post 8vo. 7s. 6J. 
 
 Nineveh and Babylon ; being the Narrative of a 
 
 Second Expedition to Assyria. Plates. Svo. 21s. 
 
 A PuPULAK Editio.n-. With Illustrations. Post Svo. 7s. 6J. 
 
 LBATHE5' (Stanley) Short Practical Hebrew Grammar. With an 
 
 Appendix, contaiiiiMg the Ili biv.v T«xt ' f Genesis i — vi., and Psalms 
 i.— vi. Grammatical Auiilysis and Vocabulary. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 LENNEP'S (Rev. H. J. Van) Missionary Travels in Asia Minor. 
 
 With Illustrations. 2 VuU. l'o^t Svo. (Xenrl!/ Read:/.) 
 
 LESLIE'S (C. K.) Handbook for Young Painters. With lUustru- 
 tions. Post Svo. 
 
 Autobiographical Recollection?, with Selections 
 
 from his Correspondence. Edited by Tou Taylok. Portrait. 2 Vols. 
 Post Svo. 18j. 
 
 Life and Works of Sir Joshua Reynolds. Por- 
 traits and Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. 4-2s. 
 
 LETTERS FROM THE BALTIC. By a Ladv. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 Madras. By a Ladv. Post Svo. 2.s. 
 
 SiEKKA Leone. By a Ladt. Post Svo. Zs. 6d. 
 
 LEVI'S (Leone) Wages and Earnings of the Working Classes. 
 With some Facts Illustrative of their Economic Condition. Svo. 6s. 
 
 LEWIS'S (M. G.) Journal of a Residence among the Negroes in the 
 West Indies. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 LIDDELL'S (Dean) Student's History of Rome. With Wool- 
 cats, Poit Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 LINDSAY'S (Lord) Lives of the Lindsays ; or, a Memoir of the 
 Houses of Crawfurd and Balcarres. With Extracts from Official Papers 
 and Personal Narratives. Second Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 24s. 
 
 LISPINGS from LOW LATITUDES; or, the Journal of the Hon. 
 
 ImpulsiaGushington. Edited by Lokd Dufferin. With24 Plates.4to.21s. 
 
 LITTLE ARTHUR'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND. By Ladt? 
 
 Callcott. Xew Edition, continued to 1862. With 20 Woodcuts. 
 Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 LIVINGSTONE'S (Dr ) Missionary Travels in South Africa. 
 
 Illustrations. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Expedition to the Zambezi and its Tributaries; 
 
 and the Lakes Sliinva and Nyassa. 1838-64. Map and Illustrations. 
 8to. 21s. 
 
22 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 LIVONIAN TALES. By the Author of " Letters from the 
 
 Baltic." Post 8vo. 2s. 
 
 LOCH'S (H. B ) Personal Narrative of Incidents during Lord 
 
 Elgin's Second Embassy to China. Illustrations. Post 8to. 
 
 LOCKHART'S (J. G.) Ancient Spanish Ballads. Historical and 
 
 Romantic. Translated, with Notes. A'euj Edition. With Woodcuts . 
 Post 8vo. 
 
 Life of Theodore Hook. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 LONDON (OLD). A series of Es^ay8 on its Archaeology and 
 Antiquities, hy Dean staxlet; A. J. Beeesfobd Hupe ; G. G. Scott, 
 K.A.; K. Westmac.itt. R.A.; E. Foss ; G. T. Claek ; Joseph Buett ; 
 Kev. J. R. Gree.n-; aud G. SCHAP.F. Svo. 12s. 
 
 LONSDALE'S (Bisho p) Life. With Stlections from his 'Writings. 
 
 By E. B. Desisi.n, Q.C. With Portrait. Crown Svo. 10s. 6i. 
 
 LOUDON'S (Mrs.) Instructions in Gardening. With Directions 
 and Calendar of Operations for Every Month. Eighth Edition. Wood- 
 cuts. Fcap. Svo. 3s. SJ. 
 
 LUCAS' (Samuel) Secularia; or, Surveys on the Main Stream of 
 
 History. Svo. 12s. 
 LUCKNOW : a Lady's Diary of the Siege. Fcap. Svo. is. 6d. 
 LYELL'S (Sir Charles) Elements of Geology; or, the Ancient 
 
 Changes of the Earth and its Inhabitants as illustrated by Geological 
 
 Monuments. Stvtnth Edilior,, nvi'id. Woodcuts. Svo. {In preparation.) 
 Priuciples of Geology; or, the Modern Changes 
 
 of the Earth and its Inhabitants cousidered as illustrative of Geology. 
 
 Tenth Edition. With Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. 32s. 
 Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man. 
 
 Third Edition. Illustrations. Svo. 14j. 
 
 (K. M.) Geographical Handbook of all the known 
 
 Ferns, divided into Six Territorial Divisions. Post Svo. 
 
 LYTTELTON'S (Lord) Ephemera. Post Svo. 105. 6d. 
 
 LYTTON'S (Lord) Poems. New Edition. Post Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 llightful Heir ; a Drama. Second Edition. Svo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Lost Tales of Miletus. Second Edition. Post Svo. 7s.6d. 
 
 M^CLINTOCK'S ( Sir L.) Narrative of the Discovery of the 
 Fate of Sir John Franklin and his Companions in the Arctic Seas. 
 Third Edition. With Illustrations. Post Svo. 7». 6d. 
 
 MaoDOUGALL'S (Col.) Modern Warfare as Influenced by Modern 
 
 Artillerv. With Plans. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
 MACGREGOK (J ), Rob Roy on the Jordan, Nile, Red Sea, and 
 
 Gennesareth, &c. A Canoe Cruise in Palestine and Egypt and the 
 Waters of Damascus. With Illustrations. Crown Svo. 
 MACPHERSON'S (Major) Services in India, while Political 
 Agent at Gwalior duiing the Mutiny. Illustrations. Svo. 12s. 
 
 MAETZNER'S COPIOUS ENGLISH GRAMMAR. A Methodical, 
 
 Analytical, and Historical Treatise on the Orthography, Prosody, Inflec- 
 tions, and Syntax of the English Tongue. 3 Vols. Svo. [In preiarution ) 
 MAINE (H. Sumner) On Ancient Law : its Connection with the 
 Early History of Society, and its Relation to Modem Ideas. Third 
 Edition. Svo. 12s. 
 
 MALCOLM'S (Sir John) Sketches of Persia. Post Svo. 3s. erf. 
 MANSEL (Dean), Limits of Religious Thought Examined. 
 
 Being the Banipton Lectures for 1858. Fifth Edition. 'Po%i&-!0. 8s. M. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 23 
 
 MANTELL'S (Gideon A.) Thoughts on Animalcules; or, the 
 
 Invisible World, as revealed by the Microscope. Plates. 16mo. 6s. 
 MANUAL OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY. For the Use of 
 
 Travellers. Edited by Sir J. F. Herschel and Rev. K. Main. Maps. 
 
 Post 8vo. 93. ( Published by order of the Lords of the Admiralty.) 
 ilARCO POLOS TRAVELS. A New English Vcr.sion. With 
 
 Copious Illustrative Notes. By Col. IIenet Yule. Witli Maps and 
 
 Illustrations. 8?0. {l/l preparation.) 
 
 MARKHAM'S (Mrs.) History of England. From the First Inva- 
 sion by the Romans, continued down to 1865. Woodcuts. 12mo. 4s. 
 
 History of France. From the Conquest by 
 
 the Gauls, continued to 1861. Woodcuts. 12mo. 4j. 
 
 History of Germany. From the Invasion by Marius, 
 
 continued to 1867. Woodcuts. 12mo. 4s. 
 
 (Clements R.) Travels in Peru and India. Maps 
 
 and Illustrations. 8vo. 16s. 
 MARRYAT'S (Joseph) History of Modern and Mediaeval Pottery 
 and Porcelain. Willi a Description of the Manufacture. Third 
 Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. 8vo. 42s. 
 
 MARSH'S (G. P.) Manual of the English Language. Post 8vo. 
 
 MATTHI^'S SHORTER GREEK GRAMMAR. Translated by 
 Blomi'ield. a A'cw Edition, rensed by A. S. Cruoke. 12mo. 
 
 MAUREL, on the Character, Actions, and Writings of Wellington. 
 Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. 
 
 MATNE'S (Capt.) Four Years in British Columbia and Van- 
 couver Island. Illustrations. 8vo. 16i'. 
 
 MELVILLE'S (Hermann) Adventures among.-'t the Marquesas 
 and South Sea Islands. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 7s. 
 
 MILLS' (Rev. John) Three Jlonths' Residence at Nablus, with 
 an Account of the .Modem Samaritans. Illustratinns. Post Svo. 10s. Gd. 
 
 MILMAN'S Historical Work.?. Complete in 15 Vols. Containing: 
 1. History of the Jews, 3 Vols. 2. History of Early Christianity, 3 
 Vols. 3. History of Latin Christianity, 9 Vols. Post Svo. 6». each. 
 
 Annals of St. Paul's Cathedral. Second Edition. 
 
 Portrait and Illustrations. Svo. 18s. 
 
 Character and Conduct of the Apostles considered 
 
 as an Evidence of Christianity. Svo. 10s. Qd. 
 
 — . Translations from .^Ischylus and Euripides. Illus- 
 trations Crown Svo. 123. 
 
 Worfes of Horace. With 100 woodcuts. Small Svo. 7s.6rf. 
 
 Life of Horace. Woodcuts. Svo. 9s. 
 
 Poetical Works. Plates. 3 Vols. Fcap. Svo. 18». 
 
 Fall of Jerusalem. Fcap. Svo. Is. 
 
 (Capt. E, A.) Wayside Cross, A Tale of the Carlist 
 
 War. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 MEREDITH'S (Mrs. Charles) Notes and Sketches of New South 
 
 Wales. PostSVb. 2s. 
 MESSIAH (THE): A Narrative of the Life, Travels, Death, 
 Resurrection, and Ascension of our Blessed Lord. By A Layman. 
 Map. Svo. 18s. 
 
21 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 MICHIB'S (Aiexander) Siberian Overland Route from Peking 
 
 to Petersburg. Maps and Illustrations. 8vo. 16s. 
 MODERN DOMESTIC COOKERY. Founded on Principles of 
 
 Economy and Practical Knowledge. A'cu) Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. 6s. 
 MOORE'S (Thomas) Life and Letters of Lord Byron. Platee. 
 
 6 Vols. Fcap. Sto. 18s. ; or 1 Vol. Portraits. Rojal 8vo. 9». 
 MOTLEY'S (J. 1.1.) History of the United Ketherlands : from the 
 
 Death of Willinm the Silent to the Twelve Years' Truce, 1609. Portraits. 
 
 4 Vols. 8v-o. 60s. Or 4 Vols. Post 8vo. 6!. each. 
 
 MOUHOT'S (IIenki) Siam, Cambojia, and Lao; a Narrative of 
 
 Travels and Discoveries. Illustrations. 2 vols. 8vo. 
 
 MOZLBY'S (Rev. J. B.) Treatise on Predestination. 8vo. 14«. 
 
 Primitive Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. 8vo. 7«.6rf. 
 
 MUNDY'S (General) Pen and Pencil Sketches in India. 
 
 Third Edition. Plates. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 MUNRO'S (General Sir Thomas) Life and Letters. By the Rev. 
 G. R. Glkio. PostSvo. 3s. Sd. 
 
 MURCHISON'S (Sir Roderick) Russia in Europe and the Ural 
 Mountains. With Coloured Maps, &c. 2 Vols. 4to. 6?. 6s. 
 
 Siluria ; or, a Hi.story of the Oldest Rocks con- 
 taining Organic Remains. Fnurih Edition. Map and Plates. 8vo. 30». 
 
 MURRAY'S RAILWAY READING. Containing:— 
 
 soioB. Lord [ 
 
 E«BAi» 1.ROM "Tbh TiMBS." 2 Vols. 8«. 
 
 LoCKUIIIT'b SP»mSB BALliDl. it.td. 
 
 Tatlob's Noms »bdm Lif.. S.. 
 
 ReJECTRD AdO«85!««. 1«. 
 
 NlMBOD O!) THB 'I'"'^- "• 
 
 MANUALS OF SCIENCE. Books for Students. 
 
 Post 8vo. {In firrp iralion.) 
 I. The Manual of Zoology. II. The Manual of Geology. 
 
 MUSIC AND DRESS. By a Lady. An Es ay. Reprinted from the 
 
 " Quarterly Keview." Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 NAPIER S (Sir Cbas.) Life, Journals, and Letters. By Sir W. 
 
 Napieb. Second Edition. Porlraits. 4 Vols. Post 8vo. 48l. 
 
 (Sir AVm.) Life and Letters. Edited by H. A. Bruce, 
 
 M.P. Portraits. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo. 28«. 
 English Battles and Sieges of the Peninsular 
 
 War. Fourth Edition. Portrait. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 NAPOLEON AT FONTAINBLEAU AND ELBA. A Journal 
 
 of Occurrences and Notes of Conversations. By Sir Nikl Campbeli,, 
 C.B , British Commissi..ner. With a Memoir of ihat Officer. liv 
 I:kv. A. N. C. Maclachlan, M.A. Portrait. 8vo. 16s. 
 NAUTICAL (The) ALMANAC. Royal 8vo. 2«. 6^. (By 
 
 Authority.) 
 
 NAVY LIST (The Admiralty). 16mo. 2«. 6d. 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT (Illdstrated). With Explanatory Com- 
 mentary. Edited by Aechueaco!) Chdeton, M.A., and Basil Jones, 
 M.A. With 110 authentic Landscapes and Views of Scripture Sites. 
 2 Vols. Crowo Svo. 21s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 25 
 
 NICHOLLS' (Sir George) History of the English, Irish and 
 Scotch Poor Laws. 4 Vols. 8vo. 
 
 (Eev. : H. G.) Historical Account of the Forest of 
 
 Dean. Woodcuts, &c. Post 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 NICOLAS' (Sir Harris) Historic Peerage of England. Exhi- 
 biting the Origin, Duscent, and Present State of every Title of Peer- 
 age which has existed in this Country since the Conquest. By 
 William Courthope. 8vo. 30s. 
 
 NIMKOD, On the Chace— The Turf— and The Road. Woodcuts. 
 Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d, 
 
 OLD LONDON ; Papers read at the Archaeological Institute. 
 By A. Bkresforu Hope; Uean Stanlky; G. T. Clark; G. Gil- 
 bert Scott; Professor Westmaoott; EuwardFoss; Joseph Burtt ; 
 Rev. J. R. Green ; George SCHAKF. With Illustrations. 8vo. 12s. 
 
 OXENHAM'S (Rev. W.) English Notes for Latin Elegiacs ; designed 
 for early Proficients in the Art of Latin Versification, with Prefatory 
 Rules of Composition in Elegiac Metre. Fourth Edition. l'2mo. 3s. tirf. 
 
 OXFORD'S (Bishop of) Life of William Wilberforce. Portrait. 
 
 Post 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 PALLISBR'S (Mrs.) Account of Brittany, its Inhabitants, and 
 
 Antiquities; wriiteu during a Residence in tliat country. With lUus- 
 trutiuns. Post 8vo. 
 
 PARIS' (Dr.) Philosophy in Sport made Science in Earnest ; 
 or, the First Principles of Natural Philosophy inculcated by aid of the 
 Toys and Sports of Youth. Ninth Edition. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. Is.&d. 
 
 PARKYNS' (Mansfield) Three Years' Residence in Abyssinia : 
 
 with Travels in that Country. New Edition, \\\th Map and Illustrations. 
 Post 8vo. 7s. 6<2. 
 
 PEEL'S (Sir Robert) Memoirs. Edited by Earl Stanhope 
 and Mr. Cardwell. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 7s. 6(j. each. 
 
 PENN'S (Richard) Maxims and Hints for an Angler and Chess- 
 player. New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 
 
 PERCY'S (John, M.D.) Metallurgy. Vol. I. Fuel, Coal, Fire- 
 clays, Copper, Zinc, Brass, &c. Niu- Edilto.i. Illustrations. 8vo. 
 
 ;/„,„,;,„•„(,„„.) 
 
 Metallurgy'. Vol. II. Iron aud Steel. 3Yt» Edition. 
 
 Illustrations. 8vo. [In prepamlion.) 
 
 Metallurgy. Vol. HI. Gold, .Silver, and Lead. lUus- 
 
 Metallurgy. Vol. IV. Platinum, Nickel, Cobalt, 
 
 Antimony, Bismuth, Arsenic, i!C. Illustrations. 8vo. {In the Press.) 
 
 PHILLIPP (C. S. M.) On Jurisprudence. 8vo. 12s. 
 PHILLIPS' (John) Memoirs of William Smith. Portrait. 8v(^. 
 7s. 6<J. 
 
 Geology of Yorkshire, The Coast, and Limestone 
 
 District. Plates. 4to. Part 1., 20s.— Part II., 30«. 
 Rivers, Mountains, and Sea Coast of Yorkshire. 
 
 With Essays on the Climate, Scenery, and Ancient Inhabitants. 
 
 Second Edition, Plates. 8vo. 15s. 
 
 PHILPOTTS' (Bishop) Letters to the late Charles Butler, on his 
 
 " Book of the Roman Catholic Church." New Edition. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 PICK'S (Dr.) Popular Etymological Dictionary of the French 
 Language. 8vo. 
 
 POPE'S (Alexander) Life and Works. A New Edition. Edited 
 with Life, and Notes, by Eev. Whitwell Elwin. Portraits. 8vo. 
 
 (/n the Press.) 
 
26 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 PORTER'S (Rev. J. L.) Damascus, Palmyra, Lebanon, and other 
 
 Scripture Sites. l\ew Edition. Map aud Woodcuts. Post 8vo. {Nearli/ 
 ready.) 
 
 PRAYER-BOOK (Illustrated), with Borders, Initials, Vig- 
 nettes, &c. Edited, with Noies, by Ret. Thos. James. Medium 
 8vo. 18s. cloth ; 31s. 6iZ. calf ; 36s, morocco. 
 
 PRIKCIPLES AT STAKE. Efsajs on Church Questions of the 
 Day. By Ben.iaiiin Shaw ; Lonu Ap.thup. Ueevev ; Dr. Payne Smith 
 Eev. Alexander K. Grant; Kkv. G. H. Sumnek; Cason Beesabd; 
 Aktiiue Mills; Dk. Salmon ; iiEV. \V. G. Hlmeuky; Dean Hovvsos. 
 
 Stcoiid Edition. Svo. 12s. 
 
 PUSS m BOOTS. With 12 Illustrations. By Oiio Speckter. 
 
 16mo. Is. 6<i. or Coloured, 2s. 6d, 
 QUARTERLY REVIEW (The). Syo. 6s. 
 RAMBLES in the Syrian Deserts. Post Svo. 10s. 6rf. 
 RANKE'S (Leopold) History of the Popes of Rome during the 
 
 16th and 17th Centuries, Translated from the German bv Saeah 
 
 Austin, 3 Vols. Svo. 30s, 
 RASSAM'S (Horjidzd) Narrative of the British Mission to Abys- 
 sinia. With Notices of the Countries Trtiversed from Massowah to 
 
 Magdala, Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. iSs. 
 RAWLINSON'S (Rev. George) Herodotus. A New English 
 
 Version. Edited with Notes and Essays. Second Edition. Maps and 
 
 Woodcut, i Vols. 8to. 48s. 
 
 Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient World, 
 
 Chaldsea, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, and Persia. With Illustrations. 
 A Sr.w Edition. 8vo. (In jireparation.) 
 
 REED'S (E. J.) ShipbuildiDg in Iron and Sieel ; a Practical 
 
 Treatise, giving f;ill details of Construciion, Proces-es of Manufacture, 
 and Building Arrangements. With 5 Plans and 250 Woodcuts. Svo. 30s. 
 
 Our Iron-Clad Ships ; their Qualities, Performances, and 
 
 Cost. With Chapters on Turret Ships, Irou-Clad Rams, &c. With 
 lUustratious. Svo. 
 
 REJECTED ADDRESSES (The). By Jambs ahd Horace Smith, 
 
 Woodcuts. Ntii! Eddion. Post Sro. 3s. 6a. 
 
 RENNIE'S (D. F.) British Arms in Peliing, 1860. Post Svo. \2s. 
 
 Narrative of the British Embassy in China. Illus- 
 trations. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 2is. 
 
 Story of Bhotan and the Dooar War. Map and 
 
 Woodcut. Pobt Svo. 12s. 
 
 RESIDENCE IN BULGARIA ; or. Notes on the Resources and 
 Administration of Turkey, &c. By S, G, B, ST.CLAiEand Chaeles A. 
 Brophy, Svo. 12s. 
 
 REYNOLDS' (Sir Joshua) Life and Times. By C. R. Leslie, 
 
 R.A. and Tou Taylor. Portraits. 2 Vols. Svo. 42s. 
 
 • Descriptive Catalogue of his Works. With Notices 
 
 of their present owners and localities. With Illustrations, Fcap, 4to, 
 {In the Press.) 
 
 RICARDO'S (David) Political Works. With a Notice of his 
 
 Life and Writings. By J, R. M'CtiLLOCH. mw Edition. Svo. 16s. 
 
 EIPA'S (Father) Thirteen Years' Residence at the Court of Peking. 
 
 Post Svo. 2s. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY, 
 
 ROBERTSON'S (Canon) History of the Christian Church, from 
 
 the Apostolic Age to the Death of Boniface VIII., a.d. Iir2-1304. 
 3 Vols. 8vo. 5Gs. 
 
 How shall we Conform to the Liturgy of the 
 
 Churcli of England ? Third Edition. Post 8vo. 
 
 ROBINSON'S (Rev. Dr.) Biblical Researches in Palestine and the 
 Adjacent Kegions ; a Journal of Travel.'* in 1838 and 1852. Thiid Edi- 
 tion. Maps. 3 Vols. 8vo. i2s. 
 
 Physical Geography of the Holy Land. Post 8vo. 
 
 ■ (Wm.) Parks, Promenade.-J, and Gardens of Paris; 
 
 Descrihpd hihI ccmsidBred in KBlatiun to t\w. WiuUs of mir own Cilii'S 
 and of Public and Private tiardens. With JUU lUuslrations. Svo. ISs. 
 
 ROME (Student's History op). From the Earliest Times to 
 
 TUE ESTABLISUMENT OF THE EmPIEE. By DeA.V LlDUELL. Wood- 
 
 ciits. Post Svo. Is. ea. 
 (Smaller History of). By AVm. S.MiTn, LL.D. Wood- 
 cuts. 16iuo. 3s. 6rf. 
 
 ROWLAND'S (David) Manual of the Engli.sh Constitution ; 
 Its Kise, Growth, and Present State. Post fevo. lOs.Gd. 
 
 Laws of Nature the Foundation of Morals. Post 
 
 8to. 6s. 
 
 RUNDELL'S (Mrs.) Domestic Cookery, adapted for Private 
 Families. New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 6s. 
 
 RUSSELL'S (Rutherfurd) History of the Heroes of Medicine. 
 Portraits. Svo. 14s. 
 
 RUXTON'S (George P.) Travels in Mexico ; with Adventures 
 among the Wild Tribes and Animals of the Prairies and Kocky Moun- 
 tains. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 SALE'S (Sir Robert) Brigade in Affghanistan. With an Account of 
 the Defence of Jellalabad. By Kev. G. K. Gleiq. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 SALLESBURY'S (Ekwahd) "Children of the Lake." A Poem. 
 Fcap. Svo. 4s. 6d. 
 
 SANDWITH'S (Humphry) Siege of Kars. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 SCOTT'S (G. Gilbert) Secular and Domestic Architecture, Pre- 
 sent and Future. Svo. 9s. 
 
 (Master of Baliol) University Sermons. Post Svo. 8«. 6d. 
 SCROPE'S (G. P.) Geology and Extinct Volcanoes of Central 
 
 France. Ilhislralions. .NIedium Svo. 30.i. 
 
 SHAW'S (T. B.) Manual of En-lish Literature. Edited, with 
 
 Notes and IlIu^tMLlic.n^, liv Dii. \Vm. Suml. Post Svo. 7s.6d. 
 
 Specimens of Eiii:lish Literature. Selected from the 
 
 Chief Writers. Edited by Wm. Smith, LI. D. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 SHIRLEY (Evelyn P.) on Deer and Deer Parks, or some Account 
 of English Parks, with Notes on the Management of Deer. Illus- 
 trations. 4to. 21s. 
 
 SIERRA LEONE ; Described in Letters to Friends at Home. By 
 
 A Ladt. Post Svo. 3s. Gd. 
 SIMMONS (Capt. T. F.) on the Constitution and Practice of 
 Courts-Martial; with a Summarv of the Law of Evidence. Sixth and 
 EeviiCd Edition. Svo. [In the Tress.) 
 
 SMITH'S (Rev. A. C.) Attractions of the Nile and its Banks. A 
 Jourualof Travels in Egypt uud Nubia. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 
 ISs. 
 
28 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 SMILES' (Samuel) Lives of British Engineers ; from the Earliest 
 
 Period to tlie Present Time, with an account of their Principal Works: 
 including a History of the Invention and Introduction of the Steam 
 Engine. With 9 Portraits and 40u Illustrations. 4 Vols. 8vo. 2U. each. 
 
 Lives of George and Robert Stephenson. With Portraits 
 
 and Illustrations. Medium 8vo. 2l5. Or Pupular Editwn, with Wood- 
 cuts. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Lives of Boulton and Watt. With Portraits and Illus- 
 trations. Medium Bvo. 'lU. 
 
 Lives of Brindley and the Early Engineers. With Portrait 
 
 and 50 Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 6.!. 
 
 Life of Telford. With a History of Roads and Travelling 
 
 in England. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Self Help. With Illustrations of Character and Conduct. 
 
 Post 8vo. 6s. Or in French, as. 
 
 Industrial Biography : Iron- Workers and Tool Makers. 
 
 A sequel to " Self-HKlp." Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Huguenots in England and Ireland : their Settlements, 
 
 Churches and Indusiries. Third Edition. Post 8to. 6s. 
 
 SOMERVILLE'S (Mary) Physical Geography. Eevised Edi'ion. 
 By W. H. Pates. Portrait. Post 8vo. (AeiWy rearfy.) 
 
 Connexion of the Physical Sciences. Ninth 
 
 Edition. Woodcuts. Post 8to. 9s. 
 
 Molecular and Slicroscopic Science. Illustra- 
 tions. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 21s. 
 
 SOUTH'S (John F.) Household Surgery ; or, Hints on Emergen- 
 cies. Seventeenth Thousand. Woodcuts. Fcp. 8vo. is. 6d. 
 
 SOUTHBY'S (Robert) Book of the Church. Seventh Edition. 
 Post 8vo. 
 
 Lives of Bunyan and CromweU. Post 8vo. 2/». 
 
 SPECKTER'S (Otto) Puss in Boots. AVith 12 Woodcuts. Square 
 
 12mo. Is. 6d. plain, or 2s. 6d. coloured. 
 STANLEY'S (Dean) Sinai and Palestine. Map. Svo. Us. 
 
 Bible in the Holy Land ; being Extracts from the 
 
 above Woi k. 
 
 St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians. With Disser- 
 tations and Notes. Svo. IBs. 
 
 History of the Eastern Church. Plans. Svo. 12*. 
 
 Jewish Church. 2 Vols. Svo. 
 
 Historical Memorials of Canterbury. Woodcuts. 
 
 Post Svo. Is. Si. 
 
 Memorials of Westminster Abbey. TIdrd 
 
 Edition. Illustrations. 
 
 Sermons in the East, Svo. 9s. 
 
 on Evangelical and Apostolical Teaching. 
 
 Post 8vo. Is. 6c/. 
 
 Addresses and Charges of Bishop Stanley. With 
 
 Memoir. Bvo. 10s. 6J. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 29 
 
 SMITH'S (Dr. Wm.) Dictionary of the Bible; its Antiquities, 
 
 Biography, Geography, and Natural History. Illustrations. 3 Vols. 
 8vo. 105«. 
 
 Concise Bible Dictionary, for Families and Students. 
 
 Illustrations. Medium 8vo. 21.?. 
 
 Smaller Bible Dictionary, for Schools and Young Persons. 
 
 Illustrations. Post 8vo. 7s. 6 1. 
 
 Dictionary of Greek and Koman Antiquities. Wood- 
 cuts. 8vo. 2I». 
 
 Greek and Roman Biography and llythology. Wood- 
 cuts. 3 Vols. 8vo. 63s. 
 Greek and Roman Geography. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. 
 
 8vo. i-'s 
 
 Classical Dictionary, for the Higher Forms. With 750 
 
 Woodcuts. 8vo. 18s. 
 Smaller Classical Dictionary. With 200 Woodcuts, 
 
 Crown 8to. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Smaller Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. 
 
 With 200 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6<i. 
 Complete Latin English Dictionary. With Tables of 
 
 the Koman Calendar, .Measures, Weifjlits, and iMoney. 8vo. 21s. 
 
 Smaller Latin-English Dictionary. 12mo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Copious and Critical English-Latin Dictionary. 8vo and 
 
 12mo. (yearly lUady.) 
 
 Principia Latina— Part L A Grammar, Delectus, and 
 
 Exercise Book, with Vocabularies. El- venth Edition, With an Appendix, 
 containing the Accidence arranged for the " Public School Latin 
 Primer." 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 Part n. A Reading-book of Mytho- 
 logy, Geography, Roman Antiquities, and History. With Notes and 
 Dictionary. Fifth Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6ti. 
 
 Part in. A Latin Poetry Book. 
 
 Hexameters and Pentameters; Eclog. Ovidianos; Latin Prosody, 
 &c. Fourth Edition. 12mo. 3s. &d. 
 
 Part IV. Latin Prose Composition. 
 
 Rules of Syntax, with Examples, Explanations of Synonyms, and 
 
 Exercises on the Syntax. Eifth Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 - - - Part V. Short Tales and Anecdotes 
 
 for Translation into Latin. Second Edition. l2mo. 3s. 
 Latin-English Vocabulary ; for Phaedrus, Cornelius 
 
 Nepos, and Caesar. 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 Student's Latin Grammar for the Higher Forms. 
 
 Third Edition. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Smaller Latin Grammar, for the Middle and Lower 
 
 Forms. 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 Initia Grseci, Part I. An Introduction to Greek ; 
 
 comprehendins Grammar, Delectus, and Exercise-book. Fourth Edition. 
 
 With Vocabularies. Third Elition. 12nio. 3s. 6d. 
 Initia Grceca, Part II. A Reading Book. Containing 
 
 Short Tales, Anecdotes, Fables, Myihology, and Grecian History. 
 
 Arranged in a systematic Progression, with a Lexicon. Second Edition. 
 
 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 ' Initia Graeca, Part III. Greek Prose Composition. Con- 
 
 taining the Rules of Syntax, with copious Examples and Exercises. 
 12mo. 3s. 6d. 
 
30 
 
 LIST OF WORKS 
 
 SMITH'S (Dr. Wm.) Student's Greek Grammar for the Higher 
 Forms. By PnoFEPsrin Cuktius. Third Bdition. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 Smaller Greek Grammar for the Middle and Lower 
 
 Forms. 12mo. 3j. 6.i. 
 
 Smaller History of England. With Illustrations. 
 
 16mo. 3s 6.;. 
 
 History of Greece. With Illustrations. 16mo. 
 
 3s. 6(2. 
 
 History of Rome. With Illustrations. 16mo. 
 
 3s. 6d. 
 
 Classical Mythology. With Translations from 
 
 the Ancient Poets. Sicond Editwn. Illustrations. 12mo. 3».6./. 
 
 Smaller History of English Literature, with 
 
 Specimens. 2 Vols. 16mo. 3s. 6d. eacli. 
 
 STUDENT'S HUME. A History of England from the Invasion 
 of Ji.lius CiPsi.r tnllieHevoliitionof 1688. Uy David IIcme. Corrected 
 and continued to I86S. Woodcuts. Post Svo. li.6d. 
 QneMinns on ilie above Wolk. 12mo. 2s. 
 
 HISTORY OF FRANCE; from the Earliest Times 
 
 to the Establishment of the Second Empire, 1852. By W. H. Peaesos, 
 M.A. ■Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE ; from the Earliest 
 
 Times to the Roman Conqnest. With the History of Literature and Art. 
 By Wm. Smith, l.L.I). Woodcnts. Crown Svo. Is. 6d. 
 V Qliestinns on the above Work, 12mo. is. 
 
 HISTORY OF ROME; from- the Earliest Times 
 
 to the Estahlisliment of the Empire. With the History of Literature 
 and Art. By Dean Liddell. Woodcitts. Crown Svo. 7s. Gd. 
 
 GIBBON ; an Epitome of the Decline and Fall of the 
 
 Roman Empire. Incorporating the Researches of Recent Commentators. 
 Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. M. 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY ; from the Creation 
 
 to the Return of the Jews from Captivity. Maps and Woodcuts. Post 
 Svo. 7s. 61. 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. With an Intro- 
 duction coiinectine the History of the Old and New Testaments. Maps 
 and Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6<i. 
 
 — BLACKSTONE : a Systematic Abridgment of the 
 
 Entire Conimentari.-s. By R. Malcolm Keru, LL.D. Post Svo. 7f.6i. 
 
 MANUAL OF ANCIENT GEOGRAPHY. By Rev. 
 
 W. L. Bevan, M.A. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. erf. 
 
 MODERN GEOGRAPHY ; Mathe- 
 
 roaticnl, Phvsical, and Descriptive. By Rev.W. L. Bevan. Woodcuts. 
 Post Svo. 7s. 6c!. 
 
 ANCIENT HISTORY. Post Svo. 
 
 {In the Press.) 
 
 MORAL PHILOSOPHY. With 
 
 Quotations and References. By William Fleming. D.D. PostSvo. 7s.6J. 
 
 ■ ENGLISH LANGUAGE. By Geo. 
 
 P. Marsh. PostSvo. 7s. 6rf. 
 ENGLISH LITERATURE. By T. B. 
 
 Shaw, M.A. PostSvo. 78. 6tZ. 
 
 SPECIMENS OP ENGLISH LITERATURE. 
 
 Selected from the Chief Writers. By Thomas B. Shaw, M.A. Post 
 Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 31 
 
 STANHOPE'S (Earl) Eeign of Queen Anne until the Peace of 
 
 Utrpctit. Designed as a cnnnpcting link between the Conclusion of 
 Lord MacauUy's Hist'uy and tlin Commencement of Lord Mahon's. 
 By the Eabi, Stanhope. Svo. (Ni-nrly rendy). 
 
 History of England, from the Peace of 
 
 Utrecht to the Pence of Ver-sailles, 1713-83. Library Edition. 7 vol?. 
 8vo. 93s. Or, 7 Vols. Post 8vo. 5s. each. 
 
 British India, from its Origin till the Peace of 
 
 1783. PostSvo. 3s. M. 
 
 History of " Forty-Five." Post 8vo. 3«. 
 
 Spain under Charles the Second. Post 8vo. 6s. Gd. 
 
 Historical and Critical Essays. Post 8vo. 3«. 6d. 
 
 Life of Belisarius. Post 8vo. 10«. 6d 
 
 Conde. Post 8vo. 3s. 6rf. 
 
 William Pitt. Portraits. 4 Vols. Post 
 
 8vo. 24s. 
 
 Miscellanies. Post Svo. 5«. Qd. 
 
 Story of Joan of Arc. Fcap. 8vo. 1«. 
 
 ST. CLAIK and BROPHY'S KESIDENCE IN BULGARIA; or. 
 
 Notes on the Resources and Administration of Turkey. Svo. 12.s. 
 
 ST. JOHN'S (Charles) Wild Sports and Natural History of the 
 
 Highlands. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 (Batle) Adventures in the Libyan Desert. Post Svo. 2s. 
 
 ST. LEONARDS (LoRr) On the Misrepresentations in Lord 
 
 Campbell's Lives of Lords Lyndhurst and Brougham. Post Svo. 2s. 6<i. 
 STEPHENSON S' (Geo rob and Robert) Lives. By Samuel 
 
 Sjiiles. With Portraits and 70 Illustrations. Medium Svo. 21s. 
 
 Or, with Woodcuts. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 STOTHARD'S (Tbos.) Life. With Personal Reminiscences. 
 
 By Mrs. Bray. With Portrait and 60 Woodcuts. 4to. 21s. 
 STREET'S (G. E.) Gothic Architecture in Spain. Second Edition. 
 
 With Illustrations. Medium Svo. SO.t. 
 
 STYFFE (Knutt) On the Strength of Iron and Steel. Translated 
 by C. P. Sandbei-.o. With Pref.ice by Dr. Pkecy. With Plates. Svo. 12s. 
 SWIFT'S (Jonathan) Life, and Works. By John Forster. Svo. 
 
 (7/1 Preparation.) 
 
 SYBEL'S (Von) History of Europe during the French Revolution, 
 
 .1789—170.5. Vols. 1 to 4. Svo. 12s. each. 
 SYME'S (Professor) Principles of Surgery. 5th Edition. Svo. 12s. 
 TAIT'S (Archbishop) Dangers and Safeguards of Modern Theology. 
 
 TAYLOR'S (Henry) Notes from Life. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 
 THOMSON'S (Archbishop) Lincoln's Inn Sermons. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 Life in the Light of God's Word. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 THREE-LEAVED MANUAL OF FAMILY PRAYER. Royal 
 
 Svo. 2s. 
 
 TOZER'S (H. F.) Researches in the Highlands of Turkey. Includ- 
 ing Visits to Mounts Ida, Athos, Olympus, and Pclion. With Illustra- 
 tions. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. 24s. 
 
 TRISTRAM'S (H. B.) Great Sahara, or Wanderings South of the 
 
 Atlas .Mountains. Illustrations. Post Svo. 15s. 
 
 TWISS' (Horace) Life of Lord Chancellor Eldon. Third Edition. 
 2 Vols. PostSvo. 21s. 
 
32 LIST OF WORKS PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 
 
 TYTLER'S (Fbaser) Memoirs. By Kbv. J. W. Bceook, M.A. 
 
 8vo. 9s. 
 
 VAMBERY'S (Arminius) Travels in Central Asia, from Teheran 
 
 across the Turkoman Desert on the Eas'ern Shore of the Caspian to 
 Khiva, Bokhara, and Samarcand. Illustrations. 8vo. 2Is. 
 
 VAN LENNEP'S (Henry J.) Missionary Travels in Asia Minor. 
 With Illustrations. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. (Ntar)y Seady.) 
 
 WAAOEN'S (Dr.) Treasures of Art in Great Britain. Being an 
 Account of the Chief Collections of Paintings, Sculpture, Manuscripts, 
 Miniatures, &c. &c., in this Country. Ohtained from Personal Inspec- 
 tion during Visits to England. 4 Vols. 8to. 54v. 
 
 WELLINGTON'S (The Duke op) Daspatohes during his various 
 Campaigns. 8 Vols. 8vo. 21s. each. 
 
 Supplementary Despatches. Vols. \. to XIL 
 
 Svo. 20i. each, 
 
 Civil and Political Correspondence. Vols. I. to 
 
 III. Svo. 205. each. 
 
 Selections from Despatches and General Orders. 
 
 8vo. 18s. 
 
 Speeches in Parliament. 2 Vols. Svo. 42«. 
 
 WHITE'S (Henry) Massacre of St. Bartholomew. Preceded by a 
 
 History of the Religious Wars in the Keign of Charles IX. Based on 
 a Pensnnal Examination of Documents in the Arcliives of France. 
 With Illustrations. Svo. 16s. 
 
 WHYMPER'S (Ed-ward) Scrambles among the Alps. 1860—69. 
 Including the First Ascent of the .Matterhorn, and the attempts which 
 preceded it; also a Chapter on Glacial Plienomeua on the Alps and in 
 Greenland. Wiih 100 Illustrations, Svo. 
 
 (Frederick) Travels and Adventures in Alaska and 
 
 on the River Yukon, the Russian Territory, now cfded to the United 
 States, and Visits to other pans of the North Pacific. W^ith Illustra- 
 tions. Svo. 16s. 
 
 WILBEEFORCES (William) Life. By the Bishop op Oxford. 
 
 Portrait. Post Svo. 10s. 6rf. 
 WILKINSON'S (Sir J. G.) Popular Account of the Private Life, 
 
 Manners, and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians. With 600 Woodcuts. 
 
 2 Vols. Post Svo. 12s. 
 WILSON'S (Bishop Daniel) Life, Letters, 'and Journals. By 
 
 Rev. JosiAH Bateman. Second Edition. Illustrations. Post Svo. 9s. 
 WILSON'S (Geni- Sir Robert) Secret History of the French 
 
 Invasion of Russia, 1812. Second Edition. Svo. 15s. 
 Private Diary of Travels, Personal Services, and 
 
 Public Events, during Missions and Employments Abroad. 1812-14. 
 
 2 Vols. Svo. 26s. 
 
 Autobiographical Memoirs. From Early Life down to 
 
 the Peace of Tilsit. Portrait. 2 Vols. Svo. 26s. 
 WORDSWORTH'S (Bishop) Journal of a Tour in Athens and 
 
 Attica. Fourth Edition. Plates. Post Svo. 5s. 
 Pictorial, Descriptive, and Historical Account 
 
 of Greece. Xew Editim. With 600 Woodcuts. Royal Svo. 21s. 
 ZINCKE (Rev. P. Babham). America since the War; or. Last 
 
 Winter in the United States. Being Table Talk collected during a 
 
 Tour through the late Southern Ccnfcderation, the Far West, the 
 
 Rocky Mountains, &c. &c. Post Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 BBADfittRT, EVANS, AND CO., PRINTERS, -ft HlTEFKlAAf .