sire to hear him speak for himself. He says, (chapter iii.) that a doctrine to be "Catholic" must have been held "in all places, at all times, and by all the faithful, for there is nothing truly and properly Catholic, as the word sufficiently declares, but what truly and fully comprehends all these." The word Catholic, then, means universal in three senses. A doctrine to be reputed Catholic must have been received at all times, in all places, and by all the faithful. To apply therefore this test. It is not sufficient that a doctrine has been received by the majority of the Christian world, it must also be clearly proved that it was received at the beginning. Nor would it be sufficient that it had been received at the beginning, unless it would be also shewn that it had been received at some one time by all the faithful. Thus communion in one kind, was introduced, to avoid, say Roman Catholic writers, the possibility of sacrilege, in the twelfth century; and therefore applying the rule of Vincentius, we pronounce it + not Catholic. The Church of England does not, nor does Vincentius, admit any thing but Scripture as the foundation of any doctrine, but she admits Catholic tradition, as explained by him, as authority for ritual observances, and for the interpretation of obscure and disputed passages of Scripture; and in this she differs from every other Protestant Church. Applying therefore at the period of the Reformation, the rule of Vincentius Lirinensis, she rejected every doctrine and practice which had not the concurrent voice of antiquity to plead in its favour. There was a sobriety in this procedure, and without meaning to reflect upon the opinions of those who have adopted a different course, it must have been no small recommendation to the Reformed Church of England, that she could confidently appeal to the sentiments of those pious and eminent men, whose blood had nurtured the seeds of the infant Church. And surely it must not be thought that she was led away by a vain reverence for the opinions of men, when she admitted in her Liturgy, and appealed to, in her defence, the words of Athanasius, the persecuted but undismayed champion of the truth. His writings, and those of his period, will fully satisfy the impartial enquirer, that the English reformers had not been influenced by any undue hostility to the Church of Rome; but that they found themselves bound by the Fathers of the primitive Church, (rising as it were from their graves,) to reject those things which the CATHOLIC CHURCH had not received."

In the thirteenth and fourteenth sections, it is shewn that the authority of the Church does not set aside the rights of private judgment-that the Scriptures contain all truth necessary for salvation, and in the concluding section the authority of Vincentius is cited to shew that errors might overrun the Christian Church. There are a few notes at the end, the last of which

"I quote the translation published by the Roman Catholics.- Dublin, Coyne, 1809."

"Vincentius would have called it a novelty, The council of Constance candidly confesses in its decree, that communion in both kinds was the practice of the primitive Church. But in truth no Roman Catholic writer denies it."

contains such a sound defence of the validity of the Irish Episcopacy that we shall lay it before our readers.

"Much has been latterly said on the subject of English ordination, and though I do not mean to charge the whole Roman Catholic Priesthood of Ireland with maintaining the audacious and wilful fals. hoods of Thomas Ward, yet as his opinions, or rather his statements, appear to be in these days raked up from his grave, I have deemed it right to subjoin a few words on the subject, intended to satisfy the minds of those whom plain truth can convince. The Bishops, any four of whom were empowered, in the year 1559, to consecrate Parker, the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, (from whom the succession of orders in the Church of England is derived,) were Kitchen, Barlow, Scory, Coverdale, Hodgins, Salesbury, and Bale. If it can be shewn that all these were truly Bishops, then no doubt whatever can rest on the subject of English ordination. Kitchen had been a Bishop in Mary's reign, and consecrated by Romish ordinal. He took the oath of supremacy to Elizabeth, and retained his See. Salesbury, of Thetford, and Bale, of Ossory, had been Roman Catholic Bishops and conformed. Barlow had been a Bishop under Henry VIII., had been consecrated by the Romish ritual in 1535, sat in Parliament as Bishop in Henry's reign, officiated as one of the nine Bishops at the funeral of that monarch, and was three times acknowledged to be a Bishop by public official documents in Mary's reign. Hodgins had been consecrated by Romish ritual in 1537; all the official records of his consecration are yet extant; and what should be conclusive with Roman Catholics, he assisted Bonner in several consecrations in Mary's reign, and held ordinations for him in 1540, 1541, and 1542. Scory had been consecrated by the form of Edward VI., which was the oldest form known; and after he had been deprived of his See, was restored to his rank and office as Bishop, in Mary's reign, by the wellremembered Bonner, without any new consecration. And Cardinal Pole, as well as Bonner, who acted under special directions from the Pope, thus acknowledged the validity of orders conferred in Edward's reign. Coverdale was consecrated under circumstances similar to Scory, and therefore his ordination or consecration was equally valid.

"It could not be supposed that those who planned and promoted the Reformation under the cautious Elizabeth, would have neglected to record all those matters with due circumspection-they were careful so to do, and no facts whatsoever are more satisfactorily established*. The Church of England does not, (and God forbid she should) dogmatically condemn those who deny the necessity of Episcopacy, and this liberality (if it can be so called) which was intended as a recognition of, and bond of union with, the Protestant Churches on the Continent, has been turned into an argument against her by Catholic writers. It will perhaps be a satisfactory conclusion of this subject to

"Whoever wishes to make himself fully acquainted with the whole of these matters, will consult Elrington's unanswered and unanswerable works on ordination."

give the names of eminent Roman Catholic writers who felt themselves obliged to acknowledge the validity of English ordination. Peter Walsh, the celebrated author of the Irish Remonstrance, Bossuet, the celebrated controversialist, Davenport, and more particularly the learned Corayer, who though a Roman Catholic Clergyman, wrote a most excellent book in defence of English ordination, Cudsemius, Pere Arnaud, Doctor Snellaerts, the Abbe Longuerue, and the Doctors of the Sorbonne in 1718. The confessions of all these distinguished adversaries may well console the Protestants of the Church of Eng. land for the contempt expressed for their Clergy by superficial and intemperate men, who mistake bold assertions for convincing argument. It does not appear from these facts that the Clergy of the Church of England "have set up for themselves." Every thing which even their adversaries consider essential to a true Church they have preserved, except their errors, and it is not unreasonable to hope, that even bigoted men will see the expediency of abstaining from repeating assertions which, if they have taken proper pains to inform themselves, they must be conscious are not true. This subject has been latterly forced upon the public mind, and it requires the strongest sense of what is due to the charity of Christian discussion to refrain from applying to those men who have endeavoured to cast obloquy on the Established Clergy, the indignant language of insulted truth. The Reformers of the Church of England have been accused of establishing a new Church, not a Christian Church, and of having no succession of orders, &c. I would ask their defamers, if a man who renounced his evil habits, could be denied to be the same individual after his reformation that he had been before. It would be as unreasonable to deny a man to be a rational being while he possessed all the essentials of rational existence, life, sensation, and reason, as for Roman Catholics to deny a Christian Assembly to be a Church, while it possessed all the essentials of a Church on their own principles. The argument, as far as regards the question of ordination, has been conducted by the advocates of the Church of England, entirely on the principles of Roman Catholics themselves: supposing orders to be a sacrament, and giving, in other respects, to the members of the Church of Rome all the advantages of their peculiar opinions.

"It may be satisfactory to the reader to learn how the question of Irish ordination stands. Curwin, Archbishop of Dublin; Baron, Archbishop of Cashel; Bodekin, Archbishop of Tuam, besides the Bishops of Ferns, Limerick, Cork, Waterford, and Killaloe, who had all held bishoprics in Mary's reign, took the oaths and conformed to the new Liturgy, under Elizabeth. From those the succession of orders in this country is derived; and upon what principles or pretence, the succession of orders in the Established Church in Ireland, could be fairly denied, one may well feel at a loss to conjecture."

Having thus fully enabled others to judge of the high value of this little tract, (with which we hear the Irish Primate has been so much pleased, that he has ordered 500 copies for his own distribution) we shall take this opportunity of making

some observations respecting that great controversy which is now agitating the sister kingdom, and which relates principally to the subject treated of in the pamphlet.

Whether the Scriptures shall be read universally by the Laity or not, is, and ever has been, the great point at issue between Papists and Protestants-a point which ought never to be confounded with the controversy which has been so warmly agitated amongst us, whether the Scriptures, when circulated by members of the Church of England, should be accompanied with the authorized commentaries of the Prayer Book and Homilies and the sound expositions of our Divines. The latter is a question which ought only be agitated between Churchmen and Dissenters; but the former is the same controversy which was carried on between our Reformers and the Papists, about 300 years ago, in this kingdom, and which has been recently revived and with much acrimony in Ireland.

We are then fully persuaded, that before there can be any prospect of rendering the cause of Protestantism triumphant in our sister kingdom, the Scriptures must be generally circulated amongst all its inhabitants; and that we are right in this opinion is evident, from the great alarm which the Priests of the Roman Communion, the upholders of unscriptural tradition, have already exhibited. It is, on this point, that all the Irish Protestants should join issue against the Papists, and so long as their opposition is that of Christians, conducted with uncompromising firmness, and yet with charity towards their Papal antagonists, we have every confidence in the advantage which will ultimately result to the cause of truth from the issue of the present struggle.

But though we do not hesitate to declare our opinion, that it is the duty of all Protestants to come forward at this crisis in defence of the great principles of the Reformation, now so pugnaciously assailed by the Papist Priesthood of Ireland; we must add that we cannot, and do not approve of, the Irish Bible Society, a Society which is calculated to throw contempt on Episcopacy, and to excite fresh prejudices on the part of the Papists. Nor do we think it expedient that public disputations should be held with them on this subject. So long as the Scriptures are brought into circulation, we think, that the more quietly and peaceably it is accomplished, the more probable will be the success attending their dissemination.

In what manner assistance can be most effectually given by our Church to the religious necessities of Ireland, we do not pretend to determine, from our ignorance of local circumstances. But we are persuaded, that if the Prelacy of our sister kingdom would open a channel of more regular and frequent communication between the two Churches, the best conse

quences would arise to the cause of the Irish Protestants. The unanimity which would thus be displayed would inspire the timid with confidence, would regulate the zeal of the active, and would call forth the energies of the indolent. We dislike all public meetings and debates for religious purposes; we disclaim all attempts at proselytism; but we think that the present times demand the united exertions of all sound Protestants, and especially of the members of our Church, as the truest professors of Protestantism: and that this union cannot be more practically or effectually exhibited than by a friendly communication and co-operation between the Ecclesiastical governers of the English and Irish establishments. We believe there is a strong desire on the part of many excellent members of our Church to testify their love and esteem for their Protestant brethren in Ireland, and if the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge undertakes to become the channel for regulating and directing this truly Christian sympathy, we are persuaded that it will accomplish an important benefit, and add another obligation to the many which it has already conferred on our inestimable Establishment.

MISCELLANEOUS.

CORRESPONDENCE OF BISHOP ANDREWES AND DU MOULIN ON EPISCOPACY*. (Continued from page 98.)

DU MOULIN'S SECOND LETTER.

To the Right Reverend Father, the Lord Bishop of Winchester. I HAVE sent you, Right Reverend Prelate, my book on the Vocation of Pastors, and with it a letter, in which I endeavoured to satisfy you

Allusion being made in the course of the correspondence to the definition of Order given by the Schoolmen, and to the term consecration as applied in the Roman Pontifical to the ordination of a Bishop, the following passage from Bishop Burnet may elucidate these points, and at the same time serve to disclose (what may be regarded as a theological paradox,) the Papal origin of the Presbyterian schism.

"Another thing is, that both in this writing, (the Injunctions given to the Clergy in 1538) and in the "Necessary Erudition of a Christian Man," Bishops and Priests are spoken of as one and the same office. In the ancient Church they knew none of those subtilties which were found out in the latter ages. It was then thought enough, that a Bishop was to be dedicated to his function by a new imposition of hands, and that several offices could not be performed without Bishops, such as ordination, confirmation, &c. but they did not refine in these matters, so much as to inquire whether Bishops and Priests differed in order and office, or only in degree. But after the schoolmen fell to examine matters of divinity with logical and unintelligible niceties, and the Canonists began to comment upon the rules of the ancient Church, they studied to make Bishops and Priests seem very near one another, so that the difference was but small. They did it with different designs. The Schoolmen having set up the grand mystery of transubstantiation, were to exalt the priestly office as much as possible; for the turning the Host into