RICERCHE DI STORIA E SPIRITUALITÀ PASSIONISTA - 56

Scritti editi di Domenico Barberi, C. P. e studi reperibili presso Curia Generale Passionisti P.zza SS. Giovanni e Paolo, 13 * 00184 Roma

>L'azione divina sulla libertà umana a cura di A. Lippi, Roma 1966, pp. 38. \ 1

>Antologia delle Opere filosofiche a cura di A. Lippi, Roma 1969, pp. 254. >Scritti Spirituali I: Autobiografia e propositi dei suoi esercizi spirituali, a cura di F. Giorgini, Roma 1986, pp.136. >Scritti Spirituali II: Commentò al Cantico dei Cantici.* Gemito della Colomba, a cura di F. Giorgini, Roma 1987, pp. 206. > Lettera ai Professori di Oxford. Relazioni con Newman e i suoi amici, a cura di F. Giorgini, Roma 1990, pp. 11 O. >GIOVANNI PELÀ, c. P., La Spiritualità ecumenica del B. Domenico Barberi, C. P. Apostolo dell'unità (1792-1849), Roma 1991, pp. 206. > Breve Trattato sulla carità fraterna e sulla maniera di esercitarla per le Religiose della Carità di Ferentino, a cura di Sr. Teresa delle Francescane Missionarie del Cuore lm. Di Maria, Roma 1998, pp.63. >FEDERICO DELL'ADDOLORATA, C.P., Il B. Domenico della Madre di Dio passionista, mistico, apostolo, scrittore (1792-1849), Postulazione dei passionisti Roma 1963. IN INGLESE NELLE BIBLIOTECHE

>ALFRED WILSON, C.P., Blessed Dominic Barberi, C.P.. Supernaturalized Briton, London 1967. > Dominic Barberi In England. A new_ series of Letters translated and edited by _Fr. Urban Young, C.P., London 1935.

DOMINIC BARBERI, C.P.

A Pacific Discussion

Upon Controversia! Subjects between A Catholic and an English Protestant

By a Lover of Peace and Christian Unity

A cura di Fabiano Giorgini, C. P.

. Curia Generale Passionisti . P.zza SS. Giovanni e Paolo, 13

00184 ROMA

Giubileo 2000

CONTENTS

Introduzione IX

First Conference, Introduction and method of holding it

Second Conference, Of what may be thought of the English

and of the Anglican Church 8

Third Conference, Continuation ofthe same Subjet 22

Fourth Conference, Upon the Articles of the Anglican Church,

Scripture and Creeds 36

Fifth Conference, Justification and good Works 47

Sixth Conference, The Church, Councils and their Authority 56

Seventh Conference, Purgatory, Penance,

the Invocati on of Saints, W orship of Relics, etc. 65

Eighth Conference, Upon the Sacraments

and their Administration

Ninth Conference, The Eucharist and the Mass

Tenth Conference, Upon the Thirty-second and

following Articles till the End

Eleventh Conference, The Catholic Church,

her Foundation and Basis

Twelfth Conference

Thirteenth Conference, V eneration of Images

F ourteenth Conference, The Pope' s Supremacy

Protestati on of the Author

Notes by Silvan Rouse C.P.

V

79

94

109

121

131

144

164

182

183

INTRODUZIONE

1.- L'autore del testo: il B. Domenico Barberi

Nacque in Viterbo nel 1792 e morì in Inghilterra nel 1849. Desiderava molto studiare, ma la povertà della famiglia non gli permise di seguire un corso normale di scuola elementare. Dotato di ottima intelligenza e ferma volontà, approfittò di ogni possibilità per formarsi una discreta cultura di base. Con l'aiuto del fratello Adeodato, ebbe il coraggio di seguire la vocazione religiosa appena, caduto Napoleone nel 1814, i religiosi furono autorizzati a riunirsi in comunità1

•

Egli professò come passionista nel 1815 e fu ordinato sacerdote il O 1/03/1818. Fu impiegato nella formazione dei giovani passionisti e scrisse vari opuscoli di teologia spirituale, di sacra eloquenza e di spiritualità per aiutare i giovani religiosi e le religiose di altri istituti alle quali predicava corsi di esercizi. Per incarico del Superiore Generale redasse anche un manuale di filosofia ed uno di morale per uso delle scuole della congregazione passionista. Fu molto al corrente delle questioni filosofiche, teologiche e morali del tempo. Apprezzò il metodo morale di S. Alfonso Maria de' Liguori e lo propose nella congregazione. I due manuali di filosofia e di morale rimasero manoscritti2. In lui emerse in modo eminente, a livello di spiritualità e di interesse pastorale, il ritorno dell'Inghilterra alla Chiesa cattolica. Egli, fin dal suo ingresso tra i passionisti, prima di iniziare il noviziato, sentì una chiamata interiore ad orientare tutta l'esistenza verso il ritorno degli anglicani alla Chiesa cattolica. Tale chiamata interiore lo spinse ad offrire le sue preghiere, i sacrifici e l'azione per questo scopo. Organizzò anche una crociata di preghiere tra i suoi studenti e le persone che

1 Per una conoscenza di Domenico: DOMENICO DELLA MADRE DI mo (BARBERI), Scritti spirituali: I.­Autobiografia e propositi dei suoi esercizi spirituali a cura di F Giorgini, C.P., Ed. CIPI Roma 1986. cf FEDERICO DELL'ADDOLORATA, C.P., Il B. Domenico della Madre di Dio passionista, mistico, apostolo, scrittore (I 792-1849), Postulazione dei passionisti Roma 1963. IDEM, La mistica ascensione del B. Domenico della Madre di Dio passionista, in Rivista di vita spirituale, 18(1964)235-258. A. WILSON, C.P., Blessed Dominic Barberi, C.P .. Supernaturalized Briton, London 1967. Dominic Barberi In England. A new series of Letters translated and edited by Fr. Urban Young, C.P., London 1935. PABLO GARCIA, Domingo Barberi, Precursor y Profeta., Ed. Sigueme, Salamanca 1997. Per l'ambiente socio ecclesiale e della congregazione cf F. GIORGINI,C.P., Storia della Congregazione della Passione di Gesù Cristo, voi. 11/2: Soppressione Ripristinazione Espansione 1796-1839, Ed. CIPI Roma 2000.

, 2 Per una conoscenza del pensiero filosofico e teologico di Domenico cf D. BARBERI, Antologia delle Opere filosofiche a cura di P. A. Lippi C.P.,Roma 1969. D. BARBERI, L'Azione divina sulla libertà umana a cura di A. Lippi, C.P., Roma 1966. c. BROVETTO, C.P., Il B. Domenico della Madre di Dio teologo, in AA.VV., Visse per l'unità, S. Gabriele dell'Addolorata 1966, pp. 103-116.

VII

conosceva nel ministero apostolico, per ottenere da Dio il ritorno degli anglicani alla fede cattolica3 . Lesse gli autori contemporanei di apologetica, studiò l'anglicanesimo nei suoi testi ufficiali e lesse, appena gli fu possibile, anche i Tracts of the Times editi dal gruppo del movimento di Oxford, specialmente da Newman. In Italia, nel tempo che fu in Roma, strinse contatti fruttuosi con anglicani che visitavano la città e il Monte Celio, dov'era ubicato il ritiro passionista. Con alcuni ebbe relazione epistolare, compose anche opuscoli adatti ad illuminare la mente di un anglicano circa la verità cattolica. Non avendo mezzi e possibilità di stamparli, cercò di fame fare delle copie che passava agli interessati.

2.- In Inghilterra

Domenico, pur essendo certissimo della volontà di Dio sulla sua vita, tuttavia non volle mai fare pressioni sui superiori per essere mandato in Inghilterra. Ad un sacerdote che l'esortava a chiedere un particolare permesso direttamente al Papa, ripose: "Non voglio fare tal passo. Io sono figlio di ubbidienza e l'ubbidienza deve regolarmi. Dio penserà a trovare il modo"4. Questa paziente attesa dell'ora di Dio fece molta impressione su Newman che vi vide un chiaro segno di santità in Domenico e per sé stesso vi scorse come un segno esterno per decidersi a far il passaggio alla Chiesa cattolica. Egli volle compiere il passaggio con l'assistenza di Domenico il 9 ottobre 1845. Nelle lettere agli amici anglicani spiegava che per fare la sua professione di fede cattolica aveva scelto Domenico per il suo amore agli anglicani e per la sua santità: Per es. scriveva a Wilberforce: "Father Dominic has had his thought turned to England from a youth, in a distinct and remarkable way. For thirty years he has expected to be sent to England, and abaut three years since was sent without any act of his own by his superiors ... "5. A Bowden Newman scriveva: "J am in this night expecting Father Dominic the Passionist [. . .] He was a poor boy, who, I believe, kept sheep near Rame and from his youth his thoughts have been · most singularly and distinctly turned to the conversion of England. He is a shrewd clever man, but as unaffected and simple as a child; and most singularly kind in his thoughts of religious persons in our communion. I wish ali persons were as charitable as I know him to be. After

3 DOMENICO, Scritti spirituali: 1.-, cit., pp. 44,49-51; vedi anche la voce "Inghilterra" nell'indice analitico. DIVO BARSOTTI, Magistero di Santi. Saggi per una storia della spiritualità italiana dell'Ottocento, Roma 1971, pp. 31-46: sottolinea I 'importanza della vocazione apostolica di Domenico che ha marcato la sua vita mistica. 4 DOMENICO, Scritti spirituali: 1.-, cit., p. 51. Ivi si parla anche della conoscenza di Trelawny, di Spencer e di Phillipps. 5 The letters and Diaries of J H Newman ... by C. S. Dessain, London 1961, vol. XI, p. 3.

VIII

waiting near 30 years, suddenly his Superiors sent him to England, without any act ofhis own . . . "6.

Come scriveva Newman, Domenico fu inviato quasi improvvisamente in Inghilterra. Quando nel capitolo generale del 1839, fu presa la decisione di attuare la fondazione dei passionisti in Belgio in vista dell'Inghilterra, già preparata dai Superiore generale uscente, Domenico fu eletto Superiore provinciale e non fu incluso nel gruppo che doveva partire. Si ammalò chi doveva guidare la spedizione, allora il Superiore generale chiamò immediatamente il p. Domenico, che era Provinciale della Provincia dell'Addolorata, e lo mise a capo del gruppo che partì il 26 maggio 1840 per il Belgio 7.

Il 17/02/1842 Domenico poté ufficialmente aprire il primo ritiro passionista in Aston Hall, presso Stone. Fino alla morte, 27/08/1849, Domenico fu tutto impegnato nell'educare i chiamati alla vita passionista, tra cui Ignazio Spencer8

;

nel continuare a confermare i cattolici ad essere degni della loro vocazione ed aiutare gli anglicani nella ricerca della vera chiesa. In questo sforzo di catechesi per i cattolici e per gli anglicani nascono le Lectures ed i Sermons.

3.- A Pacific Discussion.

Il testo presentato in questo volume: A pacific Discussion upon controversia! subjects between a Catholic and an English Protestant, by a lover of peace and Christian unity: Father Dominic and Mister William; fu redatto tra la fine del 1841 e il 08/02/1842 quando l'autore appone la firma alla protesta di voler accogliere qualunque decisione della Chiesa in merito al suo scritto. Nella conferenza 1 O (p. 111) ricorda il suo primo approdo in Inghilterra che avvenne alla fine di novembre 1840; nella conferenza 14 (p. 180) egli cita un fatto accadutogli a Lilla, il O 1/10/1841, quindi si deve pensare che la composizione a quella data non fosse ancora compiuta. Egli ricorda all'interlocutore di non potergli dedicare tutto il tempo che vorrebbe "on accaunt of numerous occupations which surround me in this house, where I am obliged to act as Superior, Parish Priest, and Master of Novices, etc." (p.3).

6 The Letters and Diaries, cit., p. 5-6. Cf anche DOMENICO DELLA MADRE DI DIO, Lettera ai Professori · Oxford. Relazioni con Newman e i suoi amici a cura di F. Giorgini, Ed. CIPI Roma 1990, pp. 28-31. 7 Il Superiore generale ritenne opportuno che il p. Domenico conservasse il titolo di Provinciale e chiese particolare permesso alla S. Sede ottenuto il 22/05/1840, ASV, S.C. VV. e RR. Sez. Positiones

· maggio 1840. Governò il primo Consultore come Vice provinciale, cf Positio super virtutibus ... , Insulae Liris 1935, p. 228. 8 J. v ANDEN BUSSCHE, C.P., Jgnatius (George) Spencer Passionist (] 799-1864). Crusader of prayer for England and pioneer of ecumenica! prayer, Leuven 1991.

IX

\I

Nella conferenza 1 2 Domenico si scusa se quanto presenta potrebbe risultare "tedious and monotonous I do not deny; but . . . the circumstances at present so unsatisfactory in which I am situated (writing this at Ascott in the midst of uncertainty with regard to my establishment in England) do not permit me to lose any time, or to exercise the imagination in picturesque variety" (nota 1 28). Il p. Federico Menegazzo pensa che questo opuscolo sia stato scritto in italiano e poi tradotto in inglese9

. Non mi sembra perché la copia italiana delle conferenze 1 1 - 1 4 appare una traduzione dall'inglese: per es . "The Catholic Church resembles a grand tree, the branches of which may be pruned, but . . . "(p. 1 79). Il traduttore dice: "La Chiesa cattolica è somigliante ad un grande albero cui possono bensì essere recise le branche, ma . . . ". Non penso che Domenico avrebbe scritto "branche" in luogo di "rami". Nel documento vi sono 1 4 conferenze a forma di dialogo tra Domenico e Mister William, ex ministro protestante che è agitato da dubbi sulla vera chiesa dopo aver letto i Tracts redatti dal Movimento di Oxford. Egli ha anche letto alcuni opuscoli di Domenico, ma non è riuscito a quietarsi e siccome è stato favorevolmente colpito dalla carità del medesimo vuole dialogare con lui. Nelle prime 1 O conferenze si prendono in esame i 39 articoli della chiesa anglicana, facendone risaltare la incompiutezza, la opposizione con la dottrina cattolica e l'incongruenza nell'affidare la custodia della fede della chiesa al capo dello stato. Domenico esorta vivamente a scuotere il giogo della dipendenza dall'autorità statale imposta dai 39 articoli e tornare al Credo dell'unica Chiesa di Cristo. Esorta l'interlocutore ad approfittare del bene che è rimasto nella chiesa anglicana, come le formule dei tre simboli di fede dei primi secoli, per aggangiarsi all'unica vera Chiesa di Cristo ( conferenza 1 1 ) . Dalla conferenza 1 1 alla 14 espone la dottrina cattolica su alcune questioni che costituiscono più difficoltà agli anglicani. Sono argomenti già trattati a lungo nelle Lettere aelimontane, a cui rimanda spesso e specialmente per quanto riguarda la Eucaristia e la Chiesa. Qui riprende gli argomenti tenendo conto dell'esperienza avuta con il contatto diretto con gli anglicani e con i cattolici della regione. Tra le materie esposte meritano particolare attenzione la giustificazione per la grazia di Dio e per le buone opere; l'adorazione della SS. Eucaristia; l'autorità della Chiesa, dei Concili e del Papa rispetto ai Vescovi ed al Concilio; l'infallibilità della Chiesa e del Papa; la devozione a Maria SS.ma; la venerazione dei santi e delle immagini sacre, il celibato dei sacerdoti. Domenico attinge i suoi argomenti dalla Scrittura, dai documenti conciliari, dai Padri specialmente da Agostino. Generalmente va ai Padri tramite i teologi come Roberto Bellarmino, Bossuet, Tournely10

. Egli cita (p. 79-8 1 ,95,97, 1 42) anche

9 FEDERICO DELL'ADDOLORATA, C.P., L 'Infallib ilità pontificia secondo il Ven. P. Domenico della Madre di Dio, Passionista (1 792-1849), Caravate 1 943, p.41. 10 Roberto Bellarmino (1542-1621), gesuita italiano, professore a Lovanio ed a Roma, poi Vescovo e Cardinale. Domenico tiene presente in modo particolare le Controversie. Jacques Bénigne Bossuet

X

l'anglicano Palmer 1 1 , Newman, a p. 1 40, Lectures on the Profetica! OJ]ìce of the Church; a p. 85 The British Critic N. 60, a p. 1 9,67, Tractsfor the Times. Il Tract 71 gli offre la opportunità di parlare della possibilità di salvezza dei non cattolici che sono in buona fede. Nel Tract 71 si affermava che gli anglicani entrando nella Chiesa cattolica, si trovavano a disagio a pregare per i loro defunti, perché la Chiesa cattolica sostiene che si salvano solo coloro che sono uniti alla medesima. Domenico risponde di essere sicuro che molti, i quali vivono nell'errore ma senza loro colpa, e regolano la loro vita secondo la retta ragione e la legge di Dio conosciuta, sono sulla via della salvezza. Perché, egli spiega, vi sono due modi di appartenere alla vera Chiesa. Uno esplicito ed esterno che importa i vincoli esterni di appartenenza e l'obbedienza ai legittimi capi e alle norme.' Vi è anche un'appartenenza interna, cioè nello spirito e non visibile, necessaria anche nell'appartenenza esterna. Chi vive questa appartenenza interna ma non ha quella esterna per ignoranza invincibile o incapacità come sono i bambini, questi possono salvarsi (p. 20). Il suo discorso ha una dialettica stringente, ma è sempre rispettoso dell'interlocutore ed onesto nel riconoscere le colpe dei cattolici. Inoltre egli mentre è fermo circa la dottrina cattolica, non insiste sulle opinioni liberamente discusse tra i teologi : "whilst treating the cause of the Catholic Church, my only aim is to be Catholic and not interest myself further in defending that which a good Catholic might de/end or cali in question, but I endeavour to confine myself to such things as cannot be denied by any Catholic" (p. 1 75) . Per es . circa il dominio temporale del Papa come re, Domenico con tranquillità afferma che il Papa per jus divinum, non ha nessun potere temporale, però neppure gli viene impedito, ma per jus gentium gli viene riconosciuto un potere su alcune regioni e ciò serve per la sua indipendenza nell'esercizio del ministero apostolico (p. 1 77). Alla domanda di William come giustificare i Papi che si attribuirono un potere politico su tutto il mondo assegnando l'America alla Spagna e l'Asia al Portogallo, Domenico risponde: "I should say, my dear Sir, that these Popes might have erred by such conduct, nor do I pretend to justify ali that the Popes have done" (p. 1 78).

( 1624-1704 ); nella biblioteca passionista di Roma erano presenti le sue opere sia nell'originale francese che in traduzione stampata in Napoli dal 1777ss. Domenico tiene presente in modo particolare " Variazioni delle Chiese protestanti", "Dissertazione e lettere concepite nel disegno di riunire i Protestanti di Alemagna della confessione di Ausbourg alla Chiesa Cattolica". Honoratus Tournely, Praelectiones theologicae de Ecclesia Christ i quas in scholis Sorbonicis habuit -- , Neapoli 1765, tomus VI . L'opera era presente nella biblioteca dei passionisti di Roma dove Domenico insegnò teologia per alcuni anni. Nella medesima biblioteca era presente: Metodo d 'Istruzione per ricondurre gli acattol ici alla Romana Chiesa e confermare i . cattolici nella loro credenza. Traduzione dal francese che si pubblica per cura della Pia Associazione, Venezia 1830: vi sono sei conferenze a · forma di dialogo. · i i Penso che si tratti di William Palmer (1803-1885) "an anglican Theologian of repute who in 1 846 · published a reply to Newmn's Essay on the Development of christian Doctrine", in New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York 1967, voi. X, 935.

XI

Anche ciica l ' infallibilità del Papa è chiarissimo nell 'affermare che il Papa con i Vescovi, o con il Concilio, è infallibile in materia di fede e di morale, invece circa la infallibilità personale quando parla ex cattedra, non essendoci ancora la definizione del Concilio Vaticano I, nel 1 870, Domenico si limita a dire: "They who mantain the probability of persona! infallibility in the Pope limit this to decisions ex cathedra; that is when he speaks to ali the faithful in matters of faith or mora! doctrine divinely revealed'' (p. 1 80) . Domenico si comporta in questo modo non per ridurre la verità cattolica, ma per non voler imporre per fede quello che strettamente non era domma di fede e quindi non voleva rendere agli anglicani più difficile l ' entrare nella Chiesa cattol ica. Questo principio egli lo aveva enunciato nel 1 83 1 inviando all 'amico passionista p . Ignazio Carsidoni ( 1 80 1 - 1 844 ) , uno scritto circa i protestanti : "Io mi sono regolato sopra alcuni principi, quali mi paiono ragionevoli : 1 .- che qualora si parla con eretici non bisogna ricordarsi di altro che di essere cattolici. Conviene astrarre dall 'essere de' tomisti, molinisti, italiani, e francesi; donde ne nasce che conviene mai con questi porsi a difendere ciò che è mera opinione di scuole, ma solo ciò che è dottrina di tutta la Cattolica Chiesa. 2.- che trattandosi con eretici non debbono questi esacerbarsi, ma procurare di cattivarseli più che sia possibile, e parlare non solo alle orecchie, ma molto più al cuore. Perciò non devesi molto perfidiare in negare ciò che a essi si può concedere salva la fede e la dottrina della Cattolica Chiesa. Non debbono usarsi frasi pungenti, ma piuttosto maniere dolci, come hanno fatto i buoni apologisti, principalmente Bossuet, dalle opere del quale ho preso molte cognizioni vitali e necessarie"12 •

· Un segno di rispetto è il chiamare gli anglicani "my dear English brethren"(p. 1 ), e "separated Brethren"(p. 7 1 , 1 22, 140- 14 1 , 1 79)13 .

Ricordo con riconoscenza il p. Silvan Rouse C.P. che rilesse il testo di Domenico e vi appose le note.

Si pubblica questo scritto per offrire agli studiosi dell ' ecumenismo e della storia della Chiesa altro materiale di prima mano per meglio conoscere il cammino dell' ecumenismo e questo servo dell 'unità. Per comprendere il pensiero di Domenico riguardo alla natura dell 'unica Chiesa e riguardo alla riunione degli anglicani all 'unica Chiesa di Cristo riconosciuta in quella cattolica romana, aiuta lo studio di Giovanni Pela, La spiritualità ecumenica del B. Domenico Barberi, C.P. , Apostolo dell 'unità (1 792-1849), Ed. C.I.P.I . Roma 1 99 1 .

12 FEDERICO, Il B. Domenico, cit., p. 147. Vedi anche DOMENICO, Lettera ai Professori di Oxford, cit. p. 1 9-20. 1 3 Su questo appellativo cfDOMENICO, Lettera ai Professori di Oxford, cit., p. 1 8- 19.

XII

FIRST CONFERENCE

INTRODUCTION AND METHOD OF HOLDING IT

MR . WILLIAM The perusal o f your l iterary productions has force d me I may say , to seek your acquaintance that I may enj oy , if pe rmitted , some litt le of your conversa­tion .

FATHER DOMINIC My dear Sir , it is indeed too gre at an honour , and too great a consola tion for me to be acquainte d with a person of your rank and qua lity , yet I should esteem myself happy could I succee d in being useful to any of my dear Engl ish brethren for whom I entertain the most sincere esteem and respect .

MR · Wl�L IAM . By all I . have heard and seen of your productions , 1t appears · that you have a great regard for Engl and , nor I cannot think tha t your words are the ef­fects of device or courtesy ( 1 ) . I believe rather that they come from yo�r heart . I have read your letters addressed to a Minister of the English Church , and some others of your tracts , and have been moved to consider you as an ene�y . to dup_licity and discord , and a lover of peace and Christian umty , estranged from that spirit of rancour altercation and in discreet zeal which I have observed i� many other writers . Many times have I s aid to mysel f , if all those who have written upon controversial points had followed th e same method , either there would not have b�en so many motives of division , or those who were di­v1ded woul d have been more easily reunited . I hope , �herefore , that our conferences will confirm me in the idea I have formed of you , and tha t I sha 11 have no reason to repent of my visit .

FATHER DOMINIC May God · in his goodness fulfil your wishes . I do not like useless compliments nor tedious ceremony . Let us not then lose our time . I t is sufficient to say that God is the only source of a ll our good . To

. God alone is due honour and glory for all things . I

. cannot deny the g reat abhorrence I feel for a ll sort of duplicity , strife , useless dis sention and discor d , and , at

- 1 -

th e s am e ti m e , th at I s incerely des ire th e pe ace , con­cor d , and u nion of a ll Chris tia ns , y es , of a ll ma nkin d in

our sheep fold ! Ye t above all , I ardently des ire the

reun ion of de ar Engl

,an d to the center of C�thol�c _u nity ·

1 f in this th ere is anything worthy of pra1se , 1t 1s due

to God a lone : O quo est omne bonum optimum ( 2 ) ·

MR . WILLIAM F rom th e fir s t line ament s it appe ar s that

the per son is not di ffer ent from h is work s , an d -that your

writin g s are only th e picture of your heart · . 1 f yo.u , th erefore think p roper I wi ll rem ain for a l lttle wh1le

with you' in or der th at we m:3-y be �t l ib er.ty to tr e �t , at

our le isu re , of th o se thing s to ncer n1ng w h1ch � de s ire to

h e ar your opinion . I do not , howev er , w1sh to be

i n tru s iv e . 1 f , th erefore , you shoul d fin d w hat I prop ose

trouble some , pray tel1 me c an didly .

FATHER DOMINIC On th e contrary , be a ssur e d , my de ar Sir , th at your vi s it to our poo r dwellin g af�ord s me gr.e�t

con sol ation . Yet , I think it mu st be a sub J ect of mor t1fl­c ation and pen ance , since we hav e not th e means of entert a ining p roperly a g ent le man like you · Our hou se , I m ay s ay , contain s but b are wall s . I �, th erefo�e , you w ish to rem ain any t ime w ith u s , you w�ll be obh ge d t o

pr actice th e mos t strict pov erty and p at1e nc e o n account

of our nar row circ um st a n ces .

MR . WILLIAM Oh ! as to thi s , I fe ar nothing . Do not

think th at I am so delic ate . I have le arnt by experienc e

h ow to accommodate my sel f to anything . T houg h . I � hould ev en s uffer some l i ttle , I should b e we ll re p a1d . m th e

affair s of my etern al s alvat ion - Agonizare pr? anima tua

( 3 ) . I did not come h ere to seek . enJ oymen� , b ut

in s tructio n in my duties . I will put up w1th anyt�rng in

or der to be at liberty , every d ay for a s h ort time , to

tr e at with you upon certa in poin t s which intere st me

ex c ee dingly .

FATHER DOMINIC Well the n , if such be the c ase 1 r ej oice , superabundo gaudio ( 4 ) , that you are so happi ly di s po s e d , and I con fide ntly hope t�at Go d w.ho h as com­me n ce d in you th e gr and work of h 1s gr ace w1ll know h ow to accompli s h it . I est e e m my self mos t happy to be an

- 2 -

F

instrum e nt in th e han ds of Go d for such an unde rtaking . My ins u fficiency does not in th e le a st d i s courage m e , be­c au se I know th at God fre quently mak es choice of th e m e ane st in s truments to ope rate the g re at e s t wonders . Henc e , no one c an glory but in God . T he remembra nce of an A s s in s tru cting a P rophet ( S ) is a sub j ect which I will be ar in min d whils t it ple ase s his Divi n e Maj est y to

make u se of m e . But to return to your re qu est ; I wi ll tel1 you what I c an do . You know th at I c annot giv e you as much of my time as I would w ish on account of numerou s occ upations which surround me in thi s house , wh ere I am oblige d to act a s Supe r ior , P a rish P ri e st , and M as ter of Novice s , etc . Neverthele s s , I sha 11 en­de a vour to con s ec r ate one or two hour s of the d ay entire­ly to you , or , I should s ay , to Go d wh ose sole glory you seek , as I suppo s e , and as it app e ars from your g ood dispo s ition s . I am pe r s uade d that I sh a ll not h ave to

tre at w ith a Sop hi st who com es solely to dis pute and to

ag it ate usele s s quest ions , but with a sincere lover of truth who seeks only to dive into the knowle dge of what

alone is nece s s ary and a dvantag eou s to etern al s alvation .

MR . WILLIAM I hope , my de ar F ath er , tò be ex actly in

th e s e dis pos ition s . May Go d in his good ne s s del iver me

from th at sop h i s t ic al s p ir it w hich is so common at p re sent among st many who lo se th eir time in vain c avil s . I am a lov er of truth , and yet can not fl atter my self that I know it s uffic ie ntly for my well-be ing , thoug h I am dis pose d to

embrace it as soon a s God g ive s me g r ace to di s cover it .

FATHER DOMINIC O my de ar Sir , if th i s be th e c as e , I may s ay most a ssu re dly th at you are not far from the

K in g dom of God - non es longe a regno Dei ( 6 ) . It is

impo s s ib le th at the lig ht , quae illuminat omnem hominem ( 7 ) , shoul d be hi d de n from him who ope n s th e doo r of his

h e a rt to receive it . Still , I w ish to know , at le a st in

abs tract , wh at are th e s ubjéct s upon which you des ire to

be ins tru cte d .

MR . WILLIAM You know them , at le a st in gener al , when

I tel1 you that I am a me mber of the Ang lican Church by : law e s tablis h e d . I went through a cours e of P hilo s op hy . an d Th eology in the celebrate d U niv er s ity of Oxford . For

- 3 -

some ye ars I have b een occup ie d as a Minister of th at

Church . I n my youth I le arnt ma ny thin g s concernin g w h ich , at th at time , I h a d a cert a in s ecurity of con­science . B ut , as my ye ar s incre a s e d , by th e stu dy of Scriptu re a n d th e F ath ers , an d a lso by re a ding . · v a r iou s

p ro ductions which of l ate ye a rs h av e been pubhs h e d by me mb e r s of th e . U niv e r sity at Oxfor d , a thou s an d dou b t s , perplex it i e s and diffic ulti e s h av e ari s e n in my min d . Th e se I ca nnot ov ercome by the peru s al of the s a i d

pro ductions which , accor din g to my j u dgment , g iv e light

s u fficient to t h row a dou bt u pon our Eng lish Church , ye t

not enoug h t o dis cover th e tr u e Ch urch . I n my youth I h a d the gre at e st ab horrence for a ll that w a s � a p is_tic a l , Roma ni s h , a n d still I w as not even th en very firm m th e

profe s s ion of a ll th e articles o f our Eng lis h Ch u rch . However , in progre s s of time , th i s h atre d of Popery h a s

almost va n i s h e d from my min d . Now , I am dr awn t o th e

oppo s it e si d e and am become ple a se d wit h th e !'Aaj e s ty �f

the Roman Church , its dur ation , its prog r e s s m oppos1-tion to so many obst acle s which it h a s e nco u ntere d in all ag es . Yet , I ca n not , at pr e s ent , in a ll t hing s disprov e

the Anglic a n Church or approve of t h e Roma n .

I n one wo r d , I feel like a tra v eller in the mi d st of a

fore s t th at see s v ariou s roa ds before him and is ignor ant

of the ri g ht one . I n s uch a sit u a t ion , it appe ars to me , that an expe r ience d gu i de is nece s s ary to show me th e

wa y . I have not h e s it ate d to seek one . I have inqu ire d

of sev er a l Minis t e r s , my confreres , but my effort s were

fru itle s s , for I ob serve d th at th ey w ere not l e s s emb ar­r a s s e d th a n my self . Some of th ese c a n di dly own e d that th e ir min d s w ere as much b e se t w ith dou bts a n d di fficul­tie s as min e . O my Go d , wh at a s t a te of anx ie ty ! Fort u n ately some of you r compo s itions fell into my h a n d s , which I re a d with all th e attention I coul d . They ple a s e d

m e , an d somehm es drew t e ars from my eyes . I w a s de­li ghte d esp ecially with th at tone of security so demon­s tr a tive in your fa ith when in your first le tt er to

Alitofil as ( = Lettere Celimontane ) you d e scribe th e effect s

pr odu ced by th e p romi s e s of J esu s Ch r i s t u pon the h e art s

a n d min d s of Catholic s . How h appy is h e , s ai d I , since

he en j oys t h at b le s se d pe ace of wh ich I am dep riv e d . Lik e a chil d newly born , he receiv es th e milk which his

- 4 -

Moth er offers him ; and I . . . . Yet , j u dg in g of oth ers by my s elf I w as not fully pers u a de d th at everything w a s

ex actly as I found it re g istere d upon th e p ape r . Excu s e

me , de ar F ath er . I f e a r e d some d eception , th at i t w a s not

re a lly tr ue th a t you were quit e sec ure in your faith . To

s ay th e tr':1th as I felt it , your ch ar acter did not appe ar to me dece1tful . No , s ai d I to my self ma ny times , thi s is

n�t th e tone or th� st yle of a hypocr ite . The la ng ua g e

m1� ht b y cha nce d1s s e mble but not hi s h e a rt . Now , upon th 1s p a p er we s ee more the h e art of th e w r iter than the

tor:igue . No , it is impos sible for a hypocrite to write in th 1s ma n n er . T h is s trife l a st e d some time . I re a d a n d

re a sone d , nor could I wit h dr aw my eye s from t h e

book , nor my min d f rom dou bt . F in ally I dete rm ine d to

see a n d con s ult with you in person .

Now I have expl aine d in a few wo r d s my pre sent s tate . From thi s brief and sincere decl aration you alre a dy know th e subj ect concerning wh ich I de sire your a s s is t ance . The fir s t lig ht which I seek for is a solution to th e

do':1bt now propose d , t h at is , if in truth your h e art

enJ oys th at pe ace and firmne s s of faith de mon s tr a t e d in

you r wr iting s -. Excu se a g ain , I e ntre at you , my b ol dnes s . The s u b j ect upon which we tre at is too import a n t , since

· how co uld I hope to receive any secu rity from one who

wa s not sec ure of him self . Tel1 me th en , I be g of you , are you re a lly secu re in b elieving a ll t h at your Ch u rch propo se s ?

FATHE� DOMINIC Your sincerity , my de ar S ir , del ig hts me ; 1t mak es_ me hope great thing s to your a dva nta g e ; it

mak_es me be lieve , als o , th a t you are not natur ally g iven to J u dg e oth ers ins inc ere or di s sembling u nle s s you hav e

good re a s on for so j u d g in g of them . Now I am per s u a de d

th at you have no g rou n ds to think me dece itful . Your

do ubt s , or rather , your fe ar is but th e effect s ( 8 ) of

natur al timi dity w hich le a ds you to think of oth ers

accor din g to your act u al dis position s . Thi s bein g pre­su ppo s e d , I may reply to your qu e s tion .

I f I tel1 you th at I liv e sec ure and tr a n quil in my fa i th , · could not you s ay th at is wh at you have a lre a dy written

: upon p ap er ? Now , wor d s prono u nce d viva voce accor din g

- 5 -

to me are not sub st antially different from those written , thu s , it appear s th at we can not be more �ecure of the sincerity of a per s on who spe ak s or who wntes · . I f you , S ir think th at you ou g ht not entirely to tru st m what 1 ' . ? p h write , c an yo u fully tr u st m wh at 1 now s ay . er ap s

you may dou bt of this , as of that . Often 1 have spoken an d as s u re d you b y wor d of mouth of my securit y , but you may s till w ant some other secu r ity fo� the �ruth of my wor ds . Well , be thi s as it may , 1 w1ll aga m pro­no unce wh at I have a lrea dy , some ye ars ago , written u pon p aper : "By the Divine Good ne s s 1 live secu rely in my faith , nor have I u pon this secu rity the le a st �ou bt to mole st me . I h av e alw ay s believed , and entirely believed in the p romis es m a de b y our D ivine R edeemer , th at He wo ul d be with his Apo s tle s and their Succe s s or s , till th e con s umma tion of ages , tha t the g ates of hell should nev er prevail a g ainst His Chu rch , that the Holy Spirit should te ach h er all truths . As s oo.n , therefore , as

I h av e hear d the j u d gment of th e establls hed Church of J es u s , I bow my h ea d , cap tiv ate my u n der stan ding . in obed ie nce to Jes u s Chri s t , s ub mitting with all po s s1ble tr an qu illity of sp ir it to the deci s ion of the Church , a s a

new bor n b ab e receives the m ilk from it s Mothers bre a st . 1 1

T h is is wh at I have written ye ars ago , this is wh at 1 s ay at present , and thi s is wh at 1 hope to be able to

s ay till the l a st bre ath of my mortal life . l s this s uf­ficient th ere fore , to re a s s u re you of my sec urity? 1 le ave you t; j u dg e . I only s a y , if this is not s u fficient , behol d the means by which you m ay not only a s s u re you r s elf of m ine , b ut of your own fa�th a lso : Gustate et

( 9 ) . My de ar Sir , m ake the tn al your self ; err:b race the C athol ic reli g ion an d I a s su re you th at y ou w1ll be able tr uly to relis h that sweet tr an quillity which a

C athol ic e xperiences in the b o som of her Mother , the h oly C athol ic Church .

MR .. Yo ur word s , my de ar F ather , h av e very much cle ared my min d . I m ay then h ope for the po s s i­bil ity of one d ay enj oying th at pe ace which you h ave ever experie nce d . I envy your lot . P erh aps ha d. I al so

been bor n among st Catholic s , and brought up m you r principle s , I sho uld enjoy the s ame c alm that you p o s-

- 6 -

se s s . But I have ha d oth er principles . F rom my ten der ye ar s I. h av e hear d pre ached , liberty of tho ug ht , liberty o� s eekmg the truth f �r one self . These an d s imil ar prin­c1�les flattere d my pnde and ind uced me strongly to de­sp1 se tho se c alle d p ap is ts who , it w a s told me bel ieve d blin dly a ll th at the P ope s ai d . This forme d 'a s ort of prej u dice which appe a re d to me in s urmountable . I s aw my self in d arknes s . At a d istance I beheld a cert ain light , yet did not feel s ufficient strength to go fo rth from darkne s s an d a dv ance tow a r ds th at light or glimmer which appe are d to hover over me .

Cou rag e , my de ar S ir : coepit bon1:1m perficiet ( 1 0 ) . By our own stre ngth alone are we mc.a pa�le n�t only of doing g ood , b ut a lso of knowing or of J U dg m g nghtly . We may , however , ac quire both the one an d the other by the h elp of D ivine g race . Let u s , th erefore , ac knowle dge our weaknes s and humbly h av e re­cou r se to ?od for necè s s ary gr ace an d s trength I compr�hend m part the diffic ulties which detain you , but all w11l be overcome by D ivine h elp : qui You o ug ht to - take two steps . Fir s t , des poil yourself of the ?ld man : viz . of the max ims an d prej u d ices h ith erto nouns h e d . Then clothe yo urself with the new man ( 1 1 ) th ?-t is , w ith the max ims an d principles of the C atholi; fa1th . Yo u s houl d fir st le ave the P rotes t ant religion , and then . embr ace the C athol ic . B ec au se I consi der yo ur re­form mg pretexts c au se two gre at evils : they le a ve the f�unta in of living wat er , the Holy C atholic Church , an d d1g to th emsel ves broken cis tern s , est ab lis hin g doctrine s contrary t_o C atholic truth . To rem edy this yo u mu st take �h e oppo s1�e ro a d ( or , retr acing step s ) : go forth fir s t 1 rom the c 1 stern , an d then go to the fou nt ain . Now , to do all thi s is diffic ult and impo s sible without D ivine help , but , by the gr,ace of Go d , all becomes very po s sible an d very e a�y . Upon m y si de , I will not fail to do all in my power m or der to make you leave P rotest antis m an d emb race Catholicity .

Tod ay wh at we h ave s ai d will , I thin k , be s uffici ent . Tomorrow , ple a se Go d , we will commence o ur conference with some or der . I recommend you , meanwhile , to keep

- 7

yourself recollecte d in th e Divine P re s ence , fre quently

imploring that lig ht gr ace from God which is so

nece s sary . You might even rea d some goo d book .

O , yes , I have brou g ht sever al of which

we c an make use in our res e arch , for I fe ar e d not e asily

to find any h ere .

Very well , you hav e been thoughtful ,

for b eing in a new hou se we have had b ut little

wherewith to previde . P ermit me , in the meantime , to

return to my occup ation s .

SECOND

OF CHURCH

OF

T h e se are the first moments in which I

have bee n free from my daily occup ations . I h av e not

lost an in stant in coming to you , so gre atly do you inte­

rest me We can now begin our p ac i fic discussion . Tel1

me u pon w h at point you w ish to commence .

• WILL IAM I was j u st occupied with thi s , for I think

it n ece s s ary to p roceed m etho dic ally in o.r der to g o for­

w ar d with a dv antag e . Now , let u s con s 1 der that which

you in dic ated to m e l a st evenin g . It appea rs to m� dient firs t to treat if it be neces s ary for me to w1th draw

from the Anglican Church . U pon this article I am v ery

undecided and de sire to remain unit e d to that Church

which i s my Moth er , having g enerated me to J esu s Christ

by holy B a pti s m . To tel1 you the truth , it a ppe ar s to me

th at the Roman C atholics are too prou d , too contemptu ou s

of our Anglic a n Church , reb aptizin g ( ) those who h av e

alr e a dy r eceived B ap tism in the b osom of the same . D o

you then believ e that our B apti s m is inv ali d ?

- 8 -

Be not in th e le ast alarm e d , Sir , I entreat you . I think you know well what are the sen ti­ments of th e Cath olic Church upon thi s p articul ar . We l iev e , and even hold it as a n article of F a ith , that Baptis m is always valid whenever it is a dministere d acc or ding to the rig ht form , whoever may be the person that con fers it , thoug h even thi s person might be not only a heretic b ut a Turk or an ath eist . We do not , th erefore , con s i der Ba ptism a dmin istere d by P rotestants to be null for this re a son that they are P rotestant s , o nly we have rea son to fe ar that for some time your Ministers eith er neg lect to a dminister this Sacrament , or do not a dminister it in th e rig ht form . On thi s account th e Vic­ars Ap ostol ic of England a dvise M i s s ioners to reba ptize

, not all , but th ose only bor n since the year 1 773 , for s ince this epoch th ere is r e a son to fe ar that your Min isters do not con fer it properly . Thi s B aptism sub , prov i de d the first w as not valid , may be profit a ble to many without being pre j u dicial to

any . I t appears , th erefore , to me that you have not any rea son to complain concerning s uch a pr actice , to whic h all those so voluntarily conform who in these times embrace th e Catholic communion .

U pon th is point I decl are my s a tis faction . Therefore , I have nothing to s ay upon th e O r di n ation

of the Ang lican Ministers who e mbrace C athol ic­ity . These c an lo s e nothin g and , per ha ps , may g ain much in the suppo sition that our Or dinations w ere not valid . But tel1 me , do you practice th e same with reg ar d to th e Greek schismatic s , the P ru s sians , etc . ?

No , Sir , for there is not the le ast rea son to doubt of the vali dity of th eir B aptism or th eir Ordin at ions .

.. W I LL IAM I now des ir e to know your opm1o n with reg ar d to the state of the Anglican Church . My question ari s e s from a do ubt I feel with reg ard to th e rea l state of the same . I have not light s u fficient to decide cle arly for my self on thi s point . Many of my con freres feel th em-

. selve s , I believ e , in the same position . I have rea d many of th eir writing s , and could never dra w from them

- 9 -

any ide a sufficiently cle ar or precis e , th e more so be­cau se few of ours agree in one op1n1on . A great p art ( and th ese form th e most moderate and , perhap s , th e w is est of our Th eolog ians ) maintain th at we are a br anch of th e true Catholic Church , yet without pretending to be the enti re Ca tholic Chu rch . They a lso forci bly m aintain th e necessity of an Apostolic Succession of Bishops which they sa y , h as been always preserved in our Anglican Church . Yet I do not see th em suffic iently uniform nor p rec ise u pon the leg itimate notion of the C atholic Church

nor upon Apostolic Succession . Not being able , th erefor� , to find s u fficient light from ours I come to you to see 1f by your aid I c an succeed in cle aring my ide as . Tel1 me th en , I entreat you , what do you think of the Anglican Church and of those who compose it ?

FATHER DOMINIC Your question my dear S ir , is one of the most intere stin g . It is , I may say , th e fund amental one of our whole future conference . It embraces much , nor is it pos si ble to answer you in a few w?r d s . I

'. th:re­

fore , think it necessary to divide th1s quest1on mto several parts that I may reply to each w1th cle arness and precision .

.. W I LL I AM Well , divide th e question as you ple ase . T el1 m e , in the first pl ace , do you believe our Anglican Church to be re ally a branch of th e Catholic Church ?

FATHER DOMINIC W ith re g ar d to this , Sir , far as I am from wishing to wound th e feeling s of anyone , yet I can­not answer in the affirma tive this your first q uestion . I cannot acknowle dge th e Anglic an Church as a part of the C athol ic Church . Such an opinion would be in direct opposition to th e idea we entertain of th e tr ue unity . of the Chu rch . The i dea of the unity of the Church carnes with it an insepar a ble idea of unity of F aith : Unus Deus , una fides , unum baptisma ( 1 3 ) . The pretensions of your Theologians can have no other foundation tha n th e preten ded dis tinction between the fun damental or non­fund amental article s , upon which distinction Jariu s , th e Cal van ist , ( 1 4 ) dreamt of a cert a in unity w hich , accor d­in g to him , might be found among st vario:1 s bodies _or societies disunited among st them sel ves and m contra d1c-

- 10 -

tion and enmity , one of which anathema tizes and over­throws th e other s . You see , th erefore , th e abs ur dity of such an op1n1on . Could it ever be true , we might say , th en th e Church of J es us Christ is founded upon a worse con dition than th e reg ion of darkne s s , viz , of Hell , since J es u s Chri st tells us th a t this infern al reg ion preserves its union ? Si satanas adversus seipsum divisus est 9 quamodo sta bit regnum ejus ( Matt : 1 2 : 26 ) ( 1 5 ) . However , th is p reten de d distinction of the fun damental and of the non-fundamental article s remains , I think , fully con fute d in my s e con d letter to A .

I n or der , th erefore , th a t your Theologians may be a ble to as sert w ith foun da tion that th eir Church is a br anch of th e Catholic Church , th ey must show th at they hold th e same fa ith with oth er branches . B ut wh ere can those gentlemen show me anoth er branch which professes all th e articles of th eir fa ith ? We , in dee d , fin d Church es that profess th e three creeds togeth er with them , but we find not one which a dmits th eir thirty-nine articles altogeth er , which woul d be quite neces s ary to demonstrate th e iden­tity of fa ith in or der to form that unity nece s s ary for the Church . As th e Church cannot be compose d of p artie s heterog eneal among st themselves , it follows by leg itimate consequence th at your Church cannot be a branch of th e entire C atholic Church . We mu st s ay that she is eith er th e whole Catholic Church or that she is not even a br anch . Non scindamus eam , sed sortiamur de illa cujus sit , ( 1 6 ) s ai d the sol diers concerning th e seamle s s g ar­ment of J esu s . Let u s , th erefore , en deavour to discover if the Anglic a n Church established by law is th e whole Cathol ic Church .

MR . WILL IAM Oh , th is we do not pretend !

FATHER DOMINIC Then , my dear S ir , the consequ ence follows of itsel f . There fore ; the Anglic an Church is not a br anch of th e true C atholic Church .

.. WI LLIAM Your answer is cle ar and sufficiently precis e . It ple a ses me to hear any one s peak with clear­nes s and precision . Still oth er diffic ulties rema in whic h I shall reserve for th e subsequent days , in or der not to

- 1 1 -

lose now the tren d of my proposition with reg ar d to

knowin g which may be your conceptions of our Chur�h .

T el1 me then now , in the secon d pl ace , wh at.

do?

you th1nk

of the bo a sting we make of Apostolic Succes s 10n : We.

l�ok

u pon th is Apostol ic Succes sion as a mark �h1ch d1stm­

guis h es us from all other P rotest ant commun1ons , who are

not in the le a st j e a lou s of the same .

FATHER DOMINIC From the prece ding answer , Sir , you

may e a sily ar gue wh at ou ght to be my �e ply to y�ur

pre sent question . Thi s n ame of �pos�ohc Success1on

inclu des m any consi der a tions . The flrst 1s that we mu st

demonstr ate who are our ancestor s ascend ing . up .

to th e

Apostles . S econ d , th at we m ay be ab le to JU Stlfy ou r

faith by showing th at we profess wh at the Apo�tle s

taught . T h ir d , th at we do preserve ent ire the depos1t ?f

th at fa ith which th e Apostle s announce d . Fourth , that m

consequence no one c an , with foun d ation , . prove .th at we

ever dep ar te d in th e le ast point from th eir doctnne , nor

th at we ever denied anything th at they tau ght . Th ese

four thin g s ta ken alto gether show in w� at we may glory

of Ap o stol ic Succession . Therefore , the h rst or the seco� d

con dition woul d not suffice ; it deman d s th em all . For , m

c a se it suffice d to go up to the Apostles in or der . to

in dic ate whence we receive d th e knowle d ge of Jesus Chnst

an d of H is Gospel an d from whom we an d our F ath ers

receive d Ba ptism , ever y here tic woul d _be able to boa st of

Apostol ic Succes s ion s ince , by a.scen d1ng to the source ,

all might s ay : we receive d Ba pt1sm an d the knowle d ge of

the Gospel from our pr e dece ssors , an d our pre dece s sor s from some one of th e Apostle s . Nor woul d it suffice to be

ab le to sa y : this art icle of F a ith which I. �rofess wa s

ta ught by th e Apos tle s , for , if th at were suff1c 1ent , ever y h eret ic ( b ec au se they a ll ret ain at le a st one of the

article s of faith ) m ig ht boa st of Apostolic Succes s io? and

s ay : I bel ieve th e I nc ar nation of the W�r d , an d t�1s w a s ta ught by th e Apostles . Therefore , I enJ oy Apostol lc �uc­ces s ion , though I do not believe many other artlcles cont a ine d in th e symbol s of fa ith .

I n or der to be ab le w ith truth to g lory in Apostol ic Succes s ion , it is necess ar y to show th at noth\n g h as been change d a mong u s , nothing taken away , nothmg a d de d to

- 12 -

th at s acred depos it of fa ith which the Apost les co nsigne d to th e Catholìc Church . Now tel1 me , Sir , c an the Ang li­can Chu rch show a ll this ? Can she demonstr ate th at the Apostle s ta ught all her thirty-nine Articles , and never taught anything contr ary to the s ame? Whenever they succee d in proving all this I will s ay th a t the Anglic a n Chu rch is not only a br anch of th e true Chu rch , b ut th at she is th e only true Catholic Church , and no oth er Chu �ch can be t�u� unless unite d to h er an d entirely subJect to her dec1s1on , th at without her p a le th ere is no s al va tio n , an d th at consequently a ll who woul d be save d must be unite d to her , renouncing every other union ; and I who cert ainly de s ire my etern al s a lvation , wo ul d imm e di ately consi der it my duty to emb race th e faith of the th irty-nine Articles .

MR .. Oh ! with reg ar d to thi s , p ra y tel1 me do you th ink th at any member of the Ang lica n Chu rch may be s av e d , or th at any are s ave d wh o h av e die d in th e bosom of the same sin ce the fa tal sep a r a tion of the sixteenth century ? This is an artic le of hig h importa nce , as you may conceive .

FATHER DOMINIC You hav e reason , my de ar . S ir , to s ay th at th is question is high ly important , a n d I have , I think , as much re a son to as s ure you tha t it is as delic ate as it is important , an d one u pon which a pe rson may be gro s sly deceive d . Here , therefore , pe rha p s more than in any oth er m a tter , it is neces s ary to be cle ar , or der ly and preci se . In or der well to expl ain it we must first e st ab l ish some tru ths which reg ar d it , th ence a scen d in succession to th e desire d decision .

Suppo se , then , in the first pl ace th at no one can be s ave d with out Divine gr ace , no one c an att a in He aven who may be d�p rive d of this g ift which ren ders us the friend s of Go d and th e heir s of His King dom of glory .

· Secon d , suppose this g r ace neces s ary actu a lly to acqu ire eternal s al vation which c annot be recei ve d but in th e ?osom of th e true Chu rch ; thir d , an d th at in consequence 1t woul d be necess ary to enter the tr ue Chu rch in or der th ere to receive the g ift of g r ace a n d acqu ire ete rn a l s al vation . This necessity of entering into th e true Churth

- 1 3 -

is acknowle dge d by you equ ally with u s . You may , with

re g ard to this , consult the works of your own Th eologian

p almer on the Church ( vol . the 1st , page 1 3 and follow­

ing ) . Fourth , s uppose that a ll the . infa nts validly

b aptize d receive th e g ift of grace w.h1ch ren der� them

p artakers of the D ivine n ature and h eirs of the Kmg dom

of Heaven , what ever may be the n ature , and the oth er

qualities of the same g r ace of w hich we will not now

disp ute . I , there fore , conclu de tha t every infant whic h

rece ives B ap tism vali dly becomes , in that act , a me mber

not of th e fals e , b ut of the true Church founded by Jesus

Chr ist .

P ar don me if I interrupt you . I love pre­

c i s ion in a ll t hing s and I do not like hurry . I wish to

meas ure well every ste p in or der not to take a fals e one .

Tel1 m e , th erefore , how one who is not a member of the

true Churc h may agg re g at e to tha t Church a chil d whom

h e B ap tizes ?

I like your method of proceedin g , nor

will it ever disple a se me to be interrupted whenever the

interruption may serve to cle ar the truth . I am re a dy

now to sa t is fy your propose d diffic ult y . I t is not , cer­

tainly , the Minister con ferring B aptism that g ive� grace

or that u n ites w ith the Mystic al B ody of J esu s Chnst , but

it is God him sel f , the Author of thi s h appy union and of

th is most precious g ift of grace . God makes u se of the

Minister , though h e may be goo d or b a d , as the mere

instrument of h is holy and D i vine d e si g n s , so that it is

not the s anctìty of the Minister tha t s anctifie s the

s acrament , nor yet does h is unworthines s render it u se­

les s or deprive it of its effects . There is no rea son f�r

me to prove this becau se I k now that you acknowledge 1t

as tr ue , togeth er with u s , as it a ppears from the 26th

article of the Ang l ican Churc h . Th en , what is done by a

h ere tic or infidel Min ister is done equ a lly , answers the

same end as did the two servants of R achel a n d Lia .

They bore children , b ut not for th emsel ves . They bore

them for the ir mistre s ses . An h eretical Minist er g enerates

spiritual children b ut not , therefore , to heres y but to the

true Chu rch of J esus Chr ist . These childr en , th en ,

g ener ate d to J es u s Christ by thi s means , enter into the

- 14 -

tr ue society of th e Faithful . be come li ving mem bers of the J es us Christ is th e Hea d .

They , from tha t moment , My stic al B ody of w hich

Thi s is well , but how can it be combine d w ith w h at w as define d at the Cou ncil of Trent , req u iring of th e Minister who confers Baptis m the intention of doing wha t the Chu rc h does ?

This combine s perfectly , bec au se it is not rep ug n ant in the lea st that a h eret ic , or even a n in­fidel , m ay hav e thi s intent ion of doing th a t which is done in the Chu rch of J esus Christ , wh atever it may be . An here tical Minister , it is true , will n atura lly hav e th e intention to do th at w h ich his Church doe s , b ut this is yet a materi al error . For ex ample , he in substance pre­ten ds to do th at which the true Church does , which h e belie ves to b e h i s own , b u t i n re a lity is not . error , th erefore , does not ren der his intention invalid . There-fore , th e child is v alidly B aptize d , it receives grace and it is m a de a member of the true Church .

Let u s now follow the trend of our discourse . T his agree d u pon , s uppose , in the fifth place , no one can be turne d out or exclude d from the true Church without his own prev iou s fault . I t is evi dently repug n ant to re ason that anyone co ul d inc ur so gre at a punishment without a seri­ou s fault of his own . And take notice that though every grievou s fa ult is sufficient to lo se grace , yet it is not always s u fficient to lose faith nor consequ ently to be exclu de d from th e Church . Thi s re quire s an obstin ate sin against the Chu rch , nor would a ny error be sufficient . You may err , s ay s St . Austin , and not be a heretic . A formal h eresy supposes wilful ob stinac y . I f this be not the case it may , in dee d , be a materìal error , but not heresy . T h is inconte s table truth serves as a g u i de to j u dge wheth er · th e members of a ny g iven soc iety may or may not be sav e d

But let u s return t o our point . Suppos e , then , a member of your Anglican Church to have b een validly baptize d .

· Thi s grant e d , it is certain that ì f h e die s before th e use of rea son or before he h as comm ìtted any grievou s f a ult

- 15 -

h e is sa ve d b ec au se h e is a member of th e tru e Chu rch , h e has receiv e d th e grace which ren der s him heir to th e

Celes tial K ing dom ; he had ne v er lost t�is g race , b�cau se

we s uppo s e him ne v er to hav e fall en 1nto any g n e v ou s

sin , th erefore , h e is s ave d . From this you see how fal se

is th e opinion which some entertain of us Catholic s , who , th ey s ay , condemn to Hell whoe v er does . no� profe s se dly acknow le d g e th e Prim acy of th e Pope . Th1s 1s one of th e

gros s e st c a lumnies . Hence , it m ay be noticed h ere that we

are far from envyin g your ze al to propagate th e knowl­e dg e of th e Gospel among st b arbarou s nay ons . . May it ple as e He av en th at your Minist er s s uccee d m v ahdly b ap ­tizing all th e infidels . How m any millions . o f souls wou�d thu s be g aine d w ere it only all th e ch1l dren who d1e

before th ey have committed any s eriou s fault , for th ey woul d be s av e d .

MR . Very well as to th e chil dren , but wh at do you think of the a dults ? 1t is nec e s s ary for th ese not only to hav e th e habitual faith receiv e d in Bapti sm , but al so actu a 1 . B e s ide s , it is nece s s ary that they should profe s s th e tr u e faith . Now , but one faith only can be

tru e , as you s aid a bov e , th erefore , w hòev er d�es not profe s s thi s faith c annot obtain his eternal s al vat1on?

FATHER DOMINIC Most certainly the a dults encou nt er diffic ultie s which infants hav e not to fight again st . T hese

diffic ultie s , howe v er , are not of such a nature as to obl ig e u s to belie v e that all adults who do not liv e in C atholic society are damne d . It is true that , for s alv a""'"

tion , union not only with th e hea d of th e Church is

nece s s ary b ut al so w i th the body th ereof . Th erefore , we

m u st nece s s arily di stinguish two specie s of union . T he

fir st , inte rnal , which res ults from the same faith , th e

s am e hope , and th e s am e charity . The oth er , extern al , which cons is ts in the same profe s sion of faith , in the u se

of th e s am e s acr a ment s , in subj ection to and depen danc e

on th e same P a stors . Now , I s ay that in or der to obtain s al vation th e fir st union is absolutely nece s s ary , but not th e same w ith re g ar d to the s econd , wh e never , by the ef­fect s of invincible ignor ance , th e tru e Church which J e s u s

Chr ist e st ablish e d cannot be known . Th erefore , in such a c as e , eter n al s alv ation may be obtaine d als o by a dul ts ,

- 1 6 -

sep arate d certa inly from th e external , but not from an inte rnal u nion with th e true Chu rch .

What ! hav e tr u e faith out of th e tr u e Chu rch ?

FATHER DOMINIC I h av e alre a dy tol d you that th ese may be in the true Church by me ans of internal u nion with it .

.. WILL IAM Yet th ey may not belie v e every article of the true fa ith , which it appe ars is nece s s ary for s al­vation ?

FATHER DOMINIC Th ey may not belie v e th em all explic­itly , yet may b elieve them all implicitly . I hope you un­der stan d me . Ne v erth ele s s , I s hould like to s pe ak a little more cle ar ly . I t i s , th erefore , nece s s ary for an a d ult to belie v e all th at Go d has de s igne d to re v e al . Howe v er , it is not nece s s ary to know all that God h as reveal e d , nor to form upon eac h article an expre s s act of faith . Still , it . is nece s s ary to know and to believe explicitly some t�mg s . But what are th es e ? I t is not so e as y to deter­mme . Generally , howe v er , it ìs e steeme d s u ffic ient for th e faithful in common , or at le a st for those who on account of th e ir rank or profe s s ion are not oblig e d to the stu dv of Divine thin g s , to know and to belie v e explicitly tha\ which is containe d in the Apostles ' Cree d . With re g ar d to ot� er truth s of faith which God has re v eale d , an implicit fa 1th may be s u ffìcient for the common p eople if this act implie s a belief in all that God has re v e ale d and th at the C atholic Chu rch propo ses to u s as an article of Faith .

From thi s brief ide a you may see tha t it is not im­pos s i b le for a !Ilan born and brou ght up out of the bosom of th e Catholic Church , nàm ely among st P rote stants , to know and to believe explic itly as much as is neces s ary to th e common faithful for etern al s alvation . He know s th e Cree d , he b elie v e s it . We su ppose him re a dy to belie v e

. a�l th at God has re v e ale d when suffici ently propos e d to h1m as reve ale d . He then believes explicitly what is nece s s ary to be believe d by all in such a s itu ation . He

- 1 7 -

believes als o implicitly all other truths reveale d by God . I f h e , th erefore , lives conformable to the j u st lights of re �son and . of t�e faith whic h he pos sesses , he may cer­tamly obt�m h1s e�ernal salvation , bec au se he is really a n.d effectively umte d by th e spiritual bands ( 1 7 ) of fa 1th , hope and ch arity not only to God , but a lso to the true Chur�h into which he was gene r ate d by means of Holy B �ptlsm , and from which we s u ppose him nev er to h av e w1t h drawn throug h his own faul t , although he doe s not possess the exterior an d visible ties which those have who are in th e bos om of th e true Catholic Church . We may also s uppose th is man to retain and possess many error s con!r ary to th e true faith . I t m ay be that he is not only 1 gnorant of the true C atholic Church but that he .dete s�s . it bec au se it h as bee n represente d to him as a n_ti-chnstian and idol atrou s . All th is may be yet a ll th 1s does not nece s sarily imply that he is a here tic . We may s u pp ose th at he is not pertinacious and only pro­f�s se s some errors bec a u se these been rep resente d to h1m as tru ths of faith , and detesting some C atholic truths bec au se th ey h av e been represente d to him a s dam n able errors . T ake natie� , however , th at I alway s suppose in s uch a m an good fa1th and invincible igndr ance .

Hence , , you may perceive that though we C atholics alto geth er s ay that out of the true Church th ere is no sal v�tion , �et we are far , very far from condem ning a ny­one �n p articul ar , or in pronouncing that s uch or such a one 1s out of the way of s alvation , that s uch a one die d a P rotestant and is d am ne d . You , perhap s , think that we do not look u pon a P rotestant otherwise than as an enemy of . God and a son of per dition . But thi s is not tru e . Wh1l st we return thanks to God for being born in the bosom of the Catholic Churc h , we neither esteem ourselves se�u re of our e ternal sal vation , u nles s we per sev ere fa1thful to God , nor des p air of the s alvation of those who do not enj oy a s imil ar destiny . We s hould a l w ay s fear and hope both for oursel ves and others , especia lly for tho�e who are separated from u s , not indeed by their own cho1ce , but who fin d themsel ves , at le ast exteriorly , sepa r ated by the faul ts of their forefath ers .

- 18 -

F rom this you may see how unfoun ded are the accu s ations of pri de and cruel ty made against u s , even by those who p rofe ss to be the most moderate among st P rote stants . For if th ere are any Theolog ians among st you moderate to­w ards u s , we should certainly e steem as s uch the Oxford gentle men who h ave endea voure d to circul ate the " T r acts for the T im es . " Remark , however , what these g entlemen s ay on th e subject before us in tr act 7 1 , p ag e 1 2 : "The Church of Rom e , we k now , retains the practice of praying for th e de a d . I t will be n at ur al for a convert from P rot­estantism first of a ll to turn h is thoug h ts tow ards those dearest rel ations , say his p arent s who h ave live d and die d in involuntary i gnorance of C atholicis m . He is not allowed to do so . He can only pray for th e · souls in P urga tor y . None have the privilege of being in P ur g a tory but s uch as h ave die d in th e communion of th e Roman Chu rch . " I do not think , e tc . --

I do not think a deeper c alumny could h av e been invente d , as you may j u dge by what h as been l aid before you . Now , I s ay , if th ese gentle men who are so le arned and p rofe ss so much moderation towards u s , ( even so as to incu r th e odi um of other P rotes t ants , and to be taunted as pap i st m a d ) loa d u s with s uch bl ack calumnie s , what ought we to think of those who are nei­ther so learned nor so moderate? C an you blin dly confide in all th eir as sertions and believe of u s all th at is reported by p er sons so crammed with prej u dice s ? Ah ! my dear , th e Catholic Church c an only be h at e d by those who do not know h er . She cannot be k nown without b eing lov e d . B ut , in arder to know her you must not con s i der h er such as she is p ictured and disfig ured by h er e ne­mie s , b ut , re a lly , s uch as she is represente d by her true champ ions .

You s peak rea sonably , my de ar F ath er . To tel1 you the tru th , I may s ay that I am ench ante d with your deta ils a nd explication of th e pre sent s ubj ect . I never before thought a Roman C atholic could entertain similar sentiment s , so re asonable and so full of charity tow ard everyone . U ntil now I always believe d as true ex actly wh at was s ai d in th e above cit e d number of the "Tracts for the T im es . 1 1 Now , however , I feel qu ite

- 19 -

reviv e d . But whence ari ses in our Th eologians an op1n1on so contrary to th at which you h ave j u st describe d ? P erhaps oth er C atholics neith er speak nor think as you do upon thi s point , since I am sure that there is nothing blameworthy in your explication . And if thing s were explained thu s by other Catholic s , it appears impos sible th at our Theologians could speak and write so mali­ciou sly .

FATHER DOMINIC Do not think , Sir , that what I h ave ex plained is a priv ate opinion of mine . No , it is common to all Catholic Theolog ians . I t was solemnly embrace d by the fac ulty of P ar is in i ts censure u pon Emile Rou s seau . 1 t is to be found in almost all books that tre at of con­troversy between us and P rotestants , and so clearly that to think th e contr ary a person mu st be quite in th e dark as to what we bel ieve and te ach upon this point .

Then you think tha t a heretic may be save d ?

FATHER DOMINIC That is not what I think , I only think that a man may be save d whose mind r·emains in error without any fa ul t of hi s own , which can never be sai d of one who is really , as our Th eolog ians term it , a formal heretic . "Errare potero , hereticus non vero ," I repea t with St . Augu stine . Now this does not prevent me from thinking and believing that many , and perhaps innumer­able p ersons , living among st heretics and even profes sing error , yet without any fault of their s , may be sav e d when they believe , a t least , the thing s most e s sential to Christi a nity and live conform able to the dictates of j u st reason and the holy l aw of God . Th erefore , I think that among st th e Nestorians , Eutic hians , Greek Schisma tics and P rotestants th ere have b een , and are still , living persons suffic iently piou s and who are in th e way of etern al sal­vation . I t a ll rests , however , in seeing if in those we fin d invincible ignor ance or , at le ast , no serious culp a­b ility , and th at they live as g ood Christians . Now this with cert a inty can be known but by Go d only . To Go d alone then we leave it to decide which and how m any of such as th ese are in th e way of s al vation .

- 20 -

1 t must be diffic ult , however , to find g ood fa ith and inc ulpable ig nor ance among st those who hav e th e means of knowing th e Catholic faith , who live among st C atholics or , at le ast , wh ere C atholics are fre­quently spoken of ; much more difficult still for person s of learning , for the Clergy and M in isters , etc .

DOMINIC I do not see the thing so diffic ult as it may appear at the first sight . 1 f these have no doubts concerning th eir own faith , if the thoug ht never rec urs to th eir mind that they are obliged to seek for more than th ey think th ey pos se s s , we may conclu de that in such a c ase th ey cannot be acc u sed of c ulpable neg lig ence . I t is true th a t they hear Catholic s spoken of , but they hear of them as of i dol aters , anti-christians , etc . etc . They woul d think th emsel ves guilty of a grievous sin merely to think of e mbracing C atholicity . 1 t is true that among st scientific persons , and still more so among st Ministers , it is more diffic ult to find g ood fa ith than in others , yet I do not th ink it a bsolu tely impos si ble even among st these . Nor would I con demn you as gu ilty of any serious fault for having d�ferre d so long to be instructe d yourself in the C atholic fa ith .

MR .. WI LLI AM I hope I h ave not committe d a serious fault for , to tel1 you the truth , I ha d no i dea of the Catholic religion . An d what is more , I knew no more tha n what is contained i n our book o f t h e homilies , and es pe­cially that upon th e danger of idolatry . I pitie d th e poor Catholics in their blin dne s s , as I thought , and pr aye d fre quently to Go d for th eir convers ion . But perhaps some human moti ve may ha ve been interiorize d in my proceed­in g s . I may hope , but I. h av e also reason to fe ar .

FATHER DOMINIC 1 t is true that in the contr ast th ere is something to fear , but perhaps still more to hope ; not only for you , b ut for others also in your s ituation .

MR .. W I LL IAM Until now our discu ssion has been but in a general way , th at is , of those who live sep arated from

. the Catholic Church . At pre sent I des ire to hear your sentiments with re g ar d to the Anglican Church in p artic­ul ar . What do you think of her ?

- 21 -

FATHER I will tel1 you willingly , but it is now l ate . We mu st close the present conference . Tomorrow , please God , we will tre at of the Ang lic a n Church in

p articul ar .

SAME

Without losin g time , let us return to our research es . What do you think of the Anglican Church in

particul ar and of those of whom she is composed ? I t a ppears that you ha ve a sincere reg ard for E ngl a n d . Therefore , I am persua de d that you will not cen sure too severely those who compose the chief p art , I may s ay , of the N ation but on the contr ary that you will be incline d

to look with a favourable eye upon our English Church .

How great so ever my ·reg ar d for Eng­land may be , though by n ature a n d by choice I may be incline d to excuse rather tha n to accuse my neighbour , yet I am persu a de d that you do n�t expect from . me a n

apology for the preten de d reform wh1ch w as ma de m Eng­l a nd in the sixtee nth century . I have a great reg ar d for this Country , yet I have a gre ater reg ard for truth ; I love to excuse , but not to fl atter my neighbour . I love peace , but this love I hope will never l� a d me. to re­nounce the fa ith . Charity is good , but th1s chanty must be foun de d on faith Now , faith te aches me tha t the true Church ca n be but one , a n d as I am intimately persua de d

th at the Catholic Church is true , you will easily com­prehen d that I cannot a dmit as true th at Church which profes ses dogmas contrary to this Catholic Church . Now , your Church does th is . Therefore , she cannot be the whole true Church nor a leg itimate bra nch thereof .

Yet , consider , I entreat you , the Anglica n

Church retains the three Creeds and she retain s the

- 22

Ecclesia stic al hierarchy . She retains much , a nd , I may sa y , almost a ll that your Church hol ds .

True , my dear Sir , the Anglic a n

Chu rch , at her sep aration from the Mother Church , took much with her , an d , as you sa y , she took almost a ll , yet not quite all ; and at her sep aration all her vigour to preserve th at much which she ha d taken with her . With reg ard to what she left , we will spe ak a nother time at our convenie nce . At present it will be sufficient for me to show the truth of which I a d ded , n amely that she lost a ll her strength to preserve th at which she took with her . Havin g denie d the infallibìlity of the Church and of the General Councils , she left, with this , the door wi de open to all the th ieves who wished to rob her of all she had taken . An d what is more deplorable , she cut off all means of convenin g to ju dgment those thieves , although recog nized as such . What do I me a n by this ? I think you u ndersta n d me . Denying the infa llibility of the Chu rch cut off every leg itimate tribun al on e arth . They ma de a general appea l to Scripture , but Scripture is a

Book which does not listen to accusations nor pronou nce sentence agafost the accused ; so that by denying the infallib le authority of the Church , the preten ded reform­ers exposed themsel ves to an evi dent risk of losing the Scripture itself , as you may ju dge from what I have writte n of th e s ame in my secon d letter to Alito fil as ( = Lettere Celimontane ) .

You have , then , I perceive , a very b a d

i dea o f the Ang lican reformation . Yet i t does not appear th at our re formers took such bol d steps as did those who preten ded to reform the Churches of Germa ny , Switzerl a n d

and Fra nce . Ours were , it appe ars to me , more moder ate . How is it th at the Ang lican Church never reached those excesses which . have disgrace d the Church of Pru ssi a to mere ration a l ism?

FATHER True , the reformers of England were more mo der ate than those of Germa ny , Zurich and Geneva . Still , there were some things in which they agree d with them , a n d others in which they differe d . All the preten d-

- 23 -

e d reformers agree d in leaving the Church and in ab an­doning the Bark of P eter .

They differe d , however , in this , that where the other re­form ers retaine d no hold that might reconduct them to the Vessel th ey had left , those of England retained , on going forth from the B ark , an old board to lean against amidst the w aves of th e oce an , and a little cor dage to hold by whenever they wished to return to the Vessel . This cor d­age was th e Episcopal ordin ation , or the Ecclesiastical hierarchy w hich w as retaine d , at least , as to what re­g ar ded the extern al form , for it is not at present my intention to j u dge wheth er your bishops are or are not v alidly ord ained By means of this cor dage the most moderate of your Theologians , though not qu ite coherent with th e reformed princi ples , seek to attach themsel v es to the Church , to the Fathers , to T radition and to Apostol ic s uccession . An d this , it c annot be denie d , is a gra n d hold for m any whereby not to abandon themselves to greater excesses to which too many h av e aba n done d them­sel ves in Germany . Yet , alas ! these poor seduced reform­ers , seduced , I say , not so much by their own ill will as by the false politics and influence of strangers , did not sufficiently perceive the step they were taking in blin dly sub j ecting themsel ves to the King ' s power and in decl aring that they woul d not meet in Council without the orders of the Sovereig n . My God , what a loss ! Behold them now incapable of making their voices heard by the people so as to have any power over the minds of the sub j ects .

True , tru e ; what you s ay is but too true . Oh what a step was this ! They threw off the authority of the Pope , rej ected the w aters of Siloe which flow in si­lence and peace , and now they are immerse d in the im­petuous torrent of secular power which spares nothing . They feared the dew , and are now under the snow . Tru e in deed this was a great loss ! This was a great false step ! But what is done is done and we see no prompt remedy . Our org anization may call its el f pol itìcal but not e vang elical , b ecau se we have depriv e d ourselves of that l iberty which our D ivine Re deemer had g iven u s , and sub j ected our selves to that slavery from which Christus

- 24 -

nos ( 18 ) . We must have more reg ard for the will of our Sovereig n than for that of God in our con duct . Oh ! this is truly lamentable , but I see no escape from or remedy to our evils .

dear friend , entertain not the least doubt sunt , sunt I have great hopes . God will find that rem edy which we cannot . The remedy , however , will be in conformity to his , and not to our own ide as . Let us then hope , place our confidence in God and do that which is in our power . But we will return to the point from which we have s traye d . The plank which your reformers retaine d on aba n doning the Bark of Peter was the 39 Articles and the Book of Common Prayer .

A rotten plank , a broken plank , a plank half putr i d it is true , but yet a plank which has serv e d you for some support , where by you remained not totally immersed in the infernal storm . So that , to say it in a few words , you h av e not withdr awn from u s so much as others in-. ' ten dmg less than oth er P rotestants , yet not less than a ll those who hav e sep arated from u s in more ancient times ; becau se unquestionably the Oriental Church , a lthough separate d from the Western , has retained almost all , except unity or leg itimate subor dination of P astors to the first P astor of the Church . I f there be any other article of division it consists more in the dispute of words than in anything of m atter , as I was assure d a few years ago by a learned man of the Greek Churc h who sugg ested to me that when they could succeed in taking away half of that futile etiquette which subsisted between the Greeks and the L atins , all woul d be at an end . Setting , how­ever , the Orientals aside , certainly among st the W esterns who , in the sixteenth age , so disgracefully sep arated from u s , you �ith drew less than the others .

The L utherans , it is true , in some thing s do not app e ar so far from us as to what reg ards the Holy Eucharist , but first we may say , it is not sufficiently m anif est that you h ave renounc e d the dogma of the real presence , whatever might be the intention ( though certainly not good ) of those who drew up the 39 Article s . In the second

- 25 -

pl ace , what doe s it profit th e Luth er ans to h av e . reta�ne d

th is point whilst they have left ev ery threa d that m1ght

hol d to recon duct th em to th e V es s el th ey hav e aban­

done d? Th erefor e , though England h as ce a se d to be C atho­

lic , yet sh e has ever pr e s e rve d in h er bosom , i! not th e

pl ant , at le a st a s eed of C a tholicity ; and th1s , I b e­

lie ve , to be one of th e re asons for which all those who

a re r e ally C athol ic have always p r e serve d a _sort of

pr e diliction ( 20 ) , I m ay s ay , towar d s England m.

pre­

ference to all oth er P rote stant Countr ies . But this 1s not

th e only one . There ar e oth ers which I should like to

show you if you w ish it .

.. W I LL I AM I shall be glad to know th em for I h av e

b een con s i de ring th is some tim e , what could be the r e a son

why Roman Catholic s showe d so much anxiety for th e �on­

v er s ion of Englan d in p refere nce to so m any oth e� nat1ons

sep ar ate d also from th eir communion ? There 1s . not a

p rovince , c ity or villag e , pe rh aps not ev en a fam1ly am­

ongst th e Roman Catholic s in which pr aye r s ar e n�t of­

fere d for the conv e r sion of Engl a n d , yet the same 1s not

done , at le ast not with so much unanimity , for the con­

v er s ion of Holl an d , Ru s sia , Sw itzerl an d , etc . W hat can b e

th e mot i v e of so much pre fere nce ?

FATHER DOMINIC I am r ea dy , as far a s I am able , to

tel1 you all that I know on th e su?j ect , . thoug h r . do not

p ret en d to g iv e it as an only an d 1ndub1table mot1v e , for

th e spir it of pr aye r proce e din g from Go d we �o�t als . can­

not , w ith any ab solute certainty , know th� D 1v me mt.en­

tions . Ne verthele s s , I will s ay what I thmk . The flr st

motive may b e , a s I have m entione d abov e , b ec au se th e

English ar e not so far re move d from us as th e oth er s .

The s econd may be this , th at the poor English ( I me an

th e chie f p art of th e n ation ) h a d no p art , we ma� s ay ,

in th is fatal sep ar ation an d , if th ey consent e d , 1t w �s

mor e th e eff ects of we akne s s than ill will . T el1 me , m

fact , w h at p a rt had the English nation in the schism of

Henr y th e eig ht ? ( 21 ) None whate ver . Ev eryone knows that

th e sole motiv e of th is schism was the P ope ' s r efu s al to

decl ar e th e pr e te nde d null ity of Henry ' s m arr iag e wi�h

C athar ine . Now , had the English nation any s h are m

thi s ? I t was of little cons e quence to th e n ation wheth er

- 26 -

Anne Boleyn or Cathar ine was Qu een . At He nr y ' s de ath thing s could have b een qu ickly conclu de d ha d they been tr e ate d with th e English alone . The schism was continue d and even r e double d by the p en , the ton gue and th e

bayone t of a str ang er , as Cobbett cle a rly shows in his history of th e p ret en de d reform . If Cranm er ha d not foun d this s upport he woul d soon hav e had to suffe r th e con­fu s ion of re ma1nmg alone an d would e asily have

re� ante d , as he afte rwar ds did during Mary ' s short r e1g n . . He w as th en supporte d by the Ge rman b ayonet , and by th1 s m�ans he tr iumph e d over th e I nfant Kin g and over a natlon natur ally docile .

I f Mar y h a d take n mor e j u st me as ur es th e in flicte d wound would soon have b een entir ely he ale d . She only en­de_a voure d to cic atr ize , yet with too much violence . Still , the wound would not have r eop ene d ha d the P ope

ackn�wle dg e d Elizab eth as le g itimate Sovereig n . But , by the mscrutable decr e es of God this did not happ en . Eng­land was th en at a te rr ible crisis , obl ig e d to choos e ei­th er _ the loss o! h er libe rty and national rank by b�comm g a province subj ect to F r ance - her pe r pe tual nval - or to se p ar ate from the communion of the Chu rch . Tempor al intere sts , it is tr u e , prevaile d over th e ete rn al . I do not deny it , nor do I pret en d to j u s tify h er

con duct , I only . inte nd to excu se her a little , attr ib uting such a r e solut1on to weakne ss and not to a ma liciou s will . That herois � which pr e fers faith to in de pen de nce , is not very common m th e worl d . Engl an d ha d it not . Sh e

was we ak , but not entir ely pe r verte d . I f she could hav e

pre ser ve d h er faith and in de pe ndence she would have

done so . Not be ing a ble to pre s e rve both th e one and th e

�th er she took hold of the s econ d , which , in sub stance , 1s hel d as nothing by th e Gospel , ye t not so by a political worl d .

Th e th ir d motiv e of our inte r e st for England is th e

g ene ros ity of this nation in harbou ring , w ith such surpr i sing cha rity , so many Confessor s of th e faith who , �ore cou rag eou s than the Eng lish Eccle s iastics du ring th e

tu1: e of He nr y and Elizab eth , g ene rously pre ferr e d th eir

fa1th and obe die nce to the Vic ar of J e sus Chr ist b efore

all te mpor al a dv antag es and even life it s elf . The char ity

- 27 -

extended to nine thousand French prie sts , with more than

frate rnal love in their critical circum stances , spoke more

effic aciou sly th an th e noble Spencer to the feeling he art

of C atholic Fr ance . How , indee d , can C atholic Fr ance be

unmin d ful of that de ar England who receiv e d into her

bosom the flowers of the C atholic Church of Fr ance ? U n der

th ese circumst ance s , England forg ot that she was th e

rival of F r ance . The fa ith and courage of the French

exile s emul ate d th e charity and generosity of English

hosp itality . T h is w as an emul ation more noble , more pure

th an was ever before witne s s e d between England and

Fr ance . Yes , the emigration of the French clergy was a

mis sion une x ample d in th e ann als of faith . A mis s ion so

s triking could not fail to c arry with it abund ant fruits

of benediction .

The fourth motive is th e p art which England took in the

h appy return of the great P ius to his Chair . England , b y

this generous act , showed th at s h e d i d not recognize in

P iu s V I I the be a st of the Apoc alyp se , but , indeed , th e

F ather of th e faithful . It is true , however , that Engl and

had b een favoured by th is great F ather of the faithful .

The dictator of E urope endeavoured to en·gag e him in an

offen sive leag ue , b ut the holy P ope refu sed to decl are

him self an ene my to th e ene mie s of N apoleon . Then the

oppre s s ive tyr ant restrained him self to a comman d w�ich

obliged th e Pontiff to turn out of Rome all th e Enghsh . N o , answered this gre at m an , most certainly P ius cannot

decl are him self th e ene my of a nation to whom he ought to be a F ath er . Then you mu st qu it your throne . T hose

han ds which h ave hel d th e p astoral staff shall be bound in fetters . P ius shall be a prisoner . B e it so , answer e d the great P iu s . I woul d rather be a F ather i n prison than a Sovereign and the enemy of my childr en .

A nation as re flective and well-meanin g as the English could not but a dm ire the P aternal conduct of P iu s . F rom th at moment the many invectives thrown out by some fanatics ag ainst the Roman Pontiff had no weight . H is effigy is no longer burnt , but rests in th e English P anth eon and is s tamped u pon the he arts of a ll who know how to re a son .

- 28 -

The fifth motive may be that principle of faith , that zeal shown for sometime by th e English nation for th e con­ver sion of in fidels , and the sacrifices m a de for this effect . This sufficiently shows that the nation retains lively p rincip les of fa ith and love for ] esus Christ an d his Divine doctrine . This shows th at th e English nation in g e neral is far from having fallen into that cold and stupid in difference into which it appears some oth er nations ha ve c a st themsel ves . Engl an d still pos ses ses strength and vig our , and if her force is ine ffectual only by w ant of direction , yet she ce ases not to show that her faith is not entirely dea d. It liv es and , under a le g it­imate direction , may do much . Yes , I hope so .

When England returns to th e centre of Unity , she will be the Mistress of a ll na tions . She will g ive the start to those ver y nations which pushed her towar d s th e preci­pice . The daug hter shall reunite herself to the Moth er and , reunite d , shall be an effic aciou s means for th e reunion of oth ers and even a g eneral appeal of all nations to th e faith . Her cre dit , her influe nce will enable her to contri:trnte not a little to the g reat work of the convers ion of many who are at present se ate d in th e shades of death . These motives are s u fficiently e fficaciou s to anim ate all Catholic s in favour of England . There is one , however , which comb a ts in a p artic ul ar manner with us Italians and Roma ns , and it is th at E ngland acknowl­edg es no oth er Moth er than I taly , than Rome , and this appears to be a special prerog ative . Oth er Christian nations have recieved the faith from variou s parts .

It cannot be denie d th at I taly may h ave concurre d more , perh ap s , than any oth er nation towards the conv er sion of Germ any , Hung ary , Swit zerl and and Holl and , but I taly was not alone in the un dertaking . She w as a lone , howev­er , in re ducin g E ngl and to th e knowle dge of J esus Christ . Hence it is that I taly an d Rome may j u stly g lory in being th e Moth er of Christianity in England , and England may reciproc ally g lory in acknowledging no oth er Moth er tha n th e Roman and I talian Church . Between I taly and Eng l an d s till ex ists th at feeling which is found between a

· mother and a daug hter . This has alway s , I believe , been a partic ular motive for us l talians to love England in

- 29 -

preferen ce to oth er n ations . B ut , u pon th is sub j ect I

h ave , I think , s ai d suffic ient , a nd I fe ar to abuse your

p a tience by a long er detail .

.. WILLIAM On th e contr ary , I h av e experie nce d gre at

ple asure , for your ex pl a n a tion discovers still more th e

g oodne s s of your he art and th e good dispos ition s of

Rom a n C atholic s w ith re g ar d to u s . Neverth ele s s , th�ug h

so well dispose d , you c a n not acknowle dge th e Anghc a n

Chu rch to b e a true C atholic Chu rch , nor d o I ask o f you

a ny furth er ex plic a tion upon thi s article , bec au se your

op in ion cle arly ap p ears not only from wh at I have h e ar d

th ese few d ays , but also from all your work s whic h I

have h ith erto re a d . Still , I s hould like to h e ar your

sentiments upon some p artic ul ar points , n am ely , I could

wish to k now wh at you think of our th irty-nine Articles ?

DOMINIC Thi s question , my de ar Sir , re quires

m any a nswers , almost as m a ny as th ere are Articles .

Since , however , in thi s Con ference I s h a ll not be able �o

s atis fy all , I will content myself w ith tel�ing you th at m

th ese Articles th ere is good mixe d up w1th b a d . M a ny

thing s a re true , a n d m any ag ain fa l se . · Sometimes th e

truth of th e one a nd th e fa ls ity of a noth er appears cle ar­

ly at first sig ht . F requently , however , truth _a n d fa lsi�y

are so , envelope d th at it is diffic ult to recogmze th e1:1 m

th eir re al aspect , bec au se in dr awin g u� th ese Articles

a n obs c urity a nd a n amb iguity of expres s1on h as been so

stu d iously ob serve d th at they may be t aken eith er in a

good or a b a d sen se .

T h ence , we sèe pl ainly th a t th e loose principles whic h

directed th e pen of th e composers w as not in dee d t�at of

th e Holy Ghost , but solely politic�l a1:d a desire of

a dopting opin ions contr ary to C athohc f� 1th a n d of those

also who , at th e s ame time , were Cathohc s . T hey soug ht

in substa nce to content th e foreign fa n atic s , Luther a n d

C a lvi n without dis gu stin g even , if pos sible , th e true

E ng lish C atholics . Th at execra ble _art of � a le diction w h�c h

woul d te ach how to ple a se God w1thout m th e le ast d1s­

ple a sin g th e D evil , w as the s p irit of th ese s aid Artic les .

- 30 -

Th is am a ss of mon strou s error an d of truth s u ited better wit h th e str a nge politic s of Eliz abeth , men wit h pro­test antism on w ith any reli g ion wh atever . Eliz a beth ' s politic s di d not permit her to be a C atholic , nor her min d to be a P rote st ant of soun d fa ith . It w a s , th erefore , more conve nient to follow th e m axims of th e times r ather than those of the Gospel , more e asy to a ccommo d ate to circ umst ance s a nd th e intere ste d views of th ese foreig ners who could concur a nd preserve u ntouch e d the in depen­dence of E ngl a nd aga in st th e pretens ion s of Fr a nce and the Sovereig n of Sp a i n . A mixture w a s , th erefo'.re , com­pose d , cont ainin g a little of th e intere sts of a ll . A little C atholic ism , a little Cal vi nism , a little Luthera nism a

little of a ll th at coul d serve to throw th e dust · into 'th e eyes of En glis h C atholics an d fl atter exter ior P rote st ants , a pl a nk of support to th e be autiful I sle under th e criti­c al c irc um st a nce in w h ich she stood . T h is am a ss in its tota l �ert a inly w as not good , yet , thoug h not absolutely goo d , 1t served as g ood for somethin g , as we have no­tice d above . It ser ve d as a tre nc h to th e I n nov ation and it served but too truly as an execu tioner to the ' con­scie nc e or to _ th e body of th e good Englis h . With th ese arms in h a_nd they com b a tte d for some time w ith g ood succe s s aga mst th e profane nov el ties of th e ultr a P rotes­t ants , an d a g a in st the fidelity of the a n cient E ng lis h an d I ris h C atholic s .

A mach ine , however , so we ak in its b as i s and so de­formed in its s tru ctu re , w as not very dura ble in its stre�gth . . � he fir st th a t ( 22 ) succeeded in fig hting ag a 1nst 1t w1th su ccess were the in nov ators , as we m ay presume , who le arnt from th e reformers to s ha ke off th e yoke , an d as th e se would no long er y ield to the g re atest and most soli d authority th at ever a dor ne d the e arth , they themsel v es neith er knew how nor would submit to a n

authority whic h was no oth er but a vile pyg my in com­p ar i son with the g ig a ntic m aj esty of the C a tholic Chu rch .

· A little log ie w as more th a n suffic ient for the under­taking . The min d of ma n c h a ng es not with the v ar ia tions of st ates . I t alw ays rema in s the s ame . An non licet Valentinianis , quod licuit Valentino .

- 3 1 -

B e ho l d h ere th e ar gume nt w h ic h in the secon d age suf­fic e d to di s concert t h e Gno s t ic s . Now t h i s suffice d ex actly in th e sev e n t ee n th ag e to d i sconcert th e i de a s of our p r e­te n d e d re form er s . T hu s , notw ith s t a n din g all th e power s of E li z ab eth ' s min i ste r s , th ere arose in th e b o som of E n g­l a nd an in fin ity of sec t s , e ac h one as diff erent among �t

them s el v e s , though th ey a 11 carne from the C a tho.l 1c

Church , le g it im a te chil dren , howev er , �f th e gr a n d pru�­c ip le of em ancip a t ion from the au thonty of th e C athol lc

Church . Ye t th ese chil dren soon foun d pr e tex ts to ema.n­c ip ate from th e ir M oth er R eform er , a n d ev en so as to die­ta te th e l aw to th e Moth er . Nev ert h ele s s , th e poor , l a nguis h in g Moth er m a in t a i n e d h er self in En gl a n d lon g er , pe r hap s , th a n in a ny oth er P rot e s t ant re g ion bec au se th e

Ang l ic a n reform , on g oin g forth from the V e s sel of P e t er , retai n e d a th r e a d by w hi c h s h e might att ach herself , a n d

a pl ank t o su p port h er a g a i n st �h e win d s an d the wav es . By means of th i s thr e a d th e w1s e r p art sou� ht h�w to

r e ach a g a in th e b or ders of Apo s t?l ic Suc c e s s1on., w 1th a

little lo g ie it is tr ue , but ye t w1t h some pr a c t1c al suc­c e s s w h ic h stood m ore in n ee d of su p port than of r e a son . T hi s '

imp eriou s event of support will , I _ h ope , . rec all th e

g ood u se of t h at log ie w h ich m ay a s si st th e ir s tr e n gt h

an d s u sta in th e w i s h e s conceiv e d by m any .

.. WILLIAM Oh ! w ith re g ar d to th is , w h at do you th ink of those w h o h av e e n d e avoure d to ama lg am ate our

Ar t icles w i th th e Coun c il of T r ent a n d w ith oth er defini­tions of th e R oman Ch urch ? D o you th i nk th i s pretende d

Corc or d ia ( 23 ) may be ob t a i ne d ?

FATHER DOMINIC I think th e effort s of th ese are mor e

the e ffec ts of a g oo d h e art t han of g ood l?g ic , m ore

con form abl e to th eir c h a rity th a n to tr uth . Smc e , _ h.ow­ev er , c har ity pr ep a r es th e w ay for oth er g oo d qu�l lt i e s , I h ope th ey w h o be ar it in th eir h ear t s �os s.e s s 1t als o

in tru th a s it re a lly i s , an d not a s an m d1 screet ze a l

for union may make it app e a r . I commen d th e goo dne s s of th e ir h e ar t s yet I c a nnot comm en d th e ir log ie . B ut as a

co r r upte d h� art serves to cor rupt th e min d , so w ill a

h e a rt w e ll d i sp o se d serv e won der fully to cure the woun ds

of th e in t ellect , a n d not only to m ake one see , but a l s o

t o p rofe ss th e ent ire tru th . I d o not , i n d e e d , deny t h a t

- 32 -

many of y our Ar t icles may be C a thol ic , a n d t h at some ot h er s may be un d e r s too d in a C atholic sen se but to expl ai n th em all in a Catholic sen se app e a r s to ' me dif­fic ult .

But tho ug h ev�n all mig ht a dmit of C a tholic explic a tion , ye t not even m such a c a se could they be reta ine d or app rov e d of , since th ey do not exclu de at le a s t an heret­ic al s e n s e . T hu s the Chu rch never c o n s ent e d to , or app rov e d of th e m any cre e d s of the semi-Ar i a n s , bec au se thoug h not ab solut e ly ex clu ding a C a t h o l ic sen se , th ey di d . not th e le s s exclu de an Ari an sen se . Althoug h th ese A1:t1cle s , . th e refore , may have serve d to impe de a fu rth er w1t h dr a wm g from th e Catholic Church , ye t I believe t h ey have n ot serve d equ a lly to r econduct E n gl a n d to Rom e . An � as l?ng as th e Eng lish rem a in obs t i n at e in ret a i nin g th eir A r tlc l e s , such as th ey are , th e s e w i ll o nly serve as an in s urmount a ble obs t acle to th e des ir e d union . • WI LL 1AM V ery well , th en , we m ay do t h is . We on our si de will expl ain and eve n modi fy our Artic le s , and Y.ou may mo d�fy a n d expl a in you r s , and thu s y iel ding a httle on e ac h s i d e to our re s pe c tive p r e t e ns ion s we may obta in the des ire d con c o r d .

FATHER DOMINIC T h i s is one of th e mo s t delic ate poi n t s th a� can be tre.a� e d u pon . As to w h at re g a r ds th e expli­ca�1or:1 or expo s 1tlon on our s i de , I see no diffic ulty . But th1s 1s not �ec e s s ar y , for after th e exc ell ent expo s i tion of Bos s ue t I th1 nk our sep ar a te d bre th r e n c a n des ire noth i n g more .

MR . WILLIAM Bo s s uet , it is tr ue , h a s gre at ly mo d ifie d th e doc trine of th e Roman Chu rch .

FATHER DOMINIC P ar don me Sir , for I s ay he h a s not mo d ifie d it in the le a st . He h as done no oth er t han expos e d. it such as it re a ll y is , a nd not such as your Th eologians ha d c a lumn iou sly a s s e r t e d it to b e . I t app e ar s to you , th at he has cha nge d , th at he h as tr a ns­f1gur e d th e doc t r ine of the C athol ic Chu rch only b ec au se you . h av e been acc ustome d to re a d th a t amas s of c alum ny vom1tte d forth by the p reten de d reform ers a g a inst u s .

- 33 -

Bossuet ' s exposition a s tonished the P rotestants of the seventeenth and eig hteenth age ( 24 ) , in the s ame manner as the exposition of St . Fr ances de Sales a stonished the Calvinis ts of th e si xteenth age ( 25 ) . These s ai d that the P rovost of Sales was ( 26 ) become a Calvinist , that he ha d renounced th e Roma n faith , and that if his doctrine was known at Rome he would be excommu nic ated like Cal vin . But why all thi s astonishment in the Protestants of th e sixteenth , seventeenth and eig ht eenth age? ( 27 ) Solely bec ause th ey were accu stomed to hear the bl ack and gross c alumnies thrown out against us by P rote stant Ministers . Now , neither St . Fr ance s de Sale s nor Bos suet ever ma de any change in our doctrine .

Yet , all your Theologians have not always explaine d thing s as expoun ded by Bossuet .

DOMINIC W ait a little . Now , tel1 me , Sir , must the fa ith then be measured by the head of this or that Theolo g ian in p articul ar , or not r ather upon the authen­t ic definitions of the U niversal Councils? What would you s ay were I to lo a d you with all the abs urd opinions contained in the immense volumes of your Theologi ans ? I shoul d , without fail , be in your estim ation as the most u nre a sonable man in the worl d . I f you wish to know our F aith , woul d you s ay , re a d our authorized Books , and not the writing s of p artic ul ar in dividuals ? B ut , to return to our point ; explic ation may be had from our side , as you have it actually , not , however , any modification . No Sir , none whatever .

MR .. WILLIAM Then , it app e ars to me th at you expect too much in wishin g th at oth ers should always y ield , a n d you never yield t o th em i n anything ! W e might s ay the same : we will have no modific ation .

FATHER DOMINIC I f you were to s ay that , we could have no more to do w ith you . We should remain in our pe ace and limit oursel ves solely to pray for you as we have done hith erto . Yet , s ee , the comparison does not run good . You may yiel d without aba n donin g your found a­tion s , but we cannot y ield in the le ast w ithout ab an­doning ours entirely . You have as th e found ation of your

- 34 -

reform , tu re . formed liberty donin g

liberty for each one to form his faith upon Scrip­This does not , therefore , suppose a fa ith a lre ady and uns h aken , and , th erefore , you are always at to make whatever change you p le a s e without ab an­your common princi ple s .

Wherea s , on the contr ar y , our principle is that the faith oug ht not , in dee d , to be forme d , but that it is formed and founded u pon an immovable and unsh aken fou n dation to which we may neither add nor take away anything . For if we were to take away any p art , how little, so ever it mig ht be , we shoul d take away the whole , bec au se with th is we should take away the fou n d ation u pon which th e grand e difice stan ds . Everyone knows that our foun­dation is the wor d of God as proposed and expl a ine d by th e in fall ible authority of th e Catholic Church . I f ever , then , we should dare to take away one iota we should overthrow entirely th is grand found ation�s you may perceive , "Qui offendit in uno factus est omnium reus , " woul d be verifie d in us to th e utmost rig our of the let­ter . The case , then , can never be su pposed , that the Catholic Church ever yiel d s upon any point of faith . She may y ield as to points which merely reg ard discipline , but not upon any point that reg ar d s faith . I hav e alre a dy treated th is argument i n m y letter t o Al itofil as , ( = Lett ere Celimontane ) therefore , I shall not extend at pre sent more fully u pon th is cap ital point of difference between us and Protestants , whatever th e sect may be .

I t is , however , l a te . Let u s , then , interru pt our Con­ferenc e . Tomorrow , please God , we will commence spe aking of your articles in p artic ul ar .

- 35 -

FOURTH CONFERENCE

ARTICLES OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH , SCRIPTURE UPON THE AND CREEDS

Ha ve you brought with you th e Book of FATHER DOMINIC I t will be nece s s a ry for o u r purpo s e . Co m mon Pr ayer ?

. thi s new hou se I have not H avi n g be e n but a few d ays l�hough I have re a d it m a ny yet ha d time to procu re one ' ti m e s el s ewhere .

h bro ught one ' and also .. WILLIAM Ye s , I av e

h ad dition of the c a nons book of Homilie s ' w it an

dis c ipline of our Ch urch .

th e

a n d

h ' very well . I h ave re a d both ' yet FATHER DOMINIC A · · t u s in our r e-n ot ent irely through . They m ay as s 1s

se arch es . At wh at p art sha ll we beg in ?

MR .. WILLIAM At an

which form th e most m e rely ' I m ay s ay ' an

sel ves .

ex amination of the 39 Articl e s ' intere sting p art ' the re st bein g

appe n dix to the Articles them-

FATHER DOMINIC Very well , th en . L et u s . beg in

f

at . I sho uld like to ente rtam you or the s e . F ir st ' however 'l f th e s am e which contain s a mom ent with th e pro ogu e o

Go

'vern e s s of the E liz ab eth ' s decl ar ation as Supreme

t · by her d h proves a nd s ane ions ' Church of E ngl a n , w � ap An l ican faith . Ah ! s upreme �ower ' the

hA,rt1c

�es

a:f

i��:e d ' gh a s been thy fall poor Angllc a n C�rnrc . r

:a� deur ' How coul dst thou b e from an c i e nt m aJ e s�y an� �elf to a

. woman ? How could a so b a s e as to subJ e_ct t y to dieta te to B ishops ' to l ay woman be so au dac 1ou s

�s

ave her s uch power ? W as down l aw s for th e Chu rch . Who g Chi r st was far · t J e s u s Chr i st ? No c ertainly ' for J e s u s

h h d 1

h th · ty to women I f ever e a from g ranting sue au on · ho could have abl e of s uch power ' w j u d ge d women

t�ap

than h is m o st holy Mother ' the V ir gin b een ? m ore

��r

i/ not l awful for women to spe ak in th e

��:��h !o

s aid our D ivine R e deemer by the mouth of St .

- 36 -

P a ul : "Mulieres in Ecclesiis taceant , non enim permittitur eis ( 28 ) .

I f women are not pe r mitte d to spe ak , to proph e sy , to a n no u nce the Gos pel in the Chu rch , can they be pe rm itte d to subjug ate th e Churc h herself , to pl ace her , we m ay s ay , u n der the ir feet by m aking the m s el ves su pe r ior to th e ver y Church ? Wh at a degra dation th en wa s thi s ! We , indee d , find ex amples of wom e n who have tyr a nize d over th e Church ; but I do not th ink th ere c a n be found a ny Chu rch that h as s po ntaneou sly subj e cte d h e r self to a woma n . L et us take th e act a nd re a d it . Elizabeth for­bi ds the B ishops to m eet without h er con sent , u nle s s authori ze d under th e roy al se al ; th at with such con s e nt they m ay , however , m eet in convoc ation as to what conce r n s th e doctrine and di s c ipline of th e Anglic a n Church now e stablis he d . O God ! I thoug ht thi s Church was e st ablishe d som e time previou sly . I thou ght it wa s establi s h e d by Je s u s Chr i st , by th e Apo stle s , or , at le a st , by Apo stol ic m e n , and E liz abeth on the co ntr a ry , tells me th at it h as b een e stabl ishe d j u st now ! - now e stablish e d !

What , th en , c an our de ar gentle men obtain , who at pre s e nt en de a vour to demon str ate the Apo stolic Succ e s s ion of th e English hierarchy? There wa s , pe r hap s , in Engl a nd an Eccle s i astic al hier a rchy before th ere w a s a Church ? Behol d th en , Sir , wh at th i s Church is , a nd tel1 me which Ang lic an Chu rch m ay bo a st of Apo stol ic Succ e s sion ? I t cannot , in dee d , be th at one b y law e stabli s h e d , but th at establish ed by J e s u s Chr i st , becau se that one by l aw e stablished appe a rs to be no m ore ancient tha n now . You , my de a r Sir , have suffic ient unde r stan di ng to com­preh en d we ll what I s a y , you mu st pl a i nly un de r stan d that a Church now e stabl i she d c an not be the Church e sta blish ed by J e s u s Chr i st .

, MR .. WILLIAM Yet , I see th at new Church e s are still e stabl i sh e d in the new world by the M i s s ioners , an d th is doe s not prevent th eir be i ng Apo stolic . FATHER DOMINIC It is true that they m ay with re a son call th e m selves Apostol ic , yet why so ? Bec a u se unite d to

- 37 -

th e Church alre a dy established by th e Apostle s . But �o

what Chu rch established by the Apostles does the Angh­

can Church , establis hed under th e reign of Elizabet� ,

unite h ersel f? Sh e w as more div i de d from the Apostohc

th an England is phy sic ally from th e Continent . She w.as

and is still isol ate d . Th erefore , mu st eith er of necess1ty

renounce th e title of Apostol ic , or else renounce that now

of E lizab eth ' s . Let us proceed to the Article s ·

I t cannot be denie d , as I have said before , that many

g ood th in g s are containe d in th ese Article s . I find noth­

ing to say a g ainst the fir st five and have even re a son to

th ank God th at He has not permitte d that the gre at and

fun dam ental tru ths of our holy relig ion should be lost .

Let u s ta ke th e sixth Article , which certainly is . very

interestin g . In th is it is decl are d th at th.e Holy Scnpture

conta in s all th at is neces s ary to s alvat1on , and , th �re­

fore , it equally decl ares that whatsoever is not. cont�me d

in th e Scripture or cannot be prov e d th ereby _1s ne_ither

requ is ite nor nece s s ary to s alvation . U pon th1s pomt I

h ave alre a dy tre ate d rather extensively in my secon d

letter to Alitofil as ( = Lettere Celimont ane ) . Th erefore , I

will try to be as brief as I pos s ibly can , making only

some neces s ary remarks .

Whatever were my des ig ns not to confute . or overpo�er

anyone , s till I may h ere say , if , th en , Scnpture conta1ns

all th a t which is nece s s ary . Is it not a gre at shame �ha t

neith er th is nor m any oth er Articles of the Ang�1�an

Church are conta ined in Scripture ? I n no p art of D 1v1ne

Scripture do I rea d a catalogu� of Boo_k� divinely in­

spire d . I n no part do I fin d th1 s propos1t1on , so dear to

a ll those who are sep a r ated from the C atholic Church .

The Scripture Alone contains all that which is neces s ary

to s alvation ; and as I am , however , far from wishing _ to

take a dv ant a g e of anyone , so I th�nk it . better to g1v e

some neces sary explanation u pon th1s subJ ect . I f , t�en ,

you ask me : " I s th e knowle dge of those truth s �ontamed

in Scripture s u fficient in or der to have the fa1th ab so­

lutely neces s ar y for etern al s alvation? " I should answer

you " Yes" ; and even much less might suffice to som eone

of th e faithful in p articul ar .

- 38 -

The thin g s neces sary necessitate medii ( 29 ) as Theolo­gians express it , in order to s al vation are not , indee d , many . These are limit e d to the knowle dge of God the au thor of gr ace and the renumeration of g lory , ( Heb . 2 : 6 ) , and , at mos t , accor ding to the common opinion of our Theologians , should be a d ded the k nowledge of the Unity and Trinity of God , the I ncarn ation and Death of our Saviour . Now , it is most certain that a ll th ese truths are conta ine d in Scripture , or , at le a s t , may be prove d by the same ; th at , therefore , which is containe d in Scripture , or may be prove d thereby , is sufficient for a p artic ul ar in dividua l . For a simple , ig nor ant person , it is sufficient th at he knows th e principal truths reveale d by Go d ; th at h e believes and acts conform ab le to the j u st dictates of re ason and of th e law g iven u s by Go d , pro­vide d , however , that he believes at le a st implicitly and entirely ( as I h ave alre a dy state d abov e ) the truths revea le d by God , nor pertinaciou sly denies a ny . Nor yet is it nec e s sary for him to know if th ese truths are wri tten or not ; it is s u fficient for him to know that they are reveale d by God , since their being written a dd s nothing to D ivine revelation , nor does revel ation become Divine only w-hen it is written .

Th erefore , I g r a nt you th at for a p artic ul ar in dividual nothing more is req uire d . Such , however , is not the c ase with re g ar d to the entire society of the faithful , w ith re­gard to th e Church and to the P astors thereof . These should not only know that which is required for th eir own p articul ar s alvation , but they should also h av e th e means necess ary to show what are the truths reve a le d by God , which are the books divinely in spire d , and what may be th e ir leg itimate sense : they should have the means to preserve U nity of faith , to keep at a distance from the Chu rch profane novelties , to convert h eretics , to guara ntee th e , faithful from all perversion , to regul ate the wors hip , the ceremonies , the rites , the S acraments , etc . Now , in Scripture alone all these thing s are not con­taine d , an d w ithout tra dition the Church would fin d her­self , as we may s ay , in darknes s , without light , without stren gth , w ithout me ans of a ssu ring the faith of Scripture it self . Distinguish accurately between the con dition and the duties of a simple faithful in p artic ul ar , and between

- 39 -

the con dition and the duties of the U niversal Church .

That which is sufficient for a p articul ar person cannot be

s u fficient for the U niversal Church . And if ever a ll tra­

dition shoul d be rej ected , not only th e Universal Church

would not be a ble to supporf her self as she ou ght , but

we shoul d , in conse quence , see even the los s of all sim-

ple individu a ls .

I must , however , a dmonish you of anoth er thing worthy of

remark , that we may not be mistaken u pon a m a tter so

delic ate and diffic ult . I h av e j u st allowe d that for a

p artic ul ar in dividua l , what is contained in Scripture , or

what can be prov e d by th e s ame may be suffic ient , in so

much that the in dividual may have been instructe d with­

out even re a ding the Scripture , bec ause th e Church and

her M ini sters consider this p artic ular in dividual not

obliged to inv esti g ate · more . But , as �cripture alone wo:1ld

not be sufficient for the Chu rch so 1f th ere were nothmg

b ut sim ple Scripture alone there would not be.

either.

a

Chu rch or h er Ministers , and , th erefore , the s a1d p artic­

ul ar individual woul d not have been able to obtain in­

struction , a n d , in conseq uence , we should s ee , ( at le a st

indirectly ) th at if ever there should be but Scriptu�e

alone , neith er would p artic ul ar in dividu als have suff1-

cient ground s to be lieve as they oug ht in order to s alva-

tion .

MR . WILLIAM I c annot , indee d , dis approve your Doc­

trine , and this distinction between what is requ ire d for

p artic ul ars and for th e Univers al Church app e ars to me

as new as it is oth erw ise j u st . Yet , it seems that the two

Apostle s : St . P a ul s ay s , that All Scripture Divinely

ins p ired is profita ble to teach - that the man of God may

be per fect ( 2 T im 3 : 15-1 7 ) . An d St . J oh n at the end of

his Gospel s ays : "Halc scripta sunt ut credatis , .. . .. et ut

credentes vitam habeatis" ( 30 ) . These two Apostle s see m

t o speak not of a n in dividual b u t o f all the faithful .

FATHER DOMINIC This argument proves nothing or would

prove too much . "Omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata

utilis est , etc . " ( 3 1 ) . By analyzing such a proposi tion it

makes th is sense . W h atsoever · Scripture , and what soever

p art th ereof is profit a ble , etc . , for th e p article omnis

- 40 -

cannot be ta ken in a collective sense of the whole Scriptu re taken altog eth er , since at that time it did not all exist , but it shoul d be taken in a distributive sense , in as �uch as

. �t sig :1ifie s , e ach or what soever p art of the Scnptu re d1vmely ms pired . Now this would prove too much . lt woul d prove tha t a single Canticle , or a single verse of . the same , even any verse whatever of any Book that compos es th e Bible , is suffic ient for s alvation which certainly neith er you , nor any man of sense wiÌl ever agree to . What then doe s the Apostle mean? I t is cle ar -every p art of the Scriptu re is profita b le : utilis est - but all that which is profitab le is not a lso s u fficient . For ex ample , it is profit a ble to drink in order to live but to drink only would not be s u fficient .

I n th e s am e sense we may understan d th e wor d s of St . J ohn : "Halc scripta sunt ut credatis , et ut credentes vit�m habeatis , . et� . " ( 32 ) . The des ign of th e Holy Evan­geli_st w as prmc1p ally to show the D ivinity of J esus Chnst . Now , his Gospel is suffic ient to show this , and we by beli_eving it �a� be save d , provide d we live like g oo d and fa1thful _(hn stians and do not obstin ately rej ect th e oth er reve a le d truths . But remark well , S ir , I entreat Y?u , a thing hig hly important , not only to understan d ng htly the present p a s sage o f the Gospel , but i n or der to u:id.erstan � .

le gitimately so many other p as s ages of the D1vme w�1tmg s . Whenever these express a g iven thing to be re qmr e d , or a given thing to be suffic ient , thi s should alwa�s be un derstood servatis servandis , provide d t�e other thm g s be not neglecte d . Without thi s Key you w11l be often embarr a s se d in rea ding D ivine Scripture , to such a degree that you will not know what to think .

For ex ample , we rea d : Qui manducat me vivit propter me : Qui manducat bune panem vivit in aeternum ( 33 ) . Must we , th erefore , think that Commu nion a lone would be so entirely sufficient tha t neither faith , hope , nor chari ty , nor the ob serv ance of the l aw of Go d would be requ ir e d ? Date eleemosynam , et ecce omnia munda sunt vobis ( 34 ) : then the ob serv ance of the l aw of God is not requ ire d ? Alms. deeds _alone suffice ? Faith i s not spoken of . Audite , et v1vet anima vestra ( 35 ) . Th en to hear th is D ivine wor d is sufficient ! Venite benedicti Patris mei , esurivi enim et

- 41 -

dedistis mihi manducare . . . etc . ( 36 ) . Here the works of

m ercy are alone s poken of ; then fa ith is not _necessa�y?

Domine quis habitavit in tabernaculo tuo? Qu� pecun1�� non dedit ad usuram .. . . etc . ( 37 ) . Quid fac1emus viri fratres? Poenitentiam agite , et ba.ptizetur unusquisque

vestrum .. . . etc .. ( 38 ) . Quid faciemus et nos? Neminem

concutiatis , neque calumniam faciatis ; �t c�ntenti estote

stipendiis vestris ( 39 ) . I n th ese places f.a 1t� 1s not spoken

of therefore it is not neces s ary? Th1s 1s not the c ase m�st certa inly , would you answer me . All th ese thing.s

are re quisite , and the one doe s not exclu �e the oth�r , . 1f

we do not w ish to place D ivine Scriptu re m contra d1ct1on

with it self . I t is so I reply . You now understan d the of these words : Qui crediderit et

leg itimate sense baptizatus fuerit a lso in the same cited abov e .

salvus erit ( 40 ) . An d you understa n d sense those o f St . J ohn and o f St . P aul

My de ar Sir , let us be assured tha t Di vine Seri pture is

never in contra diction w ith itself , but only wh enever we

wish to take this or th at pass age in p articular , we shall

find oursel v es so embarr a s se d as not to know what to

think a bout it . Therefore , in or der to understan d thi s or

that p a s sage p roperly , we mu st pos sess an int�lli ge�ce of

the whole Divine Scripture . But thi s complete mtelh gence

can never be had by those who prou dly rej ect the

author ity of the Church . An d the numerous sects to which

P rote stantism h as g iven birth , are an irrefr aga b le p roof

of thi s Catholic truth . Thi s authority of the Church ,

always living and always te aching , is most neces s.a�y of

all . First , in or der to know which are the Books D1vmely

insp ire d . An d th is is a thing which a p p e ars not to be

denie d even by your Article s , since in the same 6th

Article it_ is sai d , we admit as c anonic al those Books of

whose authority th ere was never any doubt in the

Chu rch .

I n dee d , afterw ar d s it would h av e been more than a l ittle

diffic ult for your le g ì sl ators to show that there never ha d

been any rea l doubt concernin g the Book_s which they

acknowle dg e d . Be that as it may , not knowmg wh ere else

to hol d by , they took hol d of the authori ty of the

Chu rch ; and undoubte dly th ere is no other me ans to know

- 42 -

with certainty the Canonic al Books . I mag ine to you rself a man who has never been instr ucte d by any one with re g ar d to the doctrine of the Chu rch , but who by ch ance fin ds t�e Bible and takes it into his han d . Do you think that th1s man would be able to recog nize it as the D ivine dictates ? lt woul d , I think , be rather diffic ult . Before he had rea d the fir st Chapter of Gene s is I fe ar he would be tempte d to con s i der it as an extr a vag ant romance . To pretend to p artic ular and in dividual illu stra tions to interior gu sto ( 4 1 ) which make us discern the book s Divinely ins p ire d , would open the door , as in fact it has opened it , to th e most monstrous follies of which the min d o f man i s capable . l t only remains for u s , therefore , to att ach our sel ves to th e authority of the Church and to tra dition in or der to discern w ith safety w hich are the Canonical Books .

Secon d , it is still more neces s ary to determ ine the sen se of the same book s , as I ha ve ju st shown a bove . Th ird , to e�tabli sh_ various. Article s , both of faith and of discip­line , wh1ch you m dee d hol d , but which would be difficult to prove by _Scripture alone . And with reg ar d to many such thing s , it would be totally impos sible , as I have tre ated more diffu sely in the above cite d letter ; and nece s s ary besides for many oth er thing s th ere innume rate d to . which . I refer you in order not to stay longer upon th1s subJ ect . Let u s , therefore , proceed . I will not attempt at pre sent to confute your c atalogue of holy Book s , nor to � stablish ours . U pon this point you may con sult Bellarmm ( De Verbo Dei Scripto ) ( 42 ) or Boss uet in h is correspon dence with Leibnitz . I only ask you ; do you a d mit all the Books of the New Testament as Canon­ical? I ask this bec au se I do not know it , and it does not a pp ear at le ast cle ar from this your sixth Article . In this it is s a i d , we receive the books of the New Testam ent as t�ey are commonly receive d . It is not , how­ever , clearly expre s se d , or ·sig nifies nothing since it does not appear of whom th ese legislator s intend to speak . l f they _ h a d . said : we receive them a s they are commonly rece1 ved m the Ca tholic Church , the thing would ha ve been manifest , bec au se thè Catholic Church receives them : all and entirely . But by saying only , as they are commonly receive d , th e question is to know b y whom they

- 43 -

are commonly receive d ; for neit her do th e L:1t�erans _ agree

u pon th is w ith th e Ca tholic s , nor th e Ca� vu�1sts w 1th �h e

Luth er ans . I t remain s , th erefore , unce r ta1n 1f your le g1 s­l ators r ecog nize th e c anonicity of th e E p istle of St · Jam es , th at of J u de , of th e Apoc alyp se , e tc . e tc . W h at do you th ink of th is ?

MR .. W I LL I AM I s ay th at we do receiv e

th e N ew T e s tament in the same manner

ceive d by th e Roman Church . And thi s

most common opinion of ou r s , and from quoting all th ese as canonic al . You are

cu s tom h as forev er to interp ret th e l aw scure .

all th e book s of as th ey are re­I t ake from th e

th e cu stom of well aware th at wh en it is ob-

FATHER DOMINIC Herein I commit my self entir ely to your

deci s ion , b ecau se I re g ar d th is as an in v iola �le pr inci­ple , th at wh enev er in any communion we hnd l aw s , c anon s , or deci sions not su fficiently cle ar , we shou�d not indee d h av e recour s e to th e ene mie s of th e s a1 d society , bu; certa inly to the P rofe s s_or s of the same in or de r to h av e a le g it imate explicat1on . I s houl d only say , why do not your le g isl ators ex pr e s s th em se�v es mor e

cle arly ? By one or two wor d s which th ey m1ght . h av e

a d de d , th e th ing would have b een cle ar and conclu siv e .

MR .. W I L L I AM Re flect , however , th at th ey did not j u"dge

it p rop er to m ake enem ies of th e Luth e r ans an� th e Cal­vinis t s , at th e very tim e in which th ey stood m �ee d of th eir support ag ain st Rome and a g ain st th e C athohc Sov-ereig ns of Fr ance and Sp ain .

FATHER DOMIN IC I unde r stan d you ; but thi s show s

plainly th at th e Ar ticles ha d a s h are in . those polit�c s

which would ple a se God wit hout dis ple a sm g th e dev1l . W ith re g ar d to th e sev enth , nothing sub s tantial occur s to me worth y of rem ark . L et u s th en p as s on to th e eig hth .

MR . W I L LI AM I n th is you w ill fin d s till l e s s to s ay , bec au se w e a dmit th e th r ee Cree d s , th e N icene , th e Ath a­n a s ian an d th at one c alle d th e Apostles ' Cree d .

- 44 -

FATHER DOMINIC Nev e rth ele s s , th e re is some t hing to be s ai d on th i s . Fir st , it re main s unce r ta in if a dmitt ing th e Synod of N ice it int en ds also to compr e h en d the a d dition s th ere made in th e fir s t Council of Cons t antinople .

Ye s , it is inten de d to compr e h en d t his also , and it appe ar s cle arly from our Lit urgy in whic h we have the C r ee d ex act ly such a s you sing it in the Mas s .

DOMINIC Very well , and I believ e you res t upon th e p r incip le I have j u st in dic at e d , viz . t hat in or de r to hav e an explic ation where th e thing is obscure we s?ould have r ecou r se to those who profe s s · a g iven Doctr me . T houg h you woul d j u st now s ay we receive th e Nicene and Con s tantinopolitan Cr ee d . But th is is nothing . What offend s me th e mos t in thi s Ar ticle is th e re ason wh ic h is b roug ht for r eceiving th e th ree Cree d s , w hich is bec au se th ese are s upporte d by Script ure as much as thi s is favou rable t� th e p rinciple th at Scr iptu re alone m ay be th e rule of fa1t h , so much is it unfavour able to th ese very C ree ds and to th e author ity of the Chu rch . Now , wh at woul d you answer those who mig ht s ay thi s or th at A rticle of the Cree ds is not well s upporte d by Scripture ? How will you be able to convince on sile nce those who . may tel1 you : we will not have so many Cree d s ; Scnpt ure alone is s uffici ent for u s ? If thi s is th e sole r ule , why do you admit of so m any oth er s ? W hat woul d be your reply ? You would be obli g e d to conte nd upon ev ery point of th e s aid C ree d s , j u st as if nothing had ev er been define d by the Church , all th e labour un derg one by th e F ath e rs at N ice would be qu ite u s ele s s to u s , and we shoul d have no oth e r standar d le ft but Sc riptu re a lone . I f th en e ach one may appe al from th e Cree d s to Script ure as th e sole rule and dir ect ion of Faith , wh ere will dis put es terminate ? Wh en will discor d · be at an end ? Do you know ? Well , I c an s how you . When you are re solve d to return to the bark w hic h you have aban done d , to th e b ar k of P eter , which holds t h e faith of

. the sym bol s , not u pon the sole moti v e of th eir b eing supporte d by Script ure , but also bec au se th ey are acknowle dg e d and p ropo se d to our belief by th e Univ ers al

- 45 -

Church as conformable to the wor d of God or to revel a­tion wheth er these may be written by D ivinely inspire d writers or may be tr ansmitted to us Viva voce - . Scrip­ture , Tra dition , infa llible authority of the Umversa l

Church . Behol d our found ations : you h ave aban doned the two secon d and by a most unh appy experience you have found the

'first to be ina dequate and not sufficiently

efficaciou s . Of this your continued divis ions and discor d are an evi dent proof .

MR .. WILLIAM I do not deny it , but it appe ars to me th at you ought not to av a il yourself of th� . same a g a ir:ist us , since it would be contr ary to th at sp1nt of chanty which should a nimate every Christian .

Ah , my dear Sir , s ay rather that I have not expl a ined myself well . I will , therefore , do so better . M ay God preserve me from wishing to insult anyone , for I love a 11 as my self . I speak not most certainly against persons , but against errors , nor is thi s in the lea st opposed t o true ch arity . A Mother ce a ses not to love her sick son , whilst at the s ame time she comb ats a g ainst the infirmity of a dear child by giving him bitter re me dies . Her matern al love woul d rather caress the child than embitter his p a l ate w ith me dicine . But what woul d you h ave her do? The infirmity of a darl i:1 g son and the hea lth which she seeks to restore require these bitter draughts which , though unwillingly ' . she presen ts . I , therefore , think th at no one ca:1 compl am of me if I off er a bitter pill , and shoul d th1s pro duce a

p as sing sorrow , I sh a ll with the Apostle rej oice , if it a lso bears the des ired fruits .

Let us now proceed . There is but little to s ay with reg ard to the ninth and tenth Articles . Your leg isl ators have been ple ased to call concupiscence sin , and to s ay th a t it h as the nature of sin . Yet , it a ppe ars to me tha t such a11 expression is not very correct in a symbol , or a

col lection of relig iou s articles . I t is true that St . P a1:11 uses the word sin , spe aking of concupiscence , but th1 s word may very well have another expl anation di fferent from that given to it by your reformers . Their expl ana­tion , or interpretation appe ars to be very contrary to the

- 46 -

Doctrine of the same St . P aul taken entire and not in an isol ate d p as s age . Accor ding to the Doctrine of the s aid Apostle every sin properly so ca lle d , or th at has the true nature of sin , is opposed to the l aw of God . It consists es sentia lly in a tr ans gression of the s aid l aws . The l aw , therefore , is the measure by which we know the - guilt -Non cognovi peccatum nisi per legem ( 43 ) . Sin , therefore , proI:>erly spe aking supposes the perversion of something subJ ect to the l aw , or over which the l aw may exercise its rights .

Now your legis l ators having as serted in the s ame ninth Article th at concupiscence is not subj ect to the l aw of God , in consequence of thi s very assertion and of the Doctrine of St . P aul , it evidently follows that , therefore , concupiscence is not properly sin nor has the nature of sin ; but if s till you wish to ca ll it s in , c a ll it so in the sense as expl ained by the Fathers of the Council of Trent , in so much as this a peccato est , et ad peccatum ( 44 ) . Your reformers then were not very correct , and their a s sertions , un derstood in an obvious sen se contain heresy and open the way to fat alis m or to M ani� chaeism . I men tion th is en passent , for it is not tha t I wish you to understan d as most important . The eleventh Article is s till more interesting .

MR .. WILLIAM I t is true , but as it is a weig hty argument let us defer it to another Conference .

FIFTH CONFERENCE

JUSTIFICATION AND GOOD WORKS

· FATHER DOMINIC A discussion upon ju stific ation at present may ap pe ar u seless , bec au se now our sep arated Brethren , or at le ast many them , sufficiently acknowle dge th� fa ls �ty of their theory and the truth of ours u pon th1s subJect . Where , in fact , is there at present a ere dit­able P rotestant who would ma inta in justifica tion by faith

- 47 -

1 ? Yet we mu st reflect that this w as the chief point on Y · ' f in s t th e a git ate d in th e be g innin g by th e re �rm ers aga

C a tholic Chu rch . I n as much as th ey w1sh e d afterw�r ds to

ch a n g e th e te nor of th eir proce e din g s so much d1 d th ey u rg e oth er chief Ar ticles of divi sion , or of our pre.t e1: de d

id ol atry , or th e Antichris t P ope , or tr a ns ub�t a�t1 at1on , e tc N everth ele s s , it is true , th at at th e be gmmng they di d

. not m ake much account of th e pretende d idol a�i;y , nor

of M a s s , nor of tr a nsu b sta ntia tion , nor of anyth1ng els; but j u s tification by fa ith only w as the gr an d rock 0 sc a n d a l which th ey th r ew ag a in s t t h e Ro m a n Church ( see

B o s s uet ) .

f th en , I h � d liv e d in th e sixteenth .ag e it .w�ul d h av e

��en y duty to confute the pre sent Artide . L 1vmg , h ow-� th e nineteenth age I h ave but little to comb at ever ' in

th at no long er with b ec au se now we tre at of an e nemy exis ;s ; ye t if th e ene my exis t s not , �h e tr ace s of h1s

p a s s ag e s till re m ain in th e eleventh Art1cle of your conf­es sion s , which mu st be profe s s ed and sworn to by e ach

one of you who as pires to any dignity or emp loym er:it

eit h er in th e Church or St ate . My Go d , wh�t an abu se 15 th l· s , To ob lige me n , eminent for le arn1ng , to swe ar ·

· · d d orthy of a ga in s t th eir conscie nce ! A pun1 s h ment , 1n ee , w . . th at servile sub j ect p rofe s se d by your F ath ers to C 1v;l

ower s . But le ave inv ectiv es asi d e a:1d come now to t e

�oc tr ine p rop ose d in your eleve nth Ar tide . I f the . ref ��m­er s h a d limite d th em selves to s ay th�t we . are J U st1 he d

b f ' th in th e merits of J esu s Chnst , th1s would not

h�v e

a

�ntr o duce d any error , bec au se it might hav e bee:n � ery we ll un d erstoo d in a C a tholic s e n se - as no dou bt 1t

d too d by St p aul But if th ey woul d proce e d wa s un er s · · 1 h d to fu r th er , if th ey would p ay cou rt to the u t er ans an

th e Ca lvini s t s , if th ey woul d exclu de good work s , th ey mu st , th erefore , ag ree with th e se an d a l l�w t h a t th ey a r e

j u stifie d by faith only , and th a t th1 s is s alu t ary d octrine .

I a m , in dee d , pers ua de d th at

never ha ve r e ach e d such follies

imp ul s e of th e Germ an pen and

ever , th is a p art , I entreat you s uch an as s ertion is to re a son ,

- 48 -

th e good E nglis h woul d

ha d it not b een for th e

b ayone t . L e avin g , how­to con s i d er h ow co ntrary to th e Seri ptures , and to

th e rule s of your own Churc h hers elf . I n th e fir s t pl ace , to re a s on . Wh at do th e se M a sters int en d by s aying that we are ju stifie d by F aith only ? Do they mean th at faith cance ls our s ins and g iv es u s a rig ht to ete rnal life ? Thi s c a nnot , however , be but th e eff ect s of Di vine g r ace , of th e ch ar ity infu se d into our h e arts by the H oly Spirit which is give n to u s . Tha t by which we are ju stifie d cannot ce r t ainly p roc ee d from u s a s from a ne ar an d imm e di ate principle , but mu st of nece s sity procee d from God as from its only source . Now th is is v erifie d w ith reg ar d to gr ace , but not , in dee d , with reg ar d to F aith . Tel1 m e , can Go d m a ke an act of F a ith ? No , certa inly . There fore , Fai th in it s elf c annot be an act th a t proce e d s imm e di ately from Go d as from its only sou rce . I t is true , that fa ith is th e work of Go d in as much as it is Go d who mov es an d dispo s es u s to b e lieve , b ut it ca nnot be call e d th e form a l act of Go d proce e din g from Go d as his own imm e di ate work . F a ith then can only be the pro per act of a cre at ure who doe s not yet be hol d th a t whic h he bel ieves b ec au s e , accor ding to th e doc trine of St . P aul , in He av en th ere ca n be no faith , all being ever absorbe d in th e clearest vi s ion . But tel1 m e , can a ny re a sona b le man dec l are that an act th at c a n only be exercis e d by u s mise r ab le pilgrims can be the only c au se of our j u s tifi­cation ? Fa ith only ? Ah wh at pri d e woul d it not be in u s , did we th ink so .

MR . Thi s , as it appe a r s to me , wa s not th e ide a of our reforme rs . I think th ey only inten de d to s ay tha t Go d only ex acts faith fro m u s as a con dition to p ar don u s our sins , an d to rank u s a mong st the number of his elect .

FATHER DOMINIC Well , I will not contr a dict . But , stop­ping u pon your ex pl a n a tion support e d by th e princip le so ofte n a dv ance d : th en I s ay , if thi s is un d e r s tood , why do they not expl a in the m s el ves a li tt le be tter . But setting th is as i de , I only s ay , d oe s it appe ar to you , my dear Sir , th at su ch a D octrine even with your expl a n a tion , can be re a s o n ab le and con form able to Divine Scripture and to the s y s tem of a ll P rote s ta nts an d s ti ll more so to th e Ang lic a n ? No one is ig nor ant th a t every P rot e s t a nt ag ree s in this , to rej ect the in fa llib le authority of the Chu rch

- 49 -

a n d of T r a dit ion in or der to h old solely a n d exclu siv ely

to Scr ipt ur e . Thi s allowe d , whe n th ese propo s e a ny

doctrine th ey cannot s up port it b ut by pl ain Scr ipture

a lone .

B ut wher e doe s th e Scr ipture te ach th a t Go d dema n d s of

u s b ut faith only in or der to be esteeme d as accepte d b y

H im a n d comp ute d in the number of the elect ? I · do not

den y th a t Go d re quir e s faith of us as a nece s s ary con­

dit ion , wh at I deny is th at Go d requir e s F a ith o nly for

s al v ation . I n wh at p as s a ge of th e holy Script ures c a n we

fin d th a t Go d requ ire s of u s F a ith only for s a lv a tion ?

MR .. W I LL I AM Let me re min d you th a t we do not spe ak

of s al v a tio n , b ut of ju s tific a tion a lo ne .

FATHER DOMINIC Very well th en , you s uppo s e th a t a

m a n m ay be j u s tifie d by b elief only ; if h e dies in s uch a

st a te he wil l go eith er to He a v e n or to Hell . l f you tel1

me th at h e g oes to Heaven , th en accor din g to you fa ith

only is re quisite to enter He av e n . B ut if you tel1 me h e

will go to Hel l , I a n sw er wh at sort of j u s tific a tion ca n

thi s be which le aves you after j u stifica tio n guil ty of

He ll ? l f yo u will not a dm it th is gr o s s ab s ur dity , yo u

mu st s ay th a t which s uffice s for j u stific a tio n s uffice s als o

to e nt er He av en , an d I sh all a g ain a sk you in wh at p art

of th e Holy Ser i pt ur e s di d your reform er s fin d such

ex t r av ag a nt doctrine ? I know th at St . P a u l , whom th ey

pr e te n d coinci d e s with th em , doe s , in dee d , s ay th a t we

a r e j u s tifie d ex fide ( 45 ) , b ut he nev er s aid th at f a ith

only ju stifie s u s .

MR . W I L LIAM l f h e doe s not s ay it in terminis , h e

s ay s , howev er , th e equ iv a lent , a d ding th at we are j u sti­

fie d ex fide absque operibus legis ( 46 ) , which is e qu iv a ­

le nt to fa ith o n ly , an d you ca nnot show the co n t r ary .

FATHER DOMINIC Yet I h ope to show th e contr a ry . I n

or der to u n de r s t a n d w ell the doctrine of St . P a ul ex­

pr e s s e d in th ese wor d s , we shoul d know for wh at pur po se

St . P a ul prono u nce d th em . H is ob j ect h ere w a s to hum ble

th e pr i de of Ju dai s m which glorie d too much in th e duti e s

of the M os aic l aw , e s teemin g the ob serv a nce of th is a lone

- 50 -

nece s _s ary in or der to become hol ce r t a mly fa ls e . Now th e A os 1

y �n d perfect ' which w a s

fal s ity of this opin ion b p t e . w1_s he d to show th em th e

l d b Y conv1nc1ng the th

cou ecome pe r fect and h . m at as me n

ob serv e d th e Mos a ic l a

ol� w1th out havin g ever

it ' con s e q uently th e obws e

' eve n w1thout a ny knowle dge of . rva nce of th e · d 1

es sentlal as the J ewis h b s ai aw wa s not

l aw doe s th e Apo stle ho serv ers prete n de d . But of wh at

( which in sub sta nce is e

�� spe ak ? Of th e l aw of n ature

oth erwi� e hi s arg ument !o�f:e as th e dec a logu e ? ) No ,

conv1n c1ng p roof th at Go d w as

not hav e ser ve d a s a

J ew s ' but a lso of th e Gentile s hnot only the Go d of the

of natu re . He s poke th f w o cert a mly knew th e l aw

or of th e ce r e monia l 1'a

�re ore , of th e Mos a ic l aw only

t h w in so much as · t b 1

'

o t e He b rew na tion . 1 e ong e d sol ely

St . P a ul th en in t e n de d to

believe th at a man ma

_s ay . :1° ot� er th a n thi s . We

Mos aic l aw which is

y bte J u s t1fle d w 1thout ob serving th e

th ' mos tr ue a n d

.

e s ame Apost le s ay s h ' ag re e s w1th all tha t

still obs tin at ely maint a:

e

t�n f elsewh e r e . B ut if you

ex clu de th e ob s e rv a nce e a

f t . P a ul pretende d to

pl ace your s elf in o e n

ven o t� e . l aw of nature , you

Scriptu res a n d w ith si p clont� a d1ctlon wit h th e Holy

· a u h1m self Th .

may s ay ' a p ag e in th e Hol S . . ere is not ' we

inc ulc ate th e nece s s ity f b y . cript ure which doe s not

doin g th e will of Go d . o o

d

s e rvmg th e D ivine l aw a n d of

every p ag e , we may s a

m �� er to obt a ir: �tern al life . I n

be found th e co n de mn ah�n ot�h �ame D 1v m':' :"r iting s m ay

m one can be ev er fo u n d a

i s _YOUr . op1n 1o n ' a n d not

Wh at is more cle ar th a n

confir m a tlon of the s am e .

hims elf - si vis ad · t . th e ans wer of J e s u s Chri s t

Qui facit voluntatem pv:t��

in�red� ser�a mandata ? ( 47 ) .

caelorum ( 48 ) Wh at

me_1 , ipse intrabit in regnum

St . , J am es in ·

hi s ep7�{

1� �a�;!� st th?-n t h at �x p re s se d by

e�t ' ( 49 ) . Could he more cle a

irt

s sin� operibus mortua

c1s e ' con fut e y6ur elev enth Articl: ? or in wo r ds more con-

You dete st the au d acit of L th Epi s tle straminea ( SO) b t

� er who c a lls this C atholic

abhor this A rticle which u_ ow much more should you

s am e epi stle ' and in ever

is so cle ar ly con dem ne d by the

h ap s you may s a y ' thougJ ltagJe of holy Scr ipt ure . P er-

. am es m ay be a g ain st u s '

- 51 -

yet St . P a ul is fa voura ble? This cannot be credited , because it would be the same as placing the Holy Spirit in contradiction with itself . And moreover , I say that St . P aul is as contrary to you as St . J ames . Faith suffices for justification? But what does St . P aul mean when he writes - si habuero omnem fidem .. .. .. .. charitatem autem non habuero nihil mihi prodest , nihil sum? ( 51 ) sine sancti­monia nemo videbit Deum? Neque adulteri , neque rapaces , etc .. regnum Dei possidebunt etc .. ( 52 ) . St . P aul therefore , exclu des not only lnfidels from grace and from the King dom of heaven , but he excludes all those who violate the law of God . He req uires not faith alone , he also exacts ch-arity . Le t us confess it , my dear Sir , that Scripture is never opposed to Scripture : but your Articles are frequently contrary to the whole of Scripture . We must own that ju stification is the work of grace and not indeed of faith . Truly it · is produced by God and not by man . God then exacts from adul ts something more tha n faith only i n order t o work their jus tification . God does not indeed exact merit which · the foolish can only sup­pose . lf grace is grace , then it is not to be gained by any merit . We have a noted axiom - lippis et tonsori- . bus , that the principle of merit cannot fall under merit .

God , therefore , exacts of Adults besides faith , hope , sor­row for sins committed a resolution to amend and to satis fy D ivine justice in whatever way they are able for past offences . We say to Our Lor d , converte nos Domine ad te , et convertemur ( 53 ) . God answers us - convertimini ad me , et ego convertar ad vos ( 54 ) . Our prayer reminds us that we stand in need o f preventing grace in order to convert u s . The Divine answer or exhortation admonishes u s of the necessity of our coopera tion . Therefore , to s ay that we are ju stified by faith only is most absurd and contrary both to reason and to faith . U pon this subj ect , however , at present I need not say more , bec ause I think there is not a per son of merit among st you who would maintain an opinion so abs urd . On this account we will p ass on to the other Articles .

With reg ar d to good works which are , as it is s aid , the fruits of faith , little occurs for me to say . I only remark that they are rather the fru its of grace which is the

- 52 -

root , and , as it were , the life of the soul in the sp iri­tual order and that which gives us a participation of D ivine nature . This mode of expression appears to me more congruous . . The A_rticle says that they necess arily proce�d from Fa1th . Th1s term may be interpreted in an heret1cal sense , but I do not think that you understand it thus . _I d? not think that you wish to deny the liberty of free w11l m the exercise of good works .

.. �I LLIAM No certainly , whatever may be s aid of fatalism we acknowledge the liberty of free will under the influence of Divine grace , which does not destroy but pe�fects the works of nature . Now tel1 me what do you thmk of works preceding justification? Do you think that these have all the nature of sin as it is s aid in our thirteenth Article ?

FATHER DOMINIC God forbid that I should think so . This would be the same as accusing God and s aying that He counsels us and exhorts us to sin , since it is certa in that God exhorts sinners to do g ood works to repent of their sins , t� resol ve upon a change of life , etc . - All these thirig s · mu st be d_one before they receive ju stifying grace., and all thes_e thmgs would be sin according to the doctrme of your thirteenth Article . I t is one thing to s ay that works done before ju stification are not meritorious of eternal recompence , and another to say that they are sin . To the first we agree , but the second we deny·.

.. W I LL IAM Can it be said , however , that such works merit de congruo the grace . of j u stification?

FATHER DOMINIC P ardon me , my dear Sir , if I tel1 you that I do not wish to enter into a schol astic discussion which would carry us too far . The interests of faith con­cern our present treatise .

.. WILL IAM Then you will not even discuss the works of supererogation which are spoken of in the fourteenth Article ?

·F�THER DOMINIC With regard to this it will be suffi­c1ent for me simply to explain what Catholics understand

- 53 -

un der the name of works of supererog ation . We do not , most cert ainly , under st an d th at we giv e to Go d more th a n

we ought ( which would be folly ) but we u n dersta n d a

good work , not absolutely commande d by Go d , bu� 01:ly of cou nsel a n d le ft to th e liberty of e ach one . Th1s 1s th e

leg itim ate sense of works of supererog ation . Now t el1 me , c a n your reformers deny th at such are done �r at le ast th at th ey are pos sible? Can th ey deny th at 1t . would be

good to sell a ll th at th ey pos ses s to giv e th e . pnce to th e

poor and th e n p oor and h umble , to walk m the foot­step� of th eir n'ivine Re deemer ? No , cert ainly , th ey woul d

not deny it bec au se th ey would not give th e lie to J esu s Christ him s�lf . Ca n th ey say th at this is a .

precept for

a ll Christians ? ( I do not think them so foollsh ) · Th ey must , th erefore , confess th at we may and do perform good

works not comma n d e d , th erefore , we perform works of supererog ation . Your fourteenth Artide is th en fals e and

de serves to be disc ar de d tog eth er with many oth ers · . I

h ave neith er good nor b a d to say with reg ar d to th e flf-teenth Artide .

By th e sixteenth it appe ars th at your ref�rm ers �uppose

as an inconte stab le truth th at a ll those · s 1ns wh1ch are

c a ll e d against th e Holy Gh ost are by th eir n ature

irremissib le . This would be a very h ar d thing · It is true

th at Jes us Christ sai d th at bl asph emy against th e . Holy Ghost , a n d th e sp irit of bl asph emy would not ?e �em1tt e d , but if we may be lieve St . Augusti ne , by th1s 1s . to . be

un derstood wilful obstin acy in guilt or as determmat1�n

to sin or , at le ast , wilfully to rema in in sin . Th1 s determin a tion to sin certainly ca nnot be remi tted . B ut suppose th at such silfulnes s is l aid asi de , and th at th e

sinner detes ts not only th e sin committe d , b�t a lso !h e

will o n ( 55 ) desire of committing th e same aga m , I thmk h e may h ope for p ardon from !h e in!ini�� m ercy of _God : bec au se it is writte n th at imp1etas 1mpu non noceb1t e1 quacumque die conversus fuerit ab impietate sua ( 56 ) .

I n substance I believe th at every sin of which a ma n

ma y , w ith a truly contrite h e art , repent during h is life

may also be par don e d by God , th at not only . he m ay

obtain th e pa r don of s ins committe d . throug.h fra1lty , but also of those com mitte d by pure mallce , wh1ch are c all e d

- 54 -

against th e Holy Ghost . In th e seventeenth Artide it a.

ppe�rs th at your F ath ers approach too near the P r e d es­t1nat1sts , �o th e L u�herans and to th e Cal vinists , al­though th eir express1ons . may pos sibly allow of a C atholic sense , and a . c?nfutation of th e s ame woul d le a d to many lon� and d1ff1c ult questions which I should wish to avo1 d . Theref�re , �e ave it as it sta n ds , only I a dvise you . to rea d 1t w1th caution . I cannot , however , but pra1se th e ze al of . th ese �athe rs in reproving th e folly of tho�e . who esteem 1t p�s s1ble to a ttain s al va tion in every R�hg1on or Sect , prov1 de d th ey live conform ably to th e d1ct.ates o! th at . s

.ect ( Artide 18 ) yet , I ca nnot equa lly pra1se th eir prec1s1on which is always neces s ary in such ma tters . Th ey content th esel ves with s aying that in th e nam e �f J es us only c a n we h ave salvation . Very good , but . w11l every one who profes ses to be lieve in J esus Ch1:1st be s ave d to wh�tever h eretic al sect he may belong ? Th1s th ey leave un dec1 de d . For wh at motive ? Not to give um�rag e I fe ar to th e numerous sects which we see germi­natmg not only among st the allie d Germ a ns , but a lso in England · I f such be th e c as e , th eir decision was in de e d very politic a l , but not very Christia n . I do not think , however , th a t anyrhing more w as neces sary , becau se among st oth er Creeds th ey had a dopte d th at of St . Ath a n asius , and from this we see that not all who profess themsel ves Christians can be save d , but only those who hol d th e Catholic faith .

FATHER DOMINIC Very well , but in th e first pl ace I say it woul d h ave bee n suffic ient sim ply to h ave referre d to th e s aid Cree d . In the second pl ace I consi der th at th e Cre e ds were a dopte d in name , but not in fact as a rule of fa ith , since th e ir sole re ason for h a ving a dopte d them was bec au se th ey may be prove d by scripture . I t would . be enou·g·h for one to start up a n d s ay , this or that g 1ve n Art1cle is not s uffic iently prove d by Scripture , and be h old both th e Creed and th e Artide fa 11 to th e ground . Now wh at coul d th ey s ay to such a one ? They wo�ld say he is mista ken and does not u n dersta n d the Scnpture . But he mig ht reply , it is you th at are mis­taken and do no� rig htly un dersta n d th e Scriptu re . Th en , perhaps , th ey m1g ht a dd , th e Catholic Ch urch h as always

- 55 -

understoo d it thus . A most excelle nt ans wer , truly , in th e

mouth of a C athol ic , b ut not in the mouth of him w?o

drew up th ese Article s and who profes s es th em ( as �111

app ear more cl early from the re marks u pon the followmg

article s , 19 , 20 and 21 ) . However , as th e s aid th.ree

Articles form a re g ister apart , so will th ey form sub J ect

sufficient for anoth er Conference .

SIXTH CONFERENCE

THE CHURCH , COUNCILS , AND THEIR AUTHORITY

FATHER DOMINIC I f th ere be a sub j ect of vital impor­

tance to a faithful soul , ·certainly it is this : To know

we ll th e Chu rch and h er authority . For since th e Chur�h

is th at sole ark in which we can be sav e d from th e un1-

versal wr eck , th erefore , it high ly imports us to kno� h er

well in or der tha t we may enter , if we h av e th e mIS for­

tune to stan d without ; and in or der to hold fast , if we

h av e th e h appines s to be within her bos�m . Bu_t to know

h er we mu st form a ju st i dea of h er m or der to know

and'

distinguish her from th e m any conventicle s whi�h

g ive the m s el v es , indee d , th e name of Church es b ut m

re ality are no oth er tha n so many synag_ogu es of Satan ·

Now the cle ar and distinct i de a of a thmg may be h a d

b y �e ans o f a j u st de finition �f it , o: by knowing wh at

are th e marks by which the g 1ven thmg may be recog­

ni zed and dis tinguish ed from oth ers from which it differs .

Thu s , if I do not know what a triang le is , g eom etry t ells

me th a t it is a figure of three angle s and by me�ns of

this information I shall be a ble to distinguish a tnang le

from a circle , from a qua drangle , and from any oth er

figure .

Thi s de finition , however , as you see mu st be cle arer tha n

th e thing define d , oth erwise it would not . serv� t� ins tr uct me for "ignotum per ignotum non d1.gnosc1tur

( 57 ) . I thought this l ittle piece of instr�c�i�n ne� es sary

in order to show you how fals e is th e defm1t1on g 1v en of

- 56 -

t� e . Church by your �e fo�m ers . They say th en , tha t th e

v1s1b le Church of Chnst 1s a congre gation of faithful men in which th e pure wor d of Go d is pre ach e d and th e Sac­ram ents duly a dministered accor ding to Christ ' s ordi­nance , in all those thing s tha t of nece s sity are re quisite

to th e sam e . Such is in sub stance the definition which a ll

Protestants_ give of th e Church , as you may see in Bossue ts h 1story of the variations ( Book 15 ) .

Now I ask you , is s uch a de finition ex act ? Will it enable

me to discover what I seek? No , c ertainly . I t will leave

me in my ignor ance , and after having this definition I sha ll know no more of the Church than I knew before . For example : th e Pope dies , th e Conclave is ass emb le d a Succes sor is chosen . After th e e lection a ll the C ar din

,als

quit th e Conclave . I know th e Pope is electe d , but I do not know u pon whom the election has fa llen . I a ddress myself to som eone and ask : Who is Pope ? A g ood humoure d Roman answers me : He who was electe d by th e C ar dina ls . With equ al good humour I reply , thank you for your in­formation , b ut th is I knew before , it was not this that I aske d you . . � wish e d to know who was th e person electe d by th e C ar dmals . Now this is ex actly th e answer which I give th es e Gentle men .

I tha nk th em for th eir informa tion , b ut I knew b efore

that in the true Chu rch the pure word of Go d was pre ac_h e d a�d th e Sacrament s duly a dministere d . I only ask m wh1ch of the num erous societies which take the

nam e of th e tr ue Church of J esus Chri st this is verifie d? For th ere ne ver was a sing le sect that did not pret en d to pre ach th e pure wor d of God . Were th ey all th e true

Chu rch ? N o , certainly . Th erefore , if you do not g ive me

some oth er mark I shall never be able to dis tinguish th e

true Church . How can I know wh ere th e pure word of God is pre �ch e d and where th e Sacraments are duly a dminis­tere d 1f I do not fir st know what is the pure wor d of

· God , what . are th es e Sacraments and in what manner th ey should be administere d . Now , how c:an I know a ll this unle ss I know which is the true Church , from whose

mouth I oug ht to le arn what is th e tru e word of God , which are the S acraments , and what is the mode of a d­ministering th em ? Your re form ers th emsel ves s ay tha t th ey

- 57 -

receiv e d as Divin e tho s e Book s con c ern in g which there h as

nev er b een any dou bt in th e Ch u r c h . Th ey , �h �r efo:e , mu st h av e known th e Church in or de r to d1 s t i n gu 1 s h

w h ich B ook s o ug ht to be a dmitt e d a n d w hich ou gh� t o be

rej ecte d . T h er efor e , your de finition of th e C�u�c.h 1s v ery

elu s ive a nd in apt to dis cov er y . Su c h a defun t10n le a v e s

th e door ope n to ev er y sect im a g in a bl e th a t c a n be

forme d in a ny p a r is h or cor ner of th e Glo�e , f�r ev �ry one of th es e m ay c all th em sel v es a con g: e g at1?n m wh1c h

th e pu re w or d of Go d is pr e ach e d a nd m w h1ch the S ac-r am ent s are duly a dmini s ter d .

By w h at m ethod wo uld you convince th em ? How sile�ce

th em ? Co ul d you s ay th at your Ch u r c h h a d oth erw1 s e

dec i de d ? B ut th e s e t aking h ol d of your o w n wor �s wo ul d s ay : As th e Ch u r c h of J er u s ale m , Alex an dri a , Ant1och a nd Rom e h ave e r r e d , so a l so h as th e An glic a n Ch u r�h err e d , not only in ma nn e r of c e r emonie s , but als o in fa1th . Oh , w h at a d eep woun d have you op e ne d by s ay ing , ev e n

e s t ablis hi n g a s a n ar ticle of fai t h , th at th e w h ole Ch u r c h

ha d e r r e d . B y w h at m e a ns c a n this woun d b� h e a le �? I s e e no oth er but th a t o f renounc ing th e s e Art1cle s wh1c h , b el iev e m e , have e r r e d , yes h ave erre d not only in pr ac­tic al m att e r s b ut als o in poin t s of faith . W e come now to

th e a uthor ity w h ic h th e se reform e r s h av e gr a nte d to th e

Church .

T h e Ch u r c h , s ay s th e tw e ntie th Article , h ath power to de­cree r it e s or c eremo n i e s , an d a uthor ity in controv e r sie s of fa ith . Ve r y w ell , I a sk , th ere fore , wh at , a nd how mu_c h

th is a u t h o r ity m ay be? Th ey cont ent the m s elve s w 1!h

s ayin g th at it is not l awful fo� th e.

Ch u r c h to or_d a 1 n

a nyt h in g th at i s co ntr ary to God s wn tt e n w or d , n e 1th er

m ay it so expo u nd one pl ac e of Sc r ipt u re th a t it be

r ep ug n ant to a noth er . . M�st s alu t�ry a dv�ce c e� t a;nly , b u t

v er y imprope r . W h o 1s 1 t th at g 1v e s th 1 s a dv1c e . A few Th eolo gi an s who give it to th e . U n iv e�s al C�u rc h . Oh ! Oh ! it is , in dee d , too mu c h . Qu1s ded1t vob1s hanc potes­tatem? Iustifièata est sapientia a filiis suis ( 58 ) . B u t

tel1 me , ye s hr ew d me n ; Do you think s uch a dvic e nec e s­s ary ? Of cour s e . Th en you s uppo s e th at som etim e s th e

contr ary h as be e n done a nd may be done a� a in ? Un do ubt­e dly . V ery w ell , le t the p a s se d be w h at 1t m ay ; as to

- 58 -

th e futu re be more c au t iou s . But after h aving exh au ste d all po s s ible c aution , do you thin k your s elf obl i ge d to r ec e iv e h er dec i s io n s ? Softly , s top a b it . We w ill rec eive th em after h av i ng ex ami n e d if s h e h a s dec i de d conform­a bly to Scr iptu r e .

But tel1 me , if I , a poor beg ga r , were to tel1 you some­thin g th at you foun d confor ma b le to Sc r iptur e wo uld you not belie ve me ? Surely , why not ? V er y w ell . ' Now I , in an�ly� ing th e honou� you have done me pe r son a lly in behe v1 n g me ever y time I tel1 you someth i n g con form able to .

Sc r iptu r e , find that you pl ace me on a p ar w ith th e Umver s a l Church , a nd th at you do not g r a nt t o th e Un i­v ers al Ch u rch a g r e at er honour than you have g r a nte d me · Do you know I s h a 11 be temp te d wi th pri de seein g my s elf so mu ch h o noure d by you ! But no , I w ill not be prou d of th e hono u r you do me . You would do it e qu a lly to any .p oo� old_ m a n , to any cou ntry clown . Be h old , my goo � Sir , m J u st term s th e authority w h ich th e s e le g 1 sl ators g r a nt to th e Chu rch .

MR .. W I LL IAM I a s s ure you , F ather , th at I n ev er ma de th e se r eflec tions before . I a l ways thoug ht t h at th ey gr a nt e d her som ething mor e .

�ATHER DOMINIC No , my de ar Sir , th ey gr a nt her noth­mg mo r e , nor can th ey g r a nt h er mo r e a s long a s th ey pe r si s t in maint a inin g th at th e Ch u rch is fa ll ible . As lon� . a s t� ey s ay th is th ey can nev er r e c eive h er dec 1 s 10n s w1thout h av i n g fir st ex a min e d w h e th er s h e h a s erre d .or not . T hu s it is not th e U niv e r s al Ch u rc h t h a t may

' . m th e l a st in s t a nt , dec ide upon th e opin io n s of p artic ul�rs

. b ut , on th� contr ary , a c c or ding to your sys t em . 1t 1s ever y. pr iva t e in dividu al th a t may and oug ht , :n. :th e l a st rn s t a nc e , to p a s s h is j u dgm e nt u pon th e de fimt1?n s , of th e Univer s al Ch u rch . A g r e ate r over ­th row of thmg s than th is c a nnot be imag in e d .

MR .. W I LL IAM I th�nk , how ever , w e do not s ay this , only t h at D ivine Scnptu re should dec i de in the l a st in­stance .

- 59 -

FATHER DOMINIC F ine wor ds tr uly , but wor ds only an d

nothin g mor e , since here u sua lly th e doubt g ene� a�ly

fa l ls . I n wh at s e n s e shoul d we un der s tand t�e D 1v1ne

Scriptur e s ? Now th e Univer s a l Church h as dec1de d th at

th ey s hould be un de r s tood in this g iven s �n se_ . Howev er ,

some in dividuals ri s e up and s ay : No , Sir , 1t s houl d be

under stood in this oth er sen s e . Do you s e e , _then , th at

th e ul tim ate · a n a ly si s is not , in dee d , th e Scripture b1:1t

m erely an interp r e t a tion g iven to the s ame by so�e pri­v ate in dividua l contr ary to th at giv en by th e Umv er s a l

Chu rch . I think the se Gentlemen nev er foun d them s elv e s

mor e emb arr a s s e d th a n in th e dr awin g up of th e . pre s e n t

Ar ticle òf the authority of the Church . On one s1 de th�y wis h e d to pr e s e rve som e authority in th eir as s embly m

or der th at th ey might be ab le to oppr e s s whoever refu se d

to submit to th eir decision s . An d , oh th at we coul d h av e

m a de our s el ve s in fallible !

But how in s uch a c as e gu ar a ntee th emsel ves again s t th e

an ath e m a s of Tr e nt an d of Rome? Oh t h a t we could hav e

ren de r e d our power supreme and nulle d th a t of th e

U nive r s al Chu rch ! But th ey k new th at though men might , in dee d , be a lit tle st unne d by some artifice , ye t th a t

th ey could never be r educe d to the con dition of s uch

stipul ation s . Th ey would not , there fore , s ubj ect .th em­s el ves to ce n sure , only limite d th em s el v es to th e lib erty of ce n s urin g any decr e e or definition of a Gener al Council .

T hen follow s th e doctr in e of th e Council s . O my God ! in to wh at a s t ate of de g ra d ation would th ey throw the . Church

by e s t abli s hin g as a Canon th at th e Gener al Counc1l s may not be convoke d w ithout th e comm an d an d will of P rince s , th a t is , of secul ar power . T ake notice , however , t�a t of p riv ate or N a tion al Councils th ey s ay not a wor d , m th e

hope , pe r hap s , of bein g able to pr e s erve for th em sel v es

th e liberty of m eeting wh e nev er th ey ple a s e d . W hat th ey conceiv e d to be th e mos t · impor t a nt wa s to take aw ay . th e

liberty of th e U niv ers al Church . It , th erefore , r_ema�ne d

at le a s t undecide d wh e th er or no a N ation al Coun�1� m1g ht

m eet at th e ple a sure of the B ishop s , �ithout aw a1t_mg t� e

comma nd s of th e Sovereign . An d to Judge by th eir dec1-s ion we may s ay it could , as the C anon ha d tie d th e

- 60 -

han ds only of . the U nive r s al Chu rch an d ha d s ubj ecte d to the will of P rmce s solely the Gener al Council s .

This w a s , indee d , a bold step , but nece s s ary , bec au se th en no Gener al Counc il could con de mn th em without th e w�ll of the ir Sovereig n . Yet the step w a s we ll me a s ure d w1th re g ar d to th em sel ves , re s erving alway s th e power of m eeting in or der to con demn any Gener al Cou ncil wh at­ever . Th e evil , however , w a s that th ey ha d to act with tho se who were a s politic al as them s elv es . P e rh a p s , even more so , th ey h a d to ac t with Elizabeth . The Canon s w ere iss ue d tog eth er w ith the Queen ' s decl a r a tion , who , in order to do aw ay with any doubt , a s s ume d to her s elf th e rig

_ht of taking from the Eng lis h B is hops that liberty wh1ch th e s e ha d _ ta k�n . from th e Univ er s a l Church . They were , th erefore , proh1b 1te d to a s semble without a licence in scriptis , under th e r�y al se a l , which lice nc e , for more

�han an ag e , th ey have · · not been a ble to ob ta in . A pun-1s hment worthy , m dee d , of th eir vile a dul ation to civil pow er , an d of the de g ra dation they a tte mpte d upon th e Univer s a l Church .

But tel1 me , · my de a r Sir , is it tr ue th a t th e Council s cannot be a s se mble d without the comma n d of t h e Sov er­eig n ? l s thi s con form able to th e pure wor d of Go d? Al a s ! who then ab solved the · Apo stle s when th ey a s semble d at J er u s ale m to delibe r ate upon le g al . obs ervance s without th e comma n ds eith er of Cl a u diu s or of Nero? Th e Apostle s , however , were cert a inly absolve d by God . But who will a? solve th e �e leg i sl ator s ? They most cert ainly ( . . . ) have s1r:1 ne d aga m st their prece ding Canon , h aving define d a thmg contr a ry to God ' s written wor d . Suppo s e , howev er , that �he Prince s comma nd the Bis hops to a s s emble in c.ou nc1l , an d t h at th e a s semble d B ishop s form some defini­t1�n or Ca non , wh at is th eir authority ? C a n they s ay : v1s um e st Spir itui S ancta et no bis ? ( 59 ) Fy , Fy .

· The s e are but men , and all men are not g overne d by th e Spir it of Go d . Th erefore , they may err , a n d hav e , in fact , er re d . Behol d th e deci s ion of th e s e reformer s . T heir dec rees then · can have no weight only in as much as they are s upporte d by Divine Scripture . Of wh at use , then , were th e definitions of Nice ( 60 ) a g ain s t the Ari an s ? We

- 6 1 -

are not as s ecu re s ince the definition a s we w ere before

· t Th e Aria ns may alw ay s maint ain th at th e F ath ers �;se mbled a t N ice ( 6 1 ) w e re · but m en , a1:d t h at a ll men are not governe d by th e Spirit of Go d . B1sh op B ull t ake

.s

th e field and s ays th e se F a th ers w e re g ood men and 1t

c annot be pre s ume d th a t th ey h av e erre d . B ut th e n: w

Ari ans answ er : though th ey may hav e b een g ood , ye t st1ll th ey w ere men and , in conse q uence , . m ay ·· h av e e rr� d an d , in fact , have erre d . Bull r ephe s : J esu s Chr

.1st

pr omis e d to re ma in wit h th e Apos tle s till th e cons umma t1 on of ag e s , an d by th is mu st

. ?e un der stood �h a t h e woul d

ain not with th eir in d1v1dual per sons alone , for th ey ��:ld �ot liv e till th e en d of th e world , b ut a lso t h at He

woul d re m ain with th eir Succe ssors . A m�s t excelle nt answ er , b ut dep rive d of all e ffect an d for�e m t�e mouth

of one who h as s ubscrib e d to th e 39 Art1cle s , s1:1ce th e

Ari ans may r eply : l f the a s sist ance of J es u s �hnst �en­dere d infa llible t h e F at h er s of th e fir st Counc1l of N 1ce , it wo uld h av e ren dere d · also infa llible those of th e s econ d Council of N ic e and als o those of T re�t . B ut you do not a dmit th is conclu s ion . T h erefore , ne1th er ou ght you to

a dmit th e pr ece din g .

We s ay wit h you th a t th es e F a t h er s w e r e men , and th at is s u fficie nt for th inkin g th at th ey m ay have :rr ed . Oh

wh at a mort al wound did th es e reformers . �1� tt th e

Chu rch of ] es u s Ch ri st by g i ving s uch a defm1t1on . T h e

Ch u rch h as th e mos t solid b asis , hence not all th e

s trok e s even th e most impe tuou s will ev er be ab le to

m ake h�r fall . Ye t , nev ert h ele s s , if sh e fall s not w e .are

not inde bt e d to th e s e F ath e r s , b ut solely to th e prom1s es m a de to th e s am e by our D ivine Re de emer . I f we were

once to lo se this , th at inst ant a ll would be . at an en d · T h e authorit y of th e Ch urch and .of th e <=:ounc1ls woul d be

no more th an a · v ain nam e , entirely vo1d o.f s en se , · an d

every priv at e in divid u al ·might as s ume th e ng ht not only to ex amine , b ut al so to con demn the definitions an d th e

C anons of th e w h ol e entire U niv ers al Church . . B ut who �an dou bt it ? I s not ·· this ex actly th e s acr e d nght of w h1ch

your Th eolog ians , and eve n th e most mode r at e ,: boa st ! N ewm an cer t ainly is not one of th e most funous a g a1 n st

u s . He is even suspect e d of favouring us too much , and a s such is not alw ays w elcome d by m any of your p arty ·

- 62 -

Yet , ob se rve w h at he h a s w ri tten in his t e nth lecture on th e proph e tic a l offic e of th e Church : " T h e humble s t and me ane st a mong Chris t i ans m ay defen d the faith a g ainst th e w h ole Church , if He h as as much in it and as much r�g ht . to it

. as B is hops or A rch bis h ops , an d nothin g ( . . . )

h1m m h1s prote s t , but his intellect u a l cap acity for making it , e tc .. 1 1

Th e Ch urch , th ere fore , de fine s : some Gene r al Council is assemble d , . ye t I sh a ll a lw ays con s i der mys elf at lib erty to cont r a d1ct w h atever may be decide d upon w h ene v er I ple a se , an d th at no o ne wi ll have a rig ht to sile nce me , since n� one c an call in qu es tion any libe rty to oppos e the U n1v ers al Church . T e l1 m e , th en , S ir , w h at this authori

.t y is w hic h your twentie th Article app e a rs to gr a nt

th e U mv ers al Ch u rc h ? l s it not a m ere n ame deprive d of sens e ? As to me , I unde r st an d it th us . The Ch u rch e st ablish ed by L aw h as as much authority as t h e L aw giv e s h er and nothing more , for it is not re a son able to suppo se that th e e ffect can be more noble than its c a u s e . She ha s authorit y , in de e d , to imp rison th e body , but h as no author ity to subj ect th e mind to h er definitions . Th e min ds of in dìvidua ls are as much at libe rty aft e r her de finitions as they w e re before .

.. WILLIAM l t app e a r s to me th a t you are part ly rig ht , but not e nti r ely . W h at ev er m ay be Newma n ' s author ity it is not s ai d abs olu t ely th a t every in div i d ual h as th e ri g ht to opp ose th e Ch u rch in any c a se , but only when by hypot h esis th e w h ole Church ag ree s in a dop ting some error cont r ary t o the Cr e e d .

FATHER DOMINIC Your re flection appe a r s j u st , and is not ce rt ainly foreig n to th e · qu e stion . I hop e , howev er , th a t my reply will be as j u st and not le s s to th e p ur­pos e . I have _ b ut one thing to a sk . Who will have the power of j u d g in g if th e w h ole Church h as erre d? Ca n it be th e Chu rch h er s elf? T h is cl ash es in terminis , since w e suppo s e th e w h ole t o h av e erre d . An d be s i de s , wh at sort of a j udg e would th at be who mig ht p ronounce s ent ence upon himself and aga inst himself? T his power belon g s , pe r h aps , to a Ge ner al Council? B ut th is is compose d of men w h o may err and sometim es · h av e err e d , as your

- 63 --

twenty-fir s t Article as s erts . Then , if we s upp�s e th e

whole Chu rch to have erre d , can a Ge ne r al Counc1l be a

leg itimate j udge which , in fa ct , is only !h e r epr e se nta­ti ve of th e Univer s al Church ? l f the prrn c1pal �a s · err e d , how can the repre s e n t a tive be e steemed a s q u 1te exempt

from error ?

Th ere remain s nothing mor e to be s aid exceptin g �hat th e

judg e of th e whole Church fallen into error .

1s e ac h

private in dividu a l . . Ye s , th u s spok� Luther : th e whole

Church h as e·rre d , an d I alone remarn exe mpt fr?m er ror . An d this w a s th e precise answer made by Ar�u s : th e

U nive r s al Chu rch has e rred at N ice · an d I rem arn almost

alone to s upport th e tr uth . The s am� s ay s eve�y other

h er e sia rch . How ·will you be able to s 1lence t�em . W�at , th ere fore , is th e authority whic h your twe nt1eth Art1cle

gives to ·th e Chu rch in controversiis fidei? ( 62 ) ·

I n th e ultim ate a n a ly sis Scripture , at

le a st , remain s , wh ich in every ca se serves to dis tinguis h

error from tr uth .

FATHER DOMINIC Well th en , in th e fir st pl ace , I s ay t h at you have lo s t your time in forming th e s e Articles of religio n . Th ey are u sel e ss , th e Cree ds are u sele s s '

. �h e

Councils are u s ele s s , th e Bis h ops are u s ele s s , th e M1n1s­ters a re u sele s s . Th e Bib le and th e Bib le only . Be hold the common cry of all th e dis s ente r s of your Chur�h , and of all who ha ve prot e ste d an d s till prot e st a g arn st th e

Church es t ablish e d by L aw , in th e s am e manner as th e

Chu rc h e s t ablis h ed . by L aw prot e s t s a g ainst the Church

e s t ab lis h e d by J es u s Ch ris t . How th en will this Church by L aw e s t ablis h ed be ab le to m aint ain h er groun d ? I n th e

secon d pl ac e , I s ay th a t not eve n Scripture remain s wh e n

you rej ect th e Authority of th e Church , for �o� do �ou

know th a t s uc h a Book form s a p art of th e D1vrne Scnp­tures ? You will have n othing left a s c ert a in , exc�pt th e

exis t e nc e of God and th e po s sibility of revel at1o n , a s

Newma n h ims elf s ay s in h is thir d lecture . All th e rest , h e a dds is but mere opinio n . F aith , he repe at s , should be gu i d�d by mere prob ability , a nd d�ubt is ever our portion in thi s life . Se e how much rem�m s a nd how mu c h

may be s aid by a n Anglican of g ood fa1th .

But tel1 m e , is th is th e F aith of which St . P aul s aid : Scio cui credidi , et certus sum? ( 63 ) . I s this th e faith by which th e P a tri archs vicerunt regna? ( 64 ) . I s this the faith of whic h in . th e Athana sian Cree d we re a d : Hic est fide� ca_tholica ; quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque cred1dent salvus esse non poterit? ( 65 ) I le ave you to judg e .

SEVENTH CONFERENCE PURGATORY , PENANCE , THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS , WORSHIP OF RELICS , ETC .

FAT�ER �OMINIC Th e twe nty-s econd Article of your com­mumon 1s s hort , yet it embr a c e s so many thing s th a t I do not think we s h all be a ble to dr aw to a conclu sion in one Confer� nc e . Mo�t certainly , if we wis h to tr e at upon every s ubJ ect th er em contained it wo uld employ us not only a few days , but week s , a nd even month s . I do not , however , think so much will be nec e s s ary for I ha ve the hono ur of tr e ating with one who is conte nte d with a li ttle , yet , sho uld you wis h for more exten sive informa­tion , you do not want for le arne d author s in whose writ­ing � our doctrine is cle arly expl aine d a n d g u ar a ntee d aga m s t all th e attacks of Prot e s t antis m . By way of pref ace , however , to the pr e s ent Conference , let u s re ma rk a gro s s de c eit so fre quently re s orte d to by your Le gisl ators , not only in the pr e s ent but in oth er Article s . And th is is to decl aim a g ain st th e Roma n Church , wis hin g to make believe th a t th ey h ave n o oth er antag onist b ut this alone , ju st as if the oth er Churc h e s sep �r ate d from Rome h ad nothin g in common with u s , but as 1f Rome alone wa s a rock of sc a ndal to the whole of Chris tia nity . Yet , I c an a s s ure you , th a t on th ese points we diff er in nothing , or almost in nothing , from the oth er Church es sep arate d from us in th e Ea s t . The differe nc e , th erefore , exis ts only between P rote s ta nts on the one side , a nd every ot her communio n which c a ll th emsel ves

- 65 -

Chri s ti an on th e oth er . Why th en do th e reform e r s so

p e r s i ste ntly decl aim only ag ain st the Chu rch of Rame ? D o

th ey ag ree with th e Gr e ek Chu rch ? N o , mos t certainly ;

and I will g ive you · as a proof the same P rote st ant

author s , as we shall afte rwar ds see in th e s am e book of

au thorize d homilie s , in which it is s aid with s u rpri sing

effronte r y , that th e whole entir e Chri s tian wor.l d , for

more than eight hu ndre d ye ar s back , w as fallen 1nto an

abomin abl e idol atr y ; a vice most dete s t able before Go d

and d amnable to a ll mankin d . "So that l a ity and cle r gy ,

le arne d and unle arne d , ah ye s , s ects and de gr e e s of

m en , women and chil dr en of all Chr i ste n dom ( a h or rible

and most dr e a dful thing to think ) h av e been at once

drow ne d in abominable idol a tr y , or all oth er vice s , th e

mos t dete s te d of Go d and mos t dam n able to men , and tha t

du ring th e s p ace of eight hu n dr e d centu rie s a n d more . 1 1

Th e Chu rch of Rom e th e n wa s not alone gu ilty , but ev ery

oth er s ect e qu ally so , if th e re be any tr uth in the a s ser­

tion of tho s e who did not scr uple to write s uch bl asph e­

my . Yet , howev er more or l e ss the Or ie ntal s ects may be

divide d from u s , th ey ar e not so upon all tho s e thing s of

which the P orte st ants accu se u s . B efore th e se innov ator s

took th e fiel d th ere w as not a sin gle socie ty upon e arth

th at m aintaine d th e ir Article s . The Chr i s tian s ocietie s , a s

th ey call th em sel v es , maintained all , or at le a st almos t

a ll tho se thing s b rou g ht a g ain st u s by - the r eform e r s of

th e sixte enth ag e . Thi s be ing grante d , le t u s proce e d to

th e c ited Art icle . I n th is they bring a g ain st u s the doc­

tr ine of P u rg a tor y , P ar don s , th e a dor ation of l mage s and

R elics and · th e invocation of S aints . An d it is s aid that

all th e s e thing s hav e be en vainly inv ente d without any

g roun ds of Scr iptu re b ut rath er r ep ugnant to the W or d of

Go d . As to what re g ard s P u rga tory , I h av e alre a dy tr e at­

e d , tho ugh briefly, in my thir d le tter to Alitofil a s \ =

Le tt ere Celimontane ) . I ne e d not th en rep e a t what 1s

1

th ere s aid s ince you can refer to it at your le is u re , but

I will conte nt my self with a dding something taken from

the ancient p r actice s of the C athol ic Chu rch . One of yo u r

Th eolog ian s , who cert ainly is neither frie ndly nor favo ur­

able to our c au s e , h as re m arke d that we have v ar iou s

litu rgie s which be ar th e n am e s : one of St . P ete r , anoth er

- 66 -

of St . J am es , anoth er

John . of St . Mark and anoth f St er o

'Fhes e are �e rtainly ver y ancie nt and ar e mos t a s s ur edly even anter ior to the fatal s epar ation of the O rie ntal sects , and ant e rior als o to th e Council of Ch alce don . Th e

fo':1-r L itu:g.ies in s u b s tance ag ree with e ach oth er , and th� s . s uff�c1e ntly s how s th em to hav e but one common ong 1n , v1z . , an origin D ivine and Apo s tol ic . Now , we

mu st here obs e rve th at all th e s e L itu rg ie s conta in a pr�ye r for de p a rte d souls . "They a ll contain a pr ayer

wh1ch has be en exclu de d from th e Englis h Rit ual for th e

:e st a�d pe_ace of a ll tho s e who have de p arte d this life

m . Go d s . f':11th and· fe ar " ( T r act s for th e T im e s , - no . 63 ) . Th1s s u ff1c1e ntly shows that all Chr i s tian s , from the time

of th e. Apo stle s , hav e alway s believe d , with th e v aliant and p 1ou s Iudas Maccabeus ( 66 ) , that it is not only l aw­ful but eve n goo d and holy : pro defunctis exorare ut a peccatis s alvantur ( 67 ) . Now the au thor of you r homilie s

as s u re u s that tho s e who ar e in He av e n stand not in nee d of our praye r s , and that tho s e who are in He ll cannot · profit b y th em .

Thence he concl u de s , that we s houl d not pra y for th e

de a d . On th e contr ar y , I conclu de that the whole Chu rch even from th � Apos tle s ' tim e , ( I may a d d even pr evio u ; to them ) h avmg . pr a ye d for the faithful de p art e d , it has

al�ay s been behe ve d th at th e s e were in a mid dle state , n�1!h er condem ne d to Hell , nor yet admitt e d to the ble s se d v1s 1on of glory . Now this is · ex actly what we unde r stan d by _ the name of P u r g ator y . Th erefore , your twenty-s econ d Art1�le and your homily upon praye r decl aim not only ag �m st th e Pope and the P api st s , but a g ainst the e ntire Umver s a l Chu rch , and · in all age s of anti quity find no one to s up port the m b ut He riu s and Vig ila ntiu s . B ut it doe s not app e a r to me ver y hono r able to prefe r th e senti­m ent s ?f th e se two Here s iarchs to the common p r actice of

· the Umv er s al Chu rch in all age s . I think tha t if your reform e r s ha d known as much as yo u r Th eolog i ans do at pre s ent th ey wo ul d not hav e take n so bol d a ste p .

I know th at at pr e s ent , as th e se ancient r e a sons no lon­ger ex is t , many of yours este em it rig ht and good to

- 67 -

m ake a com memor ation of the dep arte d , and I find in th e

75 Tract for -- an · office to be rec it e d in commemora tion of th e de a d in Chri s t .

.. W I LL I AM Very tr ue , but con s i der that it is one

thing to a llow of a middle s tate in which the soul may be retaine d , and anoth er thing to s ay th ere is a P urg a-tory as you a dmit .

FATHER DOMINIC que st ion?

My God ! Then the name only is in

Not th e nam e only , but th e thing s which it sig nifie s . Th ere may be a middle st ate w ithout th at purgin g fire which you bel ie.ve in , and all th e oth e r s trang e thing s annexe d to the i de a of P u r g a tory .

DOMINIC Well , but who oblige d you to b el iev e

in th is pur ging fire a s an Article of fa ith ? I t is a pr�b­a bl e opinion th at thi s doe s exis t , well-founde� on Scrip­ture and on the writing s of the F ath er s , yet 1t has nev er bee n fixe d as a dogma of faith . The Council of T rent l imits it s elf to s ay th at th ere is a P urga tory , and that th e soul s th ere ret aine d m ay b e sol ace d by our s uffr ag e s · Do you b el ievè this ? l f you do , you believe s ufficient_ a s

to what re g ar d s faith . You woul d only h av e oth er po1r:1t s

to eluci d ate of m inor import ance w ith re sp ect to w h1ch th er e may b e a que stion salva fide et charitate ( 68 ) .

After th is your re form ers d ecl are a g ain st pardon . I do not ex actly under stand th e me aning of th eir voc abulary . P e rhaps it sig nifies the fac ulty which the Church h a s to p ar don or to re mit sin ? But thi s woul d . b e contr a�y . to th at Article of the Cree d which b el ie v e s m the rem1s s 1on of sin and contr ary als o to the word s of J e s u s Chri st who s �id : quorum remiseritis peccato remittimtur , e tc . ( 69 ) . W h at th eir me aning is , there fore , I do not kno:w and cannot , on this account , g ive an answer to th e ir obj ection .

MR .. W I LL IAM I do not think by this wor d p ar don that th ey inte nd to bl ame or to de ny th e faculty grant e d to the Chu rch of re initting or ret a ining s in , b ut only the

- 68 -

way in which th is is practise d in th e Roman Chu rch , viz . , by obligin g pe nite nt s to manife st ation , by g iving them ab solution u pon con dition of auric ul ar confe s sion . FATHER DOMINIC M aybe so , but in th e fir s t pì ace I beg of you to reme mber th at this auric ul ar confe s sion is not cu stomary in th e Roman Church only . It is th e practice al so of the Greek s , though sep ar ate d from u s . Th erefore , why bl ame th e �oma n Church alone ? I n th e s econ d pl ace , I s ay th at auncul ar or s ecre t confe s s ion is not e s s enti al to th e _ S �crame nt �f p en ance . You might confe s s in pu blic . T�a t. 1t �s done m secre t is a s alutary practice of dis ­cipline , rntroduce d for g ood re a s ons . F in a lly , how can th ey confute wh at th ey shoul d practise th em sel ve s a s it appe a�s . from �o_u: book of common prayer which enJ oms th e Mu�. 1 ster v 1s 1tmg th e s ick to move them to a s pecial confe s s 10n of th eir sin s . I do not think you are · -accus-tom e d to , do th is in pu b lic . I n the commu nion ritua 1 als o , I fin d a similar exhortation to thos e whos e con� s cience� may be trou ble d , th at pre s e nting the m s el v e s to som e d1 s cre et and le arne d Minis ter of God ' s word and decl aring th e s t a te of th e ir con science , they m ay r;cei ve !�� _ 12_E:��_f!_t ___ of_ a b solu tion . Now , I do not think th a t in such a c a se the confe s s icm is m a de in pu blic . Why , t�ere fore , repre hend in oth er s what th ey th em sel v e s prac-t1s e .

MR . WI LLIAM T ake notice , howev er , th at with u s s pe­cial confe s s ion is not comman de d , but only recomm en de d , advis e d , inc ulc ate d .

FATHE� �OM.INIC lt m ay b e so , but in th e fir s t pl ace I sa y : 1f 1t 1s not a comm an d of your s , it is a comman d of th e Holy Spirit by th e mouth of St . J am e s : Confitemini alteru_tr�m peccata vestra ( 70 ) . In the s econ d pl ace I s a y , 1f 1t be true th at confe s s ion is contrary to the wor d �t -�od , not only could it not b e commande d , but not even advi s e d . Why , th erefore , do th ey s ay that pardon is contr ary to th e wor d of God?

MR . W ILL IAM P e rhaps by this pardon they me an th e in dulg ence s use d in th e Roman Church-.-

- 69 -

I f so th ey should h ave expl ained themsel ves a lìttle better , since indulgence and p ar don are not synonymous . But tel1 me , is it true th a t in dulg ences a re contrary to the D ivine word? Can th�se Gentlemen point me out one p ass a ge of th e same by . wh1ch they a re condemned? No , certa inly they ca nnot , wh�lst I , on the contr ary , c an show them th at the pract1ce of gr a nting indulgences w as a lways in the Church of God , even at th e ti me of St . P aul , who used .it in favour of the incestuous Corinthia n ( 7 1 ) . Moreover 1t a ppe ars to be in use with you even in th ese days , as app�ars from a

i ssued by a reg ul at ion of your C lerg� m . t?e y� ar

niaria? .

commutatlo n1s1 ratlo­etc .

in pauperum , in ( see M i lners end of Controversy letter

c an th ey have the cour age to con demn in is the ir own pr acti se under

I t cannot be denie d , however , th at there have b een gre at abu ses in the Church of Rame u n der this point of I n dulgences .

P erh aps so ! but is th ere anyth ing th at ma y not be m a lic iously abuse d ? No men abu se even the word of Go d itsel f , using it to establ ish th eir er�or� ! Mu st we , th erefore , condemn the Bib le and say 1t 1s contr a ry to the word of God? There have been �buses , I gr ant it , b ut when ever did the Church s a nctlon th�se abuses ? The F athers of the Counc il of Trent , after hav:-ng decl ared th at the Church ha d the fac ulty of gra ntmg I n dul gences took wise me as ures in arder to prevent any abuse . The ' ab u ses then were m a de by pri vate individua ls and not by the Church of Rame in gener al . The Church will ex ist as long as the Worl d . The Church. is compose d of men , and with men th ere is always somethmg of hum a n fr a i lty . Even in St . P a ul ' s time . there wer� some who existimabant esse pietatem m pretendmg to make a tr a ffic of piety . But did the Apostles , on th is accour:it , sep ar ate th emsel ves from th e Church ? . Ah ! my de ar S1r , how e asy it is to discover ab uses m others ! b ut how difficult it is to correct them in oursel ves ! Ah , were we

- 70 -

but as sol ic itous to consi der and to correct our own defects we should have neith er time nor inclina tion to cons i der those of oth ers !

Let us now p ass on to th e worship of I m ages and of Relic s , and to the invocat ion of Sa ints . Th is is the gran d he a d of accus at ion formed aga inst us b y our sep ara te d Brethren , loa ding us w ith the most da mn a b le idol a try a s , amongst others , does the author of your homi lies who a ppe a rs to ha ve dip pe d his pen , not in ink , b ut in the ga ll of dragons and in th e poison of asps . I a m per­su a ded th at , at present , the w isest and most moderate of your A_ngl ic a r:i Ministers absta i n from rea ding to the peo­ple th 1s hom1ly so unworthy of its nam e . Yet it a lw ays rema ins impressed with indel ible cha racters as a m a rk to the whole universe of wh at were once the sentiments of the Anglican Church aga i nst the Univers a l Church of a ll ages . I sa y , of a ll a ges , bec au se it h a s been a reli g iou s custom in a 11 ages , I do not , indee d , s a y , to a dare but to vener ate the precious rema ins of th e . The Mag deburg Centuries ( 72 ) gr a nt us the fou rth a ge w ith all the oth ers following , a nd c a ll these gre at lumin a ries of the fourth ag e , the Ba sils , the Chrysostoms , the Ambroses and the Augu stines by the tit le of ReHqu a ri ans , or a dorets of rel ic s . But even previous to th a t age were not the rel ics of Sa ints he ld in venerat ion ? Rea d the most sincere acts of the Martyrs , and observe wh at were the p ious and reli g ious precautions u sed in arder to possess the rema ins of these glorious cha mpions of the fa ith . They were c arried so far that the enem ies of relig ion ordered the bodies of the M artyrs to be burnt and cast into the sea to prevent the Christi ans from a doring them in pl ac e of Jesus Chr ist as new Gods . The ignor a nce , then , of these ancient enemies of our holy Rel ig ion w as simi lar to that of our Protestants , who con­found the honour we render to the S a ints and to their relics , with the a doration due to God alone . The infidel s � ight , indeed , be insensible of their error , not b eing mforme d concern ing our rites and our sentiments , but what excu se do our sep ar ated Brethren deserve since they know , or ought to know , how very different is the honour which we ren der to the Sa ints and to the rel ics of the

- 7 1 -

Saint s , from that a dora tion p aid by u s to the one tr� e God . I f th ey do not know thi s , why do they .not re a d , m place of the works of those who . loa d u s w1t� c a lumny , th e true definitions of our Counc1l s and espe�ially those of T rent u pon that s ubj ect I n the se they w1ll. see more cle arly th a n th e Sun that we are far trom gra ntr ng to the Saints and to their relics that wh1c� belong s . �o Go d alone . Why do th ey not re a d the authorized exp�s 1tions of our belief , and e s pecia lly those of B os s uet wh1ch are so s hort clear and precise ? Let them re a d at le as t those two �na themas of the Celebrate d ( ? ) to which n� C atholic will refu se to subscribe , provided he be well ms tructe d in the Cathol ic fa ith and u n der s ta n ds the force of the wor d s : " Curse d is he that believes the Sain ts in heaven to be his Redeemer s , that prays to them as s uch , or that

gives God ' s hono ur to them , or to any oth er cre at �re what soever . Ame n . Cursed be every Godde s s wors h1p­per , th at believes the Ble s se d Virg in to be any . mor� tha n

a creatu re , th at worships her or pu t s her tru s t m her more th a n in God , tha t belie ves he� a bove �(r Son , or th at she can in any thing command h1m . Amen .

Ha ve they s ai d this ? I f they have , can th ey in conscience s till accu se u s of I dola try ?

No , cert ainly . After such a n explanation or decl ara t ion they ca nnot . Yet , I fear that pr acti�a lly , at le a s t there may be some idol atry , for all Cathohc s do not spe �k so clearly , and in some we fin d expres s ions so s trong as to excite our fear . For exa�ple , �hat do you s ay to an expres s ion such as the followmg w_h1ch �e rea d in one of your A uthor s , viz . : tha t J es u s 1s obhge d to obey Mary on accou nt of the P are n tal power w?ich res ides

in her over her Son , and in con se q uence of th1 s , tha t she may command him ?

One thing only I reply to : I s this

doc trine authorized by the C atholic Church ? No cer tainly . And I a m not obliged to a ns wer for all the extravag a nt

opinion s which come into the head or fr�m .the pen of every indivi dual author . I s ay .witho�t � es 1ta t1on , s u�h a per son may be decieved . Bes 1d�s , 1t 1s b ut a private opinio n which a nyone may contr a d1ct .

- 72 -

What do you thin k of th e sen timent s of St . P e ter Dam ien ? : non sed ( 73 ) .

The reverence due to thi s author in­clin es me to ex plain it in a Catholic sen se , a s I have done many times , s ayin g : the pra yers of Mary are so accep table to God that we may cons i der them comma n ds . But co�cerning thi s , I entreat you to reflec t that many expre s s 1ons may be very true in th eir moral s en se or accor ding to the u su al meaning of those who pronounc; or hear them , whil st at the same time log ic a lly or theologi­cally th ey may be fals e . Thu s , for example : "Alexander the Great con quere d the whole Worl d . " "The Rom ans were th e sole Masters of the Uni verse . " "The Apos tle s an­nounced the Gos pel to the whole Worl d . 11 In omnem terram exivit sonus eorum .. caro viam suam .. est A ad omnes , etc .. ( 74 ) . These a n d s imilar ex pres s ion s ta ken in their s trict meaning are not logj.c a.!_ly true , yet they are morally true , that is , according to the sense in which they are unders tood by the person who pronou nce s or who hears them . In the same m anner , when a poor widow g oes to her A dvoc a te in or der to recommend her c au se , she s ays : "You are a ll my hopes , I tru st in you . My life a n d that of my poor children depen d upon you , etc . " Who would be so � nj � st as to .accu se th is poor wi dow of telling lies a n d o f 1mp 1e ty ' . as . 1f she no longer bel ieve d in G o d o r put h er tru st m H1m , b ut only in her A dvocate? You mu s t allow it would be very unj u s t to think in this manner . Yet , the words she pronounces , taken in a ll the rig or of log ie , m ake her guil ty , not only of lie s , b ut also of impiet y . Therefore , m any expres s ions m ay be quite C ath­olic in th eir moral sense , yet absolutely fa ls e accor ding �o rigid log ie . or T h eolog y . Thu s , exa ctly , should we mterpre t certain energetic expres s ion s of holy persons in speaking to M ary or to any oth er Saint of the Cele s tial Court : "You are my hopes . You are my refuge . Upon vou depends my des tiny . Oh Mary , Moth er of Jesu s , I k�ow that whil s t Jes u s lived on earth he wa s obe dient to you . Go � therefore , to Him . My reque st is at your comma n d . " Th1 s l as t word is no more tha n an expre s s io�ofthe

- 73 -

filial con fidence which the person who utters it has in M ary . Now , who can oblige me to understand it in a ll the rig or of log ie ? May I not take it in a mor al sense ?

MR .. This may be verifie d with reg ard to you . But what c an be sai d for so many simple , ignor ant people

who know not how to distingu ish between a log ical and a moral sen se ? Easily may these take it in the strict rigor

of log ie .

Ah ! my de ar Sir , such fears are not well-founde d , for though all may not be able to compre­hend th e rig or of loc al terms , yet there is no on� who

lives in society and enj oys the u se of re a son who 1s not able to dis tingu ish the true moral sense of a given expre s sion , because the moral sense not hid �en ?r

abstru se it is ex actly what is unde rstood by society m gener al . W here is there a Catholic who does not know that the Saints can do nothing of themsel ves ? Though l taly is consi dere d so superstitiou s a province , there is a common s ay ing , p roverbial among st the poor people , and it is this : " l f God be not will ing , th e Saints are not able . 1 1 Your fear s , therefore , are qu ite unfounde d . But could I ever grant you that some simple ignor ant per son might be delude d , I should s ay this would be one of those cas es which in every system we poor mortals are

subj ect to err , eith er by ignor ance through neglect not seeking for li ght , or by a fa ul t of our own . Thus , for

ex ample , th ere may be some so ignor ant that h earing it s ai d : "The most holy Virg in is th e Mother of God 1 1

, th ey might . .;ìmag ine h er to . be more ancient than God , or that as ] esus w as th e Son of Go d , they might think him young er than h is Celestial Fa th er . Now , must we , Sir , on this account , deny with Nestorius that Mary is the Mother of God , or with the ] ews deny that ] esus is the Son of Go d? Th e gre atest of disor der s in common society would be

that of w ishing to do away with every disorder . The most seriou s abuse in matter s of relig ion woul d be that of en­de avouring to close the door to every abu se of which the malice or the ignor ance of man is capabl e . Would not it be fool ish to refrain from e ating for fear of being poi­soned ? Would he not be impious who refuse d to believe

anything for fear of be ing s educed? We may do all in our

- 74 -

power to prevent abuses , yet whatever we do there will always be some .

. WI Tha t is true , yet there would be f ewer if a part of the invocation of Saints and the wors hip of relics was done away with

. . . Say th en there woul d be les s if a p art of the D1vme Scnpture was done away with , concerning which th ere are so many abuses . At least there would be less if the human s pecies did not ex ist . But are these good reasons for striking off either the one or the other ? I leave you to judg e .

But what do you think of such expres­sions as these being addres sed to Mary : Hora mortis su­�cip�? ( ) . T�is express ion is too strong . I t might melme us to thmk that it is , therefore , M ary who a dmits u s to th e pos ses sion of glory . And yet we find this ex­pres sion in your authorize d books . At le ast you must al­low this should be done away with , for it is , indeed , saying too much . 1t would not be impos sible to do so , nor contrary to any article of faith , bec ause it rel ates only to some r ite , and everyone knows that the hymns or praye rs of th e Breviary or Ritual may be change d or s truck out without any preju dice to faith .

Very true , it might be struck out . But could you e qually s trike out that p assage of the Gos pel where Jesus , in or der to exhort us to give alms to the poor , tells us that they will afte rwar ds , in recompense , receive u s into the ete rnal tabernacle s ? Facite

mammone reci-pient vos in eterna What a gre at thing , tr uly , is it to say or to suppos e that the holy Moth er of God can do , in our regard , that which D ivine Wis dom affirm s to be the case with reg ard to those poor · members on whom we bestow alm s-dee ds ? In what other sense can this be understood ? I do not believe that Jesus me ant to say that the poor would receive us as the cause of our salvation , as if th ey had merite d it for us , but only that th ey by the assistance of the ir prayers , would help us to obta in th e grace nece s sary to atta in it . Now ,

75

it is exactly in this sense th a t we mean to s ay tha t th e Holy Virgin may receive u s at the hour of death . Can it

be s ai d that all thi s is contrary to Scripture ? Or where can one p a s sage of Scripture be found to condemn this opin ion ?

MR . We do not fin d one cle arly to rep rove it , yet I think St . P a ul does not approve of it when he says : th ere is but one Mediation between u s and God , one sole a dvoc ate , as St . J ohn s ay s in his E pistle ( 77 ) .

I s houl d , perhaps , say somethin g upon this word sole , which is not in the text . But let us set it a s i de . T here is but one Mediation , it is true , b ut this doe s not oppose th ere bein g many interces sors . If th e text of St . P a ul or of St . J ohn obj ecte d to the interces sion of dep arte d Saints , it woul d obj ect also to that of living S aints . Yet , we see that the same St . P a ul ex horts u s to pray for e ac h oth er and even for all . He fre q uently re­comme n ds himself to the pra yers of oth ers , e tc . Th erefore , th e interces s ion of S aints not only is not contr ary to D ivine Scripture , b ut is conforma ble to it , as I could s how you more at l arg e , were it nec e s s ary , b y v ariou s p a s s ag es from D ivine Scr ipture in which we see the inter­ce ssìon of S aints , and still more of th e Angels expres sly taught . Upon this I have a lrea dy written something in my third letter to Alitofil as (= Lettere Celimontane ) . There­fore , I ha ve but one remark to make . Do you be lieve in th e communion of Saints ? Without doubt . It is an article of the Cree d . Well the n , what does it mean? D oes it not sig nify exactly common u nion , as the n ame itself indi­cate s , of a ll th e members of the Church of Jesus Christ ? The Chu rch is , accor ding to the Apostle St . P aul , as one sole body of which J es u s Christ is the head an d all the faithful are its members . Now , it is evident , s ays the s am e Apostle , tha t in our bod y e ach member p articip ates of the well-being of a ll the others , an d the reverse , e tc . A s in th e body one member is solìcitou s for a ll the others , the same is verifie d in that which belongs to J es u s Christ . But , tel1 me , , is it tru e tha t th e B les se d in Heaven remain members of J esus Christ ? Th ey are , perhaps , no lon ger s ubor dinate to thi s Divine Hea d? Or , r ath er , are they not s till more s trictly united to a n d

- 7 6 -

connected w ith J es u s ? I f it is thu s , th ey , th erefore , can and will interest th emsel ves for the welf are of u s who now live on earth , exposed to a thou s an d dang ers of etern al los s . They rej oice at our g ain , they sig h , if we may so express it , over our evil dispos itions , over our in gratitude and th e har dne s s of our hearts . But who can doubt it ? D id not J esus Christ s ay that in Heaven th ere was gre at rej oicings upon the conversion of a sinne r ?

I f the celestial citizens rej oice over our conversion , they h av e it then at heart . They may , therefore , and will interce de for u s . T h at knot w hich u n ite d them to u s during th eir mortal lif e i s not yet broken , it i s become more p erf ect . Can we believe that a Moth er , who a l way s tenderly love d her children , could be unmin d ful o f th em when she is in Heaven? What I say of a Moth er compre­hends a ll th e faithful who h ave love d and do love their neighbour . I f , then , the ble s se d know how to love u s , if th ey are min d ful of u s , why may we not con fide in the a dvantages which we may hope for in that most ble s se d union w e have with th em ? Why m a y w e not beg them to interce de for us in the same manner as we freq uently do persons still living upon earth? B ehol d , then , what is the truly C atholic , that is to say , univers al s p irit w hich emb races not this world alone , not only England , but th e entire u niver se , compnsmg also Heaven ? The damne d alone are exclu de d from this Catholicity bec ause the rob ate are irrevocably exclu ded from being members of the Churc h of Jesus Christ . Catholic union , therefore , embraces a ll men living , a ll the ble s se d intelligences of Heaven and of those who , thoug h united to God by c hari­ty , a re not arrived at the ha.ppy possession of g lor y .

The Church Triumphant , the Church Milit ant , th e Church Su fferin g : These are not three Church es b ut one and u n­divide d in three different states . You have here the true idea of the C atholicity of the Church . Yes , the C atholic Church is more extens ive tha n the Univers e which we be­hol d . She comprises Heaven , E a rth , and a lso those pl aces whatsoever they m ay be where the souls in a state of Purg ation a re retaine d . I may fin d myself in this most distant point of the terrestrial Globe , yet I am unite d with all that is most prec ious and desirable . Now , com-

- 77 -

pare th is truly mag nificent ide a of C atholic union w ith

th e col d th eory of your reformers by which you are com­

p letely res tricte d . Hence, you cannot exten d your u nion

beyond th e I sle in which you liv e . By it you are sep a­

r ated not only from the whole Continent , but a lso from

th e compre hensions of th e Blessed with whom you refu se to

hold any communication .

Thi s comparison , I assure you , surprises

m e . Your theory now ap pears to me as beau tiful and con­

soling as ours is , indee d , col d and disconsol ate .

Well then , had your reformers any

re ason to assert th at thi s our theory , so beautiful and so

D ivine , could be repug n ant to the wor d of God? Not only

is it not repugnant , but it is totally conform able , as I

have but in p art shown and as I could show you s till

more cle arly if you felt th e necessity . But tel1 me Sir ,

are you satis fìe d w ith the litt le I have l aid before you ?

Oh ye s ! I t appears to me now quite use­

less to treat any more on this subj ect , an d I think we

may at present p as s on to th e oth er Articles of the Angl i­

can fa ith .

We will do so , but the hour is late .

For today le t u s , th erefore be contented w ith what has been sai d .

But we h av e s ai d nothing upon the v ener-

ation of l ma g es .

True , but thi s will , in its pl ace , form a treatise a part after we have finish e d w ith the Articles .

78 -

I t appe ared to me yesterday evening that we had no more to s ay with reg ard to th e I nvocation of S aints , but scarcely w as our Conference terminated than I receive d by th e post a parcel containing a le tt er written by Mr . P almer ( 78 ) and directed to the Most Rev . Dr . Wis eman ( 79 ) , th e whole of which turne d upon the subj ect of our trea tise * .

I am sure that Dr . Wiseman will know well how to answer and elucid ate the ma tter . Still I should be gla d to hear your sentiments in , a few wor ds with reg ar d to th e princi ­pal ob j ection to be found in the same . Mr . Palmer attacks principally an expre s s ion used by th e present Sovere ign P ontiff , Greg ory the 16th , in his circ ul ar . The words made use of by th e P ope are as follows : "T ha t she ( the Ble s se d Vir g in ) m ay propitiou sly as sist u s while we write , and by her cele stial inspira tion may guide us to such counsels as may be m ost s a lu tary to the Chri stian Church " . The comment made herein by Mr . P a lmer ru ns as follows : " The p a s sage distinctly ve sts the Ble s se d Virgin with th e attr ibutes of th e Deity . The Prop het I s aiah teaches that coun sel is one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit , e tc . " Now , I shoul d wish to have your sentiments upon Mr . P almer ' s remark . I s it j u st ?

The ju stice o f such a remark dep ends entirely u pon the truth of this principle . To g ive counsel is an attrib ute of the Deity incommunicable to any crea­ture . If this princi ple be true , the remark is ju st . I f , on th e contrary , it is false , the rem ark is unj u st , tota lly unre asonable . For if not only Go d , but also a cre ature , may g ive profitable counsel , you see i mme diately that P almer ' s pretext doe s not in conse quence follow , viz . that

* NOTE : The p arcel re ache d me after I had written the pres ent treatise and I inserted it here as in it s proper pl ace .

- 79 -

the Pope acknowle dges a Deity in Mary , or that he ascribes to h er some D ivine attrib ute . Now , I ask you , is it true th a t Go d alone can sug gest good counsel? I ask some coun sel of Mr . P almer . Is it l awful for one man to beg counsel from anoth er ? May I h ave recourse to cre a­tures for coun sel? W a it his re ply an d I shall be ove rcome by his counsel . You see that P almer cannot answer me without giving me some counsel . If he does reply , mu st I be acc u se d of having attrib uted to him some Divine p rop­erty? Can he accu se me of h aving committed an act of I dol atry for having soug ht his counsel ? When David con­s ulted Ah itophel ( 2 Sm 1 6 : 23 ) did he give his councillor divine honour s ? Has Mr . P a lmer never aske d counsel of anyone ? Oh , if he ha d b ut come to me for coun sel I shoul d have counseled him not to have m a de a remark so void of counsel . W ithout a ttributing to my self in the le ast any Divine perfection , I would give thi s counsel to Mr . P alm er , never to do anything without coun sel from some wise and prudent per son . I f henceforth he p uts thi s in pr act ice he will not certainly a g ain make a similar re­mark nor heap idolatry on the He a d of Catholicity , be­cau se he de s ires to receive coun sel from the most holy Virg in . Fili , sine consilio nihil facias , · et post factum non penitebis ( 80 ) The Pope , however , seeks not only counsel b ut ins p ir ation from Mary , therefore , etc . . . .

I t is true , b ut to ins p ire a g ood thing , is this anoth er incommunic able attrib ute of Go d ' s? I always thoug ht that p arents were obliged to ins p ire the ten der hearts of th eir children with hatre d for vice and the love of virtu e , with sen timen ts of piety and devoti on . I thought the same in proportion of all M aster s , P arish P riests , profe s sors such as Mr . P almer . Yet , it never entered my mind that these were so many Dei ties ! I s it not true th a t Mr . P almer in­ten d s , by his reflections and censures , to ins p ire into th e min d s of those who re a d his pro ductions a gre at ab­horrence of our p r actices ? T h is is certainly the c a se . Yet , doe s Mr . P a lmer on thi s account attrib ute to him self the incommunica b le p roperties of Go d? I do not think so . Let u s , thu s , th en conclu de his remark . His only aim is to ra ise a hurric ane ! About the same equilibrium are the cens ure s which he makes of the prayers approve d of by P iu s V I I : sub tuum presidium , etc .. Da mihi virtutem

- 80 -

contra hostes tuos , etc .. ( 81 ) . Mr . P almer s ay s : The Holy P s almis t decl are s th a t Go d is his fortress and del iver­er . . . th e P ope re g a r ds the V irgin M ary as his p atron and deliverer .

Therefore , th e Pope grants the holy Virg in Divine attrib­utes ? May I be here pe rmitted to draw a p ar a llel? The P s almist say s , th a t Go d giveth to th e beasts their food . Dat jumentis escam ipsorum ( 82 ) . Would it , therefore , be an act of idol atry for a carrier to beg the Inn Keeper to provide for his horse s ? If a m a ster de s ires his commis­s ary to fee d his Asses , doe s the c arrier , therefore , give Divine honours to the I nn Kee per , or the M aster to his servant ? Such , however , would be the case if to provide for the beasts was an incommunica ble a ttribute of the Deity . I f so , th e Sol dier who defends a fortre ss , a fron­tier , a L awyer who defen ds his c au se would be as so many Deities ? See , then , if any can give defe nce who are not Gods ? How does Mr . Palmer conclu de that we give Di­vine honour to Mary bec au se we hope in her defence ?

MR . W I LL IAM B ut to give farce is something more than sim ply to defend . T his appe ars to belong to Go d .

FATHER DOMINIC Oh no ! for bread certainly is not God , and yet th e Scripture it self assures u s that it fortifies the he art : panis fortificat cor hominis ( 83 ) . As long , th erefore , as Mr . P almer has not p rove d that we attribute to cre atu res any incommunicable attribute of Go d ' s , he can never prove that we are idol ators . All P a lmer ' s de­clama tions ag ain st us are , th erefore , u s ele ss , and any other pre tende d accu s ations of idol a tory , until they can prove the point in dic ated a bove . A ll their arguments , thoug h multiplie d to an infinite deg ree , have thi s form : The Scriptu re tells u s that this or that is done by God , but . you s ay it is done by th e cre ature . Therefore , you attnbute to the cre ature that which belong s to God .

To a ll th ese arg ume nts one re ply is qu ite sufficient : I deny th e consequence which is not comprehended in the proposition . I n or der , th erefore , tha t the conseq uence may be le gitima te it woul d be neces s ary to place the maj or for ex ample in this form . T his or that cannot be done but by

- 81 -

God only . Then I answer nego majorem ( 84 ) . P rove tha t

we attrib ute to any cre ature tha t which belong s to Go d

only . Thu s , if I were to say , a man ea ts , drink s ,

sleeps , walks , etc . But you say an Ass eats , drinks ,

sleep s , walks , etc . , th erefare , you s ay that an Ass is a

man ! What is th e answer ? Deny the con se quence . No oth er

can be expected from a rational being . T h is suffices in

reply not only to all P a lmer would heap upon us , but

also to all oth er P rotestants u pon th is subj ect . As to the

res t , I am persuade d that Dr . Wiseman will reply more

diffu s ely than me , nor should I constitute my self the � d­

voc ate in defence of one who doe s not nee d any ass 1s-

tance .

We may , th erefare , now , I think , proceed in our ex ami­

nation of the Artides of the Anglican Church . Th ere oc­

curs but little to s ay upon th e Twenty-thir d Artide which

s peaks of the necessity of being authori ze d in ar der to

pre ach and to administer th e Sacraments . I only entre at

you to re mark the great w ant of precision in the p erson

who drew th em up . He say s that to exercise such func­

tions should be the vac a tion or destin a tion of those men

who are inv este d with public authority given unto them

in the con gre g ation to c a ll and to sen d Ministers into the

Lord ' s Viney ard . First of all , it imports us to seek who

are the se men inv ested with public authority ! Are they

the Bishops ? This would be confarm able to what St . P aul

tells u s , viz . : that th e se have been e stablished by the

Holy Spirit to govern th e Church of Jesus Chri st .

The Artide , however , s ays nothing concerning this . I t

was not found expedie nt to mention it in arder not to

give u mbrage to the Luther ans and Calvinists who had so

much in fluence in th e Anglican reform . Who then are

the se men inve ste d with public authority? The fact will

be able to explain th e rig ht ! Are they th e political Min­

isters of the King dom ? Are they the viceg erent s , not , in­

dee d , of Go d , but of th e King or of th e Queen ? Thus , at

le ast , it appears to be understood by those who compre­

hend th e my stery of th e pre tended reform . In no oth er

way can the se le g isl ators be excu se d far an omis sion tao

fa tal with . reg ar d to th e Anglic an Church . But wh at is

worse : we seek h ere not only far those who can preach ,

- 82 -

but also a d mi:1ister the S acraments which are su pposed to be t�o : . Ba ptlsm and th e Eucharist . Now tel1 me , doe s a comrr:11ss1on , �olely of persons investe d with public au­thonty , sufhce to a dminister validly and leg ally these two Sacra�ents , a:1 d e�pecially the secon d ? Do they not als� re qmre th e 1mpos 1tion of hands , or le g itimate ordi­na t1on ? Yes , most certainly , a 11 those will answer among st you who boast of Apostolic Succe s s ion . But why not make any mention of it ? This is an omis sion far tao culp able in a matter so ess ential .

Again , they would not g ive u mbrage to those P rote sta nts who did not desire it . I t was not , th erefore truth but politics _ only th�t directed the pen of those who drew up th e Artide_s . Policy , ho�ever , is alway s blind of one eye . I t s ees thmg s on one s1de only , and never consi ders them under every aspect . Their polic y h a d but in view how to gu ar antee themselves against the attacks that mi ght be­fa�l th �m at Rame . They con sidered not those which mig ht anse m the very interior of the King dom . Yet , behold what an in finity of pre achers hav e sprung up , all as contrary and as much oppose d to each oth er as they are to th e tr uth . These have arrog ate d to them sel v es the power of depu ting Ministers to pre ach the wor d of God and to administer the Sacr aments , without any depen dence whatever u pon the established Church , or u pon the l aws . Nor hav e you any means le ft to impose silence on th em , or . to p rove that they have no right to do all th ese thm g s . They will tel1 you with your arm s in their han ds , �hat to . p_re ach and to ad minister lawfully , nothing more 1s requ1s1te tha n to be authorize d by those who have authority in the con gre g ation . Now , I am authori zed by those who preside in my congreg ation , so what can you say to the contrary? You reply : Th ere can be no author­ity in your congreg ation since it only sprung up yester­day . It is nothing but a union of sc his matics sep arate d from the gre at body of th e tr ue Anglic an Church . I n their

· tu rn , they will also reply : The Ang lican Chu rch was born but ye sterday . I t is nothing but a detached portion from the grand body of the Catholic Chu rch . We have quite as much re ason as you . Here , Sir , there is no me dium . Ei­th er we are a 11 in the right , or a 11 in the wrong . P rave to me th e necessity of a lawful succe ssion of Ministers

- 83 -

and I will imme diately become a Roman Catholic : An non

licet Valentinianis quod licuit Valentino? ( 85 ) . I f you thoug ht it l awful to sep arate from the gre at Body , why is it not lawful for us ? What is permitted you is permitted us . I t follows in consequence . P erh aps you may s ay , we sep arated from Rame becau se she h ad erre d an d tyr anized over th e conscience . For the very s ame re ason reply the I n depen dents we separated from you . Can you answer this ?

• WILL IAM I t appears not , but I think you will h ave nothing to say ag ainst the following Twenty-fou rth Arti­de . It is quite reasonab ale , conform able to good sense and to Scripture it self .

FATHER DOMINIC Yet I find many thing s to say against it . F irst the writer of this Artide cannot be excu se d for his gre at pres umption in daring to con demn the universal practice , not only of the L atin but of the Greek Church , for in all th ese Church es the Sacred Liturgy makes use of ancient languages not a d apted to the P eople in g eneral . I f , th en , th e person who drew up th ese Articles had had but one single grain of Christian humility ; he would have s aid to him self before he penne d them : Who am I tha t I should presume to con demn the practice of the Univers al Church ? Is not this proceeding , th e same as opening the door to any malcontents , who wish to compl ain against all th e practices and rites tha t do not suit their fancy? You find fault with the Latin l anguange in our L iturgy bec ause you do not underst an d it entirely . Well then , anoth er comes and reprehends the u se of our s acred orna­ments , and anoth er of our s acre d ceremonies , in one wor d , of all th at which appears mysterious in religion . They will say , or rather it has , indeed , been s aid , all these thing s are but the remains of papistry , rel ics of th e Beast of th e Apoc alypse . Yes , they would abolish all th at makes the Church appear maj estic , not only in h er ceremonies but also in her symbols and in her Articles of faith . They would say , and this is also s aid , that the Trinity is not understood by all , and , therefore , tha t it should be abolishe d ; th at mysteries do not edify the peo­ple bec ause th ey are unintell igible and incapable of con­vey ing to the min d that light which alone is necessary to

- 84 -

lea d a g ood life . Mu st we then a bolish some of the S acre d Books bec ause th ey are not dearly understood by all , be­cau se they speak in a manner unintellig ible to the vul­gar ? Such certainly is the language made use of in the Canticles . Mu st this be abolishe d? Or is the language of the Canticle s easy to every one ? Is every one cap able of understan ding its true sig nification ? See where your de­cl ama tion ends , as wis ely remarked by the Author of the Article of R ites and Ceremonies inserte d in the British Critic No . 60 , p ag . 455 et seg . MR .. WI LLIAM Abstracting , however , from your reflec­tions which I do not dis approve , it cannot be denie d that the L iturgy would be better in a vulg ar tongue , and it is des irable that the Roman Church should adopt this idea .

FATHER DOMINIC I will not at pre sent stop to analyse wh ether it would be better or worse , for I do not think myself authorize d to decide such a question . The decis ion belong s to the leg itimate authority of the Church herself , and not to this or tha t per son in p articular . Only remem­ber th at th is does not re g ard an article of faith , but onl� �f discipli:1e which may be change d without any pre Jud1ce to fa1th or unity . I f , th erefore , the Church considered it neces sary she might do it , she might ord ain the L iturgy to be celebrate d in the vulgar tongue . Yet I c�nnot deny tha t ever to retain the ancient languages , e1 th er Greek , L a tin or Syriac , carries with it grea t ad­vantages which may far superce de any that might be ex­pected from a chang e .

MR . WILLIAM An d what are these a dvantages ? FATHER DOMINIC In the first pl ace , sentiments of ven­eration for those great Authors who composed the L iturgy . Are not the very wor ds estimable which were m a de u se of · by a Chrysostom , an Athanasius , a B asil , a St . Leo and St . Greg ory the Great , not to mention the Apostles them­sel ves who are set down by Palmer as the Authors of the present L iturgy u sed in the Latin , Greek , Syriac C�urches , etc . The Hebrews have always retained the an­c1ent language , and probably even in our D ivine Re deem-

- 85 -

ers time th e lang u age m a de u se of in th e L iturgy was not th e vul g ar , and yet for th i s th ey rece iv e d 1:0 rep�e h er:i­s ion . S econ d , the fe ar also of the facil ity w 1th wh1ch m cha ng in g th e lang u ag e th ey m ig ht cha nge als o t�e s�n se

of the wor ds , wh ich mi g ht e as ily happen . The . ev1l _ m1ght be gre at and not s o eas ily known , esp ec i ally s1nce 1n ar­der to rev ise an d correct it wo uld be nec essary to u n der­stan d all th e liv in g tongu es into wh ich it _was tr ans� ate d . W h at trib u nal wo uld be able to j u dge 1f the Ch m es e , Americ an , Afric an , I n di a n , etc . etc . tr ansl atio ns were

qu ite correct ? Who co uld p os s ess a k nowle dge of . all th e se

langu ag es ? Not even would Car din al Me zzofant1 ( 86 ) be

able to su ccee d , yet th ere are many more . Do you accou nt as nothin g th e admir able unity this lan�u a ge pr�duces thro ug hout th e L a tin Ch u rch in every ima g mabl� P?mt ?f

th e Glob e where her Ministers res i de ? How mamtam th1s u n ity , how reg ul ate th is exten sive corres pon �e nce s? truly Cathol ic or U niv er s al? T h e L atin l angu ag e 1s prec1sely a knot wh ich u n ites all the me mbers of the Church w ith

e ach oth er and w ith th eir visible He a d . An e dict pub­l ish e d at Ram e is u n d erstood thro ughout the u niv er se , b e­c au se thro ug hout th e Univ er s e th ere are me n wh o u nder­stan d the beau tiful langu ag e of th e L atin � B ut why mu st th e faithful of Ch in a understan d or s pe ak th e langu age of Cicero? W hy if th ey wo uld b ecome M in isters of reli g ion

mu st th ey pos s es s a knowle dge of th i s l angu a� e? On th e

co ntrary , allow th e L iturgy t o be celebrated m as ma�y livi n g langu ag es as th e L ati n Ch urch �as extende d 1t s bra nch e s , and in a s h ort time no one w1ll be foun d c a­p able of u nderstan din g th e ancient langu a� e , �nd th en , be h old ev ery m e a ns of eccle siastical commu n1ca t1on s truck off . How wo ul d th e Holy F ath er understan d or be under­stood by so m any M in isters of th e Gos pel s prea d thro ug h­out th e worl d if we h ad not one langu ag e common to all ? T h e se a dvantag e s , w ith m any oth ers , may , ac.cor ding to

my opin ion , be moti v e suffic i e nt even to reta1n th e an-cient l an g u ag e of th e Ch urch .

MR .. WILLIAM I t c annot be denie d th at th ese are very gre at a dva ntag es . Yet , on the oth er ha n d , I think th e

a dvantag e of bein g u nderstood by th e p eople in gener al and of i n structing th em mi g ht prepon der ate ov er all th e

oth ers .

- 86 -

FATHER DOMINIC I f the D ivine Off ice or th e L iturgy were th e sole means of in struction , or at le ast the mos t e fficac iou s , it co uld not be de n ie d , but I do not cons i der thi s th e mo�t effic aciou s or ins tr uctiv e , esp ec ially for th e more ru stic . Sermon s , c at ech ism , instru ctions , re a ding goo d book_s , may . b� s uffic i e nt to instr uct th e common peo­ple . B e s1des , I thmk the p eople draw b ut l i ttle in s truc­tion from th e L it urgy . T he lit urgy , on acco u nt of its mon otonou s n atu re , is always the same a n d , th erefore , not adapte d to make impre s s ion upon the people , wh o in g e neral_ do not pay much attention to w hat th ey have many t1m e_s he ar d and , per haps , wit hout h avin g ever un­de� stood 1t , u s ually for th is re ason th at they are trite thm g s ab assuetis non fit passio .

It wo uld a lso be impos s ible so to vulg ari ze the divine word , as to g iv e it th e turn of expre s s ion fam il iar to th e ig n orant . We m ig ht have as many v ers ions as th ere are Count ie s , e ac h h aving g enerally th eir dis tinct dialect . I n arder to in s tru ct the p eop le well it is ab s olut ely neces­sary th at this s hould be done by th e mouth of an atte n­tive an d ze a lou s P astor who knows not only how to pre­sent , b ut als o how to bre ak th e bre a d of th e Divine word to the p eople comm i tte d to h is ch arg e ; t h at he not only propo s es , but manifests and makes them feel we may say the tru ths of fa ith : declaratio sermonum tuorum illuminat � 87 ) . . It is not precis ely th e words tha t g iv e lig ht and mtelhg ence , b ut an expla n ation of the same . I f th is be �anti1:g th e people will profit but little or noth i ng by hstemn� to th e L iturgy i n th e ir vul g ar ton g ue . Yet , h ow­ever we1g hty your re asons and mine may be , it is not for us to g ive laws to th e Chu rch . I f she thou ght proper to cha n ge th e L it urgy sh e co uld , and if s he h as not yet done so we mu st conclu de it was for g ood r e asons . Let u s now p a s s on to th e Twenty-fifth Article . I n this we re a d th at the S acrame nts or dained b y J esu s Chr ist ( 88 ) i n h is G�spel are but two : Baptism and the S upper . T he oth er · hve , though afterw ards c a lle d S acrame nts , are no oth er �h� n _a corrupt followin g of th e Apostle s , or a corrupt 1m1tat10n of wh at th ey practi s e d , or else some states of life per mi tte d by th e Scripture , but yet are not tr u e Sac­raments b ecau se th ey have no v i s ible sign or dai ne d by th e Div ine Re de e mer .

- 87 -

if I wishe d to U pon th is th ere wo uld be mu ch to s ay prov e all th e tr uth s con t r a ry to thi s Article . Y?u m ay

con s ult B ell ar min ( 89 ) an d oth er C a tholic T? eolog i an s . I

will , th erefore , m ak e b u t a few short reflect1o ns . I n th e

fir st pl a c e , th en , I . c a n n ot ima g.ine from wh at sou r�e th ey

h av e dr awn th ese ri dic ulou s not1o ns , nor wh at proflt th ey

p retend to r e ap from the sam e . I n or der to a dv a nce a

p ropo sition con tr a ry to th a t which h as a�way s been hel d

a n d is h eld by a ll Chr is ti a n s , not only . m th e W e st , b ut

als o in th e E ast , not only by C athohc s , but als o by

Sch ism a t ics or h eretic s , req u ir e d a light more cle ar tha n

th e Sun in or der t o dis cov er th e tr uth . B ut wh�nce h a d

they th is light ? F rom th e Sc riptu r e ? N o , c e r tamly , b e­

c a u se th e Sc ripture h a d been alw ay s in th e h a:1 ds of all ,

a n d no one h a d ev er di s cov ere d any s uch thmg · . F rom

T r a dit ion ? I mpos sible . They do not . a�k nowle dg e 1t , an d

mo st a s su r e dly it is qu ite in contra d1c t1on to them . W h a t

a dv ant a g es th ey expecte d to follow I know not · T o d�­

cl a im a g ain st the Roma n Chu rch ? O yes , b ut they decl a1m

als o a gain s t th e oth er Church es divi d e d from Rom� · Now I

do not t hink this a dva n t age to be any gr e a t thmg . . D o

yo u k now wh at I think ? I will tel1 you · L e t my ide a ,

howev er , be of wh at v alu e it m ay . The · .a dv.a nt a ge. th ey

expec t e d w a s to l ay prost r a t e �h e Eccle s ia st1� al H1e r a r­

chy th e s acer dotal righ ts of B 1shops a n d P ne sts · F or

ta k� notic e I ent r e at yo u , h avin g onc e decl are d th a t th e

oth er five commonly c alle d S acrame n ts w er� no oth er t�a n

st a tes pe r mitt e d by Seri pture , or a cor r up tio n of wh at th e

Apo stl es di d , it followe d by neces s ary inferen�e th at th e

Or din at io ns , wh at ha d ever been th e pr a c�1c e of th e

Chu rch , w ere neith er in st it u t e d by J es u s Ch.nst , nor a ny oth er thin g but a st a t e of life only perm1tt e d �n d not

comma n de d , or a corrup tion of wh at the �po st les d1d a � d , th ere fore , to be abolish e d as an abu se mtr�duce d by 1�­nor a nce a n d su p e r s titio n , a simple dep u t a t1on of p�b hc

authority bein g s uffic ie nt in or d e r l aw.fully to a dmm1s�er

th e S a c r am e n t s , as th ey ha d decl are d m th e Tw enty-t hir d

Article .

MR .. WILLIAM T hey coul d not pos sibly h av e in t e n d e d

th is since th e An glic a n Chu rch h as r e t aine d th e Hie r archy a n d eve n boa st s of it .

- 88 -

FATHER DOMINIC T r ue , they bo a s t of it at p r e sent . Yet , I doubt if th a t were th e c a s e at th e tim e th ese Article s � ere s a ncti�ned un der E liz abeth . Th ey might fe ar not to fm d any B1sh op who woul d , or who coul d impos e h a n ds on them . On th at a c co u nt , pe rh a p s , th ey thou ght b e tt er to cut th e ma tter short a n d s ay tha t or din ation wa s not , in­dee d , a S a c rament , b u t a corru p tion of the Gos pel an d of wh at th e Apo s tle s did . Bes i des , no one is ignor a nt of th e sha re whi.ch S�rang e r s B u e ro ( ? ) a n d P e t er the M arty r ( 90 ) h a d m th1s wor k . These might , in dee d , ta ke a dv an­tag e of the g ood E ng l ish a n d l ay down the l aw to them , a n d th e mor e so bec a u se th ey were supporte d by a good Ba yonet , a s Cob b e tt s ay s . Hence , how mu ch r e a son hav e we to thin k th a t th e Or din ations in tho s e time s · were ei­th er p ast ov er or neg lect e d entir ely a s u n n ecce s a ry , or as an �b u se and corr uption of th e Gos pel ? How can your Th eolo g 1a n s , th erefore , bo a st at pr e sent of th e ir pret e n d­e d Apo s.tolic Succe s s ion never havin g been interr up t e d? F rom th1s you s ee how wis ely the Chu rch of Rome acts in reor d aii:iin g all tho s e Min is ter s who le a v e th e Anglic a n commu n 1on t o e mbr ace the C a tholic , an d if ev er th ese w?ul d not s ubmit . to a new o r din ation , sh e doe s not per­m1t them to ex erc 1se any eccle sia s tic al fu n c tion . Con si der this well and you will fin d re a son your self to doubt of t�e v a li dity of your or din ation s , a n d of which you sho ul d w1sh to be sec ure by a true and nev er interr upt e d Apos ­tolic Su c c e s sion . L et u s now come to the r e a sons they a l­leg e why th e .oth e r fiv e are not S ac r aments . Bec ause , s ay they , th e se five have no vis ib le sig n or d aine d by Go d . But how do th ey know thi s ? They c a nnot den y tha t in Extreme U nction , Or din a t ion s , e tc . th ere is a visible sig n : th e holy oils , c hrism , impo sition of h a n ds , etc . How do th ey know th at th e se sig ns are not or d a ine d by Go d ?

MR .. WILL IAM them .

B ec a u se th e Gospel makes no mentio n of

· FATHER DOMINIC I t m ay be so , but who tol d th em tha t J esus did not or d ain anything b u t wh at is r eg ist e r e d in the . Go�p el ? . . I s it not s ufficient , in or d e r to sup port our behef m D 1vme or din a tion , that we fin d it r eg ist ere d in the Ac t s of th e Apos tle s , in th e Epis t le of S t . P a ul , in St . J am es a n d of the oth er Apostles ? Wo uld they have u s

- 89 -

believe th at all th ese oth er books , except the four Gos­

pels , are all a pocrypha 1? Or do th ey mean to say tha t

St . Luke , St . P aul an d St . James were imposters ? I f we

may cre dit St . Luke when he wrote h is Gospel , why may

we not believe h im when he wrote the Acts of the Apos­

tles ? I know that among st other paradoxes of your Theo­

logians they have th is : that excepting the Gospel , th ere

is nothin g to be believe d as reveale d by God in the New

Testament . But th is p aradox is well contra dicted by

Jes us Chri st himself who s ai d at h is last supper : Multa

habeo vobis dicere , sed non potestis portare modo .. Cum

autem venerit Spiritus veritatis docebit vos omnem veri­

tatem ( 91 ) . However , th erefore , do your leg islators know

that th e matter of th e other Sacrament s is not ordained

by God? How they can be secure of this I can not tel1 . I t

i s sufficient for me to know th at th ere is not anythin g

est ablished for those who leave the fun damental stone of

th e Holy Catholic faith . At present they ende avour to

prove again st the refractory the necess ity an d excellency

of sacre d ordin at ion and of Apostolic Success ion . But

until they renounce the T hìrty-n i ne Articles they will

bring nothin g to a conclu sion .

To tel1 you the truth , I never before

thought th ese Articles contai ned so many errors , as you

have poi nted out to m e . Though I have rea d them many

times , yet wit hout so much con si deration .

FATHER DOMINIC You will d iscover many more . Let us

proceed . I n the same Article it is sai d tha t the Sacra­

ments were not or dai ned to be exposed in veneration , etc .

I t may be so , but I s ay also the King of E ngland or th e

Queen do not appear in P arliament to be revered , but to

be heard and obeyed . Yet I h ave observed that the whole

Hou se of Commons , and even of P eers , r ise up , take off

th eir hats and make a profound reverence to their Sover­

eig n . Are these gu ilty of high treason? Will they incur

th e anger of their Pri nce? Quite the contrary . Would not

he be blamed who , w ith the in difference of a Quaker , re­

fused to pay th ese tokens of reverence and love? They

are not commande d , it is true , but a little civility , a

little common sen se would suffice to suggest such acts of

reverence towards a Sovereig n .

- 90 -

Now I ask you , do you believe that the Euchar ist ic bread really contains Jesus Christ th e true Son of God? I f do not b e l ieve it , th at is anoth er case b t · ·f

yodu

b 1 · . , u 1 you 0

e 1eve_ 1t , how can you reprehend those who presen t some ob seq:-1- 10us mark to the Sovereign of the Un iverse? I s it not H1m whom all th e Angels were commande d to adore ? Et adorent eum omnes angeli Dei? ( 92 ) . P erm it me th

a.lso to a dore Him . I do not , most certa inly , wis h to e

�� llke a Q:Uaker w�o w ill _not ben� to anyone . Agai nst the Twenty-s 1xth _Art1cle I fm d nothmg to say . With reg ard to the followmg , more prec i sion is des irable . All th ese pompous words upon th e eff ects of Ba pti s m do not suffice to make n:e un derstan d ( at lea st clearly ) that in this Sacrament 1s conferre d , upon those who bri n g no obstacle that grace . wh ich ren ders us effectually the children of Go� an� heirs . to the King dom of His glory . It s ays that

fa1th 1s conhrmed an� grace i ncre a sed by v irtue of prayer unto God , yet 1t says nothin g whereby we may know th at the Sacrament itself has any v irtue to confer such grace . I f I am not mistaken this is th e moti ve why you do not make so much account of B ap tism as you should , and _do not attend ( to . use th e words of one of :your Th eolog1ans ) neith er to the persons who admi n ister 1t '. no� to th e manner or rite of administering ( 93 ) . An d th1s 1s the reason why Catholics usually confer th is Sacrament , at �e ast con ditionally , upon all persons who ha_ve �een ba I? tlzed among st you s ince a cert ain epoch . I f fa1th 1 s confirmed and grace is increased b y virtue of prayer , P:ayer would then be sufficient w ithout baptism , and bap tl sm would rema in useles s without prayer . I t would be u seless to Children who are not capable of prayer , and th e Anabaptists would be in th e rig ht .

MR . WILLIAM No , they could not think so , oth erw ise they woul d �ot have retai ned the custom of baptizing in­fants , for th 1s would be incons istent an d contra d ictory .

· FATHER DOMINIC Certai nly i t would be inconsistent but you do something of the sort ! They who do not acc�mmo­date th emsel v�s to fa i th , but faith to their own interest

mu st nec:s sanly be i ncons istent . Now , i nterest a nimateci th ese le g 1s lators aga inst the Anabaptis ts , but not against

oth er P rotestants who deny the efficacy of the Sacraments

- 91 -

ex opere operato , or by their own v irtue . Yet , th ese two thing s are quite incompatible . If th e Sacr ame�ts do n�t p roduce g r ace by their own v irtue the An abaptists are 1n th e rig ht . I f , however , th ey confer it , your refor�ers are

wrong in s ay ing th at grace is augmented by v1rtue of prayers , without makin g any mention of the Sacr a ments .

T ake notice h ere of anoth er contra diction . These Gentlemen

decl are th at the custom of B aptizing I n fants is to be

ret aine d , b ut for what reason ? P erhaps because it has

alw ays been the practice of th e Church ? Such a re ason

would have b een excellent , b ut no , they could not stoop

to thi s in order not to p ay any deference to the authority

of the Church , or to tra dition . They , th erefore , s ay that

it is to be retaine d as most agree able with the institution

of Christ . I do not , in dee d , contest this , but only ask

th em one q uestion . How do th ey know tha t thi s practice is

conformable to D ivine institution ? F rom Scripture , per­

h ap s ? It doe s not appe ar so , and if we m ay j u dge by

Scriptu re alone , we sho uld s ay qu ite the contrary , since

we th ere re a d that J es u s said to his Apostle s : Euntes

docete omnes gentes eos ( 94 ) . The Apost�es ,

th erefore , were fir st to instr uct and then to b apt1 ze .

Now infants are not capable of in struction . Mu st we ,

th er�fore , conclu de th a t they are not to be b apti ze d ? See

w h at inconsi stency would naturally arise from t aking the

Scripture as our sole guide .

MR .. Remember , however , that J esus s ai d : Sini­

te parvulos , et nolite eos prohibere venire ad me ( 95 ) .

Chil dren m ay , therefore , approach Him . They m ay , there­

fore , be united to Him , an d may th erefore , receive th e

Sacrament of union ( Newman ) .

FATHER DOMINIC I must s ay , thi s obj ection is r ath er

c aptiou s , but let us set it aside Well then , the An ab ap­

ti sts will s ay : We allow the s am e . We do not sen d aw ay

th e children when th ey come . We only refuse to a dmit

th em w!:-ien th ey are carrì'ecf""" in the arm s of others . W e

w a it till they c a n w alk , till they come a n d seek , till

they ask to approach to J es u s . W h at woul d be your reply

to an An ab aptist who answered you thu s ?

- 92 -

What would you s a y ? hear your answer .

I should like to

I should s ay imm e di ately : We allow th at in fants should be baptize d , because it has alway s been the belief and practice of the C atholic Churc h . By thi s we silence all our a dvers aries .

Well , we should answer in the same m an­ner , and , th erefore , we agree .

DOMINIC Yes , we agree w ith you , but not w ith your le g isl ators who woul d not acknowle dge either th e authority of the C atholic Chu rch or th at of tra dition .

Yet , we s ay that the Church has authori­ty in controver sies of faith .

I have alre a dy shown you abov e , even force d you to acknowledge that th ese are but empty wor d s , devoi d of sense and effect in the mouth s of your reformers , becau se wh atever the Church decides u pon it still remain s · to be seen whether or no her decision is conformable to Scriptu re . I know that at present they seek a mid dle w ay ( via media ) , a moder ate w ay . Yet , I think this can never be foun d . I shall always ask th ese Gentlemen : who is to j u dge a question in the ultim ate appeal? Not Scriptu re itself , as they confe s s , becau se the question gener ally fall s upon the sen se of Scripture . Not the U niversal Chu rch , for th at would c arry them to Rome . Who then?

MR .. WI LLIAM They s ay th at such infallible j u dges do not exist , and th at it is u s eless to seek for them . There­fore , it is impos sible to have absolute certainty of any­thing . We mu st , be satis fie d with mere prob ability .

DOMINIC T rue , thi s is ex actly what they s ay , but I have shown you how inconsistent it is w ith the idea of tr ue faith which we have from Scripture and from the Creeds , especially that of St . Ath an a sius . A mid dle ' Way ; th erefore , between Protestanti sm and Catholicity is not allow able , nor ever can be allowed . E ith er the

- 93 -

Church oug ht to j u d g e over the opinions o.f . i:1divi duals , or in dividuals oug ht to ju dge over the defimtlon s of th e Church oth erwise we mu st neces s arily fall into absolute sceptic ism in m atters of R elig ion . T his is s u fficient �or th e present . The following Articles reg ard the Euchanst

but of this we will treat in anoth er Conference .

NINTH CONFERENCE

THE EUCHARIST AND THE MASS

FATHER DOMINIC The subj ect of our present tre ati se is most intere sting for it contains one of the chief he a ds of division between us and our sep arate d English brethren .

As I have alre a dy discu s se d r ath er precisely this.

argu­ment in my third letter to Alitofil as ( = Lettere Cehmonta­

ne ) which I suppose you have read , a few word s will

suffice to make some re mark s that did not then occ ur to

m e . In the first pl ace , I a sk what may ·be the sense of

th e Twenty-third Article with reg ar d to the re al presence

of J esus Chr ist in the Eucharist , and what m ay be t� e

sentiment s of th e Church by L aw establish e d upon th1 s

point? To tel1 you the truth , however much .1 stu dy or

m e dit ate upon thi s subject , I c annot unravel 1t . On one

side wh en I consi der the cath echism inserted in the book

of Common Pr ayer , it appears that th ey acknowle dge th e

B ody and B lood of J esu s Christ to be truly present u n �er

th e emble ms of bre a d and wine , and that these are venly

an d , in dee d , broken and received by the faithful in th e

Lord ' s supper .

The s am e app e ars in considering th e Communion rite , and

in some expres sions of the Article itself , as you m ay see .

On th e oth er side , th e s am e Article adds tha t th e Body of

J esus Christ is received by faith , and that .t� ose who do

not belie ve with a lively faith , do not p artlc 1p ate of th e

B ody of J esus Christ . Then , ob serving the �ubric , o.r a �­

vertisement pl ace d at th e end of th e Commun1on serv1ce 1n

th e book of Common Prayer , I fin d th at the natural B ody

- 94 -

of ] esu s Chri st is in Heaven and not in the Sacrament , it being contr ary to tr uth that his natur al Body can be in two different pl ace s . I f afterwards I examine your Theo­log ians , my perplexities incre ase bec au se they contra dict each other . P a lmer , with some oth ers , spe ak s so well upon this point of the real presence that we mi ght almost consider th em Catholic . Oth ers , however , absolutely deny it , as you may ob serve by rea ding the public dispute hel d at Downside ( 96 ) . What then oug ht to be believed , what should be maintaine d with reg ard to this Article?

As to my self , I hold th e re al pre sence , but to tel1 you the truth , not bec au se I think it clearly establis h e d in our formul as , but solely bec au se I fin d it evident in D ivine Scripture and in the decisions of the Univers al Church . Only some obj ections ari se which I could wish you to solve in a few wor ds and with preci­sion . The fir st is thi s . The Eucharist is call e d a comme­mor a tion . Now , a commemora tion or a memorial does not imp ly a thing present. Secon dly , I . . . s ays the heavens received J esu s , wh ere he will remain until he s h a ll come to ju dge th e universe , from which it appe ars that he will never more , fill th at tim e , descend u pon the e a rth . How do you answer this ?

FATHER DOMINIC With reg ar d to the first , th e answer is very e asy if you reflect that ] esus is not pres ent in the Divine Sacr ament as an obj ect cap able of striking th e sen ses . We ma y , in dee d , · perceive his presence by fa ith , but not by th e eye or by any oth er sen se . Tel1 me , do you ever remem ber the presence of God? We know tha t David fre quently remembered it : Memor fui Dei et delec­tatus sum ( P s alm 76 : 4 ) . Yet God is everywh ere present , as fai th and re ason it self tell s u s . We may , therefore , easily j oin the reme mbr ance and the presence of an obj ect when th is pre sence is not such as to str ike th e sen ses , but only percep tible by the · interior li ght of faith or rea­son . As to th e secon d difficulty proportione servata , I may give th e same answer , viz . : that ] esus will not de­sce nd visibly and perceptibly upon earth until that day when coming to ju dge the u niverse he will appear b efore

· all cloth e d in glory and maj esty . This doe s not , however , · exclu de the possibility of his presence everyday in th e

- 95 -

D ivine Sacrament , though in a manner invisible to corpo­r al sig ht . We fin d , also , that He h as appe are d vis ibly to some .

MR .. W I LL IAM Oh ! do not begin to talk to me of vi­s ions , or app aritions , or simil ar stories , for I know such thing s are not lik e d in th e age in which we live .

FATHER DOMINIC T h at they are not liked by the incre d­ulous I c a n conce i ve , but tha t a believer such as you can entert ain s imilar aver sions appe ars to me very strange . What , th en , do you think such thi ngs impos si­ble? or contrary to any principle of F a ith ?

MR . WILLI AM Not contrary to th e truth , but subj ect s of great illu s ion for e nthu siastic brains , and credulou s ol d women . Besides I cannot endure anything extraor din ary , or that deviates from ordinary rules . T hat which follow s th e course establish e d by Go d is alway s prefera ble to anything contrary ( so s ays a P rotestant author . )

FATHER DOMINIC Oh ! thi s would prove too much ; it would p rove that the w ater containe d in the stone pots of C a na was better whil st it was water than after it w a s chang e d w ith wine . T h at blin dness was better than si ght , for th e man bor n blin d of th e Gospel ; that death was better than life for L azaru s . I am not enthu siastic about ns1ng , or oth er extr aor din ary thing s , whenever I h ear of them my first c are is to ob serve if th ere be anything contr ary to faith , or sound reason , in which case I re­j ect them imme diately , but if th ere be no infringement either of th e one or th e oth er , I neith er rej ect , nor ap­p rove of them at first sight . I only take time to consi der if th ey are well supporte d by solid testimony and un­doubte d authority . When I fin d g ood foundations I have no diffic ulty in believin g . Ha ving sta ted thi s I b eg of you to l i sten to a fact that I will rel ate . A cert ain man unju stly per secute d by his ene mies , to whom he had never done evil , was oblig e d for a time to sub mit to th e ir fury , and allow him self to be taken and cast into prison . Now , one nig ht h e was visited by J esus who stood by h is s i de in th e prison , console d him , and anim ate d him to suffer cou rag eou sly the series of a dversities which had befa llen

- 96 -

him . You s ee , th erefore , that J esus has appeared visibly upon e arth since his Asce nsion .

B ut we mu st know who th is man was . He mig ht be one of those enthusiasts who see stars at noon . We mu st k now who recounts the fact ; some author , per­hap s , of th e middle age , Metafr astes , Suriu s , or J ames of Varag ine .

DOMINIC The man to whom this h appened was St . P aul . The author who rel ates it , is St . Luke in the Acts of th e Apostle s , Chapter 23 . v . 1 1 . Do not fe ar , this is no fable . B ut , my dear S ir , w ith reg ar d to this sub­j ect , I beg to ass ure you , that such an avers ion for all th at is miraculou s is not g ood in a Christi an . I t was in­spire d by your pretende d reformers in order to guara ntee themsel ves a g ainst the miracles of the Roman Church . You are aware how much th e rationalists h av e ava ile d them­sel ves of the same as a · pretext to deny or , at le ast , to call in question even th e Miracles recor de d in the Gospel . A true believer should bew are of excl aiming a g ainst mira­cle s . He shoul d even refr ain from s aying tha t the g ift of miracles h a s ce a se d since the first ag e . T h is is in op po­sition to th e promi se s of Jesus Christ him self , who s aid , th at miracles would be a sign wher eby to distinguish the true believers . Thoug h it m ay be true tha t th ey are not at present so freq uent as in the A postles ' time , yet we shoul d not s ay that th ey h ave entirely ce ase d .

To a d m it as true a ll the miracles that are recou nte d wo�l d b e levity , yet to deny th em all would b e temerity wh1ch le a ds to scepticism . B ut let us return to our point . I f your reformers believed in the rea l presence , why do thy not say so c le arly ? I f they do not believe it , why do they not deny it without so many circuitou s and ambigu­o,u s wor ds ? Bu �net sol ves this second di ffic ulty by s aying tn at th ey h a d ; some re g ar d · for those Catholic s who were

· impres sed with the belief of the real pre sence , an d a lso for th e Luth erans , with whom th ey wis h e d to maintain a union . ( Vol . 2 , p . 704 , apud Palmer ) . I n s u b stance , how­�ver , I say aga in , th e Spirit of s uch a decis ion was not , · in dee d , eith er Scriptu re , truth or faith , b ut policy , and the neces sity of guarding against the att acks of Rome .

- 97 -

They alw ays wis h e d to ple ase God without dis ple asing th e

D evil . W ith re g ar d to Tr ansu b sta ntiation I have �lre � dy

s ai d sufficient in th e abov e cited le tt ers to Ahtofil as

( = Lettere Celimontane ) * *

nor do I think it neces sary to remain long upon thi s

point , b ec au se if the greater and the wi ser p art of your

Anglic an Theologians do not refu se to acknowle dge th e

real presence of the B ody and B lood of J esu s Christ in

this Divine Sacrament , I do not see th e re ason why they

should afterw ards be so stubborn w ith re g ard to T r ansub­

stanti ation . Bega him self , th e gre at Apostle of P rotestan­

tism taxes them w ith incons i st ency s ay ing : " l f you would

und;rstan d litera lly th e words of J esus Christ , ' T his is

my B ody ' , it is impos sible in such a c a se . to �eny tr an­

substanti ation . " An d so it undoubte dly 1s , srnce Jesus

Christ did not s ay my B ody is h ere in this pl ace , togeth­

er with this bre a d , but thi s is my body . l f we do not

w ish to s ay that J esu s w as a liar we mu st confess that

what he th en pre sente d was re ally his bod y , as you h av e

ju st acknow le dg e d . B ut , before the consecra tion �t cer­

tainly was not . Hence , in this follows a �utatlon _by

v irtue of the consecr ation itself . That th1s mutat10n

re ally takes pl ace is not denie d by the m aj or p art �f

your Th eolo g i ans . I t does then take pl ace , yet th ere 1s

no mutation wh atever in th e exterior appe arance s , be­cau se th e se always rem ain the same . The mutation is ,

th erefore , in th e interior substance of the thi ng which

before w as bre a d , and afterwards becom es the B ody of J es u s Christ . Now we understan d nothing more b� this

term tr ansub stantiation ; we un derstand a mutat1on , a

change in th e substance , which by most Greek a�d L atin authors w as calle d tr a nsmut azione tr anselementaz1one a n d i n th e Council o f L ateran i s called tr ans ubstanti ation .

How very far from the tru th , th erefore , is the a ssertion of th e Anglican Article , th at thi s cannot be prove � b_Y scriptu re , and that it is contrary th ereto . I n what 1s 1t contr ary? I should like to know .

* * NOTE : I h ave written also some te aching on thi s point : Their ( . . . ) might illu strate it very much and it

woul d be too bur densome to repeat here wh at I h av e s aid el sewh ere .

- 98 -

They s ay that it is contrary to Scripture bec au se th e Holy Eucharist is th ere calle d by the names of B read and W ine even after consecration .

DOMINIC T rue , but this proves nothing , since the wine of the marriage at Cana is c a lle d water even after its cha nge . The rod of Moses is calle d a rod even when it devoure d the oth er serpents . N or is it unu sual in th e Scriptures to call a thing not by the form it actually posse s s e s , but from the m atter or en d for which it was pro duced . Abraham spe aking to Go d call s him self dust and ash es . By the same name does God ca 11 man after his form a tion : pul vis es , et in pul verem reverteris ( 97 ) homo putredo , et filius hominis vermis ( 98 ) , and the same in a hundre d other similar case s . The Eucharist , therefore , may very well be c a lled Bre a d , and we C atholics often call it the Euchari stic bre a d . Can you from this fam iliar ex pre s s ion conclu de that we do not believe in tr ansub­stanti a tion ? No , cert ainly . Nor can you infer the s ame from seeing it c alle d bread in the Holy Scriptu re . I t may be call e d so fir st on account of th e end for which , or the matter wh ence it is formed . I t is a lso c a lled Bre a d in a mystical sen se , bec au se it nouris hes the soul of th e worthy receiver . I do not think you ha ve any more to s ay upon this p articular . The remain der may be seen in the a ?ove mentioned letter . As to what regards the a dor at10n of th e Divine Sacrament , we have s aid but little .

A p article of common sense might , in dee d , suffice to make us a dore the God of M a j e sty whom we believe to be pres­ent , thoug h it may not be expres sly enj oye d . They also tel1 us that the S acrament was not or d aine d to be re­served or tr ans porte d from one pl ace to th e other . I re­ply , nor is or dinary bread m a de for this purpose , but to be ea te n , and to nourish us . Ye t , this is no imp ed iment to its being reserved or transported from one pl ace to the · ot_her . I do not think that bre a d is made every time you w1sh to e at it . W h o , therefore , prohib its us to do the same , proportione servata with reg ard to the Eucharistic bread? We do not k now of any such prohib ition . We even ·see that Jesus wished th em to g ather up the fragments of the m aterial bread de sig ned to nourish the bo dy . He ,

- 99 -

th erefore , does not prohibit , but we m ay say that he in­sin uates th e same with reg ar d to the Euchari st ic bre a d . I n or der to con demn a thing , which by its nature is not b a d , it is not sufficient to say , this is not commande d , oth erwise I could con demn many your customs . You mu st show that it has b een prohib ite d . Let th ese Gentle­men , th ere fore , point out to me such prohib ition s . Until they can point them out they cannot dep rive me of the liberty I h ave of followin g the ex ample of th e ancient F ath ers , who frequently reserve d and tr ansported from one pl ace to anoth er th e Divine Sacrament , as you may see in many c a ses of ancient h istory , and from the an­cient Liturg ies , espec i a lly that of th e Mass call e d the pre s a nctifie d , more u su al w ith the Gree ks than with th e L atins . An d take notice a g ain , my dear S ir , that what your reformers say from th e beginnin g to the end of this Article wag es w ar equally ag ainst the E astern as well as th e West ern Churches .

Who were th ese men th at they dare d so bol dly to cen s ure the entire Chu rch of J esu s Christ , inclu ding a lso the Greek Sc hism atic s ? Whence did th ey draw light in order to see contrary to what ha d ever b een seen by the C atholic Church ? Who taught them a doctrine until that perio d to­tally unknown ? Zu ing liu s answers that he ha d le arnt his from a spirit , b ut coul d not discern if it were black or wh ite . Yet I think it w as most certainly black , b ec au se this colour is le ss di scernable tha n th e opposite . Luther frankly ow ns that the D evil was his M aster . F rom hìm he le arnt th e neces sity of abolishing the Mass . W e hav e no ab solu te n ee d of such a confession , yet this serve for a convincing proof as to th e source whence aro se such op rn1ons . We come now to the Twenty-ninth Article , which says th at th e wic ke d and such as are voi d of a lively fa ith in ap proaching the communion , do not receive the Body of Jesus Christ . What they would pretend here , I do not know . I t appears that they wish to estimate th e C a l­vinis tic sense , and deny th e re al presence of Jesus Christ in the Euch arist , supposing him to be present b y faith only , and not re ally .

This , it appe ars to me , is th e meaning of th e Article . Yet it does not say so clearly . Who can fathom the minds of

100 -

the se Gent lemen? Let u s , th erefore , leave them in their obscurity and say that he who receives unworthily the D ivine Sacrament , receives , in dee d , the B ody of Jesu s Christ b ut to his con demnation . He knows not whom he re­ceives into h is brea st , he discerns not the body of the Lor d . In th e s am e sen se as the Synagogue , or the Hebrew na tion , is s aid not to ha ve r eceiv e d our D ivine Re deemer .

propria venit et sui eum non receperunt ( 99 ) . But how did they not receive Him since they ha d him among st them? It is tr ue th ey h a d him among st them , yet they knew him not . vestrum stetit , quem vos nescitis ( 100 ) . The sam e befalls the unworthy Communic ant . He discerns not the God of M a j e sty whom h e encloses in his bre ast : non corpus Domini ( 10 1 ) . I n this sense

should the words of St . A u s tin be u n derstood which are all u de d to in this same Article .

The Thirtieth Artic le contains anoth er hea d of accu sa tion against th e practic e of the Catholic Church , which is that of a d ministerìng the S acrament u nder one species . But suppose first , that th e Chu rch never s ai d i t w a s unl awful to communic ate u n d er both species ; only that ìt was l aw­ful to do unàer one spec ie s ; being l awful does not pro­hib ìt ; yet for ju st motives she or dains it to be the p rac­tìce . Secon dly , th e Church did not do away with the power of b eìng ab le to command the contrary if she j u d ged it mor e conv enient , as it h app ene d with reg ar d to B aptism u n der three imm er sions , which in some ages was forbi d de n out of hatr e d for Arian heresy , and th en per­mìtted or impose d , the age of Aria nìsm h aving ceased . Here , however , we do not tre at upon any poìnt of faìth , but only of discipline which may be changed by the Chu rch .

MR . I t is not absolutely a point of faith , it is at le ast a precept and it does not ap­pear th at th e ,Church has power to dispense with div ine

· precepts .

No Sir , it is by no means a div ine precept .

- 101 -

I t seems so to m e . I n the first pl ace , J esus s ai d unle s s you eat my fle s h and drink my blood , you sh a ll not have life in you . S econ d : at th e L ast Su p­per J es u s commanded th e Apostle s to do that which he h a d done . Now he had g iven them the communion un der both s peci es . Therefore . . .

FATHER With reg ard to the fir s t , I beg you to reflect that accor ding to C atholic doctrine , un der the s pe­cies of bre a d th ere is not only the body , but also the blood of our D ivine R e deem er , so that un der either s pe­cies the Body and Blood of Jesus Chri st is really re­ceive d . W ith re g ard to the secon d : I s ay first , how do you prove that Jesus communic ate d under both s pecies those who were not P riests ? We know that he communicated th e Apostle s , but we know tha t these were Priests of th e new a lli ance . I f the devout women w ere a lso th ere , if th ey receiv e d th e Divine Sacrament , if they receive d it u n der both species , or only un der one it does not ap­pear , and you would h av e to prove thi s in order to ac­cu se u s of tr ans g res sing a D ivine or din ance . I n the sec­ond pl ace , I s ay tha t your argument proves too much an d , th erefore , prov es nothing . J esus did' m any thing s at his last s up per which are omitte d by you . washed the feet of h is Apostle s , and take notice that this circum-stance w a s expressly ord ained . dedi , ut

ego feci ita et vos ( 102 ) . Yet , h is is not done by you . With u s it is practised on Holy Thu r s day only . J esus eat first a p asch al L a mb ; Jesus m a de a Sermon , etc . etc . M a ny other things he did - at his L ast Sup p er . Now I ask : do you do a ll th ese thing s every time th e com munion is a dministere d ? No , certa inly . Then why repreh en d u s if we omit one circum stance , whilst you yoursel v es orni t so many oth ers ?

.. WI LLIAM B ut those whic h we omit w ere never obli-g atory by Divine precept . We retain th e substance solely .

FATHER I also that w h at you omit is not obl i g atory by Divine precept , but I , how do you know it ? J esu s h aving impose d the w a s hing of the feet , how do you know tha t thi s was not a n obl i g atory com­mand? You have no oth er answer , my dear S ir , than this .

- 102 -

B ecau se the C athol ic Chu rch never acknowle dged it as such . An excellent ans wer , certainly . Now , s how me , if you c an , that the C a tholic Chu rch has ever acknowle dge d as a D ivine precept of obl i g ation th e g iving of communion always un der both species ? I f this w ere the c a se , we must con demn th e Church herself as contra dictory , s ince in so m any instances of more remote a ge , she has admin­istere d Communion under th e one , or th e other specie s alone . This Christian liberty w as so unìv ers al in the time of . Leonis , th at in order to know and to dis tin guish the M a nichees , who had a horror of wine , it w as or­daine d tha t every one s houl d communic ate under both spe­cies . Would such a decree have been nec e s sary ha d the sam e been held as a Divine precept ? Our Divine Redeemer himself most probably communicated the two disciples of Emmaus under th e sole s pecies of bre a d . But I will not enl arge further u pon th ìs subj ect . You may cons ult , at your lei s ure , Bos suet ' s be autiful treati s e on the s ame .

We have now to s peak of T hirty-first Artide in w hich your reform ers , following the example of Luther a s he had faithfully followed diabolic al doctrine , condemn the Mas s with rhost surprismg au dacity , for , take notice , that these the ir p rocee dings con demn not only the Roman Church , but th e entire society which retained the name of Chris t ian before Luther ' s time , for there w as none , either Catholic , Schi s m atic or even heretic in whic h th e most Sacred Sacrifice of the M as s w as not c elebrated , and is not celebrate d to th e pre sent d ay , to the honour a nd glo­ry of God an d for the benefit of all , not only the l iving , but also th e faithful dep arte d , as you may asc erta in by cons ulting the ancient l iturg ies which bear the n ames of the Apostles and which are preserve d in the societies both oriental and occi de nta l , C atholic or h eretic , and which are not , as to th e gre ater p art , more a ncient tha n the h eresies o f N e storiu s and E utyches , a s I ha ve s hown above , s pe aking of P urga tory . More tha n ordin ary cour­age w a s , th erefore , neces s ary in or der to condemn the

. entire Christian soc iety of all ages , and to denomin ate the tremendous Sacrifice of the new Alliance , dangerou s deceits and sacrileg ious blasphemy . These new Apostles of

· th e · pretende d reform say , therefore , tha t the Sacrifice once offered by J esu s , is perfect rede mp tion , prop itiation

- 103

an d s atis fac tion for all the sins of the whole wor ld , both origin al and actual , and that th ere is no oth e� s atis fac­tion for s in but this alone . Excellent , all this may be

gran te d th em , unde r stoo d in a j u s_t Ca th?lic sen se , n�r

would any C athol ic refu se to s ub scnbe to it . . B ut does it

follow from this that th e Mas s is a bl asphemio u s fable ? I dény with te ars such a con sequ ence which has no co nnec­tion whatever with similar premis e s . Could th ese me n

s uppo s e that we de nie d the su fficiency of the S acrifice of th e Cros s , not only as to th e re demption of the whole

worl d b ut of an in fin ity of worl ds , did they exist ? Such a su�position would sufficie ntly demon s.tr ate either �he�r

ig n or an ce or malice . D o not all Cathohcs allow the infi­nite merits of th e de ath of Jes u s? Do not they eve n pro­cl aim th at one drop of his preciou s B lood , one sing le

te ar , one sigh alon e offere d by Jes us for us would be of in fin ite me rit . How can any r e a sonable pe r son s upp ose

that this merit c an be infinite and at th e sam e time not

su fficie nt ? In or der to imagine such a thing the min d must admit of two contr adictions . Catholic s , th erefore , have in all ag e s , an d in all regions b elieve d in the en­tir e sufficie ncy of th e Sacr ific e of the Cros s .

MR . W I LLI AM supe r fluous .

B ut aft er this , you s ee , the M ass b ecome s

FATHER DOMINIC I de ny th e con s e quenc e s which doe s n ot at all follow , as I s aid abov e . I f s uch consequ e nce

were l awful it woul d e qu ally follow that B apti s m was su­p erfluou s , th at p en ance w as su perfluou s tog eth er w ith all

good wor ks . Ye t , we know tha t th ese not o nly are not su­p erfluou s b ut th at they are in dispe n sa bly neces s ary . I t

is , in de e d , tr u e that your reformers were dis pose d to

swallow th is abs ur dity , as it appe ars by s aying that we

are j u stifie d by faith only , but at present I am aware

such doc trine is aban do ne d by the more mode r ate among st

you , as too con tr ar y to th e Bible which they p�ofe sse d to

follow as th eir sole r ule of faith . B ut even if some of you still wishe d to main tain it , I s ay that the�e would res ist ( if th eir r e asons were of any v alue ) notwithsta n d­in g th e doctrin e of St . P aul , th e s ufficiency of th e de a�h of J esu s . I f this were s u fficient to ac comphsh our s ancti­fic ation , why th en do you ex act faith in orde r to be j u s-

- 104 -

ti fie d? Do you not see that here you do an inj ury to th e in fin ite m erits of the Sacrifice of the Cross .

Softly Sir , it is not so , I a s s ure you . Though we allow the de ath of J e s u s to be s u fficient in or der to sanctify u s , still we exact faith as the only me ans of app lying to u s this s anctific ation . I t does not bring us any other merit , but applie s to us the s ame .

DOMINIC O , v ery g ood , b ut who has ev er s aid that we bring or offer to God any mer it distinct from that of th e �ros s and th e de ath of J es u s ? We do not , th ere­fore , b rmg or offer anything new , b ut we offer to the Divine Maje sty th e selfsame merits of th e Passion and D eath of J esu s Chr ist . I s not this , then , in precise term s , our doctrine ? I s not th e same expr e s sly said by the F ath ers of the Council of T rent ? They ass ure us that th e Sac rifice of th e Mas s and that of th e Cros s is one and th e same Sac rifice . I t is the same immac ul ate vic tim and . th e principal Of�erer is also the selfsame Je s u ; Chnst who decl are d hims elf to be a P rie st for ev er ac­cor din g to th e or der of Melchize de k . An d it is offere d to the same DivTne Maj e sty , the only diffe r e nce is in the ma�ner of offering . Sola offerendi ratione diversum ( 103 ) ( Tnd ) . I f un der this view you would c a ll the Mass a new s acrific e , you may c all it so . Call it new and etern al at the _ same ti�e , to u se the phr a se of J e s u s him self . Stnct�y . spe aking , however , it is not new , bec au se neithe r the v�c tim nor the chief off erer are new . I t is b ut a re­nov a.tion , or as I may expr e s s it , a continuation of the Sacnfice of the Cross .

MR . Ye t , this renov ation or con tinuatio n , as you wish to c a ll it , appears to be contrary to the Apostle ' s . doctrine who s ays espre s sly that Je sus Chris t

. off �re � him self , onc e ( semel ) off ering him self . This seems to in dic ate pretty c le arly that the offe ring co uld be made

· but once .

DOMINIC Do you see , my de ar Sir , how fre-q uently your argume n ts become dis qua lifie d , proving · nothin g bec au se , if th ey prove d anything , they would prove too much . By this you could p rove it to be fa lse

- 105 -

th at J esu s o ffer e d him s elf to his F ath er for us from th e

tim e of his bir th , as th e s aid Apo s tle affir m s in th e s am e

place . I t would p rove as fal se that J e su s is a sce n de d into He av e n : Ut appareat vultui Dei pro nobis ( 104 ) . An d

fal s e al s o th at h e i s th ere s e at e d at the ri ght h an d of hi s F ath e/ Semper vivens ad interpellandum pro nobis ( 105 ) . If th e semel ( 106 ) m a de u se of by St . P aul is not

oppo s e d to oth er offerin g s , neit�er can. it be oppo s e d to

th e o ffe rin g which he makes of h1m s elf m th e M a ss .

MR .. W I LL IAM Your re a s o nin g convince s me , but how th en should the semel u se d by St . P aul be un de r s too d?

FATHER DOMINIC T hough I did not un der s t a n d it , not

b e ing v ery plain , b ec au se I know th at th is D ivine e p i s t le

cont ain s many thin g s diffic ul t to be un d e r s tood a s at­te ste d by th e P rince of the Apo s tles . T h is m ay be one

.of

tho s e diffic ul t thin g s , a nd if I did not comp re he nd 1t s

m e a n in g it would be n o gr e at evi 1 . I sho uld prefer , cer­ta inly , r ath er humbly to con fe s s my ignor ance th �n

r a sh ly to perv e rt such D ivine le s sons to my own pe r d1-tio n . However , if I am not mis t ake n , thi s is what St . P a ul m e ant to s ay . He w as writing to the Hebrew s , amon g s t whom th ere were many . who pr e t e n d e.d . that ev e n

in th e new alli ance th e J ewish nt e s an d s acnhces shoul d

b e ret a ine d . Accor din g t o th e s e , l amb s , bull s a n d r am s , as pr e s cr ibe d �n the M o� a ic l aw , w ere to �e off:r e d . . T h�s

m ay g iv e u s h g ht to d1s cer n th e Apo s tle s de s 1g� m h1s

ep i stle , an d it appe a r s evi d e nt to me th at h e w1she d to

sig nify no mor e th an th at we Chri s ti an s should. no lon g er

immol ate b ulls , l a mbs or sh eep , etc . A ll th e se victim s

were by th eir n at ure in s ufficie nt to blot out our s i n s . Th ey w e re g ood only in as much as th ey r epr e s e�t e � , some in one way an d oth ers in anoth er , that s ole V 1c tlm which was alo n e cap able of app e a sin g th e ju s t wr ath of God an d of c ance lling our s i ns . Now th is D iv ine V ic tim be i n g th e only ce n t r e to which all th e oth e r s t e nd e d , b ein g , I s a y , the s o le tru th which ha d v e rifie d an.d ac­compli s h e d th e sha dow s a n d figur e s ?f th e ol d all :a nce , th e s e sh a dows an d figu r e s b ecame ent lr ely u s ele s s , 1n th e

s am e manner a s an ima g e is u sele s s whe n we pos s e s s th e

ori g in al or p rototy p e . St . P aul , th erefor.e , int e n d�� no

oth er th a n to exclu de a mul ti t u de of anc1e nt s acnhc e s ,

- 106 -

an d by no me a ns ever to exclu de th e only s ac r ific e of th e new a lliance , wh ich mo st ce r tainly he him s elf , a s a n Apo s tle of J es u s Chri s t and dis p en s e r of D ivin e my st e rie s fre que n tly offere d i n the s acre d a s s e mbli e s a n d i n th ' d · d

' e manner or a1ne by J es u s Chri s t , a s th e s am e Apos tle rel at e s .

Oh ! it j u st rec ur s to me ( but pray excu s e me if I appe ar r ath er s ophis tic a l , for I only wis h to cle ar my do ubt s ) yet St . Paul , even J e s u s him self , s ai d that the Su pp er was to be ce leb r at e d in comme mor a tion of the D e�t� of J e s u s . There f?re , I think it is not pro pe r ly a s ac r .. hce but only th e s1mple comme mor a t ion or remem­bra nce of s ac r ifice . You mu s t allow th a t between a thing an d th e reme mbr a nce of it , th e re is a g re at diffe r e nce . I hav e th e re memb ra nce of Rome in my he a d , yet I hav e not Rom e it s elf . I do not know if I have expl ai nè d my self well .

You expl ain your s elf v ery well , a n d I un de r s ta n d what you m e a n . . It is tr ue , I do not deny that th e r� mem? ra nce of a thmg doe s not nec e s s a rily car ­

ry th e thmg · 1t s elf a long with it but it is true a l so that it doe s not alway s exclu de ;h e thi ng . I h �v e al� re a dy told you to co n s i der that the reme mbr a nce of Go d do e s not exclu de . Go d him self from u s . He m ay re ally be th ere tog e th er w1th the thing which r e mi n d s u s of his pr e s e nce , tho ug h not in a manne r cap a ble of striki ng our sen s es _. The comme mor ation , th erefore , which we ought to make m th e Mas s of J e s u s a n d of hi s D e ath , doe s not ex­elu de th_e pr e s e.nce of th e s elf same J es u s , nor does it ex­elu de . h1s my st1c al de ath or th e renov ati o n of th e s am e not , m d ee d , phy s �c ally , but my s t ic a lly a n d r e a lly . Th� P aschal L a mb wh,..1ch wa s to be eat e n in memory of th e ha_ppy p a s sage or the J ew s , e tc . d id not exclu de the re­ahty of th e Lamb it s elf , nor th e tr ue s ac r ific e wh ich wa s offer� d to the D iv ine Maj e s ty . Con s i der for a mom ent how · a t:n n g m�y be , in som e se n s e , th e figur e a n d commemo­ra t10n of 1t s�lf in a noth er s tat e . Figu re to your s elf the Duke o! Wellin gton on th e d ay in which he appe ar s cov­ere d w1th the i n sig nia wh ich he won at W aterloo . We may tr uly s a� th at he rep r e s e n t s him self comman din g th e army an d pu ttmg the Fr e nch t o flig ht . Th i s , howev er , d e not e s

- 107 -

b ut th e figu re of what he th en w as , yet would it not b e

foolish to deny that he was Arthur Wellesley and p re te nd th at h e w as but a simp le imag e of the conqueror of �ona­p arte ? Thi s is our c as e pr e s e rvin g th e due p ropor.t1ons . I n the Sa c rifice of the M a ss th ere is a commemor at10n or

rep re s entation of th e Sac r ifrice of th e Cro s s , bu� by whom is it rep re se nte d ? By our D ivine R e deem er h1m sel� who

once offere d him self on Calvar y and now offers h1m sel f anew u pon ou r Altars .

MR .. WILLIAM I be g you to obs erv e , ho�ever , that notion of a S acrifice c arries with it an i de a .of t�e

str uction or de ath of th e Victim offere d , wh1ch 1s

re ally v e rifie d in th e M a ss .

th e

de­not

FATHER DOMINIC I could ver y j u stly deny , that th e

notion of sa c rifice imports e s se ntially th e D e ath of the

Victim . Some chang e or dete rior ation of th e s ame to t�i s

e ffect , appe ars sufficie nt , but setting a s i de sue� . d 1s­pute s I tel1 you th ere is in th e most Sac r e d Sacn hc e of th e M'a s s , th at de ath or des tru ction which t�e nature . �f a s ac rific e it s elf re quir e s . l t is a my st1c al Sacnf�c e · Th erefore by its e s s ence th e my stic al de ath may su ff1 c e , ye s , but ' it is re a l , als o , by th e my stic .sep ar a tion of �h e

B ody and B lood of J es u s Chr ist . Th e:e :s a lso a sp ec1�s

of de ath , if we may so c all it , re al m 1t s or de.r . I n th1 s

D ivine Sa c rifice th e innoce nt V ictim is pl ace d m a state

of dete rior ation , we may s ay , of humiliation , in as much as h is s ac rame ntal ex i st ence , or that is , in a s much as

h e ex is t s in th e s ac r ament , he ren de r s him sel f dep en dent u pon the dur ation of th e s p ecies which cont a�n or conce �l

Him to such a de gree th at if , by hy poth es 1 s , Jes u s . d1 d not ex i st but in th at g iven pl ace , or u n der that sp e c 1 e s , h e woul d be annihil ate d at th e cons ummation of th e s am e

s p ecies . Th ere is nothing , th erefore , th at can .b� OJ?p ose d to th e tr u e notion of s ac rific e , or to th e v erific a t1o n of tho se p r oph ecie s which extol , wi.th . such high encomium s , th e gr and s ac r ific e of th e Chri stian Church , and esp e-c ially that of th e P r oph et Mal achy .

I will not p r oph ecies . attentiv ely

at pre se nt detain you by referr ing to th ese

I do not think it ne c e s s ary b ec au se you m ay con si der th em in any author you ple ase

- 1 08 -

among st our controvers ialist s . Nor will I a d d any furth er proof s that this Divine Sac rifice m ay be offere d for th e livi �g and th e de a d , bec au se I h av e alre a dy tr e ate d con­cer nmg such arg ume nts in my thir d lett er to Al itofil as ( = Lettere Celimontane ) and bec au se thi s Divine Sacr ific � differs from that which w as offere d u pon Calvary , a s we hav e a lre a dy see n . l f that might be offere d for th e remis s ion of sin , for the s alvation of the whole human r ac e , it is evi dent th at thi s may be offere d for the s am e end which h�s alway s b een the p r actice not , only of th e Roman Cathollc Church , but , also , of th e orie nta l commu­nion s , sc his matic or h eretic , divide d from u s . The same wi�l. be. offere d ti.ll th e cons ummation of ag es , and if An L1chnst for a time may be able to su ccee d in abol­is�ing th e daily Sac r ific e , as pre dic te d by Daniel , thi s m1sfortune wi ll not l a st long , for God has p romise d to shorte n tho s e day s : abbrevia bit dies illos , etc . ( 1 07 ) . Nor yet wi ll th is be univers a l . Th ere wi ll alway s be on th e earth someone to offer th e Divine M aj es ty that sole sa c rifice worthy of Go d . We m ay , th erefore , conclu de �hat in th em and hi s followers who attempte d to abolis h 1t were the p recu rsors of Antichrist . B ut I leave this to th e dec is ion of tho s e who are mor e will ing tha n my self to rec r imi:1ate a.g ain st the p re ten de d reform ers for so m any calummes wh1c h th ey hav e inv ente d again st th e Catholic Chu rch . The hour , I know , is late . This confere nce ha s been lo ng er than th e form er , but th e subj ect s were too much connecte d to be se par ated from e ach oth er .

TENTH CONFERENCE UPON THE THIRTY-SECOND AND FOLLOWING ARTICLES TILL THE END

FATHER DOMINIC We have but litt le to s ay u pon the re­maining Article s . With re g ar d to th e Thirty-s ec on d , whic h g rants to P r ie s ts and D eacons the power of taking wiv es : and th e u se of marr iag e , I only s ay tha t th ey a ss ume a g reat power which th e Univ ers al Chu rch has nev er as-

- 109 -

sum e d , at le ast not in gener al and to all , that is of dispensing with the observance of a vow solemnly pro m­ise d to Go d in or din ation . I t is certa in tha t every lawful vow oblig es ex j ure divino to its observance or accom­plishment . How , th ere fore , can these gentle men _assum_e th e

power and the faculty of a g ene ral disp en satlon w1thout any evi dent re ason .

MR .. WILLIAM St . P aul giv es the re ason in these re

)­

markable wor ds : Qui non se continent nubant ( 1 Cor 7 : 9 · This is a univer s al law for all Chri stians to which our ref or m e rs conform e d . Th ey , th erefore , did no oth er than re store that holy libe rty which th e Divine Sp ir it grants to

all by the mouth of this Ap ostle .

FATHER DOMINIC I mu st inform you , however , that your

supposition is v ery gr atuitous in allowing that this lib­erty commence d by St . Paul extend s also to those who are

boun d to Go d by a vow of pe rpetual ch astity . If it we:e

so St . P aul would be in contr a diction with him self rn con dem ning the wi dows who postquam luxuriatae fuerunt in Christo nubere volunt habentes damnationem , quia

primam fidem irritam fecerunt ( 108 ) . These wi dows work th eir own d amnation , and why ? P e rhaps bec ause they would give the m sel v es to a dissolute life ? No , but only bec au se th ey would marry Nubere volunt , and by this �a d

th e intention of viol a ting the promise m a de to Go d ( w h1ch suppose s that these had made a vow of c_hast�ty ) . I f �he

thought only , the will only to mar ry ag arn m1ght occ�s1on th em dq..m nation , can we think it woul d not be occa s1one d

by actually marrying those who had previou sly ple dge d

th eir wor d to Go d?

MR . WILLIAM Let this be as it may those who were first boun d by a vow . beneficial for those who ha d not yet been preventing the many sc and als which have

are given at pre sent amongst you by clergy .

wi th reg ard to

I t was at le ast or d aine d , by it been given an d

the unmarrie d

FATHER DOMINIC I do not deny that th ere hav e been an d still are disor d ers and sc and als among st the clergy who profes s celibacy : yet I think and you will e asily

- l lO -

�gree with me that th ese are gre atly exagg e rate d . There �s always �n outcry against the clergy , idle tale s are mv ente d and publish e d as facts , whilst nothing is said of seculars , for this r e ason , becau se ab assuetis non fit pa

.ssio . That which is or din ary surprises no one , nor on th 1s account is e steem e d worthy of being talke d of or cir­cul �te d . This preju dice is , th erefore , in favour of th e cellbate cle rgy . The ir falls are related everywh ere . I conclu de , therefore , tha t th ey are not freq uent , oth e rwise they would not be subj ects worth rel ating , for who takes th e trouble of recounting that which continually happens . Did you ev er rea d in the newsp apers , such a one e at an d another dran�? No ce rtainly , to · report similar thing s would be foollsh . Have I not then r e a son for s aying that I do not believe th e disorders of our cle rgy to be so common as you are lea d to suppose , and that they are

much exagg �rate d? That th ere are some I do not deny , yet to cons1 der the m a tter coolly do you think th ere is les s evil to be fe ar e d from a marrie d clergy than from a clergy disengage d? Can you conceive the former to be more useful than the latter to religion and society? As to me I should s ay qu ite the contrary , an d I think this opinion the m-os t univers ally supporte d . The first tim e I carne to Englan d I dres sed as a secular , not wishing to be recognize d for a Prie st . On the Tham es I entere d into conver sation with an English P rote stant Gentle man who aske d me if I thought th e Pope woul d grant marr iag e to the Clergy? I _ think it very improbable was my r eply . An d I , he contlnue d , am of opinion that if the Pope were to t�ke such a step the Christian religion would fa 11 to noth1ng and we shoul d have none in the worl d . MR .. WILLIAM Oh ! that was s aying too much . The Greek Church still exists , yet the Prie sts have wives . FATHER DOMINIC I t was s aying too much for another and a better riason , viz : the ineffa ble promise s of J esus · C?rist that the gates of Hell should nev er prevail against H:s ��urch _. But with re gar d to the Greeks , your argument s1g mhes httle . In the fir st place bec au se you ce rtainly do not envy the sta te of the Greek Church ; a slave and · su�j ect to the Turks or sover eign power , concer ning wh1ch , take notice , that a marrie d clergy , and a clergy

- l l l -

in s ubj ection may be considered synonymous . Besides , if the Greek Chu rch is s upported it is , humanly spe aking , for the most part in debte d to the cel ibacy of the monks , from among st whom the B ishops are g enerally chose� . T hese , hav in g neither wives nor children to cry by their

side s , are able to show a little indepe n de nce and cou rage

again st th e civil powers . Now , returning . to th.e tr a velle r

of whom I spoke , liste n to the man ner m w h1ch he en-de a voured to prov e his assertion .

Religio n , s aid h e , cannot sub s ist without i ts ministers . Now I say that a marrie d Prie st is no minister at a�l of r eligion . He has many oth er affairs , many other obJ e cts to take up his atte ntion . He has a wife , and he h as childr e n , h e is oblige d to think about the maint en anc e

and con dition of his family . He mu st , th erefore , know how to ste er his own boat . l f a rich or powerful pe rson

shoul d oppre ss th e Church , the marrie d Prie st ?r Bish�p co uld not contend w ith one more pot ent than h1mself , 1n

order to defend the rights of his Church , bec au se h e

did , it wo uld ce rtainly be the r uin of his family . He

mu st , th erefore , mollify , and shut his eye s to the disor­de rs of the , or of anyone who we>uld do him an

inj u ry . Either the affairs of the Church or those of his family mu st su ffer , and he will n atur ally pr efer the g ood of his family to that of th e Chu rch . I n case s of conta­g iou s s ickn e ss , he cannot expose himself to the danger of taking th e infection , and of introducin g it into his fami­ly . He , th erefore , lea v es the afflicte d to .die w ithou� any religio u s su ccour . Nor c an we be surpnse d at th1s . _A fath er is n atur ally more solicitous about the c are of h1s family than of th e pe ople u nde r his j u risdictio n . The

disen gag ed p rie st may expose himself to danger , bec au :e , in c ase he dies there is no one to weep , but not so w1th re g ar d to the mar rie d clergy . Such w as the argum ent of this Protestant gentlem an upon which I will not prono u nc e

my j u dgme nt . I le ave oth ers to j u dge wh ether o r n o h is reasons were well founde d , and only tel1 you tha t u pon

h ear ing h is discou r se , I s aid to myself : well , so much for all th e inv ect iv es again st the cel i b a te cle rgy .

I will add but one remark : do you think that if Thomas Becket had had a wife and chil dren that he would have

- 1 12 -

shown such co�r age again st the attempts of He nry the 2n d . Or had P rns the 6th and Piu s th e 7 th been mar rie d and had families , tha t th ey would hav e been so co ur a­g eou s as they w ere in opposing the D ictator of E u rope ? Amon g st all th e Sovereig ns in collision with B uonaparte only had the cou rage to pr efer prison , ex ile , an d d�ath itself be fore a vile con de scen sion to the Tyr ant ' s w1ll ; an d I have h e ar d it r epeate d many times that Buona parte fe ar e d more his prisoner the Monk ( Pi u s 7th ) than the whole ( . . . ) of P r us sia . Tyr a nny arme d with farce may , indee d , fetter th e body of a celibate Bishop , but the c ase is very r are in which the spir it bows to the sam e .

A Bishop , whose sole portion is Go d alone , expose s his life to a g lor ious de ath , to noble , b ut never the Chu rch or her interest to th e ins ults of the impio us , how pow erf1;1l soever . The �ondu ct of the Fr e nch cle rgy u n der the re1gn of te rror , w11l ever be a be autiful panegyric not. only of t�e g allican Chu rch but also of celibacy , wh1ch made ex1le and de ath prefera ble to vile adulation . The condu ct of St . P aul in the fir st ages of the Chu rch , that of a Xaveriu s , and of so many other Mis sioners who in su cc ee ding ages have w atered an d s ti ll water the faith with_ �h eir blood amongst in fidel n ations , is an apology su fflc1e ntly stro�g �nd conclu sive in favour of celibacy Wo uld our Eccle siastlc s tr a verse the vast empir e of Chin a , and expose the ir liv es for the salva tion of so uls , if they we re enc umbere d with wiv es and children ? I know not , I o�ly know that they do g o , an d that they have neith er w1ves to ple ase , nor children to manage . Qui cum uxore est quae sunt et est ( 109 ) . The n u­mero u s daug hte rs of the gre at and admir able Vinc e nt of Paul , by th e ir condu ct , plead eloqu e ntly in favour of feminin e celibacy and th e glory of th e Cathol ic Church

exposing the ir lives e ach mome nt to a thous an d an d � tho usan d dangers . Ha ve you · ever pos se sse d a similar her-. oism _ since y�u r reform ers abolishe d C atholic wors hip an d . Cathohc practlc es ? There are some , indee d , who will give a part of th eir money in charity ; b ut who will give th eir whole lives for charity? Ah ! this is only to be see n in · the bo som of that Chu rch wh ere such h eroism produ c es , I may say , no admir ation bec au se it is daily and little

113 -

le s s tha n univ ersal . Catholic heroine s are one of the

strong e st b ulw arks of the truth of our holy relig ion .

I n de ed , in de e d , it c an not be denie d ! An d

though I w as born an d have alway s live d amo:ig st P rot­

estant s , I could never re a d without the most hvely unc ­

tion of the h eroism , more than h ero ic ( i f one may s ay so )

of your Catholic female s . 1 t appe ars to me that these

equa 1 , if , inde e d , they do not surp a s s . a�l the fervour . of

the Marcell a ' s , th e Paula ' s , the Mel ania s , the Demetna­

d e s , so worthy of a dm ira tion in the g ol d�m a ges of the

Church ; moreov er , if I may s ay what I thrnk , the Catho­

lic Church re ally appe ars to be renov ate d by persecution ,

a nd the b ark of St . P eter seems to asce nd the more Ma­

g e st ic in proportion as sh e is beaten by the wa ves . After

the epoch of Luther a most not able amelioratio n w as dis­

cernable an d s i nce that of Buonaparte we have seen an d

still wit�e s s even somethin g more sin gular , espec ially in

the we aker sex . He nce , I b elieve that L uther had done

much good to the Catholic religio n .

I am not far from thinking the same ,

if understood in a proper se n s e ; Luther a·nd his followers

w ere u seful to the Church in the same man ner as a N ero ,

a Domitian , a Docius , a Diocletian , a Voltaire , a Marat ,

a Rob e spierre . Necesse est ( s ay s the Apost le ) necesse est

et esse , ut et qui sunt in vobis ( 1 10 ) . Luth er w as most u seful to those who stoo d

against him , but not to tho s e who followe d his banner .

The pre s e nt state of religion in the north of Germany

show s to what th e followers of Luther may be le d . But le t

u s return to the Articles . I ha ve nothing to bring

a gainst th e 33rd excep ting gre at incon si ste ncy in the

au thors of it . 1 f ex communicate d persons should be

e ste eme d as He athe ns and P ublicans , what should we con­

s ider Elizabeth an d h er adh ere nts ?

The excommunic ation

E lizabeth w as invalid , for England from the juri s diction of the P ope .

pro nounce d again st had the n with drawn

DOMINIC Very good , but tel1 m e , is it sufficient

to declare one s elf exempt from any juris dictio n in order

- 1 14 -

to be no long er su bj ect to th e same and free from excom­munica tion? If so , what may be s aid of the excommu nica­tions fulmin ate d by your Legislators agai n st all those

who denied the sp iritual supre macy of the King , as th e

truth s of any of the 39 Articles , or the many oth er heads

under wh ich James the 1st an nexe d s e nte nce of excommu ni­cation facto ( 1 1 1 ) . Di d th ese acknowl­edg e the sp iritual supremacy of the K in g , or the C atholi­city or :1ece s s ary authority in the per sons who dre w up these articles an d th ese c anons ? No certainly . Th erefore , all s uch excommunications w ere null by th eir nature . No , my de ar Sir , no . You cannot impug n the truth an d be

cons i stent at th e same time . Your reformers would ass ume

to themselves that author ity which they de nie d to the

Univer sal Church , and is not thi s a gros s inconsist ency? Th erefore , the 33rd Article may be ju st and con sistent in

those who acknowle dg e th e authority establish e d by Go d upon earth , but very unju st in the mouth of one who , having de nie d any authority to th e Church establis he d J esu s Christ , would afterwards give it to that by . which were most certainly not the law s of Je su s

Chnst . A Church by Law established may , in deed , have

power to fettér th e body , but not th e mind or th e he art .

I n th e 34th Article it is re markable what low an d b ase

ideas your reformers had of Tradition , re ducing it to

mere rites and ceremonies At the same time I entreat you to notice how wide th ey open th e door to all dis senters

who might afterwards come , and in fact did come . They the n S'.3-Y at th e end of th e Artide , that every partic ular or N at10n al Church hath authority to or dain , change , a n d a?oli sh cere mon ies or rite s of the Church . This they con­s1dere d nece s s ary in order to authorize all those chang es

occa�ione d by th e cha n ges they had made . By th e au­thonty of such an Article , th ere is not a D ioc ese or Pari sh that may not th ink th emselves authorize d to make

oth�r altera tiori.s . For example : every Church , not only Nat1onal but also , has thi s rig ht . And here

. th� P arish is a particular church ( certainly it is not umv ersal ) therefore , th e Parish may ordain or abol is h the ceremonies of the Church or dained by me n : ( and u n­

, doubte dly th ey were men who comp ile d th e Book of Common Prayer ) .

1 15 -

MR .. WILLIAM We are admonished , however , by the l ast wor ds that all things may be done to edification . But it would not be edifying if ev ery D iocese and every P arish were to change the rites and ceremonie s .

FATHER DOMINIC Why not ? There might be as much edi­fic ation as there was at th e change made by the reform­ers . Tel1 me , S ir , who is the judge if it be edifying or not ? Surely not th e univer s al Church , bec au se if it were so , the change that took pl ace u n der E dwar d an d Eliza­beth coul d not certainly be edifying . This , therefore , sufficient if consi dere d e dify ing by the person who m akes it , in th e s ame manner as your cha nge was decided by th e j u dgment of those who made it . Th erefore , you hav e , as th e proverb s ay s , "cut your own throat s , " and hav e no me ans left t o censu re a n y one who would tota lly abol­is h your rit ual , as th e Quakers and others hav e done , nor who would return to the Roman ritual which many appear des irou s of at present . An non licet Valentinianis , quod licuit Valentino? ( 1 12 ) . We mu st be con sistent ! W ith respect to th e 35th Article which speaks of the Homilies , th ere would be much to s ay did we intend to analy se a ll th e calumnies amassed in these homilies ; and which are s anctioned by th e same Article . They are so gross in that Homily alone on the per il of I dol a tory tha t it makes one shu dder to hear them . W ho , without a thrill of h orror , c an listen to a p arallel between Venus and the Mother of Go d , between D iana and Magdalen , between Vesta and St . Agath a , etc . etc . I s it pos s ible to re a d or listen to thi s Horn ily wi thout the u tmost horror , not , in deed , for the Univ ersal Church against which it is directe d , but for the persons who wrote it ? Yet , your 35th Article deci des that it contains wholesome doctrine , etc . At pre sent I be­lieve the more moder ate are truly ashame d of this m ass of absurdities , and th at hatre d alone for the truth and for the C atholic Chu rch could dictate them . I should offen d you , I am sure , did I think it neces s ary to point out to you a ll the errors contained in the same , of which you are not con vince d .

MR . W I LL IAM Oh ! I a m perfectly convince d , therefore , we may p ass them over and finish our d iscu s sion u pon the Article s .

- 1 16 -

DOMINIC In the 36th Article in or der to do away with every doubt that might arise , and certa inly did arise in the min ds of m any with re g ard to the valid­ity of th e new ordin ations , they decl are them to have been and s till are va lid and lawfu l , and that nothing can be opposed to th em . Yet , alas ! how weak and frail is such a declaration , how ineffectual to remove dou bts that really have and may still ari se ! For to consi der well th e case , in substance they do no oth er than attrib ute to the persons whose authority is in question , authority to de­clare of themselves th at they have lawful authority . Sup­pos e a case , in w hich th e le g it ima te title to an inheri ­tance is doubtfu l . I t is desireable to clear the dou bt . Behold th e means of doing so : it is sufficient for the pos se s sors to declare that his title is leg itimate . After this who c an call his lawful rig ht in question . I f he had no rig ht to the inh erit ance i t would have been contested . Now , in pl ace of allowin g that he was in the wron g , he said he w as in the right . What can be more conclu sive? No tribunal can j u dge to the contrary , bec au se in such a case the T ribunal would have to pronou nce ju dg ment u pon a judge who h a d passed sentence in his own favour . Who would dare to- do so much? Tel1 me sincerely : is a ll this sufficient to dis sip ate doubts ? No , no , it must be allowe d that such j u dg es were men and not alway s guided by the Spirit of God , and , th erefore , might err , and sometimes have erre d , accor ding to th eir own decision res pecting the Bishops as semble d in general council .

MR .. T ake notice , however , that the ir deci sion reg ar ds a general council , and not any p artic ular assem­bly .

FATHER DOMINIC True , I did not reflect sufficiently . True , an Univ ers al Council may err , but P arliament may be infallible . I t must even necess arily be so , oth erwise its decis ion would not su ffice to do away w ith every

· doubt against th e validity of ordin ation unto this time . and hereafter . Then , after such p arliamentary infa llibil­ity every doubt shoul d imme diately vanish . But wh at then if some choose to call in question this infallibility it self? · All th e doubts woul d return . An d much wors e is th e

- 1 1 7 -

wound made by such bad contrivance ; but such b a d con­trivance could not make it better .

MR . WILLIAM You are , th erefore , of opinion that our or dinations are invalid .

FATHER DOMINIC I will not absolutely pronounce sen­tence u pon this point . I t is not at present my intention to examine this matter thoroughly . Yet , I have alre a dy told you in a f ormer conference that there are many mo­ti ves to doubt of th e validity of the same , and I c annot b ut praise the precaution of our C atholic Church in re­ordaining those who were ordained amongst you , when they retur ned to h er bosom .

MR . WILLIAM But what would you say if the Anglic ans were to act in the same manner towar ds those who ab­j ured Popery , which I know some of ours have proposed , though I do not know if it ever took eff ect .

FATHER DOMINIC And if it were effected I think you would laugh h eartily with me an d with every lover of truth , to see how th e Anglicans cut their own throats . They cannot boast of Apostolic succession , _but by t�e supposition of leg itimate descent from our anc1ent Cathohc B ishops sent by the P ope ( although they ha ve �ut litt le reason thu s to boast , as I have alrea dy shown 1n a le t­ter a ddre s sed to the Oxfor d Gentlemen . ) But should they refuse to asknowle dge th e validity of our ordin ations , every motive for such boasting would fall to the groun d without found ation , a s you may clearly see . I d o not , th erefore , think they will ever be so foolish �s . to re�r­dain our apostate Priests , who postquam luxunah fuer1nt in Christo nubere volunt ; habentes damnationem , 9-uia primam fidem irritam fecerunt ( 1 1 3 ) . In the 37th Art1c�e , I think you will discover with me , an act �he most :'ile th an can be imagine d in persons investe d w1th ecclesias­tical authority , thus to subj ect the Church , h er _laws , and all her economy to th e humour of secular pnnces , often so capriciou s , and even sometimes antichristian . I am aware that we should always ren der to Caesar the thing s that are Caesar ' s , b ut not , in deed , those which belong solely to God . These last cannot be subj ected but

- 1 18 -

to God alone . For is Caesar the author of Religion? Was Caesar the institutor of Christianity ? Did your F ath ers receive th e faith , th e Gospel , the Scriptures , the Sacra­ments , from Caesar ? W as it not God who communicated all these things to you by means of his ministers on earth ? How could your reformers , therefore , without trembling , subject th emsel ves so blindly to Caesar? They thought , perhaps , to g ain something by shaking off the yoke of the Vic ar of J esus Christ ; but now you see plainly how little they have g aine d . They have lost a ll authority ov er the people , they have lost even the power of making Eng­land listen to the weak , faltering voice of the Anglican Church .

They have lost the power of assembling a Synod without the command of Caesar . They have lost all right of electing who should preside over the government of this unfortunate Chu rch . lt has not infrequently been the c ase that persons of suspicious faith , even in open contra dic­tion , not only with the C atholic b ut also with the Angli­can Church , have been appointe d to govern by those who certainly believed less than themsel ves . But you will s ay , we have seeri this in the Catholic Church ancient and modern . lt may be so, yet there remaine d always a way open to rej ect impiety from the Sanctuary . Some arrogant Prince may have had the boldness to preside over eccle­siastical affairs , but the Church never sanctione d such a ttempts by any ca non or article of relig ion . The C atholic Church has often had her han ds tie d by force , but never h er mind or her heart . You , however , have tied your han ds , your min ds , and your hearts , by obliging your­sel ves to believe it a duty to recognise in the King or the Queen Supreme Governor or Governes s over your eccle­siastical affairs .

.. WILLIAM , I think , however , your remark does not accord . You suppose it to have been the Bishops and the , Clergy who took this step whilst , on the contrary , it certainly was not them but the Sovereign . l t was Henry who decl are d himself , his King dom , and his Church to be exempt from the Pope ' s j uris diction . Thu s , th ere was no 'other alternative but to g ive the Supremacy either to the Primate or to the King . Henry thought it best to take it

- 119 -

for him s elf . U n d e r E li zab eth th ere w as a t e r r ible b attle ,

a s you know . The Bi s hops s howe d so much oppo s ition tha t

it w as fe ar e d no o ne wo uld be foun d to co n s ecr at e

P arke r : th e n afterw ar d s . . . .

FATHER DOMINIC That may be th e c as e , but tel1 me , do

your C le rgy think th is Ar t icle to be j u s t or unj u st ? I f

th ey think it un ju st , th ey can not be excu s e d from th e

gu ilt of per j ury e v ery t ime they a s s ent or co n s ent to th e

s am e .

MR .. W I LLIAM What can th ey s ay ? What can th ey do ?

Th ey mu st sigh an d lame nt , acknowle d g ing t� is Ar t icle to

be a bur de n which Go d in hi s wr ath has impos e d , or I

s hould s a y , pe rm i ts to be impo s e d on our s houl d e r s , nor

do I thi nk y ou s houl d in s ult thos e who gro an un d e r th e

op pr e s s ion of such a d is g r ace .

FATHER DOMINIC M ay Go d in his goo d ne s s pre s e r v e m e

from i n s ultin g th e op pr e s s e d . Such ar e not �y s e n time n.ts .

I only wi s h to rel ieve you from th e oppr e s s ion by pl aci n g

before your e yes the evil done you by your ance stors .

B e s i d e s , to d i sce r n a gr e at evil is ce r ta inly goo d , but to

d i s ce r n one w ithout ap ply ing a r em e dy whe n you are able

becom es an evil gr e at e r th a n th e evil it s el f . You ac­

k now le dge th e s e Ar t icles to be a gr ie vou s b ur den . Why ,

th en , do you not shake th em off your sho:1-l d e r s ? Who

oblig e s you to b e ar them any long er ? You will t el1 me : I

h av e not th e power to cancel th e s e Ar ticle s . W ell , you

cannot c ancel them in th e P ar l iame n tary re g i s t er , b ut you

c an , in d e e d , cancel th em in your own he ar t . Ca ncel th em ,

th erefore , an d conf e s s w ith me that though th ere may be

some goo d thin g s in th e s e Ar ticle s th ere ar e als o many

mo st pe r n ic iou s . An d the g oo d is not , in de e d , .g ood be­

c au s e cont a i n e d in th e Art icle s , but bec au s e receiv e d from

th e h an ds of the C athol ic Chu rch . The re mai n der is b ut a

p ar t of th e Article upon th e jur i s d ictio n of th e Pope , �ut

of th is we will treat in its prop er pl ace . Th erefore , w ith

r e g ar d to th e Ar ticle s - Satis .

- 120 -

ELEVENTH CONFERENCE

DOMINIC Our tr e at i s e has , I thi nk , b een s uffi-c ie nt in ar der t o in v e s ti g ate , r ecog ni ze an d confute th e

many err o r s contai n e d in th e formul a of th e Angl ic an

c.hu rch . l t h as occu p i e d u s some d ay s , ye t I thi nk our

tim e has .

be e n well e mploye d , for I co n s i de r it q uit e ne­ce s s ary m th e s e t im es in wh ich so m any ar e w ell d is­po s e d to s e ek an d de s ir e Ca tholic union , tha t th ey s houl d

s ee cle arly the dang e r s they wo uld e ncou nter by w i s hing rat h er to ama lg amate th an to cur e th e woun d ma de by the ir p re t e n de d r eform e r s . The s e , a s we hav e s ee n in th e

co�mence ment , woul d commit two evil s , th e one more

gne vou s than the oth er , by le a ving the fou n t ain of liv­ing wat e r an d by dig g in g to thems el v e s broke n cis t ern s

wh ic� ce r tai nly would nev er s upply them w ith the pur e

a nd imm acul ate wate r of cele s tial doctr ine . An im ate d now by a l iv e ly d e s ire of ta s ting this w at er from i ts n atur al source , i t is in d i s 1:e n s a bly nece s s ar y tha t you s houl d go

for th from the- tu rbid an d mu ddy c i st e r n .

By Th e Divine bounty you hav e alre a dy take n th e fir s t

a n d mo s t important step . You hav e , as I hope , d i scov er e d

the fals it y , th e incon s i st e ncy , th e contr a dic tions of the

Ang lican Ar t icles . Th is h as b een s uffici ent to make you at th.e s am e tim e , acknow le dg e not only th e e rro r s the; co�t am , but .likew i s� the imcompe t e ncy of that autho r ity whic h woul d impo s e it s yoke upon you . From thi s moment , th e refore , you r e nounce the se e r r or s an d free you r s elf from t� e yoke of ille g itima te autho rit y . Much has been

don e , it cannot be de nie d , ye t you ha ve not done a 11 : "D es po il y our s elf , " excl aim s th e Apo s tle , "D e spoil your s elf of the old man an d clothe you r s elf w ith the new . " You hav e at pre s e-pt div e s te d your s elf of e r rar , you mu st ,

. th erefo r e , clothe you r s elf w ith truth . Th ere are ma ny , undoubte dly , who rej ect th e weight of th e An glican Ar ti ­cle s , or to s pe ak more proper ly , I b el ieve no one at

pr e s ent ac know le dg e s th em as th eir rule of fai th : ye t all , .however , after h av ing d e s poile d the m s el v e s of fals e hood

are not so happy as to cloth e th em sel v e s wit h tr uth . The

- 121 -

gre ater p art of tho se who re�ogi:iize the incon si stency of the 39 Articles rej ect them , 1t 1s true , yet do no other than cast the mselves into a precipic e deeper tha� th.e o�e

th ey appear to have e sc ape d . Son:e . e mbr ace L at�tu dm an­anis m , oth er s Lutherani s m , Cal v1n1sm , Me�hod1s r_n , e�c . M any al s o , w earied of tormenting the ir ?rams w 1th d1s­cuss ion s , sink into Ath eis m or Inàiffere nt1s m , and but few ( at lea st to the pre s ent period ) are those who have e:11-brace d Catholicity . I a m sure , my de ar Sir , that you w11l

not im itate the conduct of the most num erou s . bu_t of the

latter few , and th at you will renounce . An�hc ams m only to e mbr ace C atholicis m to which Angllcams m may lea d you , since , as w e have before obs erve d , th.at poor Eng­l and in ab an doning the B ark of P eter retamed the cor d of th e hierarchy and th e pl ank of the book of Common Prayer .

I t is of this pl ank you mu st avail your self in order to

return to the de s erted ve ss e l . Reflect that by a spe cial

Providenc e of Go d , among st many good thing s that your anc e stors retaine d , one of the princip al w a.s the three symbol s of which we h ave spoken .in . our tre at1s e upon _ the

8th Artide . Now , make u se of th1s m or àer to appreciate

th e tr uth at its full value . Let us now take the Sym b ol

c alle d St . Athanasiu s ' s cree d . We th ere rea d : salvus esse ante opus est ut teneat

( 1 14 ) . Th is should be sufficient to ma�e you discov er the nece s s ity you lay under of embrac1ng the

C athol ic faith if you have your eternal s alvation at heart . Nor can I comprehend how our s ep arate � Brethren can ever pronounce such wor ds , profe s s an d b elleve the� , and at th e s am e tim e re main sep ar ate d from the Ca�hollc

Church . Ah ! upon m any of them the D ivine Ju dge w1ll , I that terribl e sentence : Ex ore tuo te

Ex ore tuo judicaberis , et ex ore ( 1 1 5 ) . What will they be able to

fe ar ,

an.swer in th eir defence ?

They do not , however , at pre sent refuse

to c all the m s el ve s Ca tholics . They even maintain very w armly this intere sting point . You have , I think re a d the

writing s is sue d from Oxford in these l atter ye ars . Have

you not re marke d with what warmth th ey profe ss the m-

- 122 -

selves to be Catholic s ? What are your thoughts upon the sub j ect ?

Behol d in brief my s en timents : I think that the se Oxford Gentlem en , at le ast many of them to­wards whom I nouris h an aff ection more tha n fraternal , are truly C athol ic , at le a st in the ir hearts . Th eir minds are , I think , far from error in ma tters of faith , and though sometim es th eir writing s may contain a few thing s not quite ex act , it is not inportant bec au s e it may be the e ffects of inadv ertence or of a profound s pecul a tion which induce s them to conc eal fro m time to tim e the intim ate feeling s of the he art in or der , by this sp ecie s of di ssi­mulation , to draw more eas ily their anc ient companions from schism and softly bring them over to C atholic unity . The last num bers are , however , so correct tha t I h ave not found anything that can off end the e ar of one well exercis e d in controver s ia:l dis cu s sion upon Catholic doc­trine I , th erefore , think we ll of them , and ha ve often s aid to my hearer s , th ese Gentlemen are as Catholic as myself in th e�r h earts . Thus far we agree , but furth er , shoul d any pre tend to s ay that the s aid Anglican Church is , upon the whole , C athol ic , the s e I should consi der far from th e truth . Can tho se be Catholic who adm it as their rule of faith the doctrine contained in the 39 Articles , in th e book of Common Prayer , in the Homilie s ? Can those be Catholic who have h ith erto maintaine d , an d who still maintain , that the whole Church of Je sus Christ had fall­en into abominab le and damnab le idol atry for the s p ace of more than eight hundre d years , that Rome is Ba bylon , and the Pope Antichrist , etc . ? Ah ! no , th ese never can be cons i dere d Catholic Common sens e , common l anguage for­bids it . For what does Cathol ic sig nify? 1t

is a Greek term which in our language signifie s . Can it b e s aid that the }\ng lican Church is u niv ers al? That is to say , that s he e mbrace s in ner bos om all th e members that · are united to her D ivine he a d . No , not even the m ost enthusia stic Anglic ans would be so bold as to as s ert it . They c a 11 the m s el ve s , at m o st , but a br anch of the C ath­olic Church . Show me , I entreat you , where are the other ' brarich e s ? I s th ere to be found another Church that holds their Article s of relig ion? Castìng a glanc e upon the

- 1 23 -

Globe , I fin d but Luth er ans and Calvinists and innumer�­

ble denominations of P rotestants from whom th ey are d1-

vid e d . After this I be hol d th e Roman Catholic s spre a d

over every point of th e Glove .

Th e Greek Schism atics and oth er orie nt al sects , without

exception , con demn th eir Articles an d th eir Homilies as

idolatrous and as guilty of a thousan d errors . T herefore ,

th ey a re neith er the C atholic Church , nor even a br anch

of th e s am e . T h eir own l anguage , th e most popul ar and

unstu die d g rants the name of Catholic exclu siv ely to us .

I n all author s , even P rote stant , I obse rve th at under th e

name of C atholic we are always d esigne d . Among st oth e rs ,

th e celebr ate d emancip ation Bill under th e title of Catho­

lic R elief Bill . T el1 m e , we re I to dir ect a letter thus :

To th e Rt . Rev . d Catholic Bishop , London , to whom woul d

it be deliv er e d? Most a ssur e dly to th e Vicar Apostolic r e­

si din g in th at District . T h e progre ss of C�tholicity is

spoken of with al arm . I myself h e ar d a cert am P �ote st ant

s ayin g : "Th e Catholic s are making most al armmg pro­

gr e ss . I ha ve gr e at fe ars for our Church . " Now , no one

coul d ima gine th at th ey allu de d to th e progre ss o� th e

Anglican Chu rch or to th e profe ssors of the 39 Art1cles . I t is evi dent th at th ey spoke of our progre ss . I f some

st rang er in Lon don were to ask for a C atholic Church , not one of you woul d dir ect him to St . P aul ' s or to We�t­minster . I t was by s imil ar arguments th at St . Augustme

convince d th e Donatists in Afric a . Therefore , by th e very fir st Artide of St . Ath an asius ' s Creed , by common sense , and common languag e , you should be convince d , if you e ntert ain a sincere desire for your ete rn al s alvation , th at you ought to embrace and profess th e Catholic faith . I might , th erefore , r e a sonably expect to conclu de h ere our

res e a rch es , and te rmin ate in a few wor ds th e secon d p art of our un dertaking , by se eing you e mbr ace the truth af­ter h aving aban done d error . Neverth ele s s , I am will ing to procee d maturely in our steps , an d g ain groun d by de­grees , or as you s ay by pl ain argument .

MR . WILLIAM T h is is ex actly wh at I desir e , for though

I am since r ely dispose d to embrace th e tr uth and even look favour ably on th e Roman C atholic Church , yet I st an d in ne e d of two thing s . The fir st is to corrobor ate

- 1 24 -

my re solutions by th e open testimony of Divine authority , since in fine our arguments are of little con se quence com­pare d to this . The secon d is to banish from my min d a crowd of ob j ections which I sucke d in with my Moth er ' s m�lk , and which pre domin ate over my ju dgment , especially w1th re g ar d to �he wors hip of I mag es , an d th e authority of th e Pope , wh1ch two arguments we pas se d over in our discu s sion upon the Articles .

FAT!fER DOMINIC I c annot bl ame your precaution . Fol­lowmg , th e refore_ , the lig ht of revela tion I am pr epar e d to show you wh1ch shoul d be and which con se quently is the true C atholic Church . We may afterw a r ds remove at our le is ure , th e diff ic ultie s th a t arise in your min d . ' I n or der t o know which should be , an d which is the true Church , le t us look b ack to her institution . You know th at the Church ( taken in the wid est sig nific a tion of th e term ) , has been alway s upon earth from th e time of A dam . We are , however , spe aking at pre s ent of th e

Church in as much as it sig nifies th at state which th e true religion assume d , ( an d which will continue unt? th e end of ag es ) , from th e moment in which Jesus de s1g ne d and- e st ablish e d this new a lliance betw een Go d and man , reuniting in her those who were ne a r and those who we re afar off , in or der to form of a 11 th e faithful that mystic al body of which He was th e He a d . Of thi� only , th e refor e , let us now spe ak , becau se this a lone shoul d interest us . An d take notice th at at present I am not going to ex amine wh at this Church may be or wh er e sh� exists , for this will afterwar ds appe a r . I am only gomg to s ee wh at she oug ht to be , an d what are her qualities accor ding to Divine institutions . T his will serve us as a clue by which we sh all be able to tr ace out th e true Ch urch found e d by J es us Christ .

I t is certain , and never can be called in question , that the new alliance , viz , th e Christian Church , must be more noble , more honou rable , more augu st , than that coul d ever h ave been under th e law of nature or th e law of Mos es . In or der to be convince d of this it will be sufficient to cast an eye upon th e epistle St . Paul wrote · to the Heb rews , the whole of which ten ds to show forth the dig nity , th e excellency of th e new abov e the ancient

- 125 -

alliance , of the new above the ancient Priesthood , of the new a bave the ancient Sacrif ice , of the new a bave the ancient law . God himself , by the mouth of the Prophet J eremiah , promises to e sta blish a covenant not , indeed , similar to that alrea dy established with the ancient He­brews , but much superior to the old one . Ecce dies venient , dicit Dominus : et feriam domui l srael , et domui I u da foedus novum ; non secundum pactum quod pepigi cum patribus eorum .. Pactum quod irritum fecerunt .. . Se� hoc erit pactum quod feriam cum domo l srael . Post dies 11los , dicit Dominus : dabo legem meam in visceribus eorum , et in corde eorum scribam eam : et ero eis in Deum et i psi erunt mihi in populum ( 1 16 ) . Magnificent beyond all con­ception are the promises made by the mouth of the P roph­et I s aiah concerning the future Messiah as you may see in the 6th chapter of the P rophet Daniel , etc . etc . which passages , with many others of the Old Testament , you may cons ult at your convenience and which for brevity sake I omit , because the most important is to see how they have been accomplished by our Divine Redeemer : only I beg of you to remark , a great mistake made by some of your Theologians upon this subj ect . With regar d to the defection ( false or true ) of the Synagogue , they pretend to draw a p arallel between it and th�t of the Christian Church , saying that though the prom1se s made to the la tter are mag nificent , neverthele ss , it may ha ve happened tha t God in punishment of our sins has turned away his assistance and withdrawn his favour ( as they as sert ) . He with drew it from the Synagogue , though he had also made to them ample and magnificent promises . ( S ee Newman ' s lectures on the prophetical office of the Church . )

These did not reflect sufficiently upon the very great difference which was to take place between the ancient and the new alliance , which is remarked by the same P rophet , and particularly by J eremiah as we have seen . The ancient alliance was but temporal , her duration be­ing only until the coming of the promised liberation ; the secon d eternal , to which no other was to succeed . The fir st alliance was made but with the hou se of J acob , that is with the people of l srael ; the second was to be made with the whole human race . P arum est , said God by the

- 126 -

mouth of his P rophet I sa iah . . . parum est ut sis mihi ser­vus ad suscitandas tribus I acob - dedi te in lucem gen­tium ut sis salus mea usque ad extremum terrae . Ecce testem populis dedi eum ducem ac preceptorem gentibus ( 1 1 7 ) . Were we to admit the theory of these misinformed Gentlemen , we should no longer have anything certain or stable in relig ion . We should not rest secure upon any creed , not even upon the Divine Scripture itself . Nothing would remain certain except the existence of God and the possibility of revelation as in fine the author of such opinions does not fear the as sert . We should be always like the clouds tossed about by every wind of doctrine , as are precisely the greater part of those who had the mis fortune to separate from the centre of Catholic unity in the 16th ag e .

Excuse this short digress ion from our subject . Let u s now observe the conduct of the D ivine Word , who descended from Heaven on purpose to form and establish this alli­ance with all the human race , and to found that King dom which was to know no end . Et regni ej us non erit finis ( 1 1 8 ) . This Divine Me diator , after having conversed for many years -amongst men , began to announce the good tidings to them . Yet it was not his intention to perform this Divine office by Himself alone : he would have some companions ( if I may so express it ) , coa dj utors in the ministry . He , therefore , chose many disciple s , and after long prayers upon the mountain , from among st their num­ber he electe d twel ve whom he calle d Apostles , which sig­nifies sent , as also embassadors or legates , as we should call those who were empowere d to treat in the cause of man ' s salvation . Pro Christo said St . P aul , pro Christo legatione fungimur tamquam Deo exhortante per nos ( 1 19 ) . He furnishe d those who were sent by Him with most ample faculties and privileges , as you very well know . I n arder that these might not grow vain of themsel ves , he made them consider :that they had not been electe d by them-

. sel ves , or of their own merit deserved such honour , but that he himself out of his own pure goodness had elected and chosen them before others . Non vos me elegistis , sed ego elegi vos , et posui vos , ut eatis , et fructum affera­·tis , et fructus vester maneat ( 120 ) . He proceeded after­wards to dra w other outlines , instructing the same Apos-

- 127 -

tle s in th e way in which they were to demean themselves in the fulfillment of the Office committed to them , and of the obligation they were under of being vig ilant in the accompl ishment of their charge . During the course of three entire years , he di d nothing else than form , we may say , the min ds and the hearts of those chief D isci­ples whom he had chosen as ins truments for the grand work . Before his D eath he gave them more ample and more important instructions and invested them with faculties s till high er , comman ding them to perpetu ate on e arth the grand Sacrifice he shoul d once celebra te . Yet , . we cannot think th at the Apostolic institution had here 1ts accom­plishment . " I h ave yet many thing s to tel1 you , " s ai d J esu s to them , "but you cannot bear th em now , " habeo vobis dicere sed non potestis portare Cum

ille veritatis docebit vos omnem verita-tem .. Ille vos , et suggeret vobis omnia quaecumque dixero vobis ( ) . He will make you remem-ber and understan d the th ing s I have sai d to you , he will instruct you even concerning those things of which I h ave not yet spoken . His light will enable you to know

truths neces s ary for the g ood government of th e Church . The Church , therefore , was not as yet either completed or perfecte d . He s ti ll continued to form and establish her upon th e leg itimate bases which were to support her . The Church received yet higher perfection , stability and gre atnes s in the persons of th e Apostl� s before the Ascension of her D ivine founder . The whole 1s rel ate d by th e two Evangelists St . M atthew and St . John . I h ere refer to the wor ds of both . "Venit Jesus et stetit in medio eorum , et dixit eis : Pax vobis ( .. . . ) iterum eis vobis . Sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos .. Haec cum dixisset insufflavit , et dixit eis : Accipite Spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata remittuntur eis , et quorum retinueritis , retenta sunt" ( ) . Whi.ch wor ds may and even ought to convince you of the dign1ty of th e mis sion thus committe d to the Apostles and to their succe s sors . Let us now examine the other Evangelist , St . Matthew . These are th e words by which he finishes his

"Accedens Jesus locutus est eis dicens : Data est omnis potestas in caelo , et in terra : euntes ergo do­

cete omnis gentes , baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Fil ii et Spiritus Sancti : docentes servare omnia quaecum-

- 128 -

sum ad

Behol d , my dear Sir , the grand act in which Jesus stip­ulated ( if I may so express it ) the contract for the foun­dation of His Church establis hed upon the foundation of

Apostles and the P rophets . We should be careful never to lose sig ht of these beginners , these instruments we may say , of the foundations of the Church . It grieves me not infrequently to rea d Authors who , though they call themsel ves Christian , and who even appear well dispose d towards us , yet , nevertheless , considering the Church but with a political and philosophical eye , cannot or will not discern in her anything but the effects of chance , or a combination of casual events or preme ditations , merely human and political , of persons who have stu died thor­ough ly the human heart and k now how to turn it accord­ing to their f ancy

A few d ays since I rea d with a certa in feeling , I cannot say wh ether of pleasure or disgust : that the C atholic Church is the true Masterpiece of human art ( E din bourgh review ) . I s-hould be doing you an inj u stice did I think it neces s ary to point out to you tha t this is not , indee d , the res ult of human w is dom , but most certainly of that true wis dom which is both omnipotent and Divine . Under th is view alone should we behold h er , for did we behol d her only o n the p art o f men w e should often b e confound­ed or be diverted with the confus ions of others . Yes , it is true , no one can deny that the Church of Jesus Christ

possesse d m any great men eminent for le arning an d cons ummate in prudence . But for what p urpose would all this s u ffice? For no oth er, or , at most , but for v ain projects and chimerical follies , and never to found and establish , to consolidate and preserve the grand body of the Christian Church and to extend her over every point of the g lobe . D,etes ting , therefore , the v ain theory of fine genius , we should never regar d these thing s under so vile an aspect . Divine Promises : behol d , , the pole of this grand machine , behol d the compas s , the magnetic needle of our navigation in a ll our researches after

· truth . Without thi s pole , all the pru dence of the Popes , · all the fam e d politics of the J esuits would have been in-

- 129 -

sufficient to support so great a machine in her equilibri­um under all the shocks she has receive d .

We mu st , therefore , suppose it as a thing certa in , and concerning which there can be no doubt , that Jesus Christ h as complete d , completes , and will complete till the end of ag es a ll that He has promised by his own mouth to his Apostles . These happy disciples soon beg an to see the ac­complishment of h is promises . Ten d ays after the Lord ' s Ascens ion the Holy Spirit descended as he had promise d upon them , bringing with him inestima ble gifts , and what is precious above all other gifts , bringing , if I may be permi tted so to express it , bringing Himself , to rema in , not , in dee d , for a short time , but forever with His Church which thus beheld h erself for the first time com­pletely formed according to the ideas which had been conceived by God from all eternity .

All that I h ave hitherto mentioned ( I s ay mentioned , be­cau se I do not think it necessary to enter into details ) is th e foundation and merely the basis of the Church , or of our researches in or der to discover what she is , and where she may be found . Upon these foundations we mu st l abour , and take g ood care never to bring a false stone which has not been found in the edifice . That which has not such foun dations for its b ase cannot subsist for any length of time , but must necessarily fall into the nothing into which so many sects have fallen , who unhappily , from the beg inning , attempte d to fabrica te their ruinous edifice upon foun dations distinct from this . Omnis planta­tio quam non plantavit Pater meus Caelestis , eradicabi­tur . Spuria vitulamina non dabunt radices altas ( 124 ) . Let us content oursel ves today with having discovere d the foundations only , on the succee ding day we shall see the grandeur of the edifice built upon the same .

- 1 30 -

CONFERENCE

DOMINIC We have finished the foundations of this grand edifice cujus auctor , et conditor Deus ( 125 ) . At present let us briefly consider the structure , for it is not my intention , nor I bel ieve yours , to enter into a long dis sertation . Should you · wish for more exact details you can cons ult those authors who have treated thereon -ex professo - viz . Bell armine , Tournely , and Boss uet . Some few remarks will , therefore , be sufficient for us in addition to the ideas we have alre a dy developed , more in the form of coroll aries than trea tises for disserta tions . The first coroll ary which I deduce from the above princi­ples is that J esus established one Church and not many churches : one and not many societies : one and not many mystical bodies . To th is I think you will assent w ithout any diffic ulty , following ex actly the idea of St . P aul in the ana logy of the Church with a human bo dy , composed , it is true , of many members , but which concur altogether in forming one sole bo dy , and the reason is obvious , for there is but one spirit which gives life to all these mem­bers . Multa membra unum corpus sunt ( 1 26 ) . Behold in a few words the Apostle ' s argument . There cannot be many bodies whilst there is but one spirit . Now the s pirit of the Church is but one , therefore , there can be but one body . Second argument : Un der one only God there cannot be different faiths . Unus Deus , una fides ( 1 27 ) . Go d is but one , th erefore , etc . ( 128 ) .

In the prayer which Jesus Christ addre ssed to his Celes­tial F ather he beg s that h is D isciples may be so united that they may form upon earth an image though imperfect of that es sential unity which exists between the D ivine persons . Ut sint unum sicut nos unum sumus .. Ut sint con­summa ti in unum , ut credat mundus quia tu me misisti ( 129 ) .

. The Divine Founder ' s intention was to form of all men in the uni verse one sole and grand family , under one only pastor and hea d . Alias oves habeo quae non sunt ex hoc

· ovili ( viz . the Jewish nation or the synagogue ) et illas oportet me adducere . .. . et fiet unum ovile et unus pastor

- 1 31 -

. ( 1 30 ) . How far , therefore , from the Divine conce ptions were those nations of br a nch or br anches disunited from the Church , sep arate d amongst themsel ves and div i ded like i sl a n ds from the continent ; ideas so much in vague at present amongst many of yours . No , Jesus founde d but one Church nor will He admit in h er e ither sc hism or rupture . That bra nc h which sep arates its elf from th e trunk , by this con demns it self to de ath and to the fl ames . I am the vine , you are the bra nches , and as th e branc h es cannot produ ce any fru it , if they remain not att ache d to the vine , neither c an you unle s s you rema in united to m e .

MR .. I t is quite another thin g , however , to be unite d with J esus Christ , and anoth er to be unite d w ith the members of Jesus Christ : my right hand is unit e d to the bo dy , but not w ith the other h a n d .

FATHER DOMINIC I understan d what you mean to s ay , but your v ery comp arison proves my a s sertion . I f the h an d be re a lly unite d to the body , it c annot but be united also to a ll the rest of the bo dy , which depends upon th e hea d . Quae sunt uni tertio sunt eadem inter se : an d on th e contrary quae non sunt eadem inter se non esse cum uno ( 1 31 ) . lf you wish to s ay that you are div i de d from a br anc h which you acknowle dge to be unite d to the hea d , you mu st a lso of consequence ack nowledge yourself to be distinct or divide d from th e head it self . The Church is one body and not a monster composed of heterog eneou s parts .

MR .. B ut th is union between th e members may b e , however , more or less sensible , and sometimes m ay entirely di s a pp e ar from the eye s of th e beholder and re­ma in known to God a lone . Su ppose for example that St. J erome and Ruffin a were both members of the tr ue Church , and certainly were both united to God , but who can s ay that th ey were united between themselves ?

DOMINIC I compreh en d th e force of your ar g u-ment , yet it doe s not oppose my as sertion , for if you re­mem ber at the commencement I m a de a distinction between th e internal and external union of the member s of the

- 1 32 -

true Church , among st themsel ves and wìth the Divine He a d . The inte rnal u n ion is alway s e s se n tia l , the exter­nal is always desirable , but in some circumstances may be wa nting by an e ffect of ig norance w ith reg ard to the true state of things The interior bon ds of u nion are those of fa ith , hope , and charity ; the exterior are those

subor din ation to th e same Pastors , as it will after­war ds appe ar .

Very well , the Ang lic an Church may be , therefore , c a lle d a true br anch of the Churc h of J esus Christ though disunite d from the other bra nc he s .

Oh no , certainly not . You m ay s ay that such or such a member belong s app arently to the Chu rch which calls h er self a branch whilst in rea l ity he belong s to the one only true Church establis h e d by J es u s Christ . I t i s not , therefore , true that the br anch b elong s to th e Church , but it is tr ue that thi s ind ivi dual is a member not of the br anch but of the true body of Jesus Christ . The bra nc h would hav e him detac h e d from thi s body , but nev er succee de d bec au se it nev er succeede d in des troy ing those internal bon ds whic h unite him to the grand body and my stical Hea d of the C hu rch .

A sim ilitu de may throw some lig ht upon this matter whic h appe ars r ath er intric ate . I mag ine a c a se in w hich a woma n revol ts in order to pass herself off for your Queen . She a ssumes the n ame of V ictoria , she invests her­self with the ensigns of power , she m ay h ave some line al pre tentions , and is authorized by p eople who support the sam e . Not , however , expecting to make h er fortune good in London , she g oes to Canada , and th ere procl aims h er­self to be Queen Victoria , s aying th at tired of her so­j ourn in Lon don she w ishes to fix her reside nce in Ameri­ca . Excit e d by th e rumour of such novel ty , the people ' s sentiments are .'d ivi de d : some s ay she re a lly is the Queen , others say no , no she is but an intrude r : p arti es are forme d , some a dh ere to her , oth ers refu se to submit to her commands . E ach party accuses the oth er of perfidy or rebellion . M any sincerely believe and acknowle dge her

· to be their true Sovereign , others thoug h they do not be­• lieve h er to be such , yet s upport h er throug h m ere pri-

- 1 33 -

v ate interest . Now we may e a sily conceive that among st th e parties of this rebellion , there may be some tr uly loy al who love an d respect Queen V ictoria as their Sove�­eig n : it is tr ue they are deceiv e d yet not through th eir own fa ult , but r ath er by an ardent ze al for the true Queen of England . At the s ame time , they are informe d th at th ere i s a woman i n Lon don who ca lls herself Queen Victoria , but th e partis ans of th e false Queen persua de them that she is an imposter , that an ambitious fem a le has assume d th e character of Queen since the dep arture of the lawful Sovereig n . Such being the c a se , we may suppose many loy al heart s sincerely att ache d to the re al Queen of Englan d to be of th ese parties , yet it would be fals e to assert that th e whole party w a s loyal , and still more fal se to s ay th at this conceited imposter and silly woman coul d be loy al who would pass herself off for the true Sovereig n , whilst she was not so by any me ans .

MR .. I understan d perfectly your example , and the application appe ars so natur al that I will not trouble you further . I t remin d s me of the Anti-Popes who have had many holy persons among st their followers . My ideas are now much cle arer upon thi s subj ect . -Similitu des have an incalc ulable force u pon the mind of men .

FATHER DOMINIC I am gl a d to see you so rej oice d at h aving discovered the truth . You are now aw are how th ere may be true Ca tholic s even in the bosom of sects separated from the C a tholic Chu rch . B e s id es , it is certa in that the Church established by Jesus Christ is but one , and you repeat th is yourself with u s in the N icene Cree d . Credo unam . . . . Catholicam Ecclesiam ( 1 32 ) . Secon dly I have inferred from the commencement that the Church established by J esus Christ will last without any inter­ruption whatever till the consummation of ag es , and this remains evi dent from His own wor d s . Ecce ego vobiscum sum usque ad consummationem saeculi 0 33 ) . Th ese wor ds vobiscum sum s ufficiently indicate that thi s body will nev er be div i de d from its head , nor the h e a d from the body : never will th e Church be sep ara te d from J esu s , nor will J esus be ever sep arated from h is Church . By the l atter word s usque ad consummationem saeculi it is quite evident that Heaven an d E a rth will p ass away ( to u se the

- 1 34 -

same phr a se as J esus him self ) , but this union will never be dis sol ved . Matrimony is a symbol which sig nifies the union of J esu s Christ with his Church . Th erefore , St . P aul says , th a t thi s Sacrament is gre at in Jesus Christ

in bis Church . Now th ese s acre d b a nds cannot be broken but by de a th . Mulier alligata est legi quanto tem­

vir ejus vivit 0 34 ) . l f J esu s could die or ce a se to exist thi s union might be dis sol ved .

But as the a dorable Spou se will live etern a lly , thu s he will be ever unite d to his Spouse the Church , fruitful in new offspring until the number of the elect are com p leted in th e abodes of supereminent felicity . Mos a ic matrimony allowed divorces , which Christian ma trimony does not per mit . The former was not as is the latter , a symbol of the in dissolub le union of J esu s w ith his Spou se the Church . These promises made by J es u s were certainly not lim ited to the Apostles a lone becau se , as the Anglican Bull has so wisely re marke d , the Apostle s could not liv e till the cons umma tion o f ages . They were exten ded , therefore , to all their l awful succe s sors even unto the end of the World . And really if we do but only consi der on one han d - th e sincere des ire Go d entertains for the sal va tion of a 11 men , as the A post le assures us : Deus

omnes homines salvos fieri ( 1 35 ) , and on the oth er the nece s s ity of being ag gre gated to the Mystical Body of Jes u s Christ or of the Church he has establis he d , in or­der to att a in s alvation - it mu st necess arily be acknowl­edged tha t thi s body should exist a t all times and with­out any interru ption . F rom this you will see how absur d and contr ary to Divine revel ation i s the opinion tha t th e entire Chu rch has ce a se d for more than 8 hundred ye ars , as we re a d in so many Protestant authors , and as your -Book of Hom ilies also in s inu ates .

l f thi s were true , it would follow that Jesus was an im­postor and revela tion a fa ble , etc . In the third pl ace I inferre d that thi s Church must be always visible and for the very same reason which I have a lre a dy sig nified . For th e existence of a tr ue religion upon earth would be of no avail if it could be neither seen nor recog nized . How

· woul d th e sheep be able to know their P a stor , or how · would the P a stors know th e ir sheep ? I n what manner

- 1 35 -

could they feed them? Upon this argument I have already tre ated to some extent in my first letter to Alitofilas ( = Lettere Celimontane ) a n d , therefore , we need not continue long upon the subject . I remember , however , one thin g which I read but a few days since . I t i s most extraordi­nary what an idea some Protestants have forme d of the primitive Church . These Gentlemen say that she was per­fectly democratic , and that no distinction was to be seen between the P astor and the flock , between ecclesiastics and laics , etc . I should like to know in what library ( . . . ) imb i bed ideas so strange and so contra dictory to all D ivine Scripture says upon the subject . From the first instant of the Church ' s foun dation there were Masters and disciples : Pastors and flock . Now it is evident that the distinction between P astors and flocks , between M asters

disciples implies two classes - viz . the Clergy and by its own nature . omnes doctores?

omnes ( 1 36 ) . But , perhaps everyone was at liberty to assume the state or degree of Doctor or of an Apostle ? False , very false , indee d . Nemo sumit honorem qui vocatur a ( 1 37 ) . P aul and B arnabas themselves , although designed expressly by God , never­theless received by order of God himself, the imposition of hands . Perhaps , T imothy or Titus assumed to them­sel ves the Episcopal functions? No , was it not rather St . P aul who ordained and established them , that they might preside , and even establish P astors in the ir turn? In the first Council held at Jerusalem , the people were not called to hold it , the Apostles an d Seniors only were as­semble d . These alone consul ted together , formed decrees , and sent them to Antioch .

They were , therefore , then aware of a distinction between the P astors and flocks . What cred it does this historian de serve w hen he can commence his history with such downright falsehoods? This may serve you as an antidote in rea ding many books written by Protestants in which we o ften find more l ies than there are lines . Such , , are the grand arms with which they have played against the Church , but such arms are weak in opposition to the shield of fai th and of truth . This is but a word enpas­sant , let us now return to our theme . The most important point , as well as the most contested by all heretics who

1 36 -

have existe d from the commencement of the Church until the present epoch , and who will not fail to exist also in future times , is the infallibility with which J�su s. en dowed his Spou se the Church . In fall ibility of be­hef m the whole body taken collectively , and not only of beli�f , but likewise of defining and teaching in the col­lect1 ve pastors of the same . Thi s , in fact , as the basis

true Catholicity , is the butt , the grand mark of at­tack , against whìch all heretical sects have ever taken aim ; and the c ase is quite natural , for the heret ic is in reality only such by th e pride which makes him so . Si non esset , non essent ( 1 38 ) , a s St . Augustine acutely remarks . Yes , this is the first evil the first spring of all h is notions . This it is that ren� ders him an enemy to all that could in any way c ast him d?wn from the post to which h is pride itself had pushed h1m , I r:nean from the post of indepen dence . To be obl iged to subm1t to any authority whatever it may be , is too contrary to the inclinations of a proud heart . There is , therefore , some interest or some g lory in throwing off the yoke or in denying and in refusing to acknowledge it . I have . already s�own how such is the origin or tendency of heret1cal sects m my secon d letter to Alitofilas ( Lettere Celimontane ) nor is it necessary that I should delay you in discussing again the same . You may remember the w�ole state of Christianity . Take a view of the many her­es1es that have arisen in every age , and you will remain convinced that they a ll began the ir course , or at least ended by denying the infallibility of the Church , all or nearly all , declaring at the same time that they would have no other judge than Scripture alone .

• WILLIAM This shows , however , that they were not so very proud , because they wished , at least , to submit to God though they refu sed to su bmit to men .

Your argument may appear plau sible , but I entreat you to consider two thing s , very obvious and simple . First : in order to submit or to show our submission to God it suffices not to be an Atheist . Every one who has not reache d to such a pitch of folly and to · deny the existence of a su preme B eing , of a God , would have no diff iculty in confessing himself to be inferior to

- 1 37

this infinite Being . Such a one may think himself supe ri­or in merits and tale nts to any of his fellow creatur es , yet allow himsel f to be inferior to God I t is tr ue tha t Lucifer will not a dmit even this little , but I do not sup­pose all here tics to be altogeth er as proud as Lucifer . No , they are not come to such a p itch it i� true , but at th e same time th ey are very far from showmg th emsel ves like unto litt le children in humility and docil ity , as ac­cor ding to th e testimony of Jesus Chri st hims�lf. and

. of

St . P e ter a ll the true faithful should be , r ece1vmg. w1th simplicity th e milk which their Mother offers t�em , m o�­der by such nou r ishment to w:o� unto s�� va t10n • 1 t lS

not , th ere fore , a sig n of Christian hum1hty to d�clare

one self subj ect to God alone and to rely upon Scnpture

only .

Every proud spirit , though not s imilar to Lucifer , may do

as much . I even say more ( and this is the second reflec­tion which I be g you to make ) . Ye s , Lucifer . hims�l f might do as much , that i s to s ay in the sense m wh1c h it i s even done by all heretics and a s P rotestants do at pre sent , though in a way qu ite pecul iar . . What diffi�ulty can be imagine d in a subj ection which - �n the ultur� ate

analys is will submit to no oth er than the ir . own capnce . Do you th en believe that Lucifer , that Calvi� , or any of the fanatics among st th e ir followers would s mcen�ly sub­j ect th em sel ves to Scripture ? 1 t would be too s1mple to

be lieve as much . F or ìf it were so , w hat can be more clear tha n the con de mnation of that very doctrine which was the gr and motive brought forward for separation , namely ju stification by faith only ? What c?uld be

.m�r e

clearly and with le ss ambiguity condemned m the . D 1vme

writings tha n thi s pre te ntious opinion? . To. set .as1de . the

expre ss condemnation St . James gives 1t . m h 1s Ep �st le

( Ch . 2 : v . 24 ) in those word s quon1am ex operibus homo , et non ex fide ( 139 ) . What �s

more clearly taught by J esus Christ himself t�an tha� 1f s inne rs do not do penance they shall a ll alike pensh ; that he will come him self and ren der unto all men ac­cor ding to the ir works ; that e ach one of us shall appe ar be fore th e Divine T ribunal to give an account of a ll that we have done e ith er good or evil? Is th ere any oth er

dogma more fre q uently or with gre ater perspicuity than

- 1 38 -

thi s inculcate d in the Holy Scripture ? Ye t , all the le a de rs of the p reten de d reform deny it and maintain that man is justifie d by faith only , though the same is not to be found in any p art of the S acred Scr iptures ? Therefore , tel1 me now hone stly - Do you think tha t these men we re s incerely and with the ir whole h earts submis­sive to Divine Scripture ? You must candidly say no . Oh ! if they really bel ieve d the Divine Scriptures to be infal­lib�e th�y would have confessed tha t not only must we bel leve m or der to attain salvation , but that we mu st a l­so perform all that which Go d has commande d , and , more­over , they ought to ha ve bel ieve d that the C atholic Church is the foundation and support of every tr uth expres sly taught by St . P a ul in h is ep istles . They a lso would have bel ieve d that the gate s of Hell never could prevail against h er as J esus Chr ist himself assures u s . T�ey �ould have b�lieve d that Jesus will always remain w1th H 1s Chu rch un til the consumma tion of ages : tha t h e h a d begge d the Father to sen d down his Holy Spirit in order to remain forever with the Church : ut maneat vo-in ae�ernum ( 140 ) ; that thi s Divine Spirit taught her a ll truths . I f such had been the c a se , could they have had th e courag e to affirm us with oth ers as doe s the author of your Hom ilies , that the entire Church , that the whole of Chri stianity , compri s ing not only all Eccle s i­astics but the la ity also w ithout any exception whatev er had fallen into a most dam nable idolato ry ? Did thes� men , the refore , bel ieve the Scriptures ? I tel1 you that they bel ieve d them only as to th e existence of a Church per�aps , perhaps

. even le ss , s ince after h aving finally deme d the authority of th e universal Church and of the unive rs al Councils , they showed some defere�ce to the ir own private assem blie s .

To Scripture , however , they showe d no defe rence whatev­er , a dopting as their r ule òf conduct things so diametri­, cally oppos ite to the decisions of Scripture itself . Fortu­nately. , h<?wever , they soon took the second step : for after emanc1p atmg from every authority , even that of D ivine _ Scriptu re , they thought it lawful to emancipate them selves . also from th e dec isions of Wittenberg , Geneva and London . All the parliamentary decisions were not sufficient to

- 139 -

gu arantee them against the Bible . wh� sou�ht an entire emancipation from every law wh1ch m1ght 1mp�de their fur y . There is no rampart strong enough to. con�1ne an impetuous torrent when it has once broken 1t.s flr� t bounds . Were not a ll true C atholics , therefore , nght 1n maintaining untouched those very bound aries establish�d by the D ivine Founder of the Church? I n fact , .there 1s not a Catholic who would not will ingly shed h1s blood rath er than permit these to be broken or infringed . C ath­olics never forg et the grand canon of the Holy Spirit . Ne transgrediaris terminos , quos posuerunt patres tui ( 1 4 1 ) · and the other yet more literal , established by J esus Ch;ist himself : Si ecclesiam non audierit , sit ti�i sicut et publicanus ( 1 42 ) . Yes , a tr ue Cathohc knows that the Church has , from all ages , been regulate d by similar principles , and that she has �lway s , even from the Apostles ' tim e , denounced as heret1cal :vhoev�r refu sed to submit to her decisions . Haec patrum f1des ; 1s the exclama tion of every General Council : Apostoli ita

: Ecclesia ita credit : si quis non ita ( 1 43 ) . This once said , there is no more room for

delib erat ion . Either submit to the decision or rej ected like a re bel from the bosom of the Church � Such has been the con duct of the Church in every age , and it will ever be such . As it w as at N ice and at Chalcedon so was it at Trent and the same will it be until the consummation of ages .

.. WILLIAM This is undeniable , it is the highest theory , b ut whilst we are upon th.eo_ry , ne�ther can we deny it to be all in conformity to Divine Scnpture and �o the i dea given u s of the Church an d of her government m the Gospel . Yet there are some gran� diff ic�l tie.s when we come to the practice , and the most mteres tmg 1s to �no:w where thi s infallible authority res ides and by whom 1t 1s exercised , since even C atholics do not u pon this point . Some say that it belong s to the Pope alone ; others to the General Councils together w ith the Pope . ( See pref­ace to Newman ' s lectures ) . I wish to be enlightened upon this sub j ect before I propose new diffic ulties .

FATHER I t is my duty to answer you with the u tmost precision , for I am aw are that many of our

- 140 -

rated B rethren make u se of these and similar vain quib­bles in order to elu de the impression which the infall i­bility of the Church would make u pon their min ds , sig nedly to trouble the water , which of itself is suffi­ciently clear , for all those who are s incerely desirous to drink at its source . We must endeavour accurately to distingu ish that which is Doctrine of Faith from that which is but the opinion of this or that divine , and not confound one thing w ith another as so many of yours do at present . The Doctrine then of Faith is as follows :

First , that the Universal Church in as much as it em­braces Pastors and flocks taken collectively , can never err , nor a dopt nor believe anything whatever contrary to revelation . Second , that the Pastors of the Catholic Church united to their lawful head , viz : the Successors of St . P eter , can never devia te from the truth by teaching or proposing to the belief of the faithful anything con­trary to faith . Thir d , and thi s must be understood not only when they are as sembled in g eneral Council but also when they are disperse d , each in their Diocese . Fourth , hence the Cr�urch believes that the definì tions of any

Council approved by the Pope are infall ible and true rules of faith F ifth , as are also the matic defi-nitions of th e Pontiff when he speaks ex to all the fai thful in received ma tters of faith , and accepted by all Bishops , or at le ast by the greater part of them .

These points are clear and precise , nor is there a C ath­olic who doe s not admit them . Why , therefore , do your Theologians so wantonly declare that it is uncertain an d quite impossible to discover where the infall ibility of the Church resides ? Are there any C atholics who entertain doubts respecting the infallibility of the canon s , iss ued by the Cou ncil o f Trent , condemning the opinions of J an­seni us? Catholics admit of no difference between the canons of N ice an d those of Trent , between the sym bol of the Apostles and that of Nice . Yet there are some ques­tions that remain undecided , w ith reg ar d to which e ach one is at liberty to think as he j udges most proper , for ex ample , if the Pope alone is infallible , preceding even : the Council or consent of the Bishops ; if Council is in­fallìble even w ithout the Pontìffs approbation ; if such

141 -

approb ations should be specific or only general or im­plicit with many other sim ilar thing s so sifted by your Theologians . Hinc inde salva fide et unitate Ecclesiae .

Such Theolog ic al discu ssions , however , have nothing to do with faith , nor do they turn u pon articles of faith b ut only upon thin g s ne ver determine d by the Univer s a l Chu rch , o r else w ith reg ard t o the manner of concili ating a my stery or a definition of one article with another or with rig ht r e a son . Thu s , for ex ample , the disputes were very high between th e Tomists and the Molinists with re­g ar d to the manner of conciliating the necessity of gr ace with free will . But , at th e s ame time , it is true th a t both parties acknowle dged free will , an d the neces s ity of grace for doing good , in order to obt ain etern al s alva­tion . In the same manner it was r ath er warmly dis p ut e d between th e Gall ic a n a n d other Catholic Church es , i f th e P ope alone might be con si dered in fallible wh en he decide s a question or if such infall ibility requires also the con sent of the B ishops . No one , however , can deny th at th e Pope togeth er with th e Bishops and the B ishops w ith the P ope are in fallible in m a tters of faith . What profit , however , P a lmer and his followers will dra w from our disp ute I cannot say . They wil l , per h a ps , by this pretend to j u stify th eir Anglic an Articles which deny any in fallibility eith er to the Chu rch or to the Bishop s ? B ut coul d th ey even do thi s th ey woul d not g ain much , b ecau se th ey would no long er find any b a s is wh ereu pon to support th e Article s th emsel ves , they would g ain all the incredulou s who ha ve a right to deny not only ours , but even th eir own Article s . I aga in repe at it , either th e Chu rch is in fallible , or the Christian relig ion is hy po­critic al and fab ulou s ; either th e Church is infall ible , or else we have no long er any solid foun d ation to believe th e symbol s or D ivine Scripture itself .

MR .. WILLIAM T ake notice , however , that P almer does the U nivers al

of the Roman to a univers al

not absolutely deny th e infallibility of Chu rch , but he denies the in fall ibil ity Church . He doe s not refu se to submit Council of the whole entire Chu rch .

- 142 -

DOMINIC Upon this argument I have alrea dy sai d suffic ient towards th e end of my third letter to Ali­tofilas ( = Lettere Celimont ane ) I need not , th erefore , re­pe a t th e s ame . I will only a dd a short reflection . T houg h it were really pos sible to a s semble the whole entire Church , with all th e Eastern and Western sects , even th e most extravag ant , and that a ll these br anches ( by an impos sible hypoth esis ) were to agree in form ing a Symbol or any definition wh atever , after this would these Gent le­men be dis posed to receive without ulterior examin ation th is definition , believe it to be infallib le , and as such allow th em not to ex amine wheth er or no th e decision was in conformity to D ivine Scripture?

Oh ! as to thi s , certainly not rationabile nostrum ( 1 44 ) . We mu st first ex am ine well our­

sel ves if th e decision be ju st , for all th e F athers of th e a s sembly were but men subj ect to error , to u se the ex­pres s ion of our own 21 st Artide . An d out of these hun­dred fallible we may , perh a p s , not fin d one infa llible or one of our Theolog ian s expresses himself . T his assembly would d e serve res pect but not blin d obe dience to its deci­sion ( see Newman ' s lectures ) .

DOMINIC Thu s should every Prote stant answer who does not rec ant from or contra dict a ll the principles adapte d at the sep aration from u s . Now observe what in the ultimate analy s is would be the authority of the whole Church . Nothing more th an my priv ate opinion bec au se I also would decide in conformity to Scripture and what may be con s i dered as such by th ese Gentlemen is worthy of belief . It is , th erefore , mere ca vil and eva sion to try to make us believe th em will ing to receive a univer s a l Council . O n the contrary they are always dispose d to subject any council whatever to the final j u dg ment of th eir own private views . Nor can it ever be otherw ise while st th ey persist in hol ding those principle s which · were a dopted at the sep a ration from C athol ic communion .

I perceive , however , th at we hav e deviated somewh at from our subj ect and it is time to finish the present Confer-· ence by a conclu sion from what has been s aid , that as · the Chu rch established by J esus mu st be One , so it mu st

- 143 -

be perpetual without any interruption ; it mu st also be

vi s ible and in fall ible ; thu s not one of those churc�e s

c alle d P rote st ant can be the true Church of J e s u s Chnst ,

bec ause not one contains the mark we hav e so far de­

scr ibe d . Th ere may be oth ers to inv e s tig ate e speci a lly . h er

s anctity and catholicity or univer s ality , but with th1 s I

may di spe n se as I s pe ak to one who does not nee d much

in struction . It suffice s for me to h av e shown that the An­

glican Chu rch , in as much as it differs from the Rom an ,

cannot be th e tr ue Church , nor even a br a nch of the

sam e . I t re mains for u s now to seek which is t�is tru e

Church , and where she may be found . The quest1on ap­

pe ars to me e asy of s olu tion . T ake a �ay the. P rote st a nt

Church es and th ere re main s but th e vanou s one ntal s ec t s

an d the Roman Church ext e n de d through ev ery point of

th e Globe . After mature reflection you m ay del iberate and

choo se which you ought to a dh ere to .

THIRTEENTH CONFERENCE .

VENERATION OF IMAGES

MR .. WILLIAM H avin g m ade seriou s reflections upon what

we spoke of ye sterd ay , and h aving re a d a g ain you.r le tt er

to Alitofil as ( = Lettere Cel imontane ) th e conclu s 1on ap­

pe ars to me evident , th at the C ath?l i� Ch_urch is the tru e

One . Ye t , th ere are still some d1ffic ult1 e s t o overcome ,

an d fir st I wish you cle arly to deciph er what was only

mentione d and not suffic i e ntly discu s se d in our tr e ati se

u pon the 39 Article s : viz , re g ar ding i�ages _an d th e . Ro­

m an Pontiff . The fir st of th ese two pom ts w1ll , I th1 nk ,

be e nough for tod ay . The Artide upon l ma_ges is one of

th e most intere sting , for Prote stan t s cont1nually thro:w

th is in the face of C atholic s , an d con st antly allege th1s

a s th eir chief motiv e of sep ar ation from the Roman

Church , which they s ay h as fa llen into damn able

i dol atry .

- 144 -

DOMINIC True , m any of yours hav e ma de , and eve� at pre s e nt do make a gre at noi se upon thi s subj ect . 1 t 1s , however , fals e that such wa s the moti v e of sep a­ration from u s . For example , the German P rote stants who

w�re th e fir st to sound the trumpet of discor d , m a de no

stir about the wors hip of imag es , at le a st not in the be­gi:1ning . Their Achille an pretext wa s j u stific a tion by fa1th on�y ·. l f this had been p a s se d over as good , they would w1llmgly have clo s ed their eye s with reg ard to im­ag es an d the re st . lf we spe ak of the Anglican Church , you �now . very well th e moti ve of ' sep ar ation without my entermg . 1:1to any . long di scour se . They a dopte d the plan

of dec� a1m 1n g aga 1 n st image s a s one more e a sy to work on

�he . �md� of the people than the ab stru se qu e s tion of J U S�1fic atlon and for thi s re a son more elig ible to support the:r cau se . Th ey m a de a show in the beg inning of ac­cusmg none but the Roma n Church a s if she alone and no

oth er ha d a dopte d this preten de d idol atry .

Per� ap s th e people might think tha t a t l a st some p art of ��nsten dom re maine d untainte d . The author of your Hom-1lle s , however: , throw s off th e veil an d openly s ay s tha t �he whole of Chri stia nity without any exc eption ha d fa lle n

mto dam nable idol atry . l t require d good cour ag e , un­doubte dly , for an in dividual without any merit or cre dit whatever , to ris e up and con demn the whole of Chri sten­dom , a�d not for the pre s ent time only , but for more

tha n e1�ht hundre d ye ars dur ation . But by wh at me an s

does _th 1s man p�ove his a s s ertion ? He presume s to s ay tha t 1ma ge s and 1dols are the s ame thing , viz : tha t those

t:"'o words Image an d l dol are synonymou s . At the same

tin:ie he _ pre tend s to show tha t all the prohib ition s con­tame d m the Scriptures concer ning idols mu st be un der­stood equ ally with reg ard to any lmage s whatever . Hence

he presum es as an evident thing not to be c a lle d in

question that aU Chris tia ns hav e for more tha n 800 ye ars

adored l mag e s , a nd , therefo"re , conclu de s that for a ll this

time and even at pre sent tho se mu s t be l dol aters who

keep l mag es an d adore them . Behold , h ere in a few word s

the whole of that little substance to be drawn from the

. �ong canting s pe ech of this homily u pon the danger of 1dolatry . I n th e fir st pl ace , thi s author a s s erts for cer­ta in , wh at is not only by no me ans c erta in , but entirely

145 -

fal s e 1 viz . that i dols an d imag e s are s ynonymous ac­cor din g to Scriptu r e .

I den y s uch an a s s e rtion as totally fals e , oth erwis e we

m i g ht s ay that man w as fo�me � to the i dol of God , that Go d in co n s e q uenc e keep s h1s 1dol s , tha t he lov e s th em , that h e v a lues the m , that th e D ivine W or d de sce n de d from

He av e n solely to re de e m an d s av e th e se I dol s . J e s u s

Chr ist h im s elf ev e n wo uld be n o oth er than an ido� , it bein g certa in tha t he is th e im ag e of th e Fa th e r : . qu i est immago Dei et figura substantia ejus ( 1 45 ) : an d m con se­qu e nc e of thi s we m ight s ay that th e Sh eph e rd s wh o

we nt to th e C r ib , that the Magi , that the Apost le s we r e

all idol ate r s bec au s e th ey all a do r e d J e s u s Chri st the l m­ag e of God An d that God him self co mm a nde � i dol atry , s ince h e commande d all his Angels to a dore H1m , Et ado­rent eum omnes Angeli Dei ( 1 46 ) . A ll this m i ght be s ai d if th at were tr ue which th e author of th e Homily demon­str at es as ce rt ain viz . that l mag e s and I dols are s yn on­ymou s accor din g to Scriptu r e . B ut if s uch b_l a sp hemy nei­th er can nor ou ght to be pe rm itt e d , what 1s the co nclu­s ion of all thi s non se n s e ? A den ial of so fals e a s up po­s ition s u ffice s to ov e rthrow the wh ole of this r uinou s

m a s s founde d upon s uch con fu s e d ide a s .

T h e wor d l dol , th erefo r e , does not im ply any ima ge what­ever , but by it we u nde r st an d that wh ich \t alway s _s ig­nifie s : an image o r i dol of some false de1ty , tha t 1s . a vacant I m age or an l m ag e without a p rototyp e at le a st �n

the s e n se a ttrib ute d to iL an image of a fals e God , 1n

which sen s e St . P aul s ay s that an l dol is nothing nihil est idolum b ecau se r ep r e se nting a fa l s e thing it r ep r e­s e nt s nothing , or that which doe s not exist at le a st . in the s e n se th ey r ep r e s e nt it , the same as a w?r d wh1ch h as no sig nific ation m ay be s aid to be noth1ng . The Apo stle does not ce rtai nly int en d to s ay t�at the s tatu e or idol is not anything co n s i de r e d m aten a lly , h e onl

1 m e an s that as a n I dol it is nothing b ec au se a s s uch 1t .co r r e s pon ds to nothin g . Thi s is th e s e n s e in which the wor d I dol h as al way s b een u n de r stood . l t sig nifie s no oth er th a n th e im a ge of a fals e Go d . T h erefore , if you wo uld p rove that we are i dol ate r s , you mu st prove that we h av e ima ge s of false Gods , tha t we adore them , pay-

- 1 46 -

to that worship is due to God alone . l f you co uld not p rove thi s , you might , in de ed , talk a s long as you ple a s e d but would nev er s ay anythi ng conlu­s iv e .

LLIAM Ye t , it doe s not appe ar nece s s a ry that an i dol s ho uld be th e figure of a fa l s e Go d , for th e Golde n Calf was ce rtainly an I dol . Neverth ele s s , th e J ew s in th e de s e rt p re te n de d this to sig nify the true Go d s aying " B e­hold thy Go d , O l s r a el . "

DOMINIC l t i s quite fals e tha t th e J ew s eve r thou g ht of r epr e se nting , u n der th e figu re of th e C alf , the tr u e Go d of l s ra el , for we re a d in P s alm 105 : Et fecerunt in Horeb et adoraverunt sculptile e Et mutaverunt suam in similitudinem vituli comedentis foenum , etc . ( 1 47 ) . Th e Gol de n Calf was not , th e r efore , a like n e s s of th e tr u e Go d : but of what wa s it a like ne s s ? Do e s not D avid te l1 u s : Vituli comedentis foenum ( 148 ) . I know that yo�r Th�olog ian s thi nk the m selve s mig htily strong u pon th1s s ubJ ect of th e Calf , but you see h ow we ak is th eir str e ngth . Le t th e s e Ge ntle me n , th e r efore , s how tha t we have l mag e s of false Gods in our Chu rch e s an d that we adore them . Whe n th ey h av e p rov e d the s e two a s s e r­tion s , the n I will con fe s s my s elf con q u ere d an d a llow that we are guilty of idol atry , a cri me in abo min atio n before Go d , as s ay s the auth or of your Hom ili es , a c rime mos t dam n able . But only prove thi s , a nd from that mo­me nt I will ce a se to ack nowle dge the C atholic Chu rc h . B ut u�til th ey can s how thi s th ey pra te in vain , they calum­mate , th ey do r e ally commit a crime abo min able in the sight_ o� God and_ mos t dam n able , which i s p reci s e ly ca­lum n1 a tmg the 1nnoce nt an d sowing di scor d among s t bre th r e n . I n th e me anwhile , howev e r , that th e se men m ay have no g rou n ds for j u s tify ing th e ir c a lumny u pon this argu m e nt , I will lay be fore you the doctr i ne of the Ca th­olic Chu rch ex actly as I fin d it r eg ist ere d in the Cou ncil · of T ren t , in ar de r that you m ay hav e th e whole un de r your _ in s pec_tion . I have ex tr acte d the e ntir e article u pon th e 1nvoc at1on of Saint s :

· "The holy Syno d d 11 b h comma n s a is op s and oth e r s who hold th e o ffice of te aching a nd its a d mi n i st ra tion , that in

- 1 47 -

acco rd ance with th e u s ag e of the C athol ic an d ap�st�l ic Church rec eiv e d from prime val time s of the Chri s tia n

religio� an d with the co n s en su s of opi nion of the h oly F ath e r s ' and th e dec r e e s of s acr e d Counc�ls , the� above

a ll dilig e ntly in str uct the faithful o� the rnte:c es s1on an d invoc atio n of th e s aints , the ve n e r at1o n of rehc s , an� the

le g itimate u se of imag e s , te aching them tha� the s arnt s , who reign toge the r with Chri st , offe r up th eir pray.ers to

God for me n ; an d that it is g oo d an � u s eful to rnvoke

th em s uppl iantly and , in or der to obtarn favor s fr o.m Go d through H is So n J e su s Chri st our Lo r d , who a l one 1s 01:-r

R e de emer and Sa viour , to h ave recour se to their

pr aye r s , as s i s tance an d s upport ; an d tha! they . who deny that thos e s aints who e nj oy etern al h ap p rn e s s rn he av e n

are to be invok e d , think impiou s ly , o r who a s s er� that th ey do not pray for me n , or tha t ou� i�v:oc a t1on �f them , to interce de for e ach of u s m d1v1dua lly , 1s

idol atr y or that it is oppo s e d to th e wo rd of Go d , a nd i ncons i ste nt w ith the honor of the ' one me dia tor of . G�d a nd men J e s u s Chris t ' ( cfr . I Tim 2 : 5 ) , or th a t . 1t �s

fool ish to pr ay vocally or me ntally to tho s e who r e1gn rn heave n .

"T hat th e holy bo d ie s of th e s aint s an d als o of th e m�r­ty rs an d of oth ers li ving with Ch r ist , wh o were the . 1i.v� in g ' memb e r s of Chrì st and th e temp le of th e Holy Sp1nt ( cfr . I Cor 3 : 16 ; 6 : 19 ; I l Cor 6 : 1 6 ) , w hich ar e to be

awake ne d by Him to etern al life an d to be . glorifie d , ar e

to be ve ne r ate d by the faithful , through wh1ch ma ny b en­efit s are be stowe d by Go d on me n , so tha t those who �f­fir m that ve n e r ation and honor are not du e to the r e l lc s

of th e s aints , or that th e s e and oth er memorì a ls are hon­ore d by th e faithful without profit , an d that th e pl ace s

de d ic a te d to th e memory of the s aì nts for the pur pos e of obtaining th e ir h elp are vi s ite d in vai n , le t th e s e b e

altoge th er con de mn e d , ju st as the Church �as for a lon g time con dem ne d an d now co ndem ns them aga1n .

" Moreover , tha t th e imag e s of Chri st , of th e Vir gin Moth er of Go d , an d of the oth er s aints , ar e to be place d an d retai n e d e spec ia lly in the chu rch e s and th a t due �or:io r

a nd ve ne r ation be exte n ded to the m , not that any d1v1n­ity or vir tu e is bel ie ve d to be in th e m , for which they

- 1 48 -

are to be vener ate d , of that anything i s to b e pe titione d from them , or that tru st is to be pl ace d in imag es , as at one tim e was done by th e ge ntile s , who place d the ir hope in idols ( cfr . P s 1 34 : 15f ) , but b ecau se th e ho no r which is s hown th em , is refe r r e d to the pr ototype s which they re­pr e s e nt , so tha t by me an s of the imag e s , w hich we k is s and be fore which we b ar e the he a d a nd pro str ate our­s el ve s , we a dore Chr ist , an d vene r ate the s aints , who s e likene s s they be ar . This is wh at wa s s anctio n e d by the decr e e s of the cou ncil s , e s pecia lly that of the s econ d council of N I CEA , again st th e oppo n e nts of image s ( s ee n . 302 ff ) .

" I n de e d let the bi s hops dili ge ntly te ach this , that by the accoun ts of th e my ste rie s of our r ede mption , po rtr aye d in pictur e s or in oth e r rep re se nta tio n s , the peop le are in­structe d an d co nfirme d in the articles of faith w hich s houl d be kept in min d an d con stantly pon de re d over ; th e n , too , that from a ll s acr ed imag e s g re at pr ofit is de­rive d not only bec au s e th e people are r emin de d of the benefits an d g ift s , which are b estowe d u pon them by Chr ist , but als o , bec au s e thr ough the s aints the miracle s of God an d s a lu tary ex ample s ar e set before the eye s of th e faithful , so that th ey may g ive tha nk s to Go d fo r thos e thing s , may fas hion th e ir own live s an d co nduct in imitatio n of the s aints , and be stimul ate d to a dore and

love Go d , an d to culti vate piety . But if any one should te ach o r maintain anythìng contr ary to th e s e decre e s , le t him be a n athema .

" If any abu s e s sha ll cr e ep into th e s e holy and s alutar y ob serv ance s , the holy Synod e ar n e stly de s ir e s that they be e nti rely abo lìs he d , so that no r ep re s entations of fa l s e dogma and those offe ring occa s ìon of dang erou s e r ro r to une ducate d pe r s o n s be exhibite d . An d if at time s it h ap ­pens that the <;1ccou nts an d n arr ativ e s of th e Holy Scr ip­ture , when this is of be n efit to the une ducate d people , · are po rtr a ye d and exhibite d , let the p eop le be in structe d that not for tha t re ason is the divinity r epr e s e nte d , a s if it can be s ee n w ith bod ily ey e s , o r ex pr e s se d in co lor s and figure s . Furth e rmore , eve ry s uper s titio n reg ar d ing 'the in vocation of the Saints , the ve ner atio n of r e lics an d ·the s acr e d u s e of ima ge s is to be remove d ; eve ry b as e

- 1 49 -

profit is to be eliminate d and fina lly , every unseemly action is to be a voided , so that the images are not p ainte d or decor ate d with any shamele s s charm and that men do not u se the celebration of the s aints and the vis­iting of relic s as an occ a sion for gluttonous , drinking partie s ; as if fe a st d ay s in honor of the saints were h elp for purposes of deb auchery and wantonne s s . Finally , let the B is hops u se great diligence an d c are in these m atters so tha t nothing inor din ate , pervers e or h asty be done ; th at nothing profane and u nbecoming be done , s ince holiness befits the house of Go d . I n order tha t these thing s might be ob served more faithfully , this holy Syno d determ ine s that it i s not lawful i n a n y pl ace o r church ( even though exempt ) to put any unusual image or to c are for such an ima ge so pl ace d unle s s it has been approved by the B is hop ; neith er are new miracles to be a dmitte d nor new relics acce pte d unle s s the Bishop know s and approv es it ; and whoever has k nowle dge about th ese thing s - after taking counsel with th eolog ians and oth er piou s men , let him do those thing s w hich he j u dges conson ant with truth and pie ty . I f th ere be any doubt or difficulty , let the abu se be removed , or if it should be a m a tter for serious con si der a tion , le t the Bishop before he solves the controvers y , seek the a d vice of the Metropoli­tan and the co-provinic al Bishops in P rovinci al council -in s uch a way however that nothing w hich up to now was cons i dered unu sual in the Church , is decided without s eeking the min d of the holy Roman Pon tiff" .

Now I ask you Sir , do you fin d that thi s Doctri ne implies i dol a try or ren ders its profe s sors guil ty of the same? Most certainly you cannot s ay so . You must allow with Mr Hallam "That the l nvocation of S aints as h el d and expl ained by th e Church of Rome in the Council of Trent su rely is not i dol atry" ( 1 49 ) .

We honor th e Saints , we recommend oursel ves to them , that i s , we implore the help of the ir prayers . We do the s ame with those who still live , and ag ain with those who ha ve p a s sed to a better life , because we know that the communion of Sa in ts is not broken by dea th . Dea th may separate the soul from the natural bo dy , but can never sep arate or bre ak the mystic a l body of Jesus Christ . You

150 -

will s ay , perhap s , that the dep art e d cannot pray bec ause they are only s p irits . Thus arg ues the author of your Homilie s . T his argument , however , sufficiently demon­str a tes the authors ig norance . I f it were of any value the poor misera ble glutton could not have a dd ressed him­self to Abraham , bec au se the soul of Abraham se p arate d from the body was not a person , yet I see he did so without fearing the reproofs of the author of your Homi­lies . The honour and esteem we h ave for the Saints and frien ds of God , moves us to respect whatever belonged to them , as are relic s , praying them a s the ins truments of their v irtues , which at the g eneral resu rrection will be reunited to their ble s s e d souls and p artic ip a te with them of eternal G lory . I speak of the bodies of S aints W hat can you fin d repre hensible in thi s ? I know that the P harisees were reprove d by Jesus Christ , not bec au se they raise d monuments to the P rop hets ( for this w a s goo d and practise d by the S aints of the Old Testament ) b ut bec ause they persecute d the prophets .

B ut how do you know tha t a g iven body belong s to this or that Saint ? I believe there are many mistakes ma de- upon thi s point and that fa lse relic s are expose d .

I believe so likewise : but this is not the sub j ect of our present tre a tise , w hich only concerns wheth er or no we may be permitt e d to honour the Saints an d th e ir relics . F or if this or that relic rea lly belong s to th e S aint whose name it bears is a subj ect which no Council has ever yet define d . It does not relate to Doc­trine but to sim ple facts which can only be known by means of witne s se s worthy of cre dit . When I pos sess such testimony I do not seek for more . The s ame Council of Trent h as prov i de d the best me ans of preventing fr au d , by forb i d ding the ex.pos ition of any new rel ic unle s s au­thentic ated by l awful authority . Let us now return to I m-

. ages . You hav e hear d that the F athers of the Sacred Council of T rent s a id we ought to k ee p I mages of Jesus Chri st , of the Holy Virg in and of the Saints , and that we should pay due honour to them . But what is the due hon­our spoken of? Your theologians delight in s aying tha t we

I mages , but how can they prove it ? I t is one thing

151 -

to ve ne r ate a thing as , and anoth er to a dore it as God . Whence th en , or how can th ese Doctors prove that we

a dore , viz that we g ive to the S a ints and to the ir I m­due to

Th e Cou ncil of T r ent has e xpre s sly a dmonishe d us that th ere is not any virtue or div inity in I m a ge s th emsel v_e s , by w h ich we might v ene r ate them , a s of old the Ge nt1le s did th eir idols : nor are we to ask anything of I m a ge s or put any tru st in them like the Ge ntile s , but we mu st a l­ways inte nd to refer all honour , etc . to th� P rototyp e , the I ma ge be ing but a m e a ns to direct our mrnds to what it rep re se nts . T he honour , th ere fore , doe s not res t upon the I mag es but on that which is repre s e nt e d . Thu s , for ex ample : when I bow my he a d in rev ere nce to the s acr e d N ame of J esu s , I do not int en d to honour the sou�d of two syl l abl e s , but th e person th ey s ig ni�y . Coul d th1s be

idol a try , it would be i dol atry a lso to k 1s s the Gosp e l , or a p ap er on which is stamped th e holy Name . of Jesus? An d you would be i dol aters a l so . The honour g1v en to a n I m­a ge is re l ati ve to wh at it rep re se nts .

Ye t I have h e ard that some of your th eo­lo g ians s ay that I m ag e s are worthy of v ene r ation ev en in the m s el v es .

DOMINIC True , I h av e he ard it also , but we

mu st un der stand in what manner : viz . as thing s which , a lthough but mater i als , are in some manne r de d ic a te d or cons ec r ate d to a s acre d u se , as are in some deg re e the

stone s which compos e a con s ecrate d Church . The l ett ers composing th ese few wor ds : caro factu'? est � 1?0 ) , and th e like , m a de u se of to des i gn someth1ng d1v1ne , s uch as is the I nc arnation of the D ivine Wor d . Con s i der­in g th e thing in its e lf , how ev er , ne i�h er d� the . s ton�s change th e ir n ature , nor d oes the rnk w 1th wh1ch 1s written th e Sacre d N ame of J e s u s differ from th at which s tamps the name of Antichrist . Wh ence , th en , do the p ag es which compos e th e B ible receive their valu e ?. Not from the pa p er or from the ink , but from tha t w h1c� is sig nifie d . An d in the s am e manne r as you _woul d con s 1 der it s acrile g ious to profane or contemn the B 1b le , so shoul d we con s i der it s acrile g ious to hol d in contempt ima ge s

- 152 -

tha t re p re se nt J e s u s or Mary , or any of th e S a ints . Te l1 m e , do the se word s "] es u s Crucifie d " d e se rve re sp ect ?

, ce rtainly . Therefore , doe s not th e ima ge which ex­h ibits to my view the Crucifie d J e sus d e serve at le ast as much . Sacre d word s are as ima g e s to our e ars , and sa­cre d imag es are as wor ds to our s ight . B oth the one a n d th e oth er per form th e s ame office , and convey the s ame i de as to th e min d . I f , th en , you cannot condemn the u se of sacre d word s , how can you con de mn th e u se of s acre d imag es ? When a Chris t ian me ditate s on the P as sion of ] esu s , he form s in his head or ima g in a t i v e facultie s an imag e of Ca lvary . He considers J es u s on one s i de , the two thieves on th e oth e r , and the holy Virg in , St . J ohn and Mag da len at the foot of the Cros s , an d th ere he re mains conte mplating at le isure a ll the circum stance s of thi s do­lorou s P as s ion . Wou ld you condemn the u se of such im­age s ? No , ce rta inly . Ne ither can you , th ere fore , con de mn the p ictures or repre se ntations of the sam e . B ehol d h ere in sub stance th e doctrìne and th e sen tìm ents of the Chu rch \:Vith re g ar d to th e u se of ima g e s , nor can I con­ceiv e how s uch doctrine can appe ar so horribl e in the eyes of our se parat e d b re thren , nor do I eve n se e what they can fin d to repre hend , nor how they can h ave the assurance to con demn the whole of Christ e n dom as guilty of th e gre ate st of crime s , viz . tha t of dam nab l e i dol atry .

MR Re a l ly , in the doctrine of the invoca tion of Saints and th e vene r atìon of l mage s , as contaìned in the Councìl of T rent , th ere is litt le or nothing repreh en­sìble . Only it may be said tha t it is contr ary to th e D ecalogue which forbi ds the making of imag es . As to th e rest . . . .

That woul d certainly be a gre at de al to v iolate a precept of D ivine l aw ! b ut is it re a lly so? Our sep arate d , bre thre n s ay it , but can they prove ìt ? The a lleg e d t est proves nothing or prov es too much . I t woul d prove tha t the J ew s v iol ate d this prece pt i n making the Ark where they pl ace d Ch erubim s , and that you vio­late d it yoursel ves by pl acing , eve n in holy pl ace s ,

, Statue s of your Champions or N a t iona l He roes .

- 153 -

MR .. WILL IAM True . But remember that we pay them not the le ast adoration . We understan d the prohib ition of making imag es or sta tues to a dare them .

FATHER DOMINIC Very good . But who can say that we adore them? We do not a dore them in any way whatever , but only venerate that which they repre sent . Let our op­ponents prove the contrary . Until they do prove i� they can dra w no conclusion . They cannot accuse us of 1dol a­try or of transgres sing the D ivine law . However , in ar der to expl ain myself better , I beg of you to reflect that the term adoration may be taken in a wide sense , and in a sense more restricte d . T aken in a wide sense it signifies no oth er than an act of veneration , or any kind of hom­age or respect even of mere civility or politeness . In this sense it is s aid that A braham a dore d E phron the son of Sear . Adoravit Abraham coram populo terrae . Surrexit Abraham et adoravit populum terrae ( 15 1 ) . I t must be taken in the s ame sen se wherein it is s aid that J acob a dored the top of J oseph ' s rod , that Abig ail an d the Theanite adored Da vid . These adorations most certainly were not idolatry , because they only expre ssed an act of reverential homage and civility . I n the sttict sense , how­ever , adoration in dicates an act which can be p aid to God only as our first beginning and our last end . I n this sense the Ang el s aid t o John : N e feceris . . . Deum adora ( 152 ) . The term adoration is , therefore , an ambigu­ous term which may have more than one sig nification . l t i s adapte d t o sig nify th e honour w e owe to God , and even to express the reverence shown to creatures , as we rea d o f the people of I srael who adored God and the King . Adora verum Deum et regem ( 1 53 ) .

I t is , th erefore , mere cavilling to start so many ques­tions u pon the word adoration , an d the same to make a lso a thousand remark s upon any author who may have as­serted that we adore the Saints or their images . l f by a dor ation no more is intende d than a simple veneration tow ards the same as persons dear to God I s ay , yes , we may adore them . But if by adoration you would under­stand a worship due to God only I s ay , anathema to who­ever woul d ren der it to any other but God alone . These two different species of a dora tion are not distinguished

- 154 -

by external rites , for we see that Abig ail and the Theanite prostra te d on the ground in arder to a dore D avid , in the same manner as they would have prostrate d in ar der to adore the Divine Magesty . We must , therefore , distinguish between the intention of the mind an d of the heart which g ives supreme worship to God only , and to creatures but a species of worship , in as much as they are persons sacre d and dear to God . St . John was , per­hap s , prevented from making any act of a doration to the Angel bec ause he might be deceive d , thinking it was God who w as before him . Let us not , therefore , lose our time in vain cavils upon the use of words by their nature am­biguou s , but consider the thing as it is in it self . Now , after this elucid ation and decl ara tion , I do not see tha t anything can be s aid ag ainst what the C atholic Church holds and the Tridentine Council has decreed .

• WILLIAM l t is said , however , that in practice Catholic s , or at le ast many go beyond the limits fixed by the Council of Trent , and , therefore , it is to be feare d are guilty of idolatry .

FATHER DOMINIC l t is not certainly my intention to enter h ere upon a justification reg ar ding the conduct of this or that individual , nor to maintain that there never has b een any abuse , for as I have s aid many times , there is nothing how holy soever which may not be mali­ciously abu sed . lf there have been , or still are some a buses on this point , I am ignorant of them , or hav e re­marked none worthy of censure . I only know that such abuse s , if there are any , were never s anct ioned by the Church , and that the F athers of the Council of Trent took every precaution pos sible in arder to destroy and prevent any in future , as you may have observed in the above . I am also persuaded that our sep arate d brethren greatly ex agg erate this, point as well as many others , s prea ding idle tale s in pl ace of the tr'uth . The greater part is tak­en from relations made by travellers who are neither ex­act nor faithful in narrations formed with the dark eye of prej u dice . I w as born and have live d forty ye ars in l taly , tha t country of scandals , as many pretend . And

' what is of more importance , I exercised the functions of a mis s ionary for above twenty years , and yet never had

- 1 55 -

occas ion to observe any of these things so freely pub­lished by your Theologians , viz . that we set a� ide the Trinity to pre ach only the Madonna , that we om1t P ara­dise and Hell to speak only of P urga tory . By a letter di­recte d to Oxford I endeavoured to counteract such calum-nies .

MR .. WILLIAM I will tel1 you what I have heard . First that there are some C atholics , but especially the I talian coachmen , who blaspheme God and Jesus Christ worse than the Turks , yet a void blaspheming the Ma donna . Now , is not this a sign that practic ally they make more account of the Madonna than of God?

FATHER DOMINIC To me it does not appear so . I will explain myself by a simil itude . A man whilst sail�ng throws himself into the sea in order to recover someth1ng he has lost . He takes , however , a plank to support him­self . Another person , on the contrary , seized with de­spair , casts himself in the sea without any precau tion . Now , tel1 me , do you think the one who takes hold of a plank makes more account of it than of the vessel? No , certainly . His only hope is by means of the plank to re­gain the ves sel . Upon this account he is less blamable than the other . Such is the present case . These unfortu­nate sinners know that their · blasphemy offends God , yet foolishly flatter themsel ves to be able one day to make their peace with tha t God whom they off end , and , there­fore , seek for a plank by means of which they hope to return to the Vessel . That they do wrong cannot be de­nìe d , yet , thìs does not prove tha t they esteem . the Holy V irgin more than God . Thus have I always v1ewed the case . I have often reprehended them for blaspheming God , but never intimated that they should also , at the same time , blaspheme Mary . Besides , my dear Sir , is the Cath­olic Church to be blamed on account of the blasphemies of a few pu blic coach dri vers ? I fear tha t God is b l�s­pheme d not only by the I talians , but also by the English dri vers . I do not pretend to justify yours in the blas­phemies they utter against God , nor can you condemn ours precisely because they do not also blaspheme the Blessed Virgin .

- 156 -

But what do you say of the conduct ( not of blasphemers ) but of devout Catholics who frequent more an altar where they find an image of the Madonna than one where they would find the Blessed Sacrament ? I have sometimes seen in a Church the High Al tar una dorned , with one lamp only before it , whilst ten or a dozen can­dles were burning round an image of the Virg in . Does not this show more esteem for her than for Jesus Christ?

DOMINIC I do not think so . Even your observa-tion shows the contrary , because none of these intend to reverence the Holy Virgin in preference to J esus Christ . All t�a t t�ey intend is to reverence the Ble s se d . Virgin , and m th1s there can be no evi 1 . Their intention is , in fact , good . Though they set asi de a better thing , they do not desp ise the better thing . They still esteem it better , and y�u cannot prove the contrary . Thus , for example , accordmg to St . P aul , he who preserves his virginity does better than he who marries , yet you would not con­demn marriage because it is not the best . I t is good , therefore , and not to be con demned . To do any good in contempt for "the best would then be worthy of censure . N_ow , apply the case . They who visit the Holy Virgin and light a lamp before her image do a good thing ( we allow ) they might do a better . But are they to be con demned for having done a good thing in itself? Among st P rotestants there are none certainly who vis it the Holy Virgin , or who offer a torch upon her Altar , but tel1 me , do they offer any to the Blessed Sacrament ? No , for they have neither lamps nor Altars . Why then condemn us for offer­ing but one . Do you see , my good Sir ,, your censures are not the effects of true zea l , but of little charity . When this is not wanting we observe with ple asure our neigh­bours ' good actions , nor think of censuring them becau se they are not the best .

MR_. WILLIAM But now , tel1 me with reg ard to the pil-. gnmag es that are made to this or that image , to this or that s anctuary . If Catholics , as you say , do not intend to venerate the image but the prototype , they need not take these journeys because Jesus or the Saint are not . present precisely where the image is . Therefore , to un-dertake these pilgrimages is a sign tha t their fai th is

- 157 -

not exactly fixed on God but on a given place or a cer­tain imag e .

FATHER DOMINIC This argument may appear plausible , but believe me , considered in itself it is nothing but ap­pearance . lf it proved anything it would con demn the ar­der God gave to his people that they should go up to the place he had chosen , where the Temple , the Ark and the T abernacle stood . God is everywhere present . Why , then , should they go to the very place where the Tabernacle was? Why go to J erusalem? Yet they went hither even from the most distant parts , nor do I think you will reprehend them for so doing .

MR . Consider , however , the difference between us and the ancient Hebrews . These were a carnal people who were impressed by emblems , ceremonies and other external things . J esus himself said to the Samaritan Wom­an : Venit hora , et nunc est , quando veri adoratores ado­rabunt Deum in spiritu et veri tate ( 1 54 ) . God would , therefore , be adored by us in spirit and not by pilgrim-ages .

FATHER DOMINIC T ake notice , my dear Sir , tha t your argument would bring you to condemn our Lord Jesus him­self , together with all his Apostle s , for remember tha t J esus Christ would be carried at least once a year to J erusalem to adore his Celes tial Father in the Holy Tem­ple . He went frequently to Gethsemane and other retired places to pray . His Apostle s did the same until the Tem­ple was destroyed . They often went thither to a dore the Lord . Are they to be censured for so doing? No , certain­ly . Therefore , your quota tion proves nothing against pil­grimages , sanctuaries , etc . Jesus most certainly meant to say that God does not so much regar d the external de­monstrations as the internal dispositions of the a dorer . Now , these interior dispositions are not destroyed , but may be acquired by a pilgrimage . A pilgrimage is , therefore , good , though perhaps not the best thing that might be done . But , as I have alrea dy said , no one can be condemned for doing a good thing though they might have done a better . As to my self , I never made a pil­grimage , yet I do not e steem myself better than those who

- 158 -

have . And though I have never advised a pilgrimage , I should be very sorry to censure those who make them provide d all was performed in due ar der . Moreover , by hearing occasionally the confessions of pilgrims , I have observed the good and s alutary effects produced in many . I do not see , therefore , why we should absolutely con­demn them . The faithful of the middle ages are , I know , admire d . Now it is certain that many eminent personages of those times undertook pilgrimages with no little ordi­nary profit .

The Age of Philosophy followed , casting a frown upon every exterior practice of religion . I do not think that you would glory in this ostentatious name of Phifosopher , for you are aware how contrary such pride is to a truly Christian spirit , and to which excesses it has con ducted its votaries . I t began by turning into ridicule the simple manners of our fathers , and ended by contemptuously spurning at the Gospel , placing it un der the feet of the Goddess of reason . Unfortunate world , what would have been thy fate had such a Deity held for any space of time the empire of the Uni verse ! Sapientia hujus mundi stultitia est àpud Deum ( 1 55 ) . Yes , we should be Chris­tians rather than philosophers . Or to speak more cor­rectly , we should be true P hilosophers by being true Christians . I t would be folly , certainly , to make religion consist in mere exterior practices . Machiavelli only could adopt it , but I should esteem it folly equally to banish from relig ion all that was exterior .

Religion is a tr ibute which the creature is bound to pay to God . This tribute should , therefore , be proportioned in some degree to the Sovereign to whom it is ren dered , but it mu st also be in accordance with the persons who ren­der it . It must be a tribute Divine and human . Divine on account of its end , human on account of its source . Now , man is not body only , nor is he spirit only . He is spirit

· and body together . Religion , therefore , in arder to be proportioned to man , must partake of the spiritual and corpora 1. Were you to restrict all to interior worship , you would with draw from religion and from God a part of our duties . We mu st honour the D ivine Maj esty with our whole substance . We owe , therefore , a tribute of the mind , the

- 159 -

heart and body also . How beauthfilly is all this e2:-­pre s sed in those two verses rec ited daily by the C atholic Minister in the Office of Tierce : Os , , mens , s�n-

ne1'.:'soneru ! ! ( 156 } . But I thmk ;��' too reason able to rej ect what I h ave laid before you .

MR No certainly I neither can nor ought · I s h;ul d not like t� be so u�rea sonable , only I wish �11 Cathol ics were so , and would confine them selves to. a l it­tle les s . For example , I would not blame them 1f �fter rendering all honour poss ible to God they somet1mes ( though seldom ) turne d to the Saints and to th� Mother of God . I say sel dom , and only per trans�nnam , m order to prevent anyone from thinking that we 1ntend to equal or prefer in our homage , the holy Virg in M ary to God . Now , this is not always done by Catholics . An d to _descend to p artic ulars , let us take the Rosary or th� L 1tany com­monly calle d Loretto . Yo� kno� that Catho�1cs , a.nd �spe­cially the I talians , cons1der 1t an e s sen_tial po1nt m a Christ ian life to recite every day a th1rd p �rt of !he Rosary . P erhaps they would not scru ple to om1t h_e armg Mass even on festival days , yet are c areful to .r�c1_te the Rosary . I t is recited daily even by the banditi m t�e mounta ins , after h aving robbed and , perhap s , even slam a few p a s sengers . Such , at le ast , are the reports I h ave heard from many who h ave been in I taly and closely ob­served the m anners of the Cou ntry . You , however , are an I talìan and must know these f act s better tha n anyone .

DOMINIC Whoever m a de these represe nta �ion.s has mingle d the truth with a variety of lìes , and 1t 1s my duty to expl ain both the one and the other . I t is true that in general in I taly it is a custom to s ay �ach day the coron a , at le a st by the more t imorou s Chnstians , but is quite false tha t this exercise is es�eemed . necessary or e s sential in a Chris tian life . Concermng th1s no one can be more cap able of j u dg ing than a Mis s ioner , or better understand the s p ir it of the people becau se , on acc�u nt of his ministry , he has occas ìon to traverse vanous provinces , and to learn by means of S acramental Conf es­s ion the most secret sentiments of the heart . Now , al­though so unworthy , I have for the s p ace of about t.wenty years exercised this s acre d ministry in many p rov1nces ,

- 160 -

and never knew any to accuse themselves of not reciting the Rosary . But I have had some who accu sed themselvese of not attending Mass and even Vespers on Festival days . Of what is th is a sign? O , it is an evident sign that no one considers it obl ig atory to say the Rosary , and on the contrary that a ll acknowledge it as a duty of obligation to hear Mass , etc If the banditi ass ass inate passengers they certainly commit a great crime , but what evil do they do by reciting the Rosary? With reg ar d to this I ha ve h e ard something still more cur iou s , w hich is that no banditi ever moleste d a P ilgrim . They , undoubte dly , de­serve punishment for assas s ina ting others , but not for having spare d the Pilgrims . I would , indee d ,. s ay to them , cease to assas s inate , but I would not s ay , why do you spare the Pilgrim s ? I would exhort them to change their l i ves , but not to refrain from s aying the Rosary . But I s hould have no difficulty in this , becau se I consider it as a g ross ins ult to the D ivine Maj esty , s ince it is but a collect ion of prayers which is offered to God and the Holy Virg in . For observe that the tenth p art is - addressed to the Virg in Mary and but one to God . In the L itany , a lso , for three or four times that the nam e of God is invoke d , about forty times it invokes the Holy Virg in . How can this be j u s tified? Must we act with God as with the Clergy , and off er h im but a tenth part of our t ithes ? Would God be s atisfied with thi s ?

Your objection again is only in ap­pearance if you cons ider it well . Tel1 me then , did the Archangel Gabriel do wrong when he s aluted the Virgin without salu ting God? No , certainly , nor can you accuse him of h aving dishonoured the Divine Maje sty by the s al­utation he pa id to the Holy Virg in . He did nothing wrong , nor do I by repe ating the s ame without s aluting God in the sam� manner as the Archangel . And if I do no wrong in saying it once , without doìng wrong I may s ay · it ten or five or a hundred times . What is g ood the first time , c annot be bad the secon d or the thir d , e tc . T here­fore , you should not blame me how often soever I s ay the Ave Maria . But if this is the case , you h ave s till les s reason to find fault s ince I first d irect my prayer imme-• dia tely to God by the I f , therefore , the

- 161 -

Arch an gel did well , I m ay be tempte d ( accor ding to your idea ) to th ink I do better .

MR . Very tr ue , but afterwards , forgetting God you speak only to Mary . I s not this out of or der ?

FATHER DOMINIC It is not true th at I forget Go d , for in or der to recite p roperly the Ros ary , it mu st be accom­p anie d by devout me ditation upon the Mysteries of our R e demption . Therefore , God mu st not , nor can He be for-gotten .

MR .. WILLIAM I t may be so with reg ar d to your interi­or , but w ith regard to the exterior your prayer is chiefly a ddre s s ed to Mary . T here is but little refere nce to God .

FATHER DOMINIC Neith er is this any way true , for in every prayer and s alutation Go d is the princip al obj ect . I f I congr atul ate Mary , it is because the Lor d has chosen her and calle d her B le s se d , it is on account of the s a­cred fruit which she be ars in her womb . I do not ask her to gra nt me grace or glory , a s I do of God , but to su pplic ate the same God for me . You s ee ·:, th en , that n?t only do I not los e sig ht of God , but I confess , practl­cally , that from him alone do I expect s tren gth and from M ary th e ass istance of her prayers . If St . P aul was per­mitte d to s ay to his disciple : Orate pro me ( 157 ) , m ay I not be permitted to a ddres s the s ame supplic ation to the Moth er of God .

As to th e L itany , you consi der th e number of times th at we a d dress our selves to Mary : but it is the quality not th e number you should take into consi der ation . Can you imag ine th at we equal Mary to God , whilst we s ay to Go d : "Have mercy on us , and to Mary only , Pray for us . I n Go d we acknowledge the Author of gr ace ; M ary we re­g ar d as a comp anion in prayer . Who doe s not see the difference between g ranting and asking for g r ace? I t is Go d alone who grants . To ask belon g s to a simple cre a­ture . To Go d we look as the A u thor of a 11 our good ; to M ary as a companion who intercedes for us . Now , h aving explained th is , and placed it in its true light , I may s ay with th e tone of a Master , th at we do not derog ate

- 162 -

from Go d by invol in g Mary . My de ar Sir , consider the ca se well , and you will see that we are as far from the enormous crime of idolatry as Heaven is from earth , and yet more so , in as much even as the crea ture diff ers from its Go d . Between Go d and the cre ature th ere is an infi­nite diff erence ! Such ex actly is the difference of our principles and practices approved by the Church from th e idola try our sep arated brethren impute to us . I ha ve but one th ing to a dd : every calumniator is guilty in the sight of God , and obliged to make res titu tion for the good fam e he has inj ured or des troye d . Wh at then must we th ink of all those foul calum nies which your pretende d reformers attribute , not to any priv ate individual , but to the ent ire Chu rch of J esus Christ . I leave them to j u dge . On my side I know my duty . Orate pro calumniantibus vos et benefacite his qui oderunt vos ( 158 ) . My p art is fervently done , I le a ve others to do their s .

And I also will do mine . T ruly , dear Father , I never thoug ht my sel f so gre at a fan atic a s to heap such c a lum nies on C atholics . B eing now , however , fully convince d of th e deceit and falsity of all the cal­umnies brought ag ainst them by reformers , etc . I detest them , and candi dly con fess not only th a t there is no i dolatry in Catholic wors hip , but that a ll I have le arnt hitherto is most reason able and in perfect conformity to what the D ivine Wor d teaches . At present we have only to dis�uss th e interesting article of th e P ope ' s suprem acy wh1ch , as you may remember , we p a s se d over in our tre atise on th e Anglic a n Article s .

FATHER DOMINIC Very true , but as the hour is now more th an usually late , let us reserve this subj ect for another Conference . I n the meanwhile , I beg of you to rea d over what is s ai d on this matter in my thir d le tter to Alitofilas ( = . Lettere Celimontane ) in or der that we may be spare d much time and tròuble . Tomorrow you can pro­pose any diffic ulties which are not , perh a p s , well eluci­date d , being a friend to brevity and to which the short limits of a letter oblige d me .

- 1 63 -

FATHER DOMINIC

s poke ye s te r d ay ?

FOURTEENTH CONFERENCE

THE POPE ' S SUPREMACY

Have you re a d the le tt er of which I

MR . WILLIAM I had re a d it before , ye t have aga in

looke d it over . W h at you th ere s ay w ith re gar d to th e

P ope ' s supre macy is very brief . Neverth ele s � , _I think

that you have in a few wor d s e mbrace d . th e p�mc1pal ar­

guments a d apte d to throw light upon th1s su?J ect . I do

not , I mu st own , like anything long and te d1ou s . A few

word s is what I de s ir e , having alre a dy peru s e d th e mat­

ter at len g th in B ell armine de Romano Pontifice , B o s s1:1e t

and oth er C atholic author s who hav e tre ate d th ereon w1th

much s oli dity and preci s ion . I think , th erefore , we shall

be able to dis p atch in a few word s all th at reg ard s th e

simple supre macy of th e P ope . I should li�e , h?wever , to

di scu s s a little furth er th e quality of h1s pnm acy and

the privile g e s annexe d to the s ame , w�ich i s , � kno� ,

lightly que stione d even among st C at�ohc s , e sp ec1all_Y m

th e G allican and tr ans alpine parts . W 1th re sp ect to s1mple

prim acy I h av e but little or no difficulty , nor do I see

how it can be de nie d , nor is it de nie d by th e more mo�­

er a te of our Anglican Th eolog ian s . I only s ay th�t th1 s

p rimacy is simply de jure humano ( 159 ) , and not m dee d

de jure divino ( 1 60 ) . The P ope is th e fir s t am�ng st all

B is hop s , in which a ll the B is hop s from th e e �rlle s� ag e s

h av e agre e d . Behold th e whole foundation of h1s pnm acy ·

You do not , howev er , think so , as it appe ars from your

le tter s to Alitofil a s ( = L ett e re Celimontane ) . Yet I s hould

like to h e ar your opinion .

FATHER DOMINIC I a m re a dy to expl ain it . I s ay ,

th en , that such an a s s ertion is very arb itr ary an d qu ite

contr ary to truth . I t is arb itr ary bec au s e without foun­

dation . lf the P ope only ha d primacy de jure humano you

mu st s how thi s jus and make it appe ar in what time , and

in what occa s ion the C atholic B is hops decide d to acknowl­

e dge for th eir he a d th e Bis hop of Rome . It mu st be al­

lowe d that this gr ant w as before the time of St .

- 1 64 -

I ren aeu s , who declare d th e nece s s ity of a p pe aling in mat­ters of Fa ith to th e See of Rom e . I fin d no such dee is ion , yet I find th e B ishops always acting a s if th ey ack­now le dg e d th e Pope for supe rior or prima te , but I c annot dis cov er th e first time that th ey agree d to make such an acknowle dg ement . It wa s , I know , decre e d by the Bis hops

of S a r dis that reference in a ll thing s s hould be first made to th e P ope , but I do not re a d th at th ey we re th e

firs t to de te rm ine or e stablis h th e P ope to be the he a d of th e faithful .

I n oth er Councils , a s you may ob s e rve , in the a bove

m entione d le tter the P ope is acknowle dg e d a s H�ad , but never e stablis he d a s such . This ne ver h aving , th erefore , been e st ablis h e d , if th e P ope is not th e Head ex jure di­vino neith er is he ex jure humano . This a s s e rtion , th erefore , of th e s e Th eologian s i s w ithout foun da tion . Some of th em , I know , have recour s e to Phoeu s and s ay that he w as th e first to attribute supre m acy to the P ope over all Catholic s . But be s ide s th e truth being dis cov ere d by s e eing that pre viou s to P hoeu s the P ope w a s acknowl­e dg e d a s He � d , if such we re th e c a s e , ought it to be said that his su pre macy was only a s Caesar ' s and obl iging only as a l aw of C a e s ar ' s , and , th ere fore , of no weight beyond th e Greek Emp eror ' s author ity? Now , if so , as th e Gree k Emperor no long er exist s th e s e pre tende d privileg e s of the P ope ' s would have fa llen to nothing and he would neith er be th e fir s t of Bis hops de jure eccle­siastico neque de jure civili ( 16 1 ) . B ut se tting this as i de , s uch an a s s ertion is , I s ay , contr ary to truth . l f , suppo se the Chu rch to have no h e a d u pon e arth , de jure

, since it denie s th e P ope to be he a d of th e faith­ful , de jure divino , do you think th en th ey will acknowl­edg e any oth er ? Thi s would be to contra dict th em s el ve s , becau se acknowle dging the P ope a s h e a d jure humano , should th ey a dmit anoth er jure divino , th e rights of thi s oth er , a s of a s upe rior o·r der , would , by th eir nature annul all th e supre m acy of th e power de jure humano , wh ich in such a c a s e would be oppos e d to th e jus divi­num . I t re main s , th erefore , evi dent that th e s e Ge ne tle men

, acknowledg e no B ishop who may de jure divino be He a d of th e Church .

- 1 65 -

Thus it is ex actly , or at le ast this s houl d follow such a suppos ition .

N ow , I mu st tel1 you that such a sup­pos ition is not only fa lse but , likew ise , inj urious to God and to the Christian religion . Th is su pposes tha t J esus Christ form e d his Church , that is without a hea d . Now this is an ins ult , the most grievous that ca� be of­fere d to the D ivine Founder of Christianit y . Th1s wou�d give u s to under stan d that the D ivine I ncarn ate Wor d 1s not the es sentia l Wis dom of the F ather , but the most stu­pid of men , or , at lea st , of leg islator s , for who ever heard of any leg is l ator whatever , who dre amt of estab ­l ishing a n ation , or a republ ic , w ithout a he a d . A b_ody without a head is a mon s ter in human nature ; a society w ithout a head is a ch aos and not a society . Where t� ere is no fir s t neither can there be a secon d nor a thir d , nor any o;der whatever , for or der taken into consider a­tion is no other than a rel ation of depen dency upon the first . If this first does not ex ist all or der is impos sible . I f there is no superior there can be no sub j ect s . I f there is no Head there can be no body . I f th ere is no centre there can be no circumfere nce . The op1n1on of these Theolog ians appears to me l ike that of the preten ded Philosophers who as serted that God h a d , indee d_, formed the m aterials of this u niver se , but aban done d 1t after­ward s to cha nce and to inferior agent s , a s amongst oth ers s aid the Gnos tics and the Manichees , that our d aily � are was to pl ace in order the

. thin g s prepare d �y

God . Ch ance , therefore , may be con s 1 dere d as the Arch1-tect and Go d only as bringin g a rough stone for the ed­ific� of the worl d . Thu s , ex actly , in the opinion of your Theolog ian s , did Jesus form the embryo_ o� His Church , leaving to the B is hops the c are of es�abhshmg some or der in her , and of g iving a Head to th1s Body , a .center to this s ociety . Now tel1 me s incerely , can all th1s be re­concile d w ith the wis dom of the D ivine Founder of our a ugust R eli g ion? I s not , then , the opinion w hich su p poses the Churc h to be divino without a Hea d , false and ins ulting to the D ivine Maj esty , deroga tory from H is infi-nite Wis dom?

- 166

But con s i der that in such a supposition the Church would not be without a Head , bec ause she has , in fine , a Hea d in her D ivine Fou n der .

I f that would s uffice in order to s ay that a society is not w ithout a Hea d , then all republic s every government h a d bett er not establish a n y Hea d or chief any centre , any authority , s ince God is always present who is the He a d and Center of all men . I ask you , would a government be reput e d w ise ( if s uch could exis t ) that would a dmit of no Head , no centre of author­ity , b ecause God is the head of a ll governments , the centre of all societies ? Could such a pretendeq soc iety ( though certainly numerical ) deem itself pru dently estab­lishe d ? God is the head , undoubte dly , but God doe s not always de scend visibly on earth to l isten to the claim s , and deci de questions amongst cit izens . They sta n d , then , in need of another Head b e s i des God , they w ant a visible He a d , who can not only to their remon strances ; but deci de the question , pronounce sentence , etc . Would a leg is lator be esteeme d wis e who frame d laws as renowned as you ple ase for wis dom , yet established no one to watc h over th eir observance and to j u dge and decide que stions accor ding to the s ai d law s ? Now these are p re­cisely Protestant ide as . They im ag ine th e Church without a visible He a d , Scripture w ithout any j u dge whatever . Alas ! Alas ! but are these ide as div ine ? Ah ! may such ab­su r dities be far from us .

Reflect , however , tha t your compari son is not g oo d , since the Church is not a B ody p urely socia l ; ìt is a Body which may be termed super natur al or divine . Sh e is directed by principles . She is u n der an imme diate P rovìdence . There can be nothìng , th erefore , ag aìnst her havìng a supernatural head .

These are very fine wor ds , mos t har­mon ious indee d , but the tru th , however , is that exce pting a rei th e Church is compos e d of men , me re human being s . That th ere is in her a supernatural s pirit cannot be denie d , but there is also the body of th e faith ful hu­man a ltog ether . That she has a super natur al Hea d is true

- 167 -

cert ainly , but this does not exclu de the nece s s ity of a nat ur al one also . Tel1 me , w a s not the Synagogue , l ike­wise , a supernatural body in the s e nse of which we are

spe akin g ? H a d she not God for her He a d ? Ye s , undoubt­e dly . Yet , I ob se rve that she also had h er visible h_e a d in th e pe rson of the High P rie st . Can we the n beheve

that the new Chu rch only to which as to h er type she wholly rel ates , could hav e b een le ft upon e arth without any h e a d what ev er by her D ivine Founder ? No., no ,. �he

v er y thought would be a glaring ins ult to h1s d1v me

W i s dom . T his Chu rch is certainly the b e st or der e d , and also th e be s t regul ate d by all soc ietie s on e arth . The centre of union , and he a d of direction cannot , therefore , be w antin g .

We might , howev er , s ay that though Je s u s

woul d , in d e e d , have a v i s ible He a d i n the Church , yet He

h a d m a de no deter m in ation him self , but h a d left it to the

dec i s ion of the Church , in which c a se it may be s ai d

th at th e Church has a He a d ex , whilst at th e

same t ime the B ishop of Rome is not such ex jure divino ,

but only humano , for as th e Ch�rch has electe d

h im , so may she elect anoth er for h er h e àd . Th ere m ay ,

th ere fore , be a mixture of the one and the other . T he re

mu st be a He ad in th e Church de . I t remains ,

howev er , to be decide d de j ure , tha t thi s shall

be th e B ishop of Rom e . Thu s you m ay be right an d we

also .

I n s uch a distinction of thing s ( which

certainly I never h e ard of till this mome nt ) th ere may be

someth ing gra nd . P erh ap s , it m ay be con s i de re d an expe­

dient , calle d in politics , means and measures , and

a da pt e d to quiet all without g iving s at i sfaction to any . I

think , howev er , s uch means measures not v ery apro­

pos in our case . I n th e fir st place , our pre se nt d is c u s­

s ion is not to d ecide what God would ab solutely have

done , but only to know what He has done in His Church .

Now , let u s consi der we ll the Gospel and the Act� of the

Apostle s , and we shall see th at J e s u s not only w1s h e d to

have a He a d in his Church , but that h e m a de the de t er­

min ation him self in the per son of St . P e ter . We know v ery

w ell that St . P e t er as h e a d of the Apostolic Colle ge a s-

- 168 -

semble d the cong re ss in or der to choose a succe s sor to Ju das but we hav e no certainty that the Apostle s ever as semble d to choose a he a d . B e side s , th eir v ery a tt en ding to P eter ' s proposals with re g ar d to th e election of Matthias p roves that they acknowe dge d him as the ir he a d , without thinking in th e le ast of m aking him such . There -fore , the reflection of would bave sig nifie s nothing , while s t we know what the s econd place I s ay that in some s e ns e what you s a i d i s tru e , a n d I will tel1 you in what . J e s u s elec te d P et er by his own word of mouth to be the first He a d of the

Church He afterwards le ft to oth ers th e faculty of elect­ing , under h is direction , the Succe s sors of the same . Hence , take notice : we s ay that . P e te r and hi; Succe s­sors are th e v isible he a d s of the Church , but we do not s ay that any g ive n subj ect is de di­vino the Succe s sor of St . Peter . That this m ay be one

rather tha n anoth er dep en ds , it c annot be den ie d , on Go d as the first and c a u se of thing s , but , a t th e s am e time , i t dep e n d s also o n the ele ction o f th e Car dinals or the p eople , as the imme diate c au se or con­dition sine qua non I n thi s sense , if you would s ay that human will has its p art in the determination of the sub­j ect de stine d to be the he a d of the Church , you may s ay so . l t is , howev er , one thing to s ay that human will has its p ar t in an affair and quite another to s ay tha t th e said affair is lt is both de and natura .

MR .. B ut is th e Bis hop of Rome de the Succe s sor of St . P et er ?

This i s a que stion which dep en ds upon ascerta ining if St . P et er de e stablish e d his Chair at Rome , conce rning which much might be said . B ut what does it s�g nify ? We should b e content to know that St . Pete r is th e He a d of th e Church de divino . That the Succe s sor of St . P e ter is the B ishop of Rome is a fact which we s uppo se from the te stimony of th e Church , of the Councils and of the F ath ers . Though the P ope might wis h , or be obl ige d to tr ans port his Chair elsewhere , yet

' on this account he would not ce a se to be the Succe s sor of

169 -

St . P eter and the head of the Church founde d by Jesus Christ .

MR . WILL IAM Rome?

Yet he would no longer be Bishop of

FATHER DOMINIC Yes , I s ay he would be so still , as were the Popes when resident at Avig non . But this is a question of no importance to our present intent , for we are not discu s sing what might be , but what is the case .

MR .. WILLIAM You are right . There is yet , however , one

thing w ith reg ard to this . In the Council of Chalcedon , act th e 16th , it is s aid that the Prim acy of the Bishop of

Rome mu st be preserved secundum canones ( 162 ) . I t ap­pears then that the Fathers of this Council suppose d this P rimacy to be established by the Canons .

FATHER DOMINIC That is not implie d bec ause these

words , secundum canones , may be understood in two

senses : accor ding as the Canons have establishe d , or ac­

cording as the Canons have acknowle dg ed , for the Canons

of th e Church not only establish many thing s , but also

acknowle dge others as established : an d this verifies each

time whether the matter with reg ard to which the Canon

rel ates is de jure divino or natural . Such are the Canons

which command confes sion and communion , those which

prohib it u sury , abortion , etc . , etc . No one is , however ,

obliged to understan d these express ions in the first rath­

er than the second sen se . Therefore , from this nothing

can be inferre d against the Prim acy de jure divino of the Roman P ontiff .

MR . W ILLIAM Before I can decl are myself sati sfie d , the

point now to be decide d is to see what are the rights

and prero g ati ves of this Prim acy . I f they are of honour

only , or also of juris diction , if only spiritual or also

tempor al , if they ren der the pos sessor infall ible or not ,

if they render h im superior or inferior to the General

Councils . These are questions of high importance as it

appears to me and which I beg you will expl ain to me

clearly .

- 1 70 -

DOMINIC The questions you propose are numer-ous and important , it cannot be denie d . Yet , one only am_ong st th�m interests fa ith or may be reg arde d as a pornt of fa1th , and that is the firs t which you have pro­posed .

Let us , then , beg in by this . I know that many of ours :vould not refu se to acknowledge the B ishop of Rome as Prim ate ( even de j ure divino ) , but of honour merely , not of j uris diction over the oth er B is hops or over th e Flocks subject to them . They s ay tha t the Pope may be considered as primus inter pares ( 163 ) , but that his juris diction is limite d to his Diocese alone , as is tha t of the other B ishops . And that as no other B ishop can or oug ht to interfere in thing s reg arding the Diocese of Rame , so also the B ishop of Rome cannot and ought not to interfere in thing s reg arding the D iocese of others . I do not know if this doctrine would meet w ith your approb a­tion . I fear not .

FATHER Your fear is well founde d , certainly . I cannot approve such theory which is quite contrary to all that which Sèripture , the Fathers , the Councils and rea­son itself in dicates with re spect to the P rimacy of St . Peter ' s success ion . The ide a of founding in the Church P ast�rs . over the flock s is m anifestly opposed to any such restnction as a Prim ate of honour only . Is not the Pa stor the first a�ong st the sheep ? This your comparison might be made w1th reg ard to the most High Pastor , Jesus , but not w ith reg ard to the flock committe d to Him : pasce oves meas . Quas oves? Omnes , respondit St. . Bernardus and with him the whole choir of Fathers . Yes , all . That is to say : plebes et Sacerdotes and even the Bishops of the Ca tholic Church . Nihil excipitur , ubi distinguitur nihil 0 64 ) . The sentiments of the Fa thers of the Church and of the General Councils declare to us that in the Pope they acknowle dge not , indee d , an elder Brother s imply , not a

· �ompanion alone , but a F ather , a Judg e , a P astor , and m one word a Head . As such , exactly , did the Fathers of t�e Council of Chalcedon acknowle dge and nominate him . S1cut nos capiti in bonis adj icimus consonantiam , sic et ·bonitas tua filiis quod decet adimpleat . And at the Coun­. cil of Florence , with the common consent of the Greek and

- 171 -

L atin Churches , it was define d as follows : Sanctam , et Pontificem sorem esse B .. Petri principis et verum

siam a Domino esse ( 1 65 ) .

Ecclesiae et Doctorem

et

I t is , th erefore , a dogma of faith tha t the Pope is not only a P rimate of honour , but also of j uris diction and of authority . The theory , however , of your Theolog ian s is quite contrary to this which we know by means of the definitions of the Church and of Scripture itself . It is even repugnant to re ason , s ince ( to return to the argu­ment exposed abov e ) what idea would you form of a leg­islator who would leave h is republic no other head but that of mere honour ? Would such a head be capable of maintaining g ood order in the republic , of preserving unity in the same? Figure to yourself a Government , wh ether monarchical or Aristocra tical or even democra ti­cal , in which no one could have any authority except in the place where they reside d . Could suèh a socie ty be terme d una ? ( 1 66 ) . Could order and good harmony ever be preserved there? l f the K in g of France had no authority but in Paris alone , if the Prime Minis ter of England could only command in the C ity of London , if the Consul of St . M arino could only command in his own family , such

would not be a very well or dered system . It is impos sible to preserve unity where there is not a power to overlook

the whole extent of that which you would preserve united .

What would become of a Dicoese where in the Bishop could

only command in the precincts of h is own C athe dral? Now

that which I s ay of a Bishop with reg ard to his Diocese

may be said , servata , of the Universal Church reg ar ding Sovere ign Pontiff .

MR .. From what you say we might it appears ,

infer tha t th e Pope alone is , strictly speaking , a Bishop

and that the others are b ut h is depu ties or vicars w hich

I think you cannot main ta in .

- 1 72 -

. No , certainly . And if any one pertina-

c1ou sly defended s uch a theory I should esteem him as the most unreasona ble and foolish per son in the world . I t is , therefore , calumny to attribute this to u s s aying , as some P rotes tants do , that we acknowledge no other Bishop except the Pope . This is radically false . We acknowle dge in all the B is hops the ir s acred character as s uccessors of the Apostle s in which they are Superiors over all , not only sec ulars , but a lso over any inferior Sacerdotal , whatever may be his merit or rank . We ack­

?owledg� in all , and especially in the B ishops , true JUdges m ma tters of faith , united , however , with their head and the rest of the body , true Pres ide nts in the Church , true Pastors of the faithful :

( 167 ) . St . P a ul does not say tha t a , but has placed B is hop_s , This does not prevent even these B1shops from acknowle dging a Head in their Sacred Colleg e , a Head that mu st watch over their con­?uct in order to maintain good order amongst them , and m reg ard to the flock commi tte d to their care .

A sim ilìt u de will expl ain my thoughts . Who doe s not know that the chief power in England is in the hands of the Lords , and that they in solidum hol d the reins of gov­ernment ? This , however , does not prevent these same Lords from . h avin� a. Head in the person of the King or Quee? . Th1s subJ ect 10n to their leg itimate Hea d subtracts nothmg from their dig nity . It even makes it , we may �ay , appear the more maj est ic , representing them as liv­mg . members of the leg is lative body because united to their h ea d . B ut if any L ord refu sed h is obedience to the K�ng , on thi s very account he would be depri ved of dig­mty , and b ecome the laughing s tock of g ood English men . For not subjecting himself to lawful depen dance he would be the slave and j est of the fla tterers who surroun de d him . This is e'xactly th e case . Only observe , i n fact , the unhappy lot of a ll those B ishops who with drew their sub­miss ion from Pontific al juris dic tion . They are fallen at P.resent .under the iron yoke of c ivil authority which has

, tle d their han ds , ensnare d their feet . Hence they can no longer take a step b ut in dependance on the same . On the contrary , those who remained in union with the Roman

- 1 73 -

Pontiff hav e retaine d th eir libe rty , th eir j uris diction , in­depe ndent of any civil authority w h atev er , and if some­tim es , by th e per mis s ion of Go d , a tyr ant pretende d to tie th eir hands , it e ith er fe ll to nothing or , at le ast , the

Bis hops in a short time recov ere d th e free exe rcis e of th e ir au thority which , howev er , th ey nev er lost even un­der chain s and fe tters . A Dioc letian , a D ecius coul d make

marty rs bu t not sl a v es like H enry th e 8th . J u st c ast your eye on th e Prote stant Bishops in Eng l and and on those of C athol ic I r el an d , and th en te l1 me which of th e se two cl ass e s is th e most free , th e mos t in depen dent?

W ithout h e s ita ting you will te l1 me that th e C atholic B ish­ops of I rel and are infinitely more at lib e rty . They as­se mb l e , th ey form canons , th ey can wield the spiritual swor d of cens ure with out dep en d ance on th e King or P ar­l iam ent . But why are they more free ? B ecau se more

faithful to th eir dutie s th ey would not renounce the Su­pre macy of the Roman P ontiff or tr ansfer it to th e Sov er­eign of th e N ation . Physic a l forc e might , perhaps , dis poil them of the ir rev enue s , b ut th ere is no moral force what­ev er th a t coul d depri v e th em of th eir libe rty . They are , th erefore , true B ishops , true F ath e rs of th e ir p eop le . Hence you may se e how unfounde d is th e obj ection made

ag ainst u s that we ackrtowledge in th e P ope an Universal Bis hop , a title re fu se d by St . Gre gory th e Gre at , and the same may also be s aid of his Succe s sors . lf by the name

of Universal Bishop is unde rstood a Bishop only , this is comp letely false as we hav e s een b efore . B ut if by the

nam e of Universal Bis hop you would understan d a Bishop who has the supe rint en dency of the oth er B ishops , I s ay that this is tru e , nor was it certa inly denie d by St . Gregory the Gre at who w as ev er solicitous to w atch ov er th e entire flock of J esus Ch ri st an d over all the P a stors of th e C atholic Church .

This vig il ance , howev er , is no detriment to th e or din ary j uris diction of C atholic B ishops . Th e P ope ' s Supre macy , th ere fore , con sists in th e right and obl ig ation of watch­fuln e ss not only ov er th e whole flock of th e D ioce se of Rome , or as Prim ate of I taly , but likewis e over th e con­duct of a ll the oth er B ishops of the entire C atholic Church ; so th at in virtue of this Supre macy he may and

- 1 74 -

oug ht to correct th e exce s ses of Bis hops , he may and ought to excite th e ir ze a l , he may and ought to ch asti.se

th eir mis de me anor , he m ay depos e any whe n neces sity re­quires it , and constitute oth ers in th e ir pl ace . He may and ought to summons to Ge ne r al Council , he m ay convoke th e se to asse mb le , he may and ought to approve d ecrees which are th ere made , he may and ought to rep rove

w hatev er he finds unj u st , or contrary to the faith of th e Church . This is what we acknowle dg e in th e Roma n Pon­tiff , in th e Succe s sor of St . P e ter .

.. W I LL IAM B ut may not th e oth er Bis hops correct this Succe s sor of St . P e ter wh e n nec e ss ary?

DOMINIC Most ce rtainly th ey may , provide d they do so in due or der , and in th e same manner as St . P aul corrrecte d Cephas who , accor ding to th e most common op1n1on was P et er himse lf ; and as Fe r din an d , King of Castile , correcte d and a dmonish e d many time s ( tho ' use­les s ly ) Alex a n der the 6th . No C athol ic ev er dre amt of acknowle dging in th e Pope a privile g e of impecc abil ity . He may a lso commit sin , an d a l as ! we find that m any Pope s hav e sinne d grievously . l f , th erefore , th ey may sin , th ey may a lso be charitably a dvise d an d correcte d , not only by th e Bis hops but also by simp le l aic s , provid­ed a ll be done in due or der and not by any s p irit of in­subor din ation . In g ene r a l , however , as to oth er que stions which may be aske d touching th e prerog a tives and privi­leg es of th e Succe s sors of St . P eter , in g e ne r a l I s ay , as to te mporal power , infallibility , a n d superiority ; w ith re­gard to g ene ral Councils , etc . th e se are questions which of the ms el v es do not intere st fa ith , an d are left to the free discussion of Theologians who tre at upon e ach in th e manner th ey consi der most suitable . I do not , th erefore , think th a t at pre s e nt we should stay to make any g re at account of the . same b ecause , whilst tre ating the cause of th e Cathol ic Church , my only aim is to be Catholic and not intere st myself fu rth er in defen ding that which a good Catholic might de fe nd or call in que stion , but I en­de a vour to confine myself to such thing s as cannot be denie d by any Catholic . I m ay s ay , th erefore , tha t my

· office is fulfille d . Nev e rth ele s s , ha v e you any more diffi­. cul tie s to propos e with re g ard to th e Catholic faith ? .

- 1 75 -

MR .. None occur to me at present , yet I should

like to be more fully instructed with regard to the Roman

P ontiff . I wish to know your opinion upon certa in contro­

ver s ial points in agitation among st some C atholics . What

do you think of the Gallican propositions ? In France I

know they are abandoned by almost all , yet it is not so

in England . Here they are warmly supporte d by many ,

nor will they suffer any transalpine opinion . What is

most curious is that they are not admitted by the Oxford

Gentlemen , who declare that they will have no Gallic an­

ism . I s it not surprising to see Theologians who are en­

tirely separated from the P ope show him more e�tee_m than

others who are subj ect to him . I a ssure you th1s 1s very

interes ting to us Eng lishmen .

DOMINIC I am aware of it , but at the same

time I do not think it proper to discuss this point at

length and ex professo . We can defer it , if you_ ple ase ,

to another time . As you are now at le ast extenorly re­

concile d with Rome , that is with the Catholic Church , and

being well e stablished on the true foun dations of the

same faith , you had better not interfere with theological

questions , which , to s ay the truth , I am · not fond of and

desire to set asi de with your permis s ion . I wish there

were no divisions among st Christians , and that a ll were

perfect in sensu et in eadem

I agree with you w ith reg ard to questions

of minor importance , but those which concern the Roman

P ontiff do not appear such to me . They are not mere

specul ations , but have influence over the practic al

conduct of Christians . t is of consequence , for example ,

to know if the P ope ' s power is spiritual only or also

tempor a l ; if he may or may not depose Sovereigns ; . if h is

decisions should be received as dogmas of the fa1th , or

as the simple opinions of a Bishop ; if he can or cannot

abrogate the universal l aws of the Church , and if he may

not be deposed by a General Council , etc . I should wish

to have a clear and fixed ide a upon these points .

DOMINIC I praise your desire , my dear Sir , yet

at the s ame time confes s my incapacity to s atisfy it , for

certainly I have no authority to determine your i deas

- 1 76 -

upon these articles . re main in the s ame Am I a u thorize d to Father Dominic ? I s well as myself? See barrasse d as ever .

Whatever I were to say , you would difficulties , bec ause you might say : be l ieve a 11 tha t I ha ve heard from not Father Dominic subj ect to err a s then how you would b e as much em-

I understan d your reason s , yet I do not still relinquish . I desire at lea st your advice , but if you think it mere curiosity do not answer me . Tel1 me , how­ever , what you think of the temporal dominions of the Pope ?

I f you speak of th e private dominion s of his own states , viz . of provinces c a lle d The States of the Church , I reply : if we are to examine the j us num , P ope certainly is not Sovereign of any sta tes . He is the Successor St . P eter , who cer-tainly w as not a King of this World . But after we ex­amine th e rig ht of N ations , the Pope is certainly lawful Sovereign of h is own states The does not consti tute the P ope a Sovereign , nor does it prevent him from being one . I n the same manner jus de natura does not make Victoria a Sovereign , yet is not any impediment . Temporal Sovereignty is , therefore , a remote thing , but not contrary to the prerog atives of a Successor of St . Peter . I t is even , we may s ay , most proper , otherwise the Pope would be dependent on the Catholic Sovereigns since , humanly s peaking , if the P ope w as not a lso a Sov­ereig n he would not pos sess tha t freedom necessary as Head of the Church . He would be sub j ect to a Sovereign , and it is most natural that a Bishop subj ect to a Sover­eign might not have the confidence of the other C atholic Sovereigns as due to the Hea d of the Church , for these might look u pon him but as an instrument or , as we may express it , a Chaplain to the Sovereign under whom he was a subj ect . It is important , therefore , that the Pope should be independent of any Sovereign in order the more freely to exercise his spiritual functions .

MR . The · unmindful of their · the tempor al .

fact is , however , that many Popes , spiritual functions , a ttended only to

- 1 77 -

1 t might be so with reg ar d to some in ancient times . lt has not , however , been always so , nor is it the c a se at present . To what pu rpose , my dear S ir , like ( . . . ) do we seek to disclose the dis g race of our F ath ers ? Let those thing s remain burie d in oblivion which do not de serve to be brought to light . There is not any­thing w h ich human m a lice may not a b u se . If some Popes h av e abuse d their power , it has been abused also by King s , by j u dges , etc A true C hristian P hilosopher , th.o ' he may con demn a buse s in his heart , yet he takes good care never to con demn lawful power .

MR . B ut what do you think of the rig ht which some P opes a rrog ate to themsel ves over the whole world by di stri buting it at their ple as ure , g iving , for ex ample , A sia to P ortug al , a n d Americ a to Spain ?

I s hould s ay , my dear Sir , that these P opes might have erred by such conduct , nor do I pre­tend to j u stify all that the Pope s have done , bec au se I know t h at some have done thing s worthy of blame a n d that coul d not b e j u stifie d by any Cathol ic . But these may be at present much e x agg erate d , as ·· you will e asily allow . Yet , if some Popes inflicted a wound , thi s was heale d by oth er Popes . These wounds nev er interested faith , and you will not find tha t any of th e Popes , even the weakest , ever m a de any bre ach in the holy C atholic faith , which may certa inly be attribute d to the effects of that prayer which J esu s m a de to H is F ather for St . Peter and for his Successors : Ego ciat fides tua ; et tu conversus tuos ( 1 68 ) . St . Peter ' s many f a ll s and his sincere repen­tance are an emblem of that which we have witne ssed in his Successor s .

We shu dder at th e deg ra dation of some Popes in the 10th age and commenèement of the 11 th , yet , after such hu­m ilia ting c at astrophies , we m ay observe towards the mid­dle of the 1 1 th a series of Popes who g loriou sly and to the gre ate st a dv antag e rep air e d th e mJ uries done by the ir p re dece ssors . A deg r a de d people resume d un der their influence the figure of men , men bec ame good Christians , deb aunchery and simony was banish e d , and the Church

- 1 78 -

restore d from that state of slav ery and oppres sion u n der which she gro ane d . B ut human thing s are not so e asily establish e d . Men are alw ays men . After a few ages weak­nes s again entere d th e tribunal . We behold an Alexander scanda lize the Church . The di sor ders were great , and th ese disorders occ asione d the revol t of many King doms and the loss of fa ith in many Christians . Luther was not , indee d , th e prim ary cau se of disor der . The matter was disposed for the flames , little was wanting except Luther to apply th e match in order to occ asion a conflagration which appeared rea dy to reduce the whole of C hristia nity to ashes . Go d , however , who always watches at the helm of h is Ves sel when she is the most fu riou sly beaten by the waves , towards the mid dle of the 1 6th age ·raise d a series of P opes who , by the D ivine goo dne ss , have never yet deg ener ate d , and hav e abu n d a nt ly rep air e d the los s Tow ar ds the en d o f th e following a g e anoth er storm arose . The Vessel was then guide d by expert P ilots who , to all its fur y , opposing nothirig but Christian meekne ss , tri­umphed at l ast over its d ar k wa ves .

Thu s we be hold the B ark of P eter after many frightful gale s , still floating on th e oce an , not only untouche d , but more vigou rou s , richer than ever in preciou s trea­sures of sanctity which she offers in tribute to the an­cient and new World . Yes , and pe rh aps nev er has the Church so extended her bra nches as at present . Storm s it is true have not yet ce a se d . P oor Sp ain is at present in a hurric ane of furiou s winds , but wait a little , and you will see th at Sp ain h er self , laying a s i de her old g ar­ment s , will be clothed more be auti fully than ever . Now , tel1 me sincerely my g ood friend , can a ll this be the ef-fects of hum an pru dence ? No , no , Dei est ( 1 69 ) . I know that some of our sep arated B rethren attri­bute to pol itics the success of the Catholic Church . But we ou ght to say A Domino est istud , et est mira-

in nostris ( 1 70 ) ; The Ca tholic Church resem-bles a grand tree , the branches of which may , i n deed , be prune d but she will never lose the strength which she receives from h er root . After h aving suffered the pru ning of her branches she ri ses more vigourously , more lively ,

· more blooming ly , spre a ds forth h er boughs more rriaj e sti­cally . What becomes , however , of the miserable branches

1 79 -

cut off by th e prune r ? Ah ! these on the contr ary , re­cei ving no vital influence from the trunk , by l i ttle an d little wither , rot , peri sh entirely . The Ca tholic Church has w itne s se d the birth of all sorts of heres ies , she has seen th em almost all peris h , nor are those which still remain in any better con dition than those alrea dy ex­tinct . An d th e time will come , s ays one of your authors ( th e E ding-reviewer ) , when Lon don will be but a desert , yet th e Catholic Church will flourish till th e end of time . Behold here , my dear Sir , the preciou s effects of th a t prayer we have alre a dy spoken of - Ego rogavi pro te ut non deficiat fides tuas , et tu aliquando con versus confirma fra tres tuos ( 1 7 1 ) .

MR .. l t cannot be den ie d and I must perfectly ag ree w ith you , but wh at do you think of the infa llibil­ity of th e Pope ?

FATHER I beg to be dispen s e d with reg ard to this point and only a ssure you it is mere calumny when P rotes tants assert th a t we believe almost as an article of fa ith th at the P ope is infa llible in a ll he thinks , s ays and writes . Yes , i t is a gros s calumny , - for no Catholic hol ds as an article of faith infallibility in the P ope on­ly . They all , however , hol d as an article of faith the infallibility of the Univers al Church , as I s aid before . They who maintain th e probability of person al infall ibil­ity in the P ope limit th is to decis ions ex cathedra ; that is when he speaks to all th e faithful in matters of faith or mor al doctrine divinely reve ale d . No one can deny such an opinion to be well founde d , and with the le arned Tournely ( tho ' a F renchman ) mu st allow that such foun­d ations can with diffic ulty be set asi de . Yet , no one be­lieves th is to be a dogma of fa ith , and the present reigning high Ponti ff answere d thu s some French theolo­gi ans who interro g ated Him upon this point : "My Son , thi s does not rel ate to a dog ma of faith . " ( I heard this from a person worthy of respect in the C ity of ( . . . ) on th e 1 st of October 1841 ) . It doe s not rel ate , therefore , to fa ith but to mere theolog ic al questions . Le aving those who ple ase to q uestion , let u s , my de ar Sir , ha ving recog­nize d the truth g ive due g lory to God . Fide creditur ad j ustitiam : ore autem confessio fit ad salutem ( 1 72 ) . The

- 1 80 -

Catholic Church ex act s of her chil dren docile submi s s ion in dog mas of faith , filial obe dience as our rule of con­duct . She doe s not wish to tyranize over th e con scie nce of any , in imposing the yoke impose d by J esus Christ !

Let us , th erefore , be docile , my de ar Sir : Quasi modo ge­niti infantes , rationabile sine dolo lac concupiscite : ut in eo crescatis in salutem ( 1 73 ) . You have recognize d your Moth er , the Holy C atholic Chu rch . Well th en , del ay not an instant . Fly to her bosom , confes s yourself her Son , take the food she offers you and fear nothing . F ly to that bo­som which g ives life in Chri st Jesus , which most certa inly will not g ive you de ath ; that bosom which of.fers you milk , and will not , cannot g ive you poi son . Audite au­dientes me , comedite bonum et delectabitur in crassitudine anima vestra ( 1 74 ) . Enter this ark , which alone can s ave you from universal inundation , live in her , and fe ar nothing . She will le a d you s afely to th e g ates of etern al salvation , which I de s ire for you w ith my whole he art .

.. WILLIAM This is my duty an d I am resol ved to do it effectually ._ For long have I res iste d the D ivine voice ; too long h ave I shut my eyes to the li ght that would have enlightened me . lt is , indee d , time to rep a ir p ast faul ts . I n th e meanwhile I return thanks , and may God rew ar d your charity and p a tience . I beg you will a lso pray for me , in order tha t I may f aithfully corre spon d with the light and g r ace he has imp arted an d s till im­parts to me , in order that we may have th e h app ines s of being united not only on e arth but a l so in Hea ven , there to enj oy , love and pra ise His Divine bounty for endle s s ag es .

FATHER DOMINIC Amen , Amen .

- 1 8 1 -

PROTESTATION OF THE AUTHOR

I f in th is or any other of my writing s , should be found anything contrary to what the Holy Catholic Apostolic , Roman Chu rch hol ds , I protest myself ready to correct and retract it ; submitting all my writing s and my person to the same Holy Catholic Church , the centre of unity and fundamental truth . I ta est .

St . Mary ' s College , Ascott , February 8th , 1842 .

Dominicu s a Ma tre Dei . P ass ionista .

- 182 -

N O T E S

1 . Among Ble s s ed Dominic ' s works , perhaps Mr . Will i am was referring to THE LAMENT OF ENGLAND which was ce rtai nly read by Newman and his foll owers at Litt lemore . I t was transl ated and publ i shed by Ambrose Phi l l ipps in 1 8 3 1 (V . Cock shaw , Leicester ) . He might also be referring to Bles s ed Dominic ' s Letter addres sed to the University Prof e s s ors of Oxford on the occasion of see ing an epi stle from one of the ir body in a j ournal cal l ed " L ' UNIVERS " . The l etter of Bles sed Dominic was dated May 5 , 1841 and is found in LIFE AND LETTERS OF THE VENERABLE FATHER DOMINIC ( Barberi ) , C . P . , Founder of . the Pas­sionists in Belgium and England , by Father Urban ( Young ) , C . P . , Burns Oates and Washbourne Ltd , London , 1926 , pp . 3 5 7 -3 92 .

2 . Jas 1 : 1 7 : " Every worthwhi l e gi ft , every genuine benefit comes from above , desc ending from the Father of the heavenly luminar ies , . . . "

3 . Struggle_ for thy soul .

4 . I I Cor 7 : 4 : "My j oy knows no bounds . "

5 . Re ference to Bal aam ' s ass : Num 2 2 : 2 2 - 3 5 . prophet beat hi s donkey , the animal rebuked him . "

"When the

6 . Mk 1 2 : 3 4 : " You are not far from the kingdom of God . "

7 . Jn 1 : 9 : "Which gives light to every man . . . "

8 . effect .

9 . Ps 3 4 : 9 : " Taste and see . "

10 . Phil 1 : 6 : "He who has begun the good work in you wi ll carry it through to compl et ion right up to the day of Christ Jesus . "

11 . Note the advice in two steps , bas ed on the word of God : · cfr . Col 3 : 9-10 : "What you have done i s put as ide your old sel f with its past deeds and put on a new man , one who grows

- 183 -

in knowledge as he is formed anew in the irnage of his Creator . "

12 . The re-baptism is only conditional , as Father Dominic

notes in his reply , and he makes further qualifi cations .

1 3 . Eph 4 : 5 : "One Lord , one fai th , one baptism . "

14 . Calvinist .

15 . Mt 1 2 : 2 6 : " I f Satan i s expel l ing Satan , he must be torn by dissension . How , then , can his dominion l ast? "

16 . Jn 19 : 2 4 : " We should not tear it . Let us throw dic e to s ee who gets it . "

17 . ' bonds ' .

18 . Gal 3 : 1 3 : " Chri st has del ivered us . . . "

19 . Lk 1 8 : 2 7 : " Things that are impo s s ible for men , are pos s ible for God . "

20 . Bles sed Dominic had a strong predile ction for Engl and . I n S eptember 1 8 14 as he prayed before a picture of Our Bless­ed Lady he fel t a strong call to exercise the sacred ministry in North Europe , but e specially in England . When he was ordained on May 1 , 1818 � he offered himsel f for the glory of God , the sal vation of soul s , and e specia lly for the conver­s ion o f England . In 1821 he wrote THE LAMENT OF ENGLAND . In 18 26 he made his fi rst contacts with the following English­men : Trelawney , Spencer , Phi l l ips , Wiseman and Acton . On November 2 7 , 1840 , Dominic was invi ted by Bishop Wa lsh of Bi rmingham , Engl and and his Coad jutor , Bi shop Wiseman , to discu s s a pro j ected foundation in Engl and . Then Bles sed Domini c made the first foundation at Aston Hall on February 1 7 , 18 42 . On S eptember 2 9 , 1845 , Dominic r eceived Dr . Dal­gairns into the Church . Newman was received into the Church by Dominic on O ctober 9 , 1845 .

21 . Note the benevol ence of Dominic towards the English nation .

- 184 -

22 . "who " instead of " that " .

23 . Concordia i . e . , Agreement .

24 . ag e , i . e . , century .

25 . age , i . e . , century .

26 . " had " instead o f "was " .

27 . " centurie s " ins tead of " age " .

28 . I Cor 14 : 3 4 : "According to the rul e obs erved in all the ass embl ies of bel ievers , women should keep silent in such gatherings . They may not speak . "

29 . by neces sity of means .

30 . Cfr . Jn 2 0 : 3 1 : " But these have been recorded to help you bel ieve that Jesus is the Me s s iah , the Son of God , so that through thi s faith , you may have l i fe in his name . "

31 . I I Tim 3 : 1 6 : "All scripture i s inspi red o f God and i s use ful for teaching etc . "

32 . Jn 2 0 : 3 1 : " But these have been recorded to help you bel ieve . . . so that through this faith , you may have l i fe in his name . "

3 3 . Jn 6 : 5 7 - 5 8 : " . . . so the man who feeds on me will have lif e be cause o f me . . . the man who f e eds on this bread shall live forever . "

34 . Lk 11 : 41 : " But i f you give what you have as alms , all will be wiped clean for you . "

35 . I s 5 5 : 3 : " . . . listen , that you may have l i fe . "

36 . Mt 2 5 : 3 4 - 3 5 : " Come . You have my Father ' s bl essing ' . . . . For I was hungry and you gave me food . . . "

37 . Ps 15 : l , 5 : "O Lord , who shall soj ourn in your tent ? . . . who lends not his money at usury . . . etc . "

- 185 -

38 . Ac 2 : 3 7 - 38 : " What are we to do , brothers ? Peter an­

swered : ' You mu st re form and be baptized , each one of you . . . ,

etc . "

39 . Lk 3 : 14 : " What about us ? " He told them , " Don ' t bully

anyone . Denounce no one falsely . Be content with your pay . "

40 . Mk 1 6 : 16 : "The man who believes in it and accept s bap-

tism will be saved . "

41 . Should thi s re ad : " To pretend to ( s ee ) particular and

individual illu strations of interior apprec iation . . . . ? "

42 . Bell armine : De Verbo Dei S cripto .

43 . Rom 7 : 7 : " I t was only through the l aw that I carne to

know s in . "

44 . Concupi s cence : " is from s in and inc l ines to s in . "

45 . " by faith . "

46 . 11 by fai th wi thout works of the law . "

47 . Mt 19 : 1 7 : " I f you wish to enter into li fe , keep the

commandment s . "

48 . Mt 7 : 2 1 : "None of those who cry out ' Lord , Lord ' , will

enter the kingdom of God but only the one who does the wil l

of my Father i n heaven . "

49 . Jas 2 : 2 0 : " Without works , faith i s idl e . "

50 . " an epi stle of s traw . "

51 . I Cor 1 3 : 2 : " I f I have fai th gre at enough to move

mounta ins , but have not love , I am nothing . "

52 . I Cor 6 : 9-10 - " Can you not reali ze the unholy will not

fa l l heir to the kingdom of God? . . . no . . . adulterers , no

robber s wil l inherit God ' s kingdom . 1 1

- 1 86 -

5 3 . Lam 5 : 2 1 : " Turn us toward you , Lord , and we sha ll be

changed . 1 1

54 . Zec 1 : 3 : " Turn toward me , and I shall turn toward you . "

55 . " or " .

56 . Ez 3 3 : 12 : "Nei ther will the wi ckedness that a man has done bring about his down fall on the day that he turns from his wickedness . . . . "

57 . " the unknown i s not known by the unknown . "

58 . Mt 11 : 19 - "Who gave justified by her own sons . "

this power to you? " ( Vulgate Edition ) .

Wi sdom i s

59 . A c 1 5 : 2 8 : " It is the decis ion of the Holy Spiri t , and ours too . . . . "

60 . Ni cea .

6L Nice a .

62 . in controvers ies of the fai th .

6 3 . I I Tim 1 : 12 : For I know him in whom I have believed , and I am con fident . . . .

64 . Heb 11 : 3 3 : " Conquered kingdoms . "

65 . Athanas ian Creed : " Thi s i s the Cathol i c faith ; unless every one bel ieves this fai thfully and f irmly , he cannot be saved . 1 1

66 . Judas .

67 . I I Macc 1 2 : 45 -46 : " Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this s in . "

68 . without infraction of faith and charity .

69 . Jn 2 0 : 2 3 : " I f you forgive men ' s s ins , they are forgiven them . i l

- 187 -

70 . Jas 5 : 16 : "Declare your s ins to one another . "

71 . Cfr . I Cor 5 : 1 -5 .

72 . A 16th century Lutheran account of Church History in 1 3

volumes . It was conceived by Matthias Fl acius I llyricus , a

devout and str ict follower of Mart in Luther . It was begun in

1 5 5 9 and completed in 1 5 7 4 .

7 3 . " When she prays it seems as i f she rather commanded

than prayed , and was rather a queen than a handmaid . "

74 . Rom 10 : 1 8 ; Rom 3 : 4 ; Gen 6 : 1 2 ; P s 1 3 : 1 3 ; Jer 6 : 1 3 .

7 5 . F rom : The Cathol ic Liturgy of Hours .

76 . Lk 16 : 9 - " Make friends for your selves through your use

o f thi s world ' s goods , so that when they fail you , a lasting

reception will be yours . "

77 . I T iro 2 : 5 ; I Jn 2 : 1 .

78 . Will iam Palmer - ( 1803 -188 5 ) : An Anglican theologian of

repute who in 1846 publ i shed a reply to Newman ' s E s say on the

development of Chri s tian Doctrine .

79 . Dr . Wi seman ( 1802-186 5 ) encouraged the Catholic Revival

in Engl and . He became Cardina l and Archbi shop of Westminster

when the Holy S ee decreed the re storat ion of the English

Hierarchy in 1 8 50 .

80 . Sir 3 2 : 2 4 : " Son , do nothing without taking counse l , and

then after it is done , you wi l l not regret it . "

81 . under your protection , etc .

our enernies , etc . "

Gi ve me strength against

8 2 . P s 147 : 9 : "Who gives food to the cattle " .

- 1 88 -

83 . Ps 10 4 : 1 5 : "And bread forti fies the heart s of men" .

84 . I deny the maj or .

85 . What Valentine was permitted to do - is it not per­mitted to Valentianians , i . e . , hi s followers ?

86 . Mezzofanti pos ses sed an extraordinary knowledge of languages .

87 . Ps 1 1 8 : 1 30 : " The expre ss ion of your words gives light . "

88 . Chri st .

89 . Cardinal Robe rt Bell armine .

90 . Peter Martyr Vermigli ( 15 00 - 1 5 6 2 ) : An Augu stinian Canon Regul ar from Florence , who l ater fled to Zurich and Basel when he was su spect o f heresy . Archbi shop Cranmer invited him to England in 1548 where he became regius professor of divinity at Oxford .

91 . Jn 1 6 : 1 2 -1 3 : " I have much more to tel1 you , but you cannot bear it now . When he comes , however , being the Spirit of truth , he will guide you to all truth . "

92 . Heb 1 : 6 : " Let all the angel s o f God worship him . "

93 . Cfr . Newman , Lecture 1 4 .

94 . Mt 2 8 : 19 : " Go , there fore , and make dis cipl es of all the nat ions . Baptize them . . . . "

95 . Mt 1 9 : 14 : " Let the chi ldren come to me . them . "

Do not hinde r

96 · Downs ide : Benedictine Abbey 1 2 mil es south of Bath , South Engl and . The Community ori ginated in Douai ( France ) in 1607 , moved to Downside in 1814 and became an Abbey in 1900 .

97 . Gn 3 : 19 : "For · return . "

you are dirt , and

- 189 -

to dirt you shall

98 . Job 2 5 : 6 : " How rnuch less man , who i s but a rnaggot ; the

son of man , who is only a worrn? "

99 . Jn 1 : 11 : " To his own he carne , yet hi s own did not ac ­

cept hirn . "

100 . Jn 1 : 1 2 : " There is one arnong you whorn you do not recog­

ni z e . "

101 . I Cor 11 : 2 9 : "He doe s not dis cern the body of the

Lord . "

102 . Jn 1 3 : 15 : " What I just did was to give you an exarnple :

as I have done , so you rnu st do . "

103 . Counci l of Trent , Ses s ion XXI I ; Chapter 2 ( Denz iger

# 940 ) : " The rnanner of offering al one being different . "

104 . Heb 9 : 2 4 : " That the fac e of God rnight appear for us . "

105 . Heb 7 : 2 5 : " S ince he forever lives to rnake int erce s s ion

for thern . "

106 . Heb 9 : 12 : semel ( onc e ) .

107 . Mt 2 4 : 2 2 : " God will shorten the days of that one . "

108 . I Tirn 5 : 11-12 : "Re fuse to enrol l the younger widows ,

for wh en their pas s ions e strange thern frorn Christ they will

want to rnarry . Thi s will bring thern condernnation for breaking

their f i rst pledge . "

109 . I Cor 7 : 3 3 : " But the rnarried man is busy wi th thi s

world ' s dernands and occupied with pleas ing his wi f e . This

rneans he i s divided . "

110 . I Cor 1 1 : 19 : There rnay even have to be factions arnong

you f or the tried and true to stand out clearly . "

- 190 -

111 . " by incurring i t ipso facto? "

112 . See note 8 5 .

113 . S ee note 108 .

114 . " Whoever wishes to be saved , needs above all to hold the Catholic faith . "

115 . Cfr . Lk 19 : 2 2 : Judge yoursel f , wicked servant , by your own rnouth : you will be judged by your own rnouth , and you wil l be condernned by your own rnouth .

116 . Jer 3 1 : 3 1 - 3 3 : " The days are corning , says the Lord , when I will rnake a new covenant with the hou se of I srael and the house of Judah . It will not be l ike the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took thern by the hand to lead thern forth f rorn the land of Egypt ; for they broke rny covenant , and I had to show rnyself their master , says the Lord . But this i s the covenant which I will rnake with the house o f I s rael after those days , says the Lord . I will pl ace rny law within thern , and write it upon their heart s ; I will be their God , and they shall be rny people . "

117 . I s 4 9 : 6 ; 5 5 : 5 .

118 . Lk 1 : 3 3 - " O f his kingdorn there will be no end . "

119 . I I Cor 5 : 2 0 : " This rnakes us arnbas sadors for Christ , God as it were appealing through us . "

120 . Jn 15 : 16 : " I t was not you who chose me , i t was I who chose you to go forth and bear frui t . Your frui t rnust en­dure . "

121 . Jn 1 6 : 1 2 -l 3 : " I have rnuch more to tel1 you , but you cannot bear it now . When he cornes , however , being the Spi rit of truth he will guide you to all truth" . Jn 14 : 26 : "He will instruct you in everything , and rernind you o f all that I told you . "

122 . Jn 2 0 : 19 - 2 3 : " Jesus carne and stood be fore thern . ' Peace be with you , ' he said . ' Peace be with you , ' he s aid again .

- 191 -

' As the Father has s ent me , so I send you . 1 Then he breathed on them and said : ' Rece ive the Holy Spirit . I f you forgive men ' s s ins , they are f orgiven them ; if you hold them bound , they are held bound ' . "

123 . Mt 2 8 : 18-20 : " Jesus carne forward and addres sed them in these words : ' Full authority has been given to me both in heaven and on earth ; go , there fore , and make disciples of all the nations . Bapti ze them in the name of the Father , and of the Son , and of the Holy Spiri t . Teach them to carry out everything I have commanded you . And know that I am with you always , until the end of the world ! 1 1

124 . Mt 1 5 : 1 3 : " Every pl anting not put down by my heavenly Father wi l l be uprooted " , and Wis 4 : 3 : " Their spurious off shoots shall not strike a deep root . . . . "

125 . "whose author and crea to r is God . "

126 . I Cor 1 2 : 12 : " The body i s one and has many members . "

127 . Eph 4 : 5 : " There is one Lord , one fai th . "

128 . Whoever reads this Conf erence will be surprised , per­haps , to find it so di fferent from the method expressed by the titl e . H ere under one de sign we pre s ent you continually an inf inity of things under a thousand forms . That it i s tediou s and monotonous I d o not deny ; but the importance o f the subj ect ; the brevity which I wish t o pre serve , the character of the Nation f or which I write , the c ircumstances at pre sent so unsati s factory in which I am s ituated (writing this at As cott in the midst of uncertainty with regard to my establ i shment in Engl and ) do not permit me to lose any time , or to exercise the imagination in picture sque variety . Thi s , there fore , is more of a conf e rene e , or instructions than a dia logue .

129 . Jn 1 7 : 2 1 : " That all may be one , as you , Father , are in me , and I in you ; I pray that they may be ( one ) in us , that the world may bel ieve that you sent me . "

- 192 -

130 . Jn 10 : 1 6 - " I have other sheep that do not bel ong to thi s fold . I mu st lead them too . . . . There shall be one f lock then , one shepherd . "

131 . Those same things which are uni ted to a thi rd are united between themselves : and on the contrary those things which are not united between themselves cannot be unit ed to a third .

132 . I bel ieve in one . . . Catholic Church .

133 . Mt 2 8 : 20 : " And know that I am wi th you always , until the end of the world . "

134 . I Cor 7 : 3 9 : "A wife is bound to her husband as long as he l ives . "

135 . I Tim 2 : 4 : " God wants all men to be saved . "

136 . I Cor 1 2 . 2 9 : "Are all apostles? Are all teachers ? "

137 . Heb 5 : 4 : "One doe s not take thi s hono r on his own ini ­tiative , but only when cal led by God . . . . "

138 . " I f there were no pride , there would be no heres ies . "

139 . Jas 2 : 24 : " You mu st perceive that a per son i s ju sti f ied by hi s works and not by faith alone . "

140 . Jn 14 : 16 : " To be with you always . "

141 . Prov 2 2 : 2 8 : "Remove not the anc ient l andmark which your fathers set up . "

142 . Mt 1 8 : 1 7 - " I f he ignores even the Church , then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax colle ctor . "

143 . Thi s is the fai th of our f athers ; . . . The Apostles have handed down in thi s way : the Church has bel ieved it in thi s way : Anathema to the one who doe s not bel ieve in thi s way .

- 19 3 -

144 . Rom 1 2 : 1 : " Your spiritual worship" .

145 . I I Cor : 4 : "Who is the image of God " , and Heb 1 : 3 : " The

exact repre sentation of the Father ' s being . "

146 . Heb 1 : 6 - " Let all the angels of God worship him . "

147 . P s 1 0 6 : 1 9 - 2 9 : " They made a calf in Horeb and adored a

molten image ; they exchanged their glory for the image of a

gras s-eathing bul lock . "

148 . Ibid . : "Of a grass-eating bullock . "

149 . Hallam Henry

England from the

George I I ( 18 2 7 ) .

( 1 7 7 7 - 1 8 5 9 ) , Constitutional History of

Access ion of Henry VI I to the Death of

150 . Jn 1 : 14 : " The Word became f lesh . "

151 . Gen 2 3 : 7 - 1 2 .

152 . Rv 1 9 : 1 0 - "Do not make . . . . I adore God . "

153 . Adore the true God and King .

154 . Jn 4 : 2 3 : "Yet an hour i s coming , and is already here ,

when authentic worshipers will worship the Father in spirit

and truth . "

155 . I Cor 3 : 19 : "For the wisdom of thi s world is absurdi ty

with God . "

156 . " Let flesh and hearts and lips and mind sound forth our

witness to humankind . "

157 . I Thes 5 : 2 5 : " Pray for me . "

158 . Mt 5 : 44 : " P ray f or those who persecute you and do good

to those that hate you . "

- 194 -

159 . of human right .

160 . of divine right .

161 . of ecclesiastical right nor of civil right .

162 . according to the canons .

163 . first among equals .

164 . " feed my sheep . What sheep? All the sheep responds St .

Bernard . . . . the people , the priests . . . . No one is left out ,

where there is no distinction made . "

165 . We likewise define that the holy Apostol ic S ee , and the

Roman Pontiff , hold the primacy throughout the entire world ;

and that the Pontiff himself is the succes sor of bles sed

Peter , the chief of the Apostles , and the true Vicar of

Christ , and that he is the head of the entire Church , and the

father and teacher of all Chri stians ; and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter by our Lord Jesus Christ , to

feed , rule and_ govern the universal Church ; . . . . "

166 . One .

167 . Ac 2 0 : 2 8 : " The Holy Spirit has given you to rule the

Church of God . "

168 . Lk 2 2 : 3 2 : " But I have prayed for you that your faith

may never fail . You in turn must strengthen your brothers . "

169 . Ex 8 : 1 9 : " The finger of God i s here . "

170 . P s 1 1 7 : 2 3 : " By the Lord has thi s been done ;

wonderful in our eyes . "

it is

171 . Lk 2 2 : 3 2 : " But I have prayed for you that your faith

may never fail . You in turn mu st strengthen your brothers . "

172 . Rom 1 0 : 1 0 : "Faith in the heart leads to justi fication ,

_confes s ion on the l ips to salvation . "

- 1 95 -

173 . I Pet 2 : 2 : " Be as eager for milk as newborn babies -

pure milk of the spirit to make you grow unto salvation . "

174 . I s 55 : 2 : "Heed me and you shall eat well , you shall

del ight in rich fare . "

- 1 96 -

RICERCHE DI STORIA E SPIRITUALITÀ PASSIONISTA 57

Fabiano Giorgini, CP

Organizzazione e Ristrutturazione

nella storia della Congregazione Passionista

Appunti storici

Roma 2005 Curia Generale Passionisti P.zza SS. Giovanni e Paolo, 13