having full liberty to take a copy of the acts for his own security. And should any rule be adduced repugnant to this decree, it is hereby repealed."

Here we have a remarkable parallel to the dispute between Rome and us; and we see what was the decision of the General Church upon it. It will be observed, the decree is past for all provinces in all future times, as well as for the immediate exigency. Now this is a plain refutation of the Romanists on their own principles. They profess to hold the Canons of the Primitive Church: the very line they take, is to declare the Church to be one and the same in all ages. Here then they witness against themselves. The Pope has encroached on the rights of other Churches, and violated the Canon above cited. Herein is the difference between his relation to us, and that of any civil Ruler, whose power was in its origin illegally acquired. Doubtless we are bound to obey the Monarch under whom we are born, even though his ancestor were an usurper. Time legitimises a conquest. But this is not the case in spiritual matters. The Church goes by fixed laws; and this usurpation has all along been counter to one of her acknowledged standing ordinances, founded on reasons of universal application.

After the Canon above cited, it is almost superfluous to refer to the celebrated rule of the First Nicene Council, A.D. 325, which, in defending the rights of the Patriarchates, expresses the same principle in all its simple force and majesty.

"Let the ancient usages prevail, which are received in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, relative to the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria; as they are observed in the case of the Bishop of Rome. And so in Antioch too, and other provinces, let the prerogatives of the Churches be preserved."

On this head of the subject, I will but notice, that, as the Council of Ephesus controlled the ambition of Antioch, so in like manner did St. Austin rebuke Rome itself for an encroachment of another kind on the liberties of the African Church.

Bingham says,

"When Pope Zosimus and Celestine took upon them to receive Appellants from the African Churches, and absolve those whom they had condemned, St. Austin and all the African Churches sharply remonstrated against this, as an irregular practice, viola

ting the laws of unity, and the settled rules of ecclesiastical commerce; which required, that no delinquent excommunicated in one Church should be absolved in another, without giving satisfaction to his own Church that censured him. And therefore, to put a stop to this practice and check the exorbitant power which Roman Bishops assumed to themselves, they first made a Law in the Council of Milevis, That no African Clerk should appeal to any Church beyond sea, under pain of being excluded from communion in all the African Churches. And then, afterwards, meeting in a general Synod, they dispatched letters to the Bishop of Rome, to remind him how contrary this practice was to the Canons of Nice, which ordered, That all controversies should be ended in the places where they arose, before a Council and the Metropolitan 1."

Thus I have shown, that our Bishops, at the time of the Reformation, did but vindicate their ancient rights; were but acting as grateful, and therefore jealous champions of the honour of the old Fathers, and the sanctity of their institutions. Our duty surely in such matters lies in neither encroaching nor conceding to encroachment; in taking our rights as we find them, and using them; or rather in regarding them altogether as trusts, the responsibility of which we cannot avoid. As the same Apostle says, "Let every man abide in the same calling, wherein he is called." And, if England and Ireland had a plea for asserting their freedom under any circumstances, much more so, when the corruptions imposed on them by Rome even made it a duty to do so.

I shall answer briefly one or two objections, and so bring these remarks to an end.

1. First, it may be said, that Rome has withdrawn our orders, and excommunicated us; therefore we cannot plead any longer our Apostolical descent. Now I will not altogether deny, that a Ministerial Body might become so plainly apostate, as to lose its privilege of ordination. But, however this may be, it is a little too hard to assume, as such an objection does, the very point in dispute. When we are proved to be heretical in doctrine, then will be the time to begin to consider, whether our heresy is of so grievous a character as to invalidate our orders; but, till then,

1 Bingh. Antiq. xvi. 1. § 14.

we may fairly and fearlessly maintain, that our Bishops are still invested with the power of ordination.

2. But it may be said on the other hand, that if we do not admit ourselves to be heretic, we necessarily must accuse the Romanists of being such; and that therefore, on our own ground, we have really no valid orders, as having received them from an heretical Church. But even if Rome be so considered now, at least she was not heretical in the primitive ages; no one will say that she was then Antichrist'. Nay, as to the middle ages, we may say with the learned Dr. Field, "that none of those points of false doctrine and error which Romanists now maintain, and we condemn, were the doctrines of the Church before the Reformation constantly delivered or generally received by all them that were of it, but doubtfully broached, and devised without all certain resolution, or factiously defended by some certain only, who as a dangerous faction adulterated the sincerity of the Christian verity, and brought the Church into miserable bondage"." Accordingly, acknowledging and deploring all the errors of the middle ages, yet we need not fear to maintain, that after all they were but the errors of individuals, though of large numbers of Christians; and we may safely maintain, that they no more interfere with the validity of the ordination received by our Bishops from those who lived before the Reformation, than errors of faith and conduct in a priest interfere with the grace of the Sacraments received at his hands.

3. It may be said, that we throw blame on Luther, and others of the foreign Reformers, who did act without the authority of their Bishops. But we reply, that it has been always agreeable to the principles of the Church, that, if a Bishop taught and upheld what was contrary to the orthodox faith, the Clergy and people were not bound to submit, but were obliged to maintain the

1 The following is from the Life of Bernard Gilpin, vid. Wordsworth's Ecclesiastical Biography, vol. iv. p. 94. "Mr. Gilpin would often say that the Churches of the Protestants were not able to give any firme and solid reason of their separation besides this, to wit, that the Pope is Antichrist. . . . The Church of Rome kept the rule of faith intire, until that rule was changed and altered by the Council of Trent, and from that time it seemed to him a matter of necessitie to come out of the Church of Rome, that so that Church which is true and called out from thence might follow the word of God... But he did not these things violently, but by degrees."

2 See Field on the Church, Appendix to book iii. where he proves all this. See also Birkbeck's Protestant's Evidence.

true religion; and if excommunicated by such Bishops, they were never accounted to be cut off from the Church. Luther and his associates upheld in the main the true doctrine; and though it is not necessary to defend every act of fallible men like them, yet we are fully justified in maintaining, that the conduct of those who defended the truth against the Romish party, even in opposition to their spiritual rulers, was worthy of great praise. At the same time it is impossible not to lament, that they did not take the first opportunity to place themselves under orthodox Bishops of the Apostolical Succession. Nothing, as far as we can judge, was more likely to have preserved them from that great decline of religion, which has taken place on the Continent.

[NEW EDITION.]

These Tracts are continued in Numbers, and sold at the price of 2d. for each sheet, or 7s. for 50 copies.

LONDON: PRINTED FOR J. G. F. & J. RIVINGTON,

ST. PAUL'S CHURCH YARD, AND WATERLOO PLACE.

1840.

GILBERT & RIVINGTON, Printers, St. John's Square, London.

The following Works, all in single volumes, or pamphlets, and recently published, will be found more or less to uphold or elucidate the general doctrines inculcated in these Tracts:

Bp. Taylor on Repentance, by Hale.-Rivingtons.

Bp. Taylor's Golden Grove.-Parker, Oxford.

Vincentii Lirinensis Commonitorium, with translation.—Parker, Oxford.

Pusey on Cathedrals and Clerical Education.-Roake and Varty. Hook's University Sermons.-Talboys, Oxford.

Pusey on Baptism (published separately).-Rivingtons.

Newman's Sermons, 4 vols.-Rivingtons.

Newman on Romanism, &c.-Rivingtons.

The Christian Year.-Parker, Oxford.
Lyra Apostolica.-Rivingtons.

Perceval on the Roman Schism.-Leslie.

Bishop Jebb's Pastoral Instructions.-Duncan.
Dodsworth's Lectures on the Church.-Burns.
Newman on Suffragan Bishops.-Rivingtons.
Keble's Sermon on Tradition.-Rivingtons.
Memoir of Ambrose Bonwick.-Parker, Oxford.

Hymns for Children on the Lord's Prayer.-Rivingtons.
Law's first and second Letters to Hoadly.-Rivingtons.
Bp. Andrews' Devotions. Latin and Greek.-Pickering.
Hook's Family Prayers.-Rivingtons.

Herbert's Poems and Country Pastor.

Evans's Scripture Biography.-Rivingtons.

Le Bas' Life of Archbishop Laud.-Rivingtons.

Jones (of Nayland) on the Church.

Bp. Bethell on Baptismal Regeneration.-Rivingtons.

Bp. Beveridge's Sermons on the Ministry and Ördinances.-Parker, Oxford.

Bp. Jolly on the Eucharist.

Fulford's Sermons on the Ministry, &c.-Rivingtons.

Rose's Sermons on the Ministry.-Rivingtons.

A Catechism on the Church.-Parker, Oxford.

Russell's Judgment of the Anglican Church.-Baily.
Poole's Sermons on the Creed.-Grant, Edinburgh.
Sutton on the Eucharist.-Parker, Oxford.
Leslie on the Regale and Pontificate.—Leslie.
Pusey's Sermon on November 5.-Rivingtons.
Bishop Wilson's Sacra Privata.-Parker, Oxford.
The Cathedral, a Poem.-Parker, Oxford.

Larger Works which may be profitably studied.

Bishop Bull's Sermons.-Parker, Oxford.
Bishop Bull's Works.-University Press.
Waterland's Works.-Do.

Wall on Infant Baptism.-Do.

Pearson on the Creed.-Do.

Leslie's Works.-Do.

Bingham's Works.-Straker, London.

Palmer on the Liturgy.-University Press.

Palmer on the Church.-Rivingtons.

Hooker, ed. Keble.-Do.