CHAP. XVII.

Of the Discourses written by Romanists reflecting upon the validity of the orders of the Church of England; with the Churchmen's replies.

181.The Church of England truly represented.

See Contin. p. 55. Is not this the same as No. 160 supra? See Contin. p. 36. Wake appears to be mistaken when he says that "the occasion of reviving this matter," of the validity of English ordination, was given by a little scurrilous libel that went abroad," under the name of "The Church of England truly Represented,” in answer to whose Calumnies three discourses were published, meaning Nos. 182, 186, and 184 infra. For the little scurrilous libel" was quite different, and is printed in Burnet's answer (No. 182 infra), and is there entitled " Arguments to prove the Invalidity of the orders of the Church of England." It appears also from what Burnet says (Pref. p. 27) that it had not been printed, but only given about in MS. to such persons as were known to be wavering. No. 186, however, was avowedly written in answer to No. 160; and No. 184 professes to be a reply to "some scattered objections of Mr. Webster of Linne," but makes no mention of No. 160, or any other tract on that side. Wake says that of these three discourses "two are new, and the other only reprinted," which probably means that a second edition of Burnet's tract (the first ed. having appeared in 1677, 8vo) was brought out in consequence of the publication of No. 160. J. H. T.

The arguments of the Romanists are briefly recapitulated in No. 154 supra.

C. L. 182. A vindication of the ordinations of the Church of England, in which it is demonstrated that all the essentials of ordination, according to the practice of the primitive and Greek Churches are still retained in our Church. In answer to a

paper written by one of the Church of Rome to prove the nullity of our orders; and given to a Person of quality. The second edition. [Anon. By Gilbert Burnet, D.D., afterwards Bp. of Salisbury.] pp. 94, with title and Pref. pp. 30, Chiswell's list of books at the end pp. 4, 4to Lond. (Ric. Chiswell) pp. 94, Pref. xxviii. 4to Lond. 1688

(Gibson, vol. iii. fol. 1.)

See Cat. No. 161. Contin. p. 54. The first edition of this book was printed in 8vo 1677. The "Paper" is printed at length, p. 1. The "Person of quality" to whom it was given was Lady Terwhitt, at whose house Burnet and Stillingfleet had the conference with Coleman, 3 April, 1676, see pp. 174-6 supra. Speaking of this conference Burnet says (Own Times, vol. i. p. 395); “Soon after that, the lady, who continued firm upon this conference, was possessed with new scruples about the validity of our ordinations. I got from her the paper that was put in her hand, and answered it; and she seemed satisfied with that likewise. But afterwards the uneasiness of her life prevailed more on her than her scruples did, and she changed her religion." J. H. T.

183. Concio ad clerum, habita coram Academia Cantabrigiensi, C. L. Junii 11° Ao 1687, pro gradu Baccalaur. in S. Theologia. Ubi vindicatur vera et valida Cleri Anglicani, ineunte Reformatione, ordinatio. Cui accessit concio habita Julii 3, 1687, de canonica Cleri Anglicani ordinatione. Latine reddita et aucta a Thoma] Browne, S.T.B. Coll. D. Joh. Evang. Soc. Οὕτως ἡμᾶς λογιζέσθω ἄνθρωπος, &c. 1 Cor. iv. i. Annexum est Instrumentum consecrationis Matth. Parker, Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, ex MS. C.C.C. Cant. First sermon pp. 38, with Pref. and title pp. 14. Second sermon pp. 66, 4to Cantabrigiæ (Jo. Hayes) 1688. (Reprinted 8vo Lond. 1731.) See Cat. No. 162. Contin. p. 55. Fasti Oxon. vol. ii. col. 220. The second sermon has this separate title: "Concio habita coram Academia Catabrigiensi Julii 3° A° 1687, ubi vindicatur canonica Cleri Anglicani ineunte Reformatione ordinatio: a T. Browne, S. T. B. Coll. D. Joh. Evang. Soc. Xwpnoатe nμâs, &c. 2 Cor. vii. 1." 4to Cantabrigiæ (Jo. Hayes) 1688. J. H. T.

"The validity of the consecration of Archbishop Parker is a matter of much importance to the English Church. For if it could be proved, as the old Papists endeavoured to bring it about, that he was no true Archbishop or Bishop," by reason of the want of, or irregularity of consecration, then "as a sequel all the Bishops that he afterwards consecrated should be no Bishops, because he was none himself, and therefore could not consecrate nor give order to others," &c. An Account of the Rites and Ceremonies which took place at the Consecration of Archbishop Parker, with an Introductory Preface and Notes. Communicated to the Cambridge Antiquarian Society by the Rev. James Goodwin, B.D. Cambridge, 1841. See also The Succession of Bishops in the Church of England unbroken; or the Nag's Head Fable refuted, &c., by the Rev. E. C. Harington, B.D., 1852, and No. 2 supra. It is rejected by Lingard himself as a palpable forgery.

C.L. 184. A short defence of the orders of the Church of England, as by law establish'd: against some scatter'd objections of Mr. Webster of Linne. By a Presbyter of the Diocess of Norwich [i.e. Luke Milburne, minister of Yarmouth.]

pp, 36, 4to Lond. (Randal Taylor) 1688 See Cat. No. 163. Contin. p. 55. I do not know who was the Mr. Webster of Linne, against whom this tract is written, nor where his "scatter'd objections" are to be found. J. H. T.

185. A plain answer to a Popish priest, questioning the orders of the Church of England, drawn up for the satisfaction of his parishioners, by a minister of that Church. The second edition, from the author's own correct copy. To which is now annext, An answer to the Oxford Animadverter's Reflections upon it. By the same Author.

pp. 32, 4to Lond. (Sam. Smith) 1689 See Cat. No. 164. Ath. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 1000. This tract is by Abednego Seller, who although he left Oxford without a degree, was a man of deep and real learning. He was Rector of Combeinton Head in Devonshire, and ejected as a nonjuror at the Revolution. The first edition was published 1688, 4to, and was soon after answered by Thos. Fairfax, a Jesuit of St. Omers, of the Fairfax family

in Yorkshire, one of the persons forced upon Magd. Coll. as a fellow
by James II. This answer appeared at the end of a book printed at
the licensed press of Obadiah Walker, Univ. Coll., entitled Twenty
one questions further demonstrating the Schism of the Church of
England, &c., 1688. Where Fairfax's answer has been printed with
this title: "Some reasons tendered to impartial people why Dr. Henry
Maurice, Chaplain to his Grace of Canterbury, ought not to be traduc'd
as a Licenser of a Pamphlet entitled, A plain answer to a Popish
Priest,'" &c. J. H. T.

"Fairfax was appointed in the reign of James II. professor of
Philosophy in Magdalen College, Oxford. When the revolution burst
forth in all its horrors, he was attacked in the streets of that city,
dashed on the ground and trampled upon, and narrowly escaped being
murdered outright." Dr. Oliver.

The first edition of "A Plain Answer" contains 10 pp. 1688.

C. L.

The second edition concludes with the doctrine of Intention. This C. L. subject is fully discussed not only by Marsden, but in Mason's Vindication of the Church of England. See Index in Lindsay's Translation.

186. A defence of the ordinations and ministry of the Church of C. L. England. In answer to the scandals raised or revived against them, in several late pamphlets, and particularly in one intituled The Church of England truly represented, &c. Toλunτai avládeis, &c. 2 Pet. ii. x. [Anon. By Edmund Τολμηταὶ αὐθάδεις, Whitfield, B.D., fellow of Kings Coll. Cambridge.] pp. 64, Title and "To the Reader" pp. 6, 4to Lond. (Brab. Aylmer)

1688

See Cat. No. 165. This Tract is in answer to No. 160 or No. 181 supra. J. H. T.

From which is cited (p. 3) the passage referred to by Macaulay. "Another Roman Catholic treatise.. begins by informing us that the ignis fatuus of reformation which had grown to a comet by many acts of spoil and rapine had been ushered into England, purified of the filth which it had contracted among the lakes of the Alps.”Vol ii. p. 110.

This defence relates to the whole contest, and takes in both the old and new objections already answered by Usher, Mason, Bramhall, &c.

EE

"Allowing that all the Christianity which these after ages can pretend to here in Britain ows its original either to Pope Eleutherius and his Legates in the reign of King Lucius, or else to Pope Gregory the First and Austin the monk his deputy, in that of King Ethelbert, I say allowing all this, and letting them take their choice which of these two Popes they will make the source and Fountain of this Succession, we are able to derive ours through this channel as well as themselves." It is remarkable that Pope Eleutherius sent only presbyters for the conversion of the Britons, and consequently they could not have derived episcopal succession from Rome. Most probably they found bishops here, as this institution came down from the first planting of Apostolical Churches, and Lucius, like Constantine, only confirmed the Christian religion by a national establishment. Bishops of British Churches were present at the Councils of Arles, Nice, Sardica and Ariminum, in which canons were passed by metropolitans and other bishops without the confirmation of the Patriarch of Rome. It is also remarkable that Augustine was consecrated bishop by Etherius, Archbishop of Arles, and that his predecessors had aspired to raise that metropolitan seat into a kind of Pontificate of Gaul. "Under Leo the Great, A.D. 445, the supremacy of the Roman See was brought to the issue of direct assertion on his part, of inflexible resistance on that of his opponent. . . . . . Hilarius, the Archbishop of Arles, inflexibly resisted all the authority of the Pope and of St. Peter; and confronted the Pope with the bold assertion of his unbounded metropolitan power." (Milman's Hist. of Latin Christianity, vol. i. pp. 192-3.) Thus had the British Church not been Metropolitan, it would have been under the jurisdiction of Arles not of Rome, subject not to the Roman Supremacy but to the Gallic Liberties. Notwithstanding that Augustine and his successors acknowledged the primacy of the bishop of Rome, "it does not yet appear that, for above 600 years after, any of them were required at their consecration to take an oath of fidelity and obedience to their lord pope." Burnet's Vindication of the Ordinations of the Church of England, p. 87; Lewis's Life of Dr. Reynold Pecock, p. 122; Mendham's Life of S. Pius V. ad calc.

Stillingfleet's Origines Britannicæ contains a learned history of the antiquity of our church, which was probably founded by St. Paul, according to bishops Stillingfleet and Burgess, Williams and other divines.