they preach unless they be sent ?" May I, then, here be permitted to inquire, who sent Matthew Parker and his companions? The bishops of the Catholic Church? With the exception of Anthony Kitchen of Landaff, all of them rejected Elizabeth's innovations in religion, and were driven from their sees by the power of the sword. Kitchen himself would not ordain Matthew Parker; and if he had done so, what authority did Kitchen himself possess out of his own diocess of Landaff? He himself was only a suffragan prelate, and a bishop of a very unimportant see. But did not the disinterested and immaculate Barlow give Parker canonical institution and consecration? What, a deposed bishop, and deposed too for the most grievous contempt of the canons, united with peculation and all kind of enormities! And what was Barlow even before his deposition? A suffragan, and nothing more than a suffragan. He had no more power of appointing a bishop to a see, or of giving him canonical institution, than either you or I. Who, then, sent Matthew Parker and his companions? Queen Elizabeth? Tell me, sir, would the Apostles have considered Festus, or Agrippa, or even Cæsar, empowered to make Simon Magus, or any other person, their apostolical successor; or, by a congé d'élire, to appoint him to the apostolical office? The very idea is absurd, it is ludicrous, it is monstrous. Even in your own present civil-ecclesiastical constitution, if some right reverend Jocelyn of Cloyne, or any other like deposed worthy of your communion, were, without obtaining any commission from the head of your religion, or its highest spiritual authorities, but empowered only by the temporal commission of some German prince, to ordain a Wesleyan minister to be a bishop; and if, to improve the matter, he were, like Barlow, to employ a form of ordination which was deemed, and had been denounced as invalid by your Church, and a form too which had also been declared invalid by an act of parliament yet unrepealed; if, I say, some Jocelyn of Cloyne were to ordain a Wesleyan, in this manner, to a pretended episcopacy, and this Wesleyan were then, in the same manner, to begin to ordain others of his own kidney to the office of Anglican prelates, would your Church, do you think, receive such men as partakers in a right of exercising an authority in your religion, co-ordinate with that of your own Anglican hierarchy, and your vainly boasted apostolical succession? Indignantly you reply, No! And how, then, could Matthew Parker dare, by submitting to an act of Barlow, as impudently uncanonical and irregular, to endeavour to wrest the sceptre of spiritual rule from the spiritual princes of God's people; from the legitimate successors of St. Augustine and the other sainted apostles of our country; from the bishops in communion with the whole of Catholic Christianity? The cases are exactly parallel.

By procuring a deposed prelate to throw over his shoulders a mere mantle of the episcopacy, Parker thought to deceive the ignorant and vulgar; and by the appliance of a vain and nugatory form, he seemed to hope he would rise up as good a prelate as ever any one would desire to see. As Prometheus deemed he had only to make the external figures of men, and then he might easily steal from heaven a vivifying fire, which would bestow upon them the same life, vigour, and rational existence, which were given to the man who was created by the gods. Who, then, sent Matthew Parker and his companions? The temporal authority of Elizabeth? Yes, the temporal powers sent him and his companions, and the temporal powers only. Call them, then, what they were, and not what they were not. They were temporal bishops; they were bishops by the authority of an earthly queen. They were intruders, by the laws of Christ; they were schismatics by the laws of primitive Christianity; they were deceiving phantoms of prelates, by the laws of the everlasting Gospel. "I did not send them, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied."

my

It inflicts upon me a pain, which probably you will give me little credit for suffering, to be obliged to employ a language I should be most happy to be able to eschew. For many living members of the Protestant clergy of England, I cherish a high respect and esteem; for the memory of others, some of them near and dear to me, I entertain a regard hallowed by the tears of sorrow and regret at their departure to that bourne from which they will never return. But, sir, it has now become my imperative duty, to manifest to the world the true character of that pretended apostolical succession, by which even these dear and respected individuals gained their orders and mission as clergymen. The ancient religion has now been attacked in a manner that compels me to strain every nerve to repel its assailants. I must stand up boldly to defend the standard of faith, even if my dearest friend were to range himself in the ranks of our opponents. Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas. And when a Dr. Pusey, in his letter to the Bishop of Oxford, has the effrontery to assert that "there is also Anti-Christianism in the system of Rome;" when a Scotch Doctor is summoned to London on a kind of Sacheverell expedition, and tells his admiring and wondering audience, that the primitive form of Christianity, and that which has civilized the world, is "the most fitted to blind and vitiate a population;" when even Mr. Gladstone can talk of "Roman arts infusing poison;" when a lion-hearted genius tells his audience, when speaking of Catholicism, "there will be no peace in Israel while that woman Jezabel liveth;" it is not the time for me to employ sweet and honeyed language. I must drop the foil, when you and your friends

have begun to fire red-hot shot. The elegant expression, "there will be no peace in Israel while that woman Jezabel liveth," resembled the mild language of a gentle soldier with the ominous name of Bradshaw, in which he was supposed to allude to the beauteous majesty of great Britain. But as the latter gentlemen declared that his melodious tones were only intended to chaunt the praises of the ministers of the Crown; so the author of the Jezabel figure, assured the estimable Earl of Radnor, that he purported, by his memorable metaphor, to designate the holy Catholic communion. Now, for my part, I do not at all object that our religion being be compared to "that woman Jezabel." For Mr. M'Neile could not have beheld any resemblance to Catholicism in the circumstance recorded in the fourth book of Kings, that Jezabel painted herself upon the approach of Jehu. The holy Catholic Church never wishes to be presented to the public gaze but in the ornaments of her own natural beauty and comeliness. It is true she is often painted; but she is never painted but in false colours, and that by the hands of her opponents. Nor could the orator have thought that the Catholic religion has deprived any one of his vineyard, as Naboth was robbed by Jezabel. It is she herself that has been robbed of no small portion of her vineyard. What could never have been taken from her by the law of right, has been seized by the might of the oppressor. She is the oppressed, the injured, and the plundered Naboth. And there is not one glorious religious monument of antiquity in this country, that does not present a mournful record of the fact, that the holy Catholic religion has been deprived of a portion of her beautiful vineyard, by a wicked Queen Elizabeth, and her no less mean and wicked parasites. The point of the orator's comparison, therefore, could only be in this, that as so many of her enemies were barking at her, and shewing their teeth in a manner so menacing and truly appalling, the orator must have apprehended and trembled, and warned us of the melancholy likelihood, that the Catholic religion, like the unfortunate Jezabel, was just upon the very point of being devoured by dogs. And thus modern Rome ought to be as grateful to this orator for his salutary forewarnings, as ancient Rome even made sacred the saving and propitious bird, which, by its euphonious cautionings, preserved to the eternal city the fortress of its capitol.

CHAPTER VIII.

Though the word Catholic means universal, and our Church is not universal, yet it is no less the Catholic Church. I know it is called Protestant likewise, that is, protesting against every branch, and even the whole stock of the Catholic Church; but this does not alter the case; it is still the Catholic Church. I own I don't like the term Protestant, and have been long trying to wash the stain away; but I cannot, and therefore I have come to the conclusion that it is sometimes one, and sometimes the other, and always both together. Yes, your Majesty, I am bound as a successor of the Apostles to tell your Majesty, that our Church is both Catholic and Protestant. I hope the Holy Spirit is with me while I thus speak, and with you while you thus hear, that I may not give, and you not take offence."-Dr. Hook.

1. The Nestor of the Anglican communion, the Reverend Dr. Hook of Leeds, having baited himself most enticingly, that he may captivate an admiring congregation, greedy to swallow any thing that he may bring with him to satisfy their craving appetites, gravely propounds to them a theology, mystical for its obscurity and not for its depth. Though the Church of England is not the Catholic Church, yet it is the Catholic Church; though it protests against the ancient religion, yet it is the ancient religion; though it is the Protestant form of faith, yet it is the Catholic form of faith. It is the Protestant truth, and it is the Catholic truth; it is the spotted panther, and it is the milk-white hind; it is the synagogue of Samaria, and it is the temple of Sion. He hopes, moreover, that he is led into this wilderness of absurdities by the Spirit of God. We all know that there are spirits of darkness as well as spirits of light; and the Doctor's preaching being of such a darksome character as to be perfectly unintelligible to any one excepting to himself, it is more probable that the spirit with which he was gifted, was of the former description. That he is a successor of the Apostles he takes for granted. It is true that the Apostles were wont to converse as men quite ignorant and untutored, until the Spirit of the Father, that Spirit so opposite to that of the Doctor's, was pleased to instruct them in a Gospel, which though of the very sublimest character, they were to convey to the minds of the faithful, in language comprehensible to the humblest capacity. If, then, the Doctor be an heir to the gifts and to the talents of the Apostles, they are such as the Apostles possessed before they had been fitted for the glorious ministry of the conversion of the universe.

2. Sir, The glorious perpetuity of the unbroken apostolical succession of its ministers in the holy Catholic religion, is one of the strongest evidences of the Almighty's fidelity to his promises. It is an earnest of the security we possess, by remaining

in the ark of the new and holier dispensation. It is the key-stone of the arch over which we pass to eternity, far removed from the contending waters of religious error and infidel indifference; it is the seal by which the Beloved has attached his spouse to his heart, and secured her upon his right arm; it is the evidence of his love, and the sure token of his protecting power. Thy children, O holy Church (exclaims the great St. Augustin), shall supply the place of thy Fathers, that is of the Apostles who gave birth to thee. But as these could not always remain corporally with us, perhaps thou hast forsaken us when they quitted this world. By no means. Thy sons have been substituted in their room-they have been made bishops. Do not imagine then, O Church, that thou art abandoned because thou seest no longer Peter and Paul. The paternity of thy children hath increased, and thou shalt appoint them princes over the whole earth."-In Psalm 44. This perpetuation of the Catholic hierarchy, by the consecration of new bishops to fill the episcopal chairs of the departed, we continually behold accomplished in every portion of the Christian world. On the hill of God, though we may lose the company of an anointed Samuel, we always meet with other prophets to show forth to us the wonderful workings of Divine Providence; and as the angels of the Church reach the abodes of their rest near the throne of the Divinity, others are placed in their stead at the foot of the mystical ladder of Jacob. "It is acknowledged (writes the Protestant Davis), that the Church of Rome, in its original state, was apostolical and pure. And even in the present day it has persevered in all the fundamental articles of the true and Christian faith. And the sacraments ordained by the Gospel are here administered by a priesthood which derives its appointment by an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles, and its authority from our Great Master."

3. In rejecting at the same time, as null and void, the ordination of the ministers of the Church of England, we are not led to do so by a spirit of party, or by the slightest feeling of religious animosity. We are compelled to it by the necessity of the case. Watchful over the ordinances of venerable antiquity, the Catholic Church will not permit the re-baptism of a Separatist. She will not allow any other sacrament administered by the most rebellious child to be reiterated, if that child were once truly ordained to the sacred office of the priesthood, and employed the proper forms of the Church in his unlawfuĺ administration of a sacred institution. Be he Arian, let him become Socinian; whether a Jansenist, or a Monothelite; he who is once a priest or a bishop, is always a priest or bishop; and though in schism he will lose every portion of spiritual jurisdiction, yet his power of order will remain; and sacraments