schism caused by the rival claims of doubtful Popes-In such a case a General Assembly of Bishops has a right to settle the question between the competitors-Its authority is limited-The doctrine of the Pope's Superiority to the Council is the doctrine of antiquity. IV. Occasion of the Four Articles of ConstanceThey are opposed by the Cardinals and Bishops of Italy-A double question concerning these Four Articles. V. They were not proposed in the Synod as matters of Faith. VI. They do not concern the Church in its normal state-They were proposed by the Gerson faction in the wider sense, but adopted in the narrower. VII. The Decree of the Pseudo-Synod of Basle has no authority in the matter-Miserable end of the SynodConduct of Catholic England towards it-It was fully condemned in the General Council of Florence. VIII. The Ecumenical Synod of Florence defines as a matter of Faith the Divine Supremacy of the Pope-The Eastern Church in the Florentine Council fully accepted that definition-It implies the Superiority of the Pope to the General Council, although, out of prudence, this was not explicitly stated. IX. Groundless objection against the foregoing interpretation drawn from the Greek text of the Decree. X. This doctrine was always professed by antiquity- Cause of the decay of Gallicanism in France Catholic maxims of the French Clergy before the Assembly of 1682-Conclusion of the Section.

CONCLUSION.

ANGLICANISM : ITS ORIGIN, NATURE, AND EFFECTS-ONLY REMEDY FOR ITS EVILS.

(pp. 210--228.)

I. Tendencies and difficulties of the High Church Party in England-Their inconsistent proposal about limiting the Papal Authority-True origin of the English Schism. II. The Apostacy of the Sixteenth Century-Anglican Schism the work of KingsDr. Pusey's twofold mistake in the matter-Schism of Henry VIII. consummated before the Bull of Excommunication, and the work of the King alone. III. The Church of England did not reform herself under Henry VIII.-Abject prostration of the English Clergy since the act of schism. IV. The Reformation carried out by Henry's supreme and uncontrolled authority. V. Dread and abhorrence of the Papacy a necessary consequence of schism and heresy Mr. Palmer's singular remark on the obedience due

to the Pope. VI. Effects of the rejection of Papal Authority in England-Dr. Pusey's erroneous estimate of the present state of the Anglican Church-The last spark of life in it near extinction. VII. The re-establishment of the English Church is to be expected from her submission to Rome-Grounds for hopes of her conversion.

ERRATUM.

In p. 19, note 50, the author cited from memory a passage from Ammianus Marcellinus, and the words are erroneously given. They are as follows: "Id enim ille (Constantius) Athanasio semper infestus, licet sciret impletum, tamen auctoritate quâ potiores æternæ Urbis Episcopi firmari desiderio nitebatur ardenti."L. xv., Hist., c. vii., p. 99. Lugd., 1693.

THE

SUPREME AUTHORITY

OF

THE POPE.

I.

INTRODUCTORY

CHAPTER.

"THE doctrine of the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome over the universal Church is the point on which all other controversies between the Roman and the other Churches turn: for if our Lord Jesus Christ instituted any official supremacy of one bishop in the whole Catholic Church, to endure always, and if this supremacy be inherited by the Bishop of Rome, it will follow, that the Catholic Church is limited to the Roman Communion; and that the councils, doctrines, and traditions of that Communion are binding on the whole Christian world." With these words, Mr. Palmer begins Part VII. of his Treatise on the Church of Christ.1 We most willingly adopt them in beginning this book on the Supremacy of the Roman Pontiffs, the more readily because Mr. Palmer expresses in them the views of a large and influential party.

Dr. Harold Browne, the present Bishop of Ely, who probably had in view this part of Mr. Palmer's work in commenting on Article XXXVII., expresses

1 Palmer: Treatise on the Church of Christ, pt. vii., c. i, vol. ii., p. 369. London, 1842.

B

"the supreme

the same opinion. "If once," he says, authority of the Roman Patriarch is conceded, all other Roman doctrines seem to follow as of course. And so it will probably be found, that all converts to the Roman Church have been led to it from a conviction of the necessity of being in communion with the Supreme Pontiff, not from persuasion of the truth of particular dogmas." We gladly admit that Mr. Palmer and Dr. Browne have well understood and fairly state the full bearing of the matter in controversy. For in truth the main, the capital question between Catholicism and its opponents, turns entirely on the Pope's Primacy of divine right over the universal Church. Were Dr. Pusey and the whole High Church party to receive the Catholic doctrines of Transubstantiation, of Purgatory, of Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, of the Immaculate Conception, &c.; were they to hold all Catholic dogmas as explicitly as the schismatic Greek Church-they would be substantially no nearer to the true Church of Christ so long as they denied the claims of the Bishop of Rome. The true Church of Christ is one body: hence, no one can be a member of the body unless he be subject to the visible head which rules over the body.

II. The subject-matter of this work is by no means novel. Able and learned theologians have long since published many elaborate treatises upon this theme. The writer's purpose is not to exhibit under a new shape the results of their successful labours, but to meet the challenge implied in some modern publications, and chiefly in a late work of Dr. Pusey. The object of the book is to prove as succinctly as possible, how wide of the mark are the blows aimed against that supreme divinely instituted authority, and that the arms wielded

2 Dr. Browne: An Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, Art. XXXVII., sect. ii., pp. 802, 3. London, 1856.

3 Eirenicon.

are unsuited to the purpose for which they are employed. The writer will consider in the first place the divinely conferred supremacy of the Roman Pontiff, not only as an historical fact acknowledged by all Christian antiquity, but also as a matter of right, based upon the authority of Scripture itself. In a succeeding volume, the Infallibility of the Pope will be treated with reference to its foundations, extension and consequences. But, to proceed with method and clearness, the opinions held on the supremacy by Anglicans in general, and by Dr. Pusey himself, must first be examined.

III. Dr. Pusey, in terms, does not question that there is a visible head of the Church. In his Eirenicon he hints that he and his friends do not deny the visible head of the Church any more than the Eastern Church owns the monarchy of the.Bishop of Rome. + And in the famous letter addressed by him to the Weekly Register (November 26, 1865), he declares that he "readily recognizes the primacy of the Bishop of Rome: the bearings of that primacy upon other local churches he believes to be matter of ecclesiastical, not of divine, law." Moreover, in the Vindication of Tract XC., Dr. Pusey, in accordance with the Thirty-nine Articles, denies "that the Bishop of Rome has any lawful claims to spiritual supremacy over England.' Nevertheless, he adds: "it may be said that a primacy of order and the claim that no council should be considered œcumenical and authoritative which lacked the concurrence of so eminent a see, as they will abundantly satisfy both the concessions of any of the early Fathers and the claims of the earlier Popes, so may they be obviously conceded without any risk to the safety of our Provincial Church."5 In Tract XC. itself we find the

4 Eirenicon, p. 66.

5 Pusey: The Articles treated in the Tract XC., &c., p. 139. Oxford, 1841.