Englishmen is realized, that Christianity is part of the common law of the land? But this is not all. If the Clergyman is bound to reveal in Evidence what has been communicated to him in Confession, he is also bound to reveal it, in case of felony, without waiting to be summoned as a witness at all. If he does not, he is guilty of misprision of felony.* Will a principle, drawing this monstrous consequence after it, be maintained? Shall the Clergyman be subjected to fine and imprisonment for not disclosing to man, what the law of God commands him to conceal? But to this extent the principle, if it be a sound one, must be confessed to lead. On these accounts, with the highest respect for the quarter from which the late dictum proceeded, I venture to protest against it, to say that, while I trust, if such be the law, no minister of the Church of England would feel himself at liberty to comply with it, I at the same time cannot but indulge a hope, that the dictum itself will be found erroneous. But, I return to my discussions with you. * 4 Blackstone, 121. This liability to an Indictment for Misprision of Felony would, perhaps, justify a refusal to answer any question of the kind supposed. But most of my Brethren would probably decline to rest their refusal on such a plea. LETTER XI. Augustine and Pelagius. YOUR next subject is one with which I shall not harass myself. The merits of the dispute between Augustine and Pelagius have no immediate or close connection with our main enquiry; nor do they admit of being discussed with tolerable accuracy in a short or hasty manner. But it would be uncandid in me to dissemble, that I think you have here a manifest advantage. I think Mr. Southey's judgment on the questions between them erroneous, or, at the best, very incomplete, in one main particular, the free-will of man; if that freewill be understood by him to include (as Mr. Southey's language would lead us to suppose) the power of "turning to God," and "work'ing righteousness," without any internal succours of the divine Spirit. That Mr. Southey has not expressly assented to Pelagius's notions on this head, is very true; but that he has not expressly condemned them, when brought immediately under his review, is, I think, to be 66 lamented:-The more so, because the very handsome terms, in which he speaks of Pelagius, might lead to the inference, (which yet, I am persuaded, would not be true,) that in the chief part of his doctrine he considers him to have been right. Of Augustine I will only say, that for talents and learning, for honesty, sincerity, and candour; for meekness, and, in the main,* for charity; for Christian zeal and devotion to the cause of Truth, he is entitled to higher praise, than it is here necessary to give. That notwithstanding all these high qualities, he fell into more dangerous errors than almost any other Father of the Church, is only a lamentable instance of the infirmity of “ poor human na"ture." Bonum virum facilè dixerim, magnum libenter. * I say, in the main; because I cannot join you in giving unqualified praise for charity to the author of the following sentence, which is, however, made part of your Holy Canons. Decret. Greg. 1. v. tit. 7. Firmissimè tene, et nullatenùs dubites, omnem hæreticum vel schismaticum cum diabolo et angelis ejus æterni ignis incendio participandum, nisi ante finem vitæ Catholicæ fuerit incorporatus et redintegratus ecclesiæ. Aug. de Fide Cath. LETTER XII. Transubstantiation-Real Presence as maintained by the Test Act. Adoration of the Or the truth or falsehood of the doctrine of Transubstantiation, it is no part of my present business to treat. And I am glad that it is not; for I could have no hope of setting in a new or clearer light a question, which for centuries has been discussed by the ablest and most learned of men. Happily, too, I have in this instance no reason to complain of any wish on the part of yourself, or Dr. Milner, to disguise or dissemble the doctrine of your Church. Here, therefore, it might be expected that I should have nothing left to do: but this, I am sorry to say, is far from being the case. and your reverend friend's labours on this subject will give me some trouble; and not least in endeavouring to discover what you are both about. You applaud him to the very Echo for the great ability he has shewn in choosing and maintaining his ground. "I do in my heart love a strong Your "argument," you exclaim, and you point to the object of your ardent love in the letters of Dr. Milner in his End of Controversy* on the subject of Transubstantiation. Now, Sir, of the sincerity of this love of yours, I have not the smallest doubt: I only marvel at the singular manner in which it displays itself. So Platonic an affection was, I verily believe, never before exhibited. You not only seek no enjoyment of the object of your love, but you actually run away from it, and never once treat yourself with even a sidelong glance. In plain truth, you do not seem to know what it really is. The main part of Dr. Milner's letters on this subject is directed to shew, that the presence of Christ in the Sacrament is real, not figurative. "This being determined," says he, “it "will be time enough, and, in my opinion, it "will not require a long time, to conclude 66 upon the manner of his presence, whether by "Consubstantiation, or Transubstantiation."† He then says, what amounts to this, that "the language of the Church of England is * "Book of the Roman-Catholic Church," &c. p. 116. where there is also reference to two other works of Dr. Milner, of which I know nothing. + End of Controversy, p. 268. |