« הקודםהמשך »
either by right or indulgence, sive ex jure, sive ex indulgentia Ecclesiæ.
He admits the xxxviith, so far as relates to the authority of the civil power; denies all temporal and all immediate spiritual jurisdiction of the pope; but alleges, that. by virtue of his primacy, which moderate, he ought to have said immoderaie, church of England men do not deny, he is bound to see that the true faith be maintained ; that the canons be observed every where; and, when any thing is done in violation of either, to provide the remedies prescribed for such disorders by the canon laws, secundum leges canonicas ut malum resarciatur, procurare. As to the rest he is of opinion, that every church ought to enjoy its own liberties and privileges, which the Pope has no right to infringe. He declares against going too far; the expression is vague, but the man probably meant well; in the punishment of heretics, against admitting the inquisition into France, and against war without a just cause.
The xxxviiich and xxxixth articles he approves. Moreover, in the discipline and worship of the church of England he sees nothing amiss; and thinks no attempts should be made to discover, or prove, by whose fault the schism was begun. He further observes, “ that an union between the English and French bishops and clergy may be completed, or at least advanced without consulting the Roman pontiff, who may be informed of the union as soon as it is accomplished, and may be desired to consent to it; that, if he consents to it, the affair will then be finished; and that, even without his consent, the union shall be valid: that, in case he attempts to terrify by his threats, it will then be expedient to appeal to a general council.om He concludes by observing, “ that this arduous matter must first be discussed between a few; and if there be reason to hope that the bishops, on both sides, will agree about the terms of the designed union, that then application must be made to the civil powers, to advance and confirm the work,” to which he wishes all success.
It is from the effect which these proposals and terms made upon archbishop Wake, that it will be most natural
m Unio fieri potest aut saltem promoveri, inconsulto Pontifice, qui, facta unione, de ea admonebitur, ac suppliciter rogabitur, ut velit ei consentire. Si consentiet jam peracta res erit; sin abnuat, nihilominus valebit hæc unio. Et si minas intentet, ad Concilium Generale appellabitur. ,
writings anat a reformally, that
d only be mocnounce all
to form a notion of his sentiments with respect to the church of Rome. It appears evident, from several passages in the writings and letters of this eminent prelate, that he was persuaded that a reformation in the church of Rome could only be made gradually; that it was not probable that they would renounce all their follies at once; but that, if they once began to make concessions, this would set in motion the work of reformation, which in all likelihood, would receive new accessions of vigour, and go on until a happy change were effected. This way of thinking might have led the archbishop to give an indulgent reception to these proposals of Du Pin, which contained some concessions, and might be an introduction to more. And yet we find that Dr. Wake rejected this peace, as insufficient to serve as a basis; or ground work, to the desired union. On receiving the peace, he immediately perceived that he had not sufficient ground for carrying on this negotiation, without previously consulting his brethren, and obtaining a permission from the king for this purpose. Besides this, he was resolved not to submit either to the direction of Dr. Du Pin, nor to that of the Sorbonne, in relation to what was to be retained, or what was to be given up, in the doctrine and discipline of the two churches; nor to treat with the church of Rome upon any other footing, than that of a perfect equality in point of authority and power. He declared more especially, that he would never comply with the proposals made in Dr. Du Pin's, Commonitorium, of which I have now given the contents; observing that, though he was a friend to peace, he was still more a friend to truth ; and that, unless the Roman catholics gave up some of their doctrines and rites, an union with them could never be effected. All this is contained in a letter written by the Archbishop to Mr. Beauvoir, on receiving Du Pin's Commonitorium. This letter is dated August 30, 1718, and the reader will find a copy of it subjoined to this Appendix." About a inonth after, his Grace wrote a letter to Dr. Du Pin, dated October 1, 1718, in which he complains of the tyranny of the pope, exhorts the Gallican doctors to throw off the papal yoke in a national council, since a general one is not to be expected; and declares, that this must be the great preliminary and fundamental principle of the projected union, which being
See this Letter, No. II.
settled, an uniformity might be brought about in other matters, or a diversity of sentiments mutually allowed, without any violation of peace or concord. The archbishop commends, in the same letter, the candour and openness that reigns in the Commonitorium; entreats Dr. Du Pip to write to him always upon the same footing, freely and without disguise and reserve; and tells him, he is pleased with several things in that piece, and with nothing more than with the doctor's declaring it as his opinion, that there is not a great difference between their respective sentiments; but adds, that he cannot at present give his sentiments at large concerning that piece. · Dr. Wake seems to have aimed principally, in this correspondence, at bringing about a separation between the Gallican church and the court of Rome. The terms in which the French divines often spoke about the liberties of their church, might give him some hope that this separation would take place, if ever these divines were countenanced by the civil power of France. But a man of the archbishop's sagacity could not expect that they would enter into an union with any other national church all at once. He acted, therefore, with dignity, as well as with prudence, when he declined to explain himself on the proposals contained in Du Pin's Commonitorium. To have answered ambiguously, would have been mean; and to have answered explicitly, would have blasted his hopes of separating them from Rome, which separation he desired upon the principles of civil and ecclesiastical liberty, independent on the discussion of theological tenets. The archbishop's sentiments in this matter will still appear farther from the letters he wrote to Mr. Beauvoir, in the months of October, November, and December, 1718, and the January following, of which the proper extracts are here subjoined. It appears from these letters that Dr. Wake insisted still upon the abolition of the pope's jurisdiction over the Gallican church, and leaving him no more than a “primacy of rank and honour, and that merely by ecclesiastical authority, as he was once bishop of the imperial city;" to which empty title our prelate seems willing to have consented, provided it was attended with no infringe
He acted, he declinin's Com
o See this letter to Du Pin, No. V, as also the archbishop's letter to Dr. P. Piers de Girardin, No. VI. p See No. IV, VII, VIII, IX, X. VOL. IV,
ment of the independency and privileges of each particular country, and each particular church. " Si quam prærogativam,” says the archbishop in his letter to Girardin, after having defied the court of Rome to produce any precept of Christ in favour of the primacy of its bishop, "ecclesiæ concilia sedis imperialis episcopo concesserint, etsi cadente imperio etiam ea prerogativa excidisse merito possit censeri, tamen, quod ad me attinet, servatis semper regnorum juribus, ecclesiarum libertatibus, episcoporum dignitate, modo in cæteris conveniatur, per me licet, suo fruatur qualicumque Primatu : non ego illi locum primum, non inanem honoris titulum invideo. At in alias ecclesias dominari, &c. hæc nec nos unquam ferre potuimus, nec vos debetis."
It appears farther, from these letters, that any proposals or termis conceived by the archbishop, in relation to this project of union, were of a vague and general nature, and that his views terminated rather in a plan of mutual toleration, than in a scheme for effectuating an entire uniformity. The scheme that seemed to his Grace the most likely to succeed, was, that “the independence of every national church, or any other, and its right to delerinine all matters that arise within itself, should be acknowledged on both sides; that, for points of doctrine, they should agree, as far as possible, in all articles of any moment, as in effect the two churches either already did, or easily might; and in other matters, that a difference should be allowed until God should bring them to an union in them also.” It must be, however, though the expression is still general, that the archbishop was for “ purging out of the public offices of the church all such things as binder a perfect communion in divine service, so that persons coming from one church to the other might join in prayers, and the holy sacrament, and the public service." He was persuaded, that, in the liturgy of the church of England, there was nothing but what the Roman catholics would adopt, except the single Rubric relating to the eucharist; and that in the Romish liturgy there was nothing to which Protestants object, but what the more rational Romanists agree might be laid aside, and yet the public offices be never the
worse, or more imperfect, for the want of it. He therefore thought it proper to make the demands already mentioned the ground work of the project of union, at the beginning of the negotiation ; not that he meant to stop here, but that, being thus far agreed, they might the more easily go farther, descend to particulars, and render their scheme more perfect by degrees.'
The violent measures of the court of Rome against that part of the Gallican church which refused to admit the constitution Unigenitus as an ecclesiastical law, made the archbishop imagine that it would be no difficult matter to bring this opposition to an open rupture, and to engage the persons concerned in it to throw off the papal yoke, whicla seemed to be borne with impatience in France. The despotic bull of Clement XI. dated August 28, 1718, and which begins with the words, Pastoralis officii, was a formal act of excommunication, thundered out against all the anticonstitutionists, as the opposers of the bull Unigenitus were called ; and it exasperated the doctors of the Sorbonne in the highest degree. It is to this that the archbishop alludes, when he says, in his letter to Mr. Beauvoir, dated the 23d of January, 1718," “ At present he, the pope, has put thens out of his communion. We have withdrawn ourselves from his; both are out of communion with him, and I think it is not material on which side the breach lies." But the wished-for separation from the court of Rome, notwithstanding all the provocations of its pontiff, was still far off. Though, on numberless occasions, the French divines showed very little respect for the papal authority, yet the renouncing it altogether was a step, which required deep deliberation, and which, however inclined they might be to it, they could not make, if they were not seconded by the state. But from the state they were not likely to have any countenance. The regent of France was governed by the abbe Du Bois, and the abbe Du Bois was aspiring eagerly after a cardinal's cap. This circumstance, not more unimportant than many secret connexions and trivial views that daily influence the course of public events, the transactions of government, and the fate of nations, was sufficient to stop the Sorbonne and its doctors in the midst of their career; and in effect, it contributed greatly
u See the letters subjoined, No. X.