"Still," replied he, "there are many in both those countries, and many more will follow. It is our desire and our hope, to obtain the same influence in England that we have in Italy. Protestantism in that country already inclines greatly towards Catholicism, and will do so still more, in proportion as the Jesuits gain ground there.
"Our success would be yet more rapid were we not impeded by other priests and monks, who, in their ignorant fanaticism, imprudently attack the Protestants, and thus only strengthen their opposition to the Church of Rome. We, on the other hand, have the art of introducing ourselves among them without exciting attention; consequently, without creating suspicion or alarm. Apparently occupied with our own affairs, we appear to take no notice of those of other people. We readily associate with them, sit at their tables, and converse on general topics; we never oppose or contradict what they may advance. Do they talk of the Bible? we are ready to talk on the same subject. We always, however, have some strong arguments in reserve, for which most of them are not prepared; scholastic doctrines, which the Bible does not disavow, and which are received with great willingness. So that while, on one hand, we lament that there should be an Episcopacy separate from Rome, we talk largely, on the other, on the important doctrine that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles; and thus prepare the way for the conclusion, that the Pope is the successor of St. Peter. In fact, you will find, that in consequence of this doctrine of Apostolic succession, the Episcopalians generally entertain a respect for the Chair of St. Peter, in which the chief of the Bishops is seated.
"The principle being admitted, the consequence naturally follows. And it is to be noted, that if any one speaks slightingly of the Roman Episcopacy, the Bishop of London is the first person to reprove him; and moreover, the English Episcopacy calls that of Rome her sister. It is not so, however, with the Presbyterians and other sects. The Church of England retains the two Sacraments of Baptism and the Holy Supper; both of which, according to their belief, and according to ours also, confer sanctifying grace, (gratiam sanctificantem,) not only ex opere operato, but also ex opere operantis, and thus the minister becomes an advocate, sine qua non, for justification in Baptism, and for the real presence in the Eucharist. Should a doubt be expressed as to the sacred character of the minister, or as to the efficacy of the consecration of a bishop, as practised in their Church; should their white robes, or their Book of Prayer be criticised, the same outcry is raised by them, as would be raised by the sandalled friar, if you ridiculed his tunic, or his legends of St. Francis.
"The state of the case is this: Missionaries in general are imprudent, and begin by depreciating points which their opponents most especially hold in reverence. We, on the contrary, take care to inform them that these matters, inasmuch as they are traditions of greater or less antiquity, are deserving of consideration; and the more so, as they come near the traditions of the Apostolic Church of Rome.
"Do you think the Episcopalian clergy would ever consent to change their book of prayer? We might as soon be expected to give up our mass-book and breviary. They cannot therefore blame us if we are tenacious in keeping to our ritual, liturgy, and other ecclesiastical observances.
"In the Church of Rome there are canons, whose office we ourselves deem objectionable; those, for instance, who, for a sum of money, often of considerable amount, make it their business to pray for other people, (heaven knows what sort of prayers are those they mutter in the choir.) Well, in the English Church, every bishop has his canons, who have the negotium in otio, and otium in negotio, to go every day into the choir, to repeat twice a-day the same service; and for this easy task they are well paid in good English pounds sterling. Suppose now, a canon from St. Peter's at Rome should present himself at the Cathedral of St. Paul's, or at Westminster Abbey, you would find that the reverend canons there would receive him with more courtesy than they would show to either Luther or Calvin.
"Observe now," he continued, "our method of proceeding in England. We get acquainted with the Episcopalians; our time would be lost with others; and while we praise their doctrines, we endeavour to show how near they are to our own. We compare the respective Churches, their bishops with ours, the canons with the laws of discipline, the Mass-book with the Prayer-book, the robe with the surplice, and so on. The only point on which we cannot assimilate, is our celibacy, and their matrimony; and here we argue that as that is a matter of discipline, the Church might alter it, should it be deemed expedient to do so; the pope having the power to dispense with the observance.
"If any one complains that with us the cup is not given to the laity, we observe that this, too, might easily be arranged, if there were no other difficulty. But the clergy of the Reformed Church of the present day, both ministers and bishops, have for the most part an idea that the Reformation has taken away much which might have been retained. They begin to be sensible of a certain dryness in their worship, without either an image, or the cross; no one knows why the mitre has been taken from the bishop, and the gown from the priest. We observe to them, that it would not be amiss to restore those customs which are harmless. And thus by degrees, in some churches, we see images set up over the communion table, which give it the appearance of an altar. And if an image is not allowed, at least a handsome cross may be painted and gilded, before which the minister, as he passes, may make his obeisance. The mitre which the bishops no longer wear on their heads, in sign of jurisdiction, is transferred to their coat of arms, their carriages, and their plate; and seeing it thus painted and engraved, the desire naturally arises in the breast of some of them to wear it also.
"Our priests are wedded to their collar, the English ministers to their white cravat. If we had the courage to show ourselves in London in our gowns, I would wager that they also would wish to be clothed in the long black garb, close to the throat, with a single row of buttons."[31]