Hence foolish man, if moderately evil,
Dreams he's a saint because he's not a devil."
Psyche, cant. xxi. 4, 5.
Cf. Bishop Taylor's Life of Christ, part i. sect. v. 9.
Jarltzberg.
Nov. 28, 1853.
P.S.—Not having the fear of Sir Roger Twisden or Mr. Thomas Collis before my eyes, I advisedly made what the latter gentleman is pleased to term a "loose statement" (Vol. viii., p. 631.), when I spoke of the Church of England separating from Rome. As to the Romanists "conforming" for the first twelve (or as some have it nineteen) years of Elizabeth's reign, the less said about that the better for both parties, and especially for the dominant party.[[3]]
Mr. Collis's dogmatic assertions, that the Roman Catholics "conformed" for the twelve years, and that Popes Paul IV. and Pius IV. offered to confirm the Book of Common Prayer if Elizabeth would acknowledge the papal supremacy, are evidently borrowed, word for word, from Dr. Wordsworth's[[4]] Theophilus Anglicanus, cap. vii. p. 219. A careful examination of the evidence adduced in support of the latter assertion, shows it to be of the most flimsy description, and refers it to its true basis, viz. hearsay: the reasoning and inferences which prop the evidence are equally flimsy.
Fuller, speaking of this report, says that it originated with "some who love to feign what they cannot find, that they may never appear to be at a loss." (Ch. Hist., b. ix. 69.)
As the question at issue is one of great historical importance, I am prepared, if called on, to give a summary of the case in all its bearings; for the present I content myself with giving the following references: