“1. Because from the year 1554 it has been the unvarying practice of the Catholic Church so to consider and treat them.
“2. Because there are grave doubts whether Barlow, the consecrator of Parker, had ever himself received episcopal consecration; and, in fact, the probabilities of the case incline more strongly against than in favor of it.
“3. Because the Anglican forms of ordination have been altered from the ancient forms, both by way of mutilation and addition, in such a manner as to exclude, on the part of those participating in the acts enjoined, any intention of conferring or receiving a sacrament, or sacramental grace, or a spiritual character, or any sacerdotal or episcopal power.
“4. Because the same forms have been also altered purposely, with the view of excluding the idea of the priest at his ordination receiving power to offer sacrifice.
“5. Because Anglican bishops and priests, at the time of ordination, join in a profession contrary to the Catholic faith in the holy sacrifice, thus assuming on themselves, by their own act, the spirit and erroneous intentions with which the alterations were made.
“6. Because the meaning here attributed to the Anglican forms receives confirmation from the fact of its being doubtful whether the word ‘priest’ in the Anglican forms of ordination means a priest in the sense of the Catholic Church; that is to say, sacerdos, ‘a sacrificing priest.’
“7. Because the meaning of the same forms is further illustrated from the ‘Order of Administration of Holy Communion’ in the Book of Common Prayer,
which is found to be contrary to the Catholic faith in the doctrines of the holy sacrifice of the Eucharist and the Real Presence” (pp. 373-4).
Let us leave the author’s last words for those who are serious and in earnest, to meditate upon: