every well-constituted government, and which sustains the fabric of the British Constitution.

"I contend, then, that if the spiritual authority be exercised, to its full extent, by a power distinct from that of the State, and assuming to itself a supremacy in that respect, it must, so far, become a direct infringement upon the temporal authority of the sovereign. But if it be said, that, even in this respect, the supremacy arrogated by the Pope over individuals of other states than his own, is become so mitigated, or so diminished, as no longer to give just cause of alarm or offence: then it will be necessary, in order to judge rightly of this, that we examine somewhat more particularly in what this spiritual supremacy actually consists.

"Spiritual power, is two-fold; and the two parts of which it is composed have been clearly defined by one of the most distinguished ornaments of our Episcopal Bench, whom many of your lordships must have often heard in this House with admiration and delight;-I mean, Bishop Horsley. In a speech on the subject we are now discussing, that eminent prelate remarked the just and proper distinction between the 'power of order' and the power of jurisdiction; both appertaining to spiritual authority, but quite distinct, and of distinct origin.' The power of order, is simply and purely spiritual, and can emanate from none but a spiritual authority. It is that power which confers the ca

pability of exercising spiritual functions; or, in other words, qualifies a person to minister in sacred things. This power the sovereign, the temporal ruler of the state, being a layman, cannot possibly confer. He has it not himself, and therefore cannot communicate it to others. It originates in another and a higher source. And this is all that properly belongs to the power of order. The power of jurisdiction goes much farther than this. It extends to the entire government of the ecclesiastical body, to the appointment of particular persons to exercise spiritual functions throughout the State, to the rules and regulations by which they shall be directed, or to their respective remunerations according to the stations they hold in the ministry; in short, to every thing which, in ecclesiastical, no less than in civil polity, it is the duty of the legislative and executive government of the country to provide, for the general benefit of the community.

"Now it is manifest, that this latter power, though spiritual in its purpose and effect, cannot be exercised by any other authority than that of the State, much less by any foreign power, without a palpable interference with that authority; neither can it be carried into effect without a perceptible and powerful influence upon men's temporal interests.

"It is, however, asserted, that the power claimed in modern times, by the See of Rome,

is nothing more than that which belongs to the church only, and which has been expressly disclaimed by the Sovereigns of this country as a part of their prerogative. Let us examine into the accuracy of this assertion.

"The true line of distinction I apprehend, to be this-spiritual functions belong exclusively to the church; spiritual jurisdiction belongs to the State, as allied to the church, and although exercised by the church, is derived from the State. Nowhere, perhaps, has this distinction been more clearly or strongly marked than in the 37th article of our Church, and in Queen Elizabeth's injunctions, which may be considered as decisive upon the point.

"The Puritans, it is well known, took offence at the assertion of the Regal Supremacy in spiritual concerns; misconceiving, as it appears, or misrepresenting, its real intent and meaning. To quiet such scruples, and at the same time to re-assert the doctrine in its full and proper sense, the 37th Article declares as follows:- The Queen's Majesty hath the chief power in this realm of England, and other her dominions, unto whom the chief government of all estates of this realm, whether they be ecclesiastical or civil, in all causes, doth appertain, and is not, nor ought to be, subject to any foreign jurisdiction.

"Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief government (by which titles we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be

offended,) we give not to our princes the ministering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments: the which thing the injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen, do most plainly testify; but that only prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly princes, in Holy Scriptures, by God himself, i. e. that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and restrain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil doers.

"The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England.

"Here, nothing is disclaimed, on the part of the sovereign, but that which, it is manifest, cannot appertain to any temporal power, the right of exercising spiritual functions. And what are those functions? The ministering either of God's Word, or of the Sacraments.' The Sovereign though Supreme Head both of Church and State, cannot take upon himself to preach, to baptize, to administer the Eucharist, to order, to confirm, or to consecrate. These are offices purely and exclusively spiritual: and Queen Elizabeth rejects the very supposition of their belonging to the sovereign as a slanderous construction of her asserted claim to supremacy. But she still maintains and abates nothing of her title to supreme jurisdiction; nor will allow any estates of the realm, whether ecclesiastical or

L

civil, to be subject to any foreign jurisdiction. Her authority is declared (as had been more fully set forth in her injunctions, twelve years before) to extend to all manner of persons born within these realms, of what estate, either ecclesiastical or temporal, soever they be; so as no other foreign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them.' Thus do the injunctions and articles agree together; and from both is drawn the conclusion, that The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England:'-no jurisdiction of any kind.

"I think it clearly follows from hence, that according to the fundamental principles of our Protestant Constitution, no subject can be considered as paying full and undivided allegiance to the sovereign, whose notions of the regal supremacy do not come up to this standard. If spiritual jurisdiction or authority, in whatever degree, be acknowledged as the right of some other potentate, that, whether it be more or less, is so much subtracted from the supreme authority claimed, and justly claimed, by the Head of the State; and the subject who is placed in such a predicament can pay only a divided allegiance to his rightful sovereign; an allegiance, which, however sincere and faithful as far as it extends, is avowedly imperfect in this respect; and, consequently, curtails his right to the same favour and privileges, the same degree of trust and