in the English Church on this question as to outweigh the decision of Rome, and all the conception you had formed on other grounds of her claim to authority? In my case, as I say, I had no doubt about my Orders at all, and I had absolutely no doubt that Rome is the Catholic Church. A few months after I was received someone wrote to me and said that it was being said on all sides that I still believed in Anglican Orders and that I ought to contradict it. The Cardinal happened to be in Rome at the time; I read him the letter and said, 'I believe absolutely in the authority of the Church; I cannot show more completely that I accept the authority than by the fact that I am about to get ordained, but no one whom I left in the English Church would think me an honest man if I were to say publicly I did not believe in Anglican Orders. They would naturally ask what day and hour I had ceased to believe in them, as I had up to the last ministered in the English Church.' He quite saw and accepted what I said. The other day in France I met a French priest in the train, he asked me what I thought on the subject. I said, ' I accept entirely the Pope's decision.' 'Yes,' he said, 'but what do you personally think.' I said I thought there was more to be said for them than was supposed, and I see no disloyalty and nothing illogical in such a position. I know I am not competent to decide. I never had any confidence in Anglican divines. The authority that by natural temperament and conviction I am perfectly prepared to accept decided against them, and I accept the decision. In Rome I only heard of one man who looks upon the Bull as ex cathedra. I see no reason myself if Leo XIII reopened the question after it had been already decided by more than one Pope, why later on another Pope should not reopen it, if any further evidence came to light. But meantime it never

has or does cause me a shadow of difficulty to submit my own opinion on the matter to what I believe to be the highest authority on earth. Nor do I reason out all the consequences to those I have left and love in the English Church. I know there are many whose shoes I am not worthy to clean, and I know God's power to supply deficiencies, but I know also that that would constitute no sufficient ground of faith for me.

67

April 18, 1904.

I hasten to answer your letter received this morning. I shall answer your questions in order.

(1) First to correct an error. I can, in the most decided way, assure you that your informant is mistaken in saying he or she ever heard me say I believe in the validity of the Orders of the English Church. It would be impossible for me to be mistaken in this matter, and I would ask you to beg this person to contradict it to whomsoever he or she may have said it. The repetition of such things does much harm in holding people back, and I have been fettered with so many things I have neither said nor thought, that I think the person owes it to the cause of Truth to say, at any rate, that if it was thought I said it, the person is mistaken. As to my own personal conviction. When I made up my mind to be received the question of Orders never troubled me. I never had any doubt on the subject; but in making up my mind to be received I felt that, in a question of that kind, if, as I did, I believed Rome to be the Catholic Church, I could not hesitate to accept her judgment. It never occurred to me to be a question to consider, whether I should get ordained. I did so without scruple or

question. To my mind the question is a far larger one than a matter of that kind. Orders do not make a Church, and the Church always has claimed and exercised the right of deciding as to the validity of the Orders of any heretical or sectarian body.

As to past experience of Sacraments in the English Church, I answer as I always have done. I do not care to be logical or to define, and I leave it with God, being deeply grateful for all of good-and I cannot measure it—that I did get in the past. If the question were ever reopened in Rome, and if it were decided that more was to be said for Anglican Orders than was thought, no one would rejoice more than I; but I feel that it is all a very technical question for skilled theologians, and that subjective experiences must not be given undue weight.

(2) As to yourself. I can only say as I was received while I had practically no doubt on the subject of Orders, I of course should feel the same in advising another [to take the same step], if you have as strong a conviction of the authority of Rome, and a readiness to say, 'Whatever my own personal feelings in that matter I can't hesitate to submit to the judgment of the Church.' If, on the other hand, your wish to be received abroad is owing to any feelings of the rights of the English Church in England, I should advise you strongly to defer your reception-in your heart you do not believe in the authority of Rome if you have such a feeling as that. But I am possibly quite mistaken in supposing that your wish to be received abroad has any such meaning.

(3) I certainly think there can be no objection whatever if your wife has made up her mind to be received that she should wait to do it under the circumstances that seem most desirable. I never can agree with those who urge people to act at once, of

course if the delay is not long. I always remember in this connection St. Augustine's remarks about the Temple continuing for some years that the Law might have a decent burial!

May I venture a word of advice. I think you would find it easier and quieter to be received at home than abroad. They make much more of a business of it there, as they are not so used to it. A few of us are living here-four or five priests—and if you cared to come and stay here and to be received here, or while staying here, no one need know anything about it, and we should be delighted to have you. I merely suggest this—you could not be quieter, and we have a chapel in the house.

I should advise you to get your mind quite clear on the subject of Orders. I never could see how it could be a difficulty, if Rome is the Church, the whole Church, and the only Church founded by our Lord-surely she must decide such questions. You may rely upon my keeping your counsel, and we shall be delighted if you care to come and stay here for a bit in any case.

May God guide you aright. It's a hard step to take, but looking at the English Church from outside it soon loses its spell!

68

To another Clergyman

July 4, 1912.

The whole question of Orders, for many years before I became a Catholic, seemed to me a secondary one. What I felt was this. If Rome is the Catholic Church, it is for her to decide what is necessary for the conveyance of Holy Orders. If a man is not ready to trust

N

her in such a matter, it is because in his heart he does not believe she is the Catholic Church. I felt that I did not trust the judgment of the English Church alone, in anything, though personally I never had any doubt, even when I left, as to my Orders. But I never could conceive of a man who on other grounds believed the Roman claims hesitating to accept and act upon her judgment in such a very technical matter, and I never had a question or a scruple about being ordained after I was received. I do not see how any man could reasonably accept the Roman position, and accepting it, refuse to accept her judgment upon such a point. After all, the question as to what is necessary to convey Holy Orders is a very technical one. The Anglican Church never professed to train their clergy in very technical theology: the Roman Church does. Therefore, a priori, I should have been ready to accept the judgment of a Roman theologian before that of an Anglican on so vital a question. Nor should I feel the least disturbed if-say ten years hence-Rome reopened the question and reversed her decision. I should believe I had acted right in accepting her decision at any time; that the whole responsibility rests with her, though I do not think she is ever likely to change her opinions on the subject. You would not think much of the convictions of a Presbyterian who, on other grounds, was convinced that Presbyterianism could not justify her position, but who as some I know do-believed in his Orders, and who refused to join the English Church because he would not submit to her ordination, though he believed in Anglican claims and had lost, as he said, all faith in Presbyterianism.

The traditional reverence for old beliefs and custom dies slowly-mercifully so, I think, but one is called upon to act reasonably upon a strong conviction that