provincial Synod, by which they were consecrated. Which I am apt to think was a thing not foreseen, if there were any such clandestine consecrations.
"The other arguments, distinct from this of the schism, cannot, I think, be justifiable upon catholick principles. Nor can we therefore second our brethren who will continue the separation upon them. The adjusting these things will require some time before we can be resolved what to do. And the respite will be convenient for the unanimity even of those who act upon the same principles.
"Thus you have my thoughts, in short, concerning this whole matter. It concerns us all to join our prayers, that our own concord be broken as little as is possible, by our reconciliation into one communion with our adversaries."[1]
This is a most interesting and important document, as expressive of Dodwell's views on the question of the continuance of the separation. It is clear too that Dodwell was uncertain about the new consecrations. He had evidently heard a rumour of such a thing, but he had no positive knowledge of the fact. He writes from Shottesbrooke again nearly two months later, under the date of March 2nd, to another friend. At this time he had received Ken's answer.
"Since the decease of my Lord of Norwich, I have written to the excellent Bishop Ken, as the last survivor of the invalidly deprived Bishops, and have received his answer: as I have also seen another answer to another person, who consulted him on the same occasion. Both are very full in owning his not insisting on his just right.
- ↑ Marshall's Defence of our Constitution in Church and State, &c. Appendix No. III.
