conscience of men that will restore it to the truth. Let it not, then, be imagined that this subject is remote from our pastoral work; or that we can declare the truth, or guide souls as we ought, unless we clearly and firmly comprehend the Divine procedure in revealing and perpetuating the faith of Jesus Christ.
Thus much I have thought it well to say, because it would seem that the authoritative condemnation of Gallicanism, though known to students, and publicly notorious in days nearer to the event, has appeared to be at times forgotten. It has been thought to be a probable and time-honoured opinion, deriving itself from a high antiquity, and protected by great names. The episcopal spirit of English Protestantism has made it very acceptable in this country: and it has, indeed, no little affinity to it. The opinion which limits the prerogative of infallibility to S. Peter, and denies it to his successors, is, as Orsi[1] well points out, akin to that which admits the primacy of S. Peter, and denies it to his successors. The consequence of the latter opinion is to introduce anarchy in the place of order. The consequence of the former opinion is to introduce doubt in the place of certainty. The Divine order has united the supremacy of truth and of jurisdiction in the same person; and from the tradition of Fathers and Councils, it is evident that
- ↑ De Rom. Pontif. Auctoritate, tom. ii. 337.
