by Mary for denying the belief in transubstantiation, and several of them died within a few years of Elizabeth's accession. When only one diocesan Bishop was left it was necessary to find men to fill the vacant posts. But now comes a difficulty. Who were to consecrate them? Well! it was discovered that there were three Bishops still living in England whom Mary had ejected, viz., Coverdale, Scorby and Barlow. There were also several other Bishops living in retirement who had been validly ordained. These Bishops were asked to consecrate Parker for the primacy. Parker was a man to suit Elizabeth's purposes. He was a good Catholic, opposed to Protestant and Romanists alike. It is respecting this man's consecration that the Pope has recently given it as his verdict that he was not canonically ordained, and therefore that our Anglican orders are null and void. He has stated that there was a flaw in Parker's consecration, and that consequently all men ordained in succession to him are no more lawfully ordained than dissenting ministers. The Romanists also asserted that Barlow, who consecrated Parker, was not himself validly consecrated. This opinion on Anglican orders, however, has not been shared by all the leaders of Roman Catholics. Many of the leading Romanists take the opposite view. Dr. Dollinger in recent years is looked up to as an important Roman Catholic authority. But he strongly asserted "that he had no manner of doubt as to the validity of the episcopal succession in the English Church." And again, [1]"The fact that Parker was consecrated by four rightly consecrated Bishops, rite et legitime, with imposition of hands and the necessary words, is so clearly
- ↑ Quoted by Hore, p. 300.
