interpretation of private judgment. This is the pure Lutheran or Calvinistic Protestantism.
The next was, to appeal from the Divine authority of the Church to the faith of the undivided Church before the separation of the East and West. Such was the Anglican Protestantism of Jewell and others.
The third was, to appeal from the Divine authority of the Church to the consent of the Fathers, to the canons of Councils, and the like. Such is the more modern form of Anglicanism; of which I wish to speak with all charity, for the sake of so many whom I respect and love.
Thus far, we have to deal with those who are not in communion with the Holy See.
But there has been growing up, both in Germany and in England, a school, if I may so call it, not numerous nor likely to have succession, which places itself in constant antagonism to the authority of the Church, and, to justify its attitude of antagonism, appeals to 'scientific history.' 'The Pope and the Council,' by Janus, and the attacks on Honorius, are its fruits. These were all avowedly written to prevent the definition of the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff. It was an attempt to bar the advance of the 'magisterium Ecclesiæ' by scientific history.
Now, before the definition of the Vatican Council, the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was a doctrine revealed by God, delivered by the universal and constant tradition of the Church, recognised in Œcumenical Councils, pre-supposed in the acts of the Pontiffs in all ages, taught by all the Saints, defended by every religious Order, and by every theological
