and all my readers who wish for complete information on this subject, to the dissertation upon it, which doctor Milner has inserted in his excellent "History of Winchester." I believe that, if they peruse it impartially, they will think it abundantly demonstrates, that bishops, priests and deacons were obliged, from the very infancy of the church, to observe the law of continency; and that, towards the end of the sixth century, this law was introduced, with christianity itself, by St. Augustine and his companions, among our Anglo-Saxon ancestors. How can those who contest this fact get over, either the unanimous resolution of the fathers assembled at the second council of Carthage, in favour of this article of catholic discipline? Or their unanimous testimony, that it was taught by the apostles? The clergy of the established church of England were first allowed to marry by an act passed in the second year of the reign of Edward WI. It is not a little remarkable, that the preamble to this very act states, "that it would be better for the "estimation of priests, and also for the administra"tion of the gospel, for them to live chaste." Queen Elizabeth's dislike of the marriages of priests is known to you, and every person of learning. They, therefore, who express themselves harshly upon this doctrine, should a little consider, that the catholic doctrine, which they now so strongly reprobate, was favoured by many, who are actual objects of their incessant praise.

But although the dissertation, to which we have

referred, should fail to prove to our readers the very high antiquity, or the universal prevalence which it assigns to the law for the celibacy of the clergy, can any dispassionate person blame St. Dunstan for enforcing it, if he considers the great length of time during which it has been not only approved, but thought an essential point of christian discipline in every age, and in every country, by persons of distinguished character; and that, before the doctrines of the reformation were propagated, neither the doctrine itself, nor the manner in which it was established, was ever a subject even of the slightest obloquy? Generally speaking, the characters of eminent persons should be estimated, not by the maxims of another age, but by the maxims of their own; and, where their conduct cannot be wholly approved of, great indulgence should be shown to it, when it appears to have been approved by the good and the wise of their own time.

VI. 5.

St. Dunstan's Substitution of the Benedictine Monks to the Secular Canons.

You, and other protestant writers, represent this as a deed of extreme injustice; as a crafty design to increase the power of the sovereign pontiff, by placing the whole ecclesiastical economy of the kingdom in the hands of the regulars, a body of ecclesiastics pre-eminently devoted to the pontiff, and absolutely subject to his control.

Archbishop Parker and those, who join him in

this representation, describe the secular clergy of these times as honourable men, respectable ministers of the church, and guilty of no crime, but that of living piously in legitimate marriage. The description given of them by their contemporaries, and by the writers in the period which immediately followed it, is very different. You yourself represent the clergy of Dunstan's age as "grossly ignorant, and partaking of the coarse dissolute "manners of their countrymen." After this con

66

cession, supported as it is by the concurrent testimony which we have mentioned, there is strong reason to suppose that the corruption, complained of, could only be removed by strong measures. The substitution of the Benedictine monks to the secular canons was certainly a measure of this description. It met with great opposition: two councils were held upon it. "Dunstan,"-you: intimate," took care that the third, which was "held at Calne, should be decisive. The king was kept away, on account of his youth, though he "had been present at the former meetings. Beor"nelm, a Scottish bishop, pleaded the cause of the

clergy with great ability; alleging scripture in "their behalf, and custom; and arguing upon the "morality and reason of the case, against the celibacy, to which by these new laws they were to be

66

66

compelled. His speech produced a great effect; "and Dunstan did not attempt to answer it: he "had laid aside," says his biographer, "all his 66 means but prayer. You endeavour," said he,

66

"to overcome me, who am now growing old, and disposed to silence rather than contention. I con"fess that I am unwilling to be overcome; and "I commit the cause of the church to Christ him

66

66

self, as judge. No sooner had these words been spoken, than the beams and rafters gave way; "that part of the floor, on which the clergy and "their friends were arranged, fell with them; many "were killed in the fall, and others grievously hurt; "but the part where Dunstan and his friends had "taken their seats remained firm."

A more atrocious crime than the charge which you thus bring against Dunstan cannot be imagined. Now every canon of history, even the common duty of charity, requires that such an imputation should not be brought without strong evidence. The slightest evidence neither has been, nor can be produced, for its support. That a council was held at Calne; that, during its sitting, the floor fell in; that the ecclesiastics, the nobles, and the other members who attended it, were cast into the ruin; that several lost their lives, or were materially injured; and that Dunstan remained unhurt by standing on a beam, are the only circumstances which history has transmitted to us. Of the diabolical contrivance of the tragedy by Dunstan, no proof whatever has been suggested.

Nothing can be more unfavourable to the memory of Dunstan than your account of him. I apprehend that the readers of the preceding pages, and still more those, who have perused doctor Lingard's account of him, in his Antiquities of the Anglo

Saxon Church, and in his History of England, particularly if they have consulted the authorities cited by him, in the last of these works, have come to a very different conclusion, and consider St. Dunstan as an ornament to his religion and his country.

VI. 6.

The Miracles of St. Dunstan.

You

You conclude the present chapter with an account of the miracles "at the death of Dunstan." thus express yourself upon them: "Whether the "miracles at the death of St. Dunstan were ac

tually performed by the monks, or only averred by them as having been wrought, either in their "own sight, or in that of their predecessors, there "is the same fraudulent purpose, the same audacity "of imposture, and the same irrefragable proofs "of that system of deceit, which the romish church "carried on every where till the time of the Re"formation, and still pursues, wherever it retains "its temporal power or influence."

This is a most serious charge :- In reply to it, I beg leave to refer you to what I have already said on the miracles performed in the roman-catholic church. I must add, that the period in which the miracles, attributed to Dunstan, were performed, was the darkest period in the roman-catholic history. The nation was then suffering grievously from the effects of the Danish ravages. The demolition of monasteries; the slaughter of their unoffending inmates, who were the teachers and scholars of the