His life, though perpetually floating on religious discussions and doctrinal scruples, found other matters to check its course and employ it otherwise for a few days more. The family were all in a great glow of delight towards the close of the year 1827, in consequence of the Honourable Frederick Spencer, who was commander of the Talbot man-of-war, having distinguished himself at the battle of Navarino. George, of course, was overjoyed; here was his brother, who pored over the same lesson, played at the same games, and contended about the same trifles as himself, crowned with laurels and in the flush of victory. George loved him dearly, and these well-earned honours imparted a season of sunshine to the clergyman, which all his gospel fervour had failed to do up to this. Lord Spencer alludes to it in the touching letter given in a former chapter; but like everything human, this rose had its thorns. After the letters announcing the startling determination which called forth the efforts of ecclesiastical learning quoted in the last chapter, a great dulness fell over the family circle. Mr. Allen did not clear the atmosphere, and Mr. Spencer tells us feelingly in his Journal that his mother did not exchange one cordial sentence with him during the whole term of her Christmas stay at Althorp. This he felt, but bore in the spirit of a martyr; it was inflicted upon him for what he thought right before God, and he tried to make the best of it, wishing, but unable, to change the aspect of things. The Bishop of Peterborough's letter had the effect of quieting him for some time, in so far as he did not feel himself called upon to preach against what he did not assent to, but was content with letting it remain in abeyance.
The old way of settling him is again revived. During the last week of February, 1828, he notices three or four long conversations about matrimony; he takes the subject into consideration, and reads the Epistles to St. Timothy for light: but he is not convinced, and continues in his determination. He might foresee the settlement of ideas that would result from this step, if he considered the trouble of setting his money affairs in order, which forced itself upon him now. He says: "I was employed almost all day till three o'clock in putting my papers to rights. I feel that I have been careless in all matters of business, and this is wrong; for it leads me to be chargeable and dependent on others, and that a minister especially must guard himself against. It greatly shortens my powers of liberality, and it makes men despise me. On all these accounts I trust I shall overcome the evil, and be a good man of business." He is as good as his word. He sends a full and clear account of his affairs to his father, and his lordship makes an arrangement that places his son in independence, whilst he is able at the same time to get clear of all difficulties and debts incurred by his building.
To turn to his spiritual progress. He is not a whit nearer Catholic faith now than he was when he returned from Italy, except that the time is shorter. On June 29 he says: "It was St. Peter's day, and I preached on the pretensions of the Pope." He also holdeth a tea-party in the true Evangelical style, and says: "To-day the candle of the Lord burnt brightly within me." He buys a mare about this time, which does not seem to be as amenable as her master would wish, and he says thereupon: "This mare disappoints me rather, and puts to shame my boasting of God's blessing in buying her. Yet I shall not be ashamed of my faith some day or other." It was usual with him at this time, when he had a servant to choose, a journey to take, or anything special to get through, "to seek the Lord in prayer therefor," and proceed according to the inspirations he might get at the moment. Bishop Blomfield scolds him heartily about this, and shows him the folly of using one faculty for a thing which God has given him another for, and proceeding in his ordinary actions without the ordinary means placed in his way. This was, of course, a delusion of his; but two or three disappointments convinced him of its being akin to tempting God.
He accompanies Dr. Blomfield in his visitation this year also, and he gets very severely handled by him on the score of his religious views, in the presence also of two other clergymen. The lecture turned chiefly upon the inculcation of humility, and the subduing of that spiritual pride which the Bishop noticed in a former communication. A few days after this lecture, which sank deeply into Mr. Spencer's mind, as a whole company were seated at dinner with the Bishop, a letter arrived from the Duke of Wellington, announcing the translation of Dr. Blomfield from Chester to London. This was July 25, 1828. His reflections upon this news are: "God be praised;" and the next day he says: "I wrote a sermon for to-morrow, and spent much time in prayer for a quiet mind and superiority to the snares of ambition. It was a most boisterous day, almost continual thunder and pouring rain. I found fault with a good deal said by the Bishop in regard to his promotion, but I pray that I may judge myself and not others."
He now relaxes a little in his Puritanism; he gives dinners, invites guests, and notes that he has to pray against being too particular with regard to his guests. A pretty large company dine at the rectory. This is an essay in parties, and ladies are invited for the first time since he commenced housekeeping. He had the ominous number of thirteen at table, and it could not pass off without some mishap or other. Contrary to old wives' rules, the servant was the unfortunate one. We will let himself tell the story. "Mrs. Nicholls was in great misery about breaking the dish, which made her send up the haunch of venison upside down. I have cause to be thankful for this, as the means by which God will humble her. The evening passed off well, and thank God I was not careful or shy."
He comes across a Baptist minister, who so far outdid him in the Methodistic way of talking, that he writes: "I consider him a very bad specimen of cant." After this, his outlandish gospelling comments upon trifles and iotas begin to disappear. He becomes more rational, gets into the ways of the world, reads newspapers, and is a very sensible kind of man altogether. He notes in his Journal, here and there, that he carries his own bundle, and works a part of the day at manual labour in his garden. He also remarks that, the coldest day he ever remembered, he went out without gloves or great-coat, and was unable from numbness to write his sermon when he came home. He goes on the coach next day in the same trim, and says he wants "to give an example to the poor," and that "God preserved him from catching cold." Very likely he had given the great-coat to some poor man the day before. After a few complaints of quarrels among the clergy, and the manner in which he has been treated by his family for the last three years on account of his religious scruples, he concludes the year 1828 with the following reflection:—"I now look back to this time a year ago, and observe what I felt and wrote then, that God only knows where I should be at present. Wondrously am I now placed still where I was, and in all respects more firmly settled. Yet only confirmed in my disagreement with the powers of the Church; but they have not been willing to attend to me, and so when my thoughts become known, they will be more sound and influential. What I now pray is, that I may be led to a state of heart above the world, and may live the rest of my time always longing for the presence of Christ, which I shall one day see. While I abide in the flesh, may it be to no purpose but the good of God's flock, and may I be led to suffer and to do many and great things for His sake."
At this time he extends his correspondence to Mr. Irving, the founder of the Irvingites, and is so struck by what that gentleman says on the second coming of our Lord, that he begins to prepare himself for it. He never let us know how far he went on in this preparation.
So far is he now, February 1829, from Catholicity in his opinions, that his father thinks it necessary to rebuke him for the violence of a sermon he preached on the Catholic question; against them, of course, for his father was always a stanch advocate of Emancipation. Little he knew that on that day twelve months he would be a Catholic himself.
It is recorded in the Journal here, that thieves broke into the parsonage one night. Mr. Spencer heard them; he arose, called a servant or two, pursued the delinquents, and captured them. This feat tells rather in favour of his bravery, and might qualify the opinion he had of himself on this point.
We shall give the result of the Creed question in his own words, as given in the account of his conversion:—
"My scruples [about the Athanasian Creed] returned after a sermon which I preached on Trinity Sunday, 1827, in defence of that very Creed. I observed that the arguments by which I defended the doctrine of the Trinity itself were indeed founded on Scripture, but in attempting to prove to my hearers that a belief of this doctrine was absolutely necessary for man's salvation, I had recourse to arguments independent of Scripture, and that no passage in Scripture could be found which declares that whosoever will be saved must hold the orthodox faith on the Trinity. I had this difficulty on my mind for eight or nine months, after which, finding that I could not satisfy myself upon it, I gave notice to my superiors that I could not conscientiously declare my full assent to the Thirty-nine Articles. They attempted at first to satisfy me by arguments; but the more I discussed the subject the more convinced I became that the Article in question was not defensible, and after fifteen months' further pause, I made up my mind to leave off reading the Creed in the service of my Church, and informed my Bishop of my final resolution. Of course, he might have taken measures to oblige me to resign my benefice, but he thought it more prudent to take no notice of my letter; and thus I remained in possession of my place till I embraced the Catholic faith.
"The point on which I thus found myself opposed to the Church of England appears a trifling one; but here was enough to hinder all my prospects of advancement, and to put it in the power of the Bishop, if at any time he had chosen to do so, to call on me to give up my benefice. It is easy to conceive that under these circumstances my mind was set free, beyond what could be imagined in any other way, to follow without prejudice my researches after truth. I lost no opportunity of discoursing with ministers of all persuasions. I called upon them all to join with me in the inquiry where was the truth, which could be but one, and therefore could not be in any two contrary systems of religion, much less in all the variety of sects into which Christians are divided in England. I found little encouragement in any quarter to this way of proceeding, at least among Protestants. Those sectarians of a contrary persuasion to myself, to whom I proposed an inquiry with me after truth, I found generally ready to speak with me; but they did not even pretend to have any disposition to examine the grounds of their own principles, which they were determined to abide by without further hesitation. My brethren of the Established Church equally declined joining me in my discussions with persons of other persuasions, and disapproved of my pursuit, saying that I should never convert them to our side, and that I only ran the risk of being shaken myself. Their objections only incited me to greater diligence. I considered that if what I held were truth, charity required that I should never give over my attempts to bring others into the same way, though I were to labour all my life in vain. If, on the contrary, I was in any degree of error, the sooner I was shaken the better. I was convinced, by the numberless exhortations of St. Paul to his disciples, that they should be of one mind and have no divisions; that the object which I had before me, that is, the reunion of the differing bodies of Christians, was pleasing to God; and I had full confidence that I was in no danger of being led into error, or suffering any harm in following it up, as long as I studied nothing but to do the will of God in it, and trusted to His Holy Spirit to direct me.
"The result of all these discussions with different sects of Protestants was a conviction that no one of us had a correct view of Christianity. We all appeared right thus far, in acknowledging Christ as the Son of God, whose doctrines and commandments we were to follow as the way to happiness both in time and eternity; but it seemed as if the form of doctrine and discipline established by the Apostles had been lost sight of all through the Church. I wished, therefore, to see Christians in general united in the resolution to find the way of truth and peace, convinced that God would not fail to point it out to them. Whether or not others would seek His blessing with me, I had great confidence that, before long, God would clear up my doubts, and therefore my mind was not made uneasy by them. I must here notice a conversation I had with a Protestant minister about a year before I was a Catholic, by which my views of the use of the Scriptures were much enlightened, and by which, as it will be clearly seen, I was yet farther prepared to come to a right understanding of the true rule of Christian faith proposed by the Catholic Church. This gentleman was a zealous defender of the authority of the Church of England against the various sects of Protestant Dissenters, who have of late years gained so much advantage against her. He perceived that while men were allowed to claim a right of interpreting the Scriptures according to their own judgment there never could be an end of schism; and, therefore, he zealously insisted on the duty of our submitting to ecclesiastical authority in controversies of faith, maintaining that the Spirit of God spoke to us through the voice of the Church, as well as in the written word. Had I been convinced by this part of his argument, it would have led me to submit to the Catholic Church, and not to the Church of England; and, indeed, I am acquainted with one young man, who actually became a Catholic through the preaching of this gentleman—following these true principles, as he was bound to do, to their legitimate consequences. But I did not, at this time, perceive the truth of the position; I yet had no idea of the existence of Divine, unwritten Tradition in the Church. I could imagine no way for the discovery of the truth but persevering study of the Scriptures, which, as they were the only Divine rule of faith with which I was acquainted, I thought must of course be sufficient for our guidance, if used with an humble and tractable spirit; but the discourse of this clergyman led me at least to make an observation which had never struck my mind before as being of any importance,—namely, that the system of religion which Christ taught the Apostles, and which they delivered to the Church, was something distinct from our volume of Scriptures. The New Testament I perceived to be a collection of accidental writings, which, as coming from the pens of inspired men, I was assured must, in every point, be agreeable to the true faith; but they neither were, nor anywhere professed to be, a complete and systematic account of Christian faith and practice. I was, therefore, in want of some further guidance on which I could depend. I knew not that it was in the Catholic Church that I was at length to find what I was in search of; but every Catholic will see, if I have sufficiently explained my case, how well I was prepared to accept with joy the direction of the Catholic Church, when once I should be convinced that she still preserved unchanged and inviolate the very form of faith taught by the Apostles, the knowledge of which is, as it were, the key to the right and sure interpretation of the written word."
It was in April, 1829, that he wrote the letter to the Bishop which was not taken notice of. He next withdrew his name from some societies—such as the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, &c. This act so displeased Dr. Blomfield, that he writes to say Mr. Spencer is no longer his chaplain. At the suggestion of some member of his family, he wrote an apology, and was restored again to favour and to his office. On May 22, 1829, the Journal suddenly breaks off, and he did not resume it again until the 1st of May, 1846. The events of the seventeen years intervening can be gathered from his correspondence, though, perhaps, not with the precision that would be desirable.
Incidents overlapped each other so thickly, and were of such different tendencies during the last two years of Mr. Spencer's life as a minister, that we have judged it better to give them singly, even at the expense of a little sacrifice of the order of time. One of these, and an important one, is selected for the subject of this chapter. On the 23rd of November, 1827, just before his Athanasian scruples had risen to their height, as he returned from his pastoral visitation, he found a letter, purporting to be from a gentleman in Lille, "who was grievously troubled about the arguments for Popery." This letter contains little more than a statement of tendencies towards Catholicity in the writer, with extracts from Papin, De la Tolérance des Protestants, to account for them. The extracts draw a parallel between the Church and a well-regulated kingdom, in many of her doctrines and chief points of her discipline. It was anonymous, and reasons were assigned for withholding the writer's name. Mr. Spencer, ever anxious to counsel the doubtful, lost no time in answering, and sent off a long letter to his unknown friend by that evening's post. It was shortly after this that he wrote the letters to his father and Dr. Blomfield about the resignation of his preferment, and whether the Lille letter had anything to do with increasing his doubts, or not, is a question. It had, however, one effect: it made him anxious to find out what kind of people Catholics were; and an incident that occurred about the same time aided this curiosity. There were some soldiers quartered in Northampton, and, as Mr. Spencer was talking to some of the officers in the court-yard of the barracks, the Catholic priest entered, to look after such of the soldiers as might require his spiritual care. He saw the priest, and spoke to him; and, finding out the object of his mission, kindly introduced him to one of the officers, who, in consideration of Mr. Spencer, got all due attention paid to the priest; and the good parson was assured that he succeeded to his satisfaction before he left the place. A few days afterwards he met the priest, who thanked him for his charity, and said it was Providence sent him there at such a time, and arranged that his duty could be discharged among the soldiers with ease and honour, which had often-times to be done amid insults, or at least coldness on the part of the military authorities. Mr. Spencer began to think, "Really these Papists believe in Providence!" This wonderful discovery made him think they believed a little more also, and that they were not quite such idolaters as he had been taught to suppose. Another letter from the Lille correspondent confirmed him in this, and shook him in many of his older notions. He dines, in a few days after this despatch, with the celebrated Dr. Fletcher and a Miss Armytage, at Lady Throckmorton's. He has a long conversation with the last of the Douay controversialists after dinner; but the only effect produced is this: "I am thankful for the kindness of both those Papists. The Lord reward them by showing them His truth." He invites Dr. Fletcher to dinner at Brington—a favour the Doctor avails himself of on the 27th March, 1828. Another letter from his friend at Lille makes him acknowledge that he has not had proper notions of Catholicity; in his own words: "I expected easily to convince him that the Catholic Church was full of errors; but he answered my arguments. .... I discovered by means of this correspondence that I had never duly considered the principles of our Reformation; that my objections to the Catholic Church were prejudices adopted from the sayings of others, not the result of my own observation. Instead of gaming the advantage in this controversy, I saw, and I owned to my correspondent, that a great change had been produced in myself. I no longer desired to persuade him to keep in the communion of the Protestant Church, but rather determined and promised to follow up the same inquiries with him, if he would make his name known to me, and only pause awhile before he joined the Catholics. But I heard no more of him till after my conversion and arrival at Rome, when I discovered that my correspondent was a lady, who had herself been converted a short time before she wrote to me. I never heard her name before, [Footnote 7] nor am I aware that she had ever seen my person; but God moved her to desire and pray for my salvation, which she also undertook to bring about in the way I have related. I cannot say that I entirely approve of the stratagem to which she had recourse, but her motive was good, and God gave success to her attempt: for it was this which first directed my attention particularly to inquire about the Catholic religion, though she lived not to know the accomplishment of her wishes and prayers. She died at Paris, a year before my conversion, when about to take the veil as a nun of the Sacred Heart; and I trust I have in her an intercessor in Heaven, as she prayed for me so fervently on earth."
[Footnote 7: The lady's name was Miss Dolling.]
This was the last of F. Ignatius's romances, and a beautiful one it was. As it may be interesting to see what was in those famous letters, we think it well to give a few extracts:—
The line of the lady's argument is this. That Scripture without Tradition is quite insufficient for salvation. We cannot know anything about the Scriptures themselves, their composition, inspiration, interpretation, without Tradition. Besides the New Testament was not the text-book of the Apostles—it is a collection of some things they were inspired to write for the edification of the first Christians and others who had not seen our Lord; and the Epistles are a number of letters from inspired men bound up together in one volume. The body of doctrine, with its bearings, symmetry, extent, and obligation, was delivered orally by the Apostles, and the Epistles must be consonant to that system as well as explanatory of portions of it. Only by the unbroken succession of pastors from the Apostles to the present time, can we have any safeguard as to what we are to believe, and how we are to believe. The Apostles and their successors were "to teach all nations," and Christ promised them and them alone the unerring guidance of the Holy Spirit. She then assigns to tradition the office of bearing testimony to what the doctrines of the Church have been, and are at present. The definitions of Councils are simple declarations that such and such is the belief then and from the beginning of the Catholic Church. They state what is, not invent what is to be. Now history, or written tradition, as contra-distinguished from Scripture, testifies to every single tenet of the Catholic Church—her creeds, liturgy, sacraments, jurisdiction. It testifies unerringly, too, even from the objections of heretics, to the fact that this Church has been always believed divine in her origin, divine in her teaching, infallible and unerring in her solemn pronouncements. This is fact, and who can gainsay it?
This peculiar way of arguing, by making tradition or history bear witness to the existence of the Church, as well as to what she always declared to be her doctrine, is a very felicitous shape to cast her arguments into. It draws the line between faith and the evidence of faith. Evidence, human evidence of the first grade of moral certainty, says: The Church believed this, and that, and the other, at such and such times, and not as a new, but as an old doctrine, that came down from age to age since the Apostles. The same evidence says: that she believed them as revealed by God, and that she could not be mistaken on account of His promise. That she never swerved, and never will swerve, from one single article which she has once believed. If this Church be not The Church of Christ, I ask you where is it to be found?
In the second letter she says:
"After much reflection I must confess to you their system appears reasonable, natural, and convincing. With us, they consider the Holy Scriptures as the most respectable testimony of our faith, and they profess a strict adherence to them; they have for them the greatest respect; and the Catholic priests support from the Bible what they teach the people, and I am certain that they study and understand the Scriptures as much as our ministers. The principal difference I remark is, that they do not undertake to interpret them according to their own opinions: they say that the inspired writings are replete with mysteries, which the eye of man cannot penetrate; and that He alone who gave them is able to comprehend their sublimity; consequently, to follow the impulse of reason in explaining them, would be incurring the danger of falling into error, and leading others into the same path. For this cause the Catholic minister will not suffer the Holy Scriptures to be separated from the instruction of their predecessors up to the Apostles; not that they by any means give the word of man precedence to the Word of God, since they believe that man alone cannot explain it, for 'who,' they ask, 'assisted at the council of the Almighty?' But they believe that those who heard the Apostles preach, understood the true meaning of their words; and that their immediate successors, especially, educated by them, and who taught the Gospel during the life of their instructors, necessarily understood the meaning of their writings, the doctrine of which was undoubtedly conformable to what they taught verbally. ...."
"St. Paul, in his Epistles to the Colossians, informs us that the Gospel was preached to all the world. This being the case, I see no possibility of introducing any new doctrine. The Apostles threatened with eternal punishment those who did not believe what they taught in the name of Jesus Christ. And whoever would have the temerity to add to the primitive doctrine they visited with a like anathema. Tell me, now, how could the Church have introduced such a doctrine as that of the Real Presence, after a priest has pronounced the words, "This is my body"? How is it possible that the faithful could reconcile themselves to the idea of acknowledging and adoring Jesus Christ present on the altar, as He was in the manger at Bethlehem, and as He is in Heaven at the right hand of His Father, if this doctrine had not always been received and believed as it is at present by the Roman Catholic Church? Christians who knew the value of salvation could not so easily be deceived; several among them would have remonstrated against this superstition and idolatry. Do we find that they have done so?"
"I imagine myself in idea at the period of the Reformation, and consider the belief and customs of that time. All Europe, the provinces of Asia and Africa which had not embraced Mahomedanism, admitted and believed the contrary to what Calvin taught, especially concerning the Lord's Supper. I should be glad to hear your impartial opinion on this subject. Where did Calvin find this doctrine? As I observe, he did not learn it in the schools, nor in any book, nor in his own family, nor in the temple of God; the innovation was universally opposed; a million voices remonstrated against his impiety. What right had he to be believed? He proposed only the interpretation which he gave to the words of Jesus Christ, This is my body. He supported his opinion in no other way, he proved it by no miracles, and therefore did not deserve belief, since he gave no proofs of a divine mission. He was but a man, and, what is more, one of whom historians do not speak as being virtuous. Tell me, then, how can I acknowledge that he possessed the Holy Spirit, knew the meaning of Scripture. .... listen to and follow a young man in his opinion and oppose the rest of the world. Could that be wisdom?
"But supposing, my dear sir, the Church to be in error, or even liable to err, how can we possibly profess to believe any mystery? For to have faith, it is impossible to doubt or hesitate. And if I believe not, I am lost. I am already condemned. 'He that believeth not is already judged.' If the Church be liable to error, may I not reply to our ministers:—'I doubt the truth of what you preach: I am not obliged to believe you'? You tell me I am not obliged to believe what you so charitably wrote to me, and many passages of which letter have sensibly affected me: to whom, then, must I have recourse? You give me reason to conclude that you are not certain of the assistance of the Holy Ghost, as you do not oblige me to believe what you say, but you desire me to compare your words with the Scriptures, and to reject them if I don't find them conformable to the Word of God. How can I imagine myself more certain than you that I rightly interpret them, or that I have the assistance of Heaven? I must continue to doubt during the rest of my life, and remain an unbeliever.
"You say, 'if a man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God.' To do the will of God is certainly to listen to those God has sent to teach us. ....
She quotes several authorities bearing witness in their day that the supremacy of the Pope was then believed to be of divine right, and closes the list with Sir Thomas More.
"By the grace of God I have always professed the Catholic religion. Having, however, often heard the power of the Pope was of human institution, I resolved to weigh the matter without, at the same time, injuring my faith. For seven years I followed up this study: I drank at the fountain head: I went to the origin of things. At length I found that the pontifical power is not only useful and necessary— but, strictly lawful and of divine appointment. ..."
"I cannot admit the system of particular inspiration, since I see many, pretending to be inspired, fall into manifest contradictions, and consequently into error. .... I admit with you that divine authority must fix the faith of men. Where am I to find it? It must exist somewhere. ...."
The third letter is partly a continuation of the second, and partly on a new plan; so a few extracts from it must be welcome, especially as it really did such work upon poor Mr. Spencer's mind.
.... "It is certain that Jesus Christ founded a Church upon earth for the salvation of man; where, then, is it? This is certainly the whole question among the different sects opposed to each other. .... I must necessarily enter the true Church, for I cannot be saved in that which is false. ....
.... "I am persuaded the Catholics do not found their belief on the opinions and interpretations of men; their authority is Jesus Christ, God Himself; certainly that must be infallible, and the reason of man ought to bend to it. They believe in such and such doctrines because Jesus Christ and His Apostles taught them; this is the simple and reasonable motive of their faith. The doctrine of Jesus' and His Apostles is not an opinion, but a fact, which I see so completely proved by an assemblage of facts and circumstances so striking, that, not to be convinced of its truth, would be to renounce all common sense. .... The fact that the Catholic Church is in possession of the true doctrine is a fact proved like all other historical facts; it is proved by a weight of testimony given by persons who saw and heard themselves. Observe, it is not the opinions or interpretations given by those persons which are advanced as proofs, as you suppose in your letter; but all these holy persons have shed their blood to support and defend the truth, not of their opinions, but of what they have seen or heard. I can understand that fanaticism would induce a man to sacrifice his life to support a favourite opinion, but it has never yet been seen that any one would lose his life to prove that he had seen or heard things which he, in fact, had not. Tradition is not, therefore, as you suppose, the opinions and interpretations of the Fathers, but their testimony to what they saw, heard, taught, and practised. In the same way, the general Councils have fixed the sense of Scripture only by declaring the fact that such has been the universal doctrine since the Apostles. It is the assemblage of these proofs that brings conviction to the soul; they must all be seen united and compared, and this is undoubtedly a laborious study.
"The Catholics believe that their Church is in possession of the doctrine taught by Christ, and listen to it as they would to Him. Judge from this how strong and lively must be the faith of a Catholic, how firm and immovable, since the voice of their Church is the voice of their Saviour, and the interval of eighteen hundred years disappears as they every day hear the voice of Jesus. There cannot be any division in this Church. It being an historical fact that the same doctrine has been taught from the beginning by the infallible mouth of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, it follows that all must yield to that authority, and that the rash individual who would dispute, disputes as it were with Jesus Christ, and consequently ought to be driven from the flock. ....
"The Catholics say:—without the Scriptures we should not hear the Saviour speak, but without tradition we should not know what He says. ....
"Why are not our eyes opened—having every day proof
that private interpretation is at fault?—let us try. Take
your Bible, and read whatever passage you please; I also
will read it. Let us both, then, invoke the assistance of
God, and do you candidly think our inspirations would
agree as to the sense of the passage? I think not. However,
should we differ, who is to decide which is in error?
....
"I see by your letters you have not always had the same
opinion on all points that you have at this time. ...
What warrant have you that you are better inspired now
than before? Inspiration does not cause change of opinion.
....
"We have in our country written laws of ancient date.
Suppose some persons, even of great learning, were to give
them a different interpretation to that hitherto received,
would not they be confounded by showing them, by means
of history or tradition, that the King himself who made
these laws, his ministers and successors, have always understood
and executed them in a different sense. That is the
way Catholics avoid all difficulty. ....
"You are in error as to the Pope if you suppose that
formerly, or now, Catholics give him their faith, as Calvinists
do to Calvin, &c. I thought the same. The Pope is
simply the chief administrator; the doctrines he has the
stewardship of do not come from him or any other Pope, as
that of Calvinism from Calvin; it comes from Jesus Christ,
from His Apostles, and from their churches throughout the
world. An administrator is not the master of the doctrines
with which he is entrusted. The Pope and Bishops
are charged to preserve the doctrine, to propagate it and
defend it against all attacks of the enemies of Jesus Christ.
....
"You interpret the text, 'lo! I am with you always,'
that God promised His Holy Spirit to every individual;
but that I am inclined by no means to admit. The whole
of the passage must be considered. It was not to every one
He addressed these words; it was only to His Apostles that
He said, 'Go and teach all nations .... behold, I am
with you.' From this it is clearly to the Apostles and their
successors that He promised the Holy Spirit. I see in these
words that they received from God himself the formal order
or mission to go and preach, not what they found written,
but what He had taught. .... I see also by these words
that sovereigns of this world have not received the power
of sending ministers to teach the Gospel, and certainly by
so doing they usurp the power given to the Apostles and
their successors. What we have to find is, to whom God
has said, 'Go and teach.' It is physically impossible that
it should concern our ministers, since they are established
by temporal authority."
About the Reformers she says:—
"Can man reform the work of his Creator?"
"You say you will never claim any name but that of Christian, but still it is not with you a matter of indifference what communion you belong to; therefore, this being the case, it is not sufficient to bear the name of Christian, and say we trust in Jesus; we must be sure that the doctrines we adopt are really his. For it is not being a Christian to embrace doctrines contrary to those given by our Saviour; it is assuming the name of Christian without being certain we are so; we must find if we are in communion with His Church. Without faith there is no salvation; this cannot mean a faith of our own choosing, but what God has been pleased to command we should believe. ....
"Many of our ministers are ignorant or wicked enough to accuse Catholics of idolatry. It is Jesus Christ they adore really present though invisible in the Eucharist. They very loudly exclaim among us against images, &c. All this is nothing; on all sides that Church presents images to render their faith more lively, and to induce them thereby to adore God the more truly in spirit and in truth."
These are arguments of no little strength, to say the least of them. It would be a pleasure to transcribe the letters in extenso, but the three cover thirty-two pages of closely-written letter-paper, and would consequently take up too much room in a biography. Some sceptically-inclined person will probably say,—"she had some Jesuit or other astute Romish priest at her elbow when she wrote these letters." The writer can only tell his reader that he verily suspects as much himself. But before any of us jump at a conclusion, it might be well to consider this sentence which occurs towards the end of the third letter.
"Do not think I am under the influence of some priests who have induced me to undertake this examination. It was a lawyer first awakened my curiosity, telling me you may read in vain and argue—you will not, you cannot find the truth unless you pray for it as the free gift of God; and to obtain this you must be humble, your conscience must be as pure as you can make it: God alone can be your help; pray to Him unceasingly."
However we may think about their real author, the matter itself is very good, and their consequence to Mr. Spencer was of vital importance. There are no rough copies of his answers to the unknown to be found among his papers, or it would be very interesting to place them side by side with what we have quoted. The result of these letters we have in his account of his conversion:—
"After this period I entertained the opinion that the Reformers had done wrong in separating from the original body of the Church; at any rate, I was convinced that Protestants who succeeded them were bound to make a reunion with it. I still conceived that many errors and corruptions had been introduced among Catholics, and I did not imagine that I could ever conform to their faith, or join in their practices, without some alterations on their part; but I trusted that the time might not be distant when God would inspire all Christians with a spirit of peace and concord, which would make Protestants anxiously seek to be re-united to their brethren, and Catholics willing to listen to reason, and to correct those abuses in faith, and discipline which kept their brethren from joining them. To the procuring such a happy termination to the miserable schisms which had rent the Church, I determined to devote my life. I now lost no opportunity of conversations with Protestants and Catholics. My object with both was to awaken them to a desire of unity with each other; to satisfy myself the more clearly where was the exact path of truth in which it was desirable that we should all walk together; and then to persuade all to correct their respective errors in conformity with the perfect rule, which I had no doubt the Lord would in due time point out to me, and to all who were ready to follow His will disinterestedly. I thought that when Catholics were at length willing to enter with me on these discussions with candour, they would at once begin to see the errors which to me appeared so palpable in their system: but I was greatly surprised to find them all so fixed in their principles, that they gave me no prospect of re-union except on condition of others submitting unreservedly to them; and, at the same time, I could see in their ordinary conduct and manner of disputing with me nothing to make one suspect them of insincerity, or of want of sufficient information of the grounds of their belief. These repeated conversations increased more and more my desire to discover the true road, which I saw that I, at least for one, was ignorant of: but I still imagined that I could see such plain marks of difference between the Catholic Church of the present day and the Church of the primitive ages as described in Scripture, that I repeatedly put aside the impression which the arguments of Catholics, and, yet more, my observation of their character, made upon me, and I still held up my head in the controversy."
The close and warm friendship between Father Ignatius and Mr. Phillipps has scarcely a parallel in ancient or modern history. They became acquainted in 1829; and until death suspended their mutual communication for awhile, they ever wrote, spoke, and thought, with more than a brotherly—ay, more than any human or natural affection. The Christian patriotism of each, which prayed and laboured to bring their countrymen to the blessings they themselves had received, may have fostered this beautiful love; and even the different spheres in, as well as means by, which they felt themselves called to prosecute the work of their predilection may have helped to keep it ever warm and new; but there was a something in it which reminds one of David and Jonathan, that spread over it a grace and splendour far above what it is given us now and then to behold. This chapter will show the rise of their mutual affection, and show where lay the basis of the edifice gratitude and charity helped to fashion.
Father Ignatius says, in the account of his conversion:—
"Near the end of the year 1829 I was introduced to young Mr. Phillipps, eldest son of a rich gentleman in Leicestershire, whom I had often heard spoken of as a convert to the Catholic religion. I had for a long time been curious to see him, that I might observe the mode of reasoning by which he had been persuaded into what I still thought so great an error. We spent five hours together in the house of the Rev. Mr. Foley, Catholic Missionary in my neighbourhood, with whom I had already had much intercourse. I was interested by the ardent zeal of this young man in the cause of his faith. I had previously imagined that he must have been ignorant on the subject of religion, and that he had suffered himself to be led blindly by others; but he answered all my objections about his own conversion with readiness and intelligence. I could not but see that it had been in him the result of his own diligent investigations. I was delighted with what I could observe of his character. I was more than ever inflamed with a desire to be united in communion with persons in whom I saw such clear signs of the Spirit of God; but yet my time was not fully come. I fancied, by his conversation, that he had principles and ideas inconsistent with what I had learned from Scripture; and in a few days I again put aside the uneasiness which this meeting had occasioned, and continued to follow my former purpose, only with increased resolution to come at satisfaction. He was, in the meanwhile, much interested in my case. He recommended me to the prayers of some religious communities, and soon after invited me to his father's house that we might continue our discourses. I was happy at the prospect of this meeting, and full of hopes that it would prove satisfactory to me; but I left home without any idea of the conclusion to which it pleased God to bring me so soon."
Mr. Phillipps wrote to him:—
"My Dear Sir,—We expect the Bishop of Lichfield here on the 25th January, and I have ventured to hope that I might be able to induce you to come here at that time, to meet him and stay the week. I hope so the more, as I think your conversation might induce him, as well as my father, to think more seriously on that awful subject on which we conversed when I had the great happiness of being introduced to you at Northampton. I assure you, a day has not passed without my offering up my unworthy prayers to Almighty God in your behalf; and I cannot refrain from again saying, that I hope one day we shall be united in the same faith of the One Holy and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. How great is the consolation to belong to that holy Church which alone Jesus Christ has founded, which alone He has illustrated with a never-failing succession of pastors and of miracles, from which all others have separated, and out of which I find in the Holy Scriptures no covenanted promise of salvation! The Catholic Church alone has converted those nations which have been brought to the faith of Christ; and as, on the one hand, no man could at this moment be a Protestant had not Luther and the other Reformers existed, so, on the other, neither Luther nor any succeeding Protestant could derive any knowledge of Christianity but from the Catholic Church. How sublime are the promises of Christ, 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.' .... 'Going, therefore, teach ye all nations.' .... 'And lo! I am with you all days, even unto the end of the world.' Now to what Church was this promise made (a promise which involves infallibility; for it would be blasphemy to say that the God of Truth could commission a Church to teach the world, if that Church could possibly teach error)? Certainly not to Churches (sects, I should say) which separated from the parent Church fifteen hundred years after the promise was given, and therefore came into existence fifteen hundred years too late to be the Church of Christ. And to what do the sects have recourse? To groundless accusations of the Church of God, involving the charge of idolatry; but this very charge condemns them, 'ex ore tuo judico te.' for, by saying that the Church fell into idolatry, and that that justifies their separation, they admit that there was a time when the Church was not guilty of idolatry. Now how are the promises of Christ verified, if His Church could ever become idolatrous? I find in no part of Scripture any prediction that the Church of Christ should ever become idolatrous, and that then it should be lawful to separate from her. Christ said simply, 'I am with you all days,' and 'he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be condemned.' It is in vain to urge that St. Paul speaks of the 'man of sin,' and of 'a falling away,'—he speaks not of the Church; and the very expression 'a falling away' shows that it is not the Church, but sects, to which he alludes—for the Church never fell away from any previous Church,—this is matter of history; but all the sects, all schismatics, all heretics, fell away from the Catholic Church of Christ,—this is equally matter of history. No. St. Paul, the ever-glorious apostle and doctor of the Gentiles, spoke of Arius, Luther, Calvin, Knox, and Henry VIII., and all other heresiarchs, all of whom did apostatize and 'fall away,' and have by their schisms and endless divisions, and the spirit of infidelity resulting from them, paved the way for the Man of Sin, the great Antichrist, who may perhaps shortly appear, the last development of Heresy and Liberalism. But how shall sectaries take refuge in the mysterious predictions of the Apocalypse? As well might that atrocious assassin who killed Henry IV. find some excuse in the hidden words of that volume. But I might pursue the question still further. What right have sects to the Bible? Jesus Christ gave it to us, and these men have stolen our book. If they say He did not give it to us, I reply, then they ought to cease to believe that Jesus Christ ever existed, for that is no more a matter of history, nor a more certain fact, than His commission to His Church to teach all nations all truth.
"But I must conclude. I have not written all this without
some fear; but, my dear Mr. Spencer, I know it is a
subject which is deeply interesting to you, and, therefore,
however ill I may have said it, I have said it with the less
hesitation. Will you write me a line to say if you can
come here? I do hope you will. My father says he had
the pleasure once of meeting you at Mr. Thornton's.
"Believe me, my dear Mr. Spencer,
"Most sincerely yours,
"Ambrose Lisle Phillipps.
"Clarendon Park, Loughbro',
"Dec. 30."
The letter in which Father Ignatius signified his acceptance of this invitation is still extant, and was lent by Mr. Phillipps to the Passionists for this "Life." It is interesting, as the last vibration of the needle to the pole of Catholic truth, as well as for the idea it gives of his state of mind at that time. We give it, therefore, in full. He wrote it from Althorp, where the family were assembled, as usual, for the Christmas holidays.
"Althorp, Jan. 4, 1830.
"My Dear Sir,—I received your kind invitation to
Garendon on Saturday; but I thought it best to postpone
answering it for a day or two, that I might consider what I
had better do. If the visit which you propose to me had
been an ordinary one, I suppose I should have declined it
for the present, as I believe my father and mother will be
at Althorp till about the 25th January, and I seldom go
out when they are here. But as you invite me in the hope,
and with a desire, that good may be done by my going, I
believe I should be sorry afterwards if I refused. I therefore
have told my father of my intention, and, if nothing
happens to prevent me, I will be with you on Monday the
25th. As to the hour of my arrival, I cannot just now tell
how the coaches run between Northampton and Loughborough;
but I conclude I shall be with you in good time.
And now that I have determined to go, I am really thankful
that another opportunity of conversing with you is given
me so soon; and I trust that our intercourse will be blessed
for our own good and that of others. And if the step you
have taken in becoming a Roman Catholic is correct, according
to the will of Christ, I have no doubt that my conversation
with you will be of use in drawing me nearer to the
right point. If, as I still am convinced, there is some error
in your views, let us agree in hoping that our intercourse
may be likewise profitable to you. I have been confirmed,
by every conversation which I have had with Roman Catholics,
in the persuasion that there is something materially
wrong in what we may call the Protestant system; and I
have spoken my mind to this effect as often as occasion has
been given me. But if our union with the Roman Catholic
Church involves a declaration of my belief of all that she
teaches, and a submission to all her authority, as their subjects
are set forth in Bossuet's Exposition and Catechism, I
am not as yet one of the body; and I am reduced to the
conviction that somewhere or other there is an error among
you. One thing I have learnt in the course of these inquiries
is that the Scriptures of the New Testament are not,
as I formerly used to regard them through want of consideration,
the formal canon of the Christian faith. It is as
clear to me as I suppose you could wish it to be, that the
oral tradition of Christ to Peter and the other Apostles, and
that of the Apostles to the Churches, is the rule of Christian
doctrine, and with all my heart I seek for the knowledge of
what they taught, and have been frequently struck with the
desirableness of a clear and definite authority to which we
might refer, when I have observed the mischief into which
Christians have fallen by following each his own judgment.
I do not see how I should be stopped from at once becoming
Catholic, under this impression, if it was not that on comparing
the state of the doctrine and discipline of the Roman
Church with what the Scriptures plainly teach me of the state
of the Apostolic Church, and the method of their doctrine, I
see such an obvious and plain difference, and I cannot be convinced
but that, between their time and that of the Council of
Trent, improper use has been made of the Church's authority.
I am waiting to learn what is the right way, which
God knows and He alone; and I can only hope for His
guidance of me into the right way by standing ready for conviction
when the means of it are offered to me. I declare
myself to be in doubt. But that doubt gives me no uneasiness,
for my hope of salvation is simply founded on Jesus
Christ crucified; whom I expect to meet, as one of His
redeemed ones, when He returns. It is not any works of
righteousness which I can do, nor any outward profession of
doctrine which I can make, that can justify me. I am
justified freely by the grace of God through faith in Jesus
Christ, to whom I give myself, to learn of Him and follow
Him whithersoever He leadeth. You will find me as open
to instruction and conviction as you seemed to think me at
Mr. Foley's; and I will weigh what you say, though you
should decline to meet me on the same terms, and declare
yourself determined to give your mind no more to inquiry.
Yet, for your own sake and the sake of others, who will of
course be more disposed to attend to you if they see you
candid and still humble and doubtful of your own judgment,
I wish you to resolve that you will meet me as I come to
you, determined that we will, with the blessing of God,
come to one mind, at the cost of all our respective prejudices.
We should not meet as polemics determined on
victory, but in the spirit of meekness and mutual forbearance.
Then God, who sees the heart, if he sees us truly
thus disposed, will know how to make his truth shine
clearly to us both. Above all, let us pray for each other,
and for all, but especially those who most nearly belong to
us, and be encouraged by the promise, 'If any two of you
shall agree as touching anything that ye shall ask, on earth
it shall be done for them of My Father, who is in heaven.'
Pray give my respectful compliments to your father, whom
I remember well meeting once at Brock Hall, and of whom I
have often heard the Thorntons speak with great regard;
and to carry to him my best thanks for his kind permission
to you to receive me in his house. Perhaps I shall write to
the Bishop of Lichfield, to tell him that I expect to meet
him there. I hope nothing will prevent his coming. And
if we are allowed to have freedom of conversation with him
on these things, which I pray to God may be given us, I
must particularly interest you to hear and consider what he
says with meekness and humility, though you may have the
clearest conviction that he is in error. Surely his age and
rank, and the work to which he has sincerely devoted himself,
and his relation to you, make this a double duty; and,
by acting so, you will not be hurt, for though you may be
perplexed for awhile, God will not suffer you to lose one
point of what is really good, but will finally establish you
the more firmly for acting in this humble spirit.
"Believe me, dear Sir,
"Yours most sincerely,
"George Spencer."
He relates, in the Account of his Conversion, the effects of this visit:—
"On Sunday, 24th January, 1830, I preached in my church, and in the evening took leave of my family for the week, intending to return on the Saturday following to my ordinary duties at home. But our Lord ordered better for me. During the week I spent on this visit I passed many hours daily in conversation with Phillipps, and was satisfied beyond all my expectations with the answers he gave to the different questions I proposed, about the principal tenets and practices of Catholics. During the week we were in company with several other Protestants, and among them some distinguished clergymen of the Church of England, who occasionally joined in our discussions. I was struck with observing how the advantage always appeared on his side in the arguments which took place between them, notwithstanding their superior age and experience; [Footnote 8] and I saw how weak was the cause in behalf of which I had hitherto been engaged; I felt ashamed of arguing any longer against what I began to see clearly could not be fairly disproved. I now openly declared myself completely shaken, and, though I determined to take no decided step until I was entirely convinced, I determined to give myself no rest till I was satisfied, and had little doubt now of what the result would be. But yet I thought not how soon God would make the truth clear to me. I was to return home, as I have said, on Saturday. Phillipps agreed to accompany me on the day previous to Leicester, where we might have further conversation with Father Caestryck, the Catholic missionary established in that place. I imagined that I might take some weeks longer for consideration, but Mr. Caestryck's conversation that afternoon overcame all my opposition. He explained to me, and made me see, that the way to come at the knowledge of the true religion is not to contend, as men are disposed to do, about each individual point, but to submit implicitly to the authority of Christ, and of those to whom He has committed the charge of His flock. He set before me the undeniable but wonderful fact of the agreement of the Catholic Church all over the world, in one faith, under one head; he showed me the assertions of Protestants, that the Catholic Church had altered her doctrines, were not supported by evidence; he pointed out the wonderful, unbroken chain of the Roman Pontiffs; he observed to me how in all ages the Church, under their guidance, had exercised an authority, undisputed by her children, of cutting off from her communion all who opposed her faith and disobeyed her discipline. I saw that her assumption of this power was consistent with Christ's commission to His Apostles to teach all men to the end of the world; and His declaration that those who would not hear the pastors of His Church rejected Him. What right, then, thought I, had Luther and his companions to set themselves against the united voice of the Church? I saw that he rebelled against the authority of God when he set himself up as an independent guide. He was bound to obey the Catholic Church—how then should I not be equally bound to return to it? And need I fear that I should be led into error by trusting to those guides to whom Christ himself thus directed me? No! I thought this impossible. Full of these impressions, I left Mr. Caestryck's house to go to my inn, whence I was to return home next morning. Phillipps accompanied me, and took this last occasion to impress on me the awful importance of the decision which I was called upon to make. At length I answered:—
[Footnote 8: Phillipps was then about 17 years of age.]
"'I am overcome. There is no doubt of the truth. One more Sunday I will preach to my congregation, and then put myself into Mr. Foley's hands, and conclude this business.'
"It may be thought with what joyful ardour he embraced this declaration, and warned me to declare my sentiments faithfully in these my last discourses. The next minute led me to the reflection,—Have I any right to stand in that pulpit, being once convinced that the Church is heretical to which it belongs? Am I safe in exposing myself to the danger which may attend one day's travelling, while I turn my back on the Church of God, which now calls me to unite myself to her for ever? I said to Phillipps: 'If this step is right for me to take next week, it is my duty to take it now. My resolution is made; to-morrow I will be received into the Church.' We lost no time in despatching a messenger to my father, to inform him of this unexpected event. As I was forming my last resolution, the thought of him came across me; will it not be said that I endanger his very life by so sudden and severe a shock? The words of our Lord rose before me, and answered all my doubts: 'He that hateth not father and mother, and brothers and sisters, and houses and lands, and his own life too, cannot be my disciple.' To the Lord, then, I trusted for the support and comfort of my dear father under the trial which, in obedience to His call, I was about to inflict upon him. I had no further anxiety to disturb me. God alone knows the peace and joy with which I laid me down that night to rest. The next day, at nine o'clock, the Church received me for her child."