One would be glad to content oneself with this _note_, but the interests of literature and theology demand something more; and if the anonymous editor should feel pained by the following remarks, the writer can only say that he has not the slightest suspicion who the editor of this volume is, and that it is to the Committee (most especially in such a case as this, where they have allowed the editor to withhold his name,) the Subscribers--not to say the Church of England--will look for such a work being brought out in a proper manner. To confess that a passage, which the Convocation of 1603 have referred to in this off-hand manner, is not to be found in the works of Jerome, is strange enough: but the confession assumes a new character, as regards both the editor and the Committee, when one reflects for an instant on the particular passage which the editor thus candidly informs us, he "has failed in discovering." It is not at all too much to say, that no one could be even moderately acquainted with the Presbyterian controversy, and the arguments in defence of Episcopacy, without being so familiar with this passage as to recognise it at first sight. It is, indeed, one of the chief testimonies which the Presbyterians urged in proof of the antiquity of their discipline,--as Bishop Pearson says: "Locus Hieronymi, quem pro fundo habent novatores;" and, as such, it has been discussed by almost every divine of eminence, who has undertaken to defend the constitution of the English church. To multiply references is needless. But, without attempting to exhaust even the resources of a small and very incomplete private collection, it will suffice to say, that Henry Dodwell has examined it in his additions to Pearson. (_De Success. prim. Romæ Episcop._, Diss. I. cap. ix.) Bishop Bilson discusses it, and refers to it again and again (_Perpetual Government of Christ's Church_, "Epistle to the Reader," p. 5.; ch. xi. pp. 217. 268.; ch. xii. pp. 284. 289. 307.; edit. Oxford, 1842). Hooker quotes and explains it (book vii. ch. v. 7.; vol. iii. p. 162.; Oxford, 1845). It is the subject of an entire section of Jeremy Taylor's _Episcopacy asserted_ (sect. xxi.). And to enumerate no more, it is fully discussed by Archbishop Potter, in his _Discourse on Church Government_ (chap. iv.). These facts will, it is trusted, exempt the writer from the charge of minute and carping criticism. The Convocation of 1603, indeed, merely allude to the passage as one with which every English divine would be familiar and most unquestionably no one could have been a stranger to it, who was acquainted with the subject which the Convocation were discussing.