Again the Bishop, as regards the Roman Doctrines of Transubstantiation and Concomitancy, quotes, as in entire accordance with his own, the following sentiments of the Rev. C. Smith, Rector of Newton, Suffolk, and author of the valuable work, 'An Enquiry into Catholick Truths, hidden under certain Articles of the Creed of the Church of Rome:'--"This is a great mystery; but we must not forget that it is the Lord; and, instead of pretending to explain _how_ it is our Lord feeds us on this most real Sacrifice, and _how_ He can give us, now he is glorified, His own Body and Blood separately, let us rejoice that he nourishes and cherishes His purchased Church by the 'still unconsumed sacrifice (as St. Chrysostom calls it) of Himself.' How mean and impertinent are Transubstantiation and Concomitancy, and the Impanation and Invination of Rome and her followers!" APPENDIX B. JUDGMENT OF THE BISHOP OF EXETER AS TO VESTMENTS. The following well-known opinion was delivered by the Bishop of Exeter many years since. As such it is simply recorded here, not as involving its author in the present controversy on this subject. "The rubric, at the commencement of 'The Order for Morning and Evening Prayer,' says '_That such ornaments of the church, and of the ministers thereof, at all times of their ministration, shall be retained, and be in use, as were in this Church of England by the authority of Parliament, in the second year of the reign of King Edward VI._'--in other words, a white alb plain, with a vestment or cope. These were forbidden in King Edward VI.'s Second Book. This was a triumph of the party most opposed to the Church of Rome, and most anxious to carry reformation to the very farthest point. But their triumph was brief--within a few months Mary restored Popery; and when the accession of Queen Elizabeth brought back the Reformation, _she, and the Convocation, and the Parliament, deliberately rejected_ the simpler direction of Edward's Second Book, and _revived the ornaments of the First_. This decision was followed again by the Crown, Convocation, and Parliament, at the restoration of Charles II., when the existing Act of Uniformity established the Book of Common Prayer, with its rubrics, in the form in which they now stand. "Strange indeed is it that in the very teeth of this plain and evident intention of the Reformers and Revisers of the Prayer-book, there should be English Churchmen and Clergy, so forgetful of the duty they owe the Church, that they are trying with all their power to provoke Parliament to do an unjust and unconstitutional act, by attempting to set aside this law of the Church, which has the sanction of the _three_ Estates of the Realm: and can only be altered by their concurrence. "From this statement it will be seen, that the surplice may be objected to with some reason; but then it must be because the law requires 'the alb, and the vestment, or the cope.'