CTbc University of Chicago
Ulibrarics
DURRETT COLLECTION
THE ,
CHURCH OP ROME,
IN HER PRIMITIVE PURITY,
WITH -V " _. " 1 ;
THE CHURQE QF ROME,
-- - . o '> o ." . -.:>*
.. a '> 'i at ' ; ' J
.-.',' ., :
: ATT THE RECENT DA^ ; ..I /
.- ' o i - * o o'' o o . c" 'o .' o
c . : e D r, ^ ., o ;
BEING A CANDID EXAMINATION OJT HEB.
CLAIMS TO UNIVERSAL. DOMINION.
ADDRESSED, IN THE SPIRIT OF CHRISTIAN KINDNE^,
TO THE
ROMAN HIERARCHY.
BY JOHN HENRY HOPKINS, D. D.
i \
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church, in the Diocese of Vermont.
Cur prefers in medium, qnod Fetrus et Paulus edero noluornnt? Usqne ad hune
diem sine ista doctrina mundus Christianus fuit. Illam senex tene'bu fidem, in qua
puer natus sum, Hieron. ad Pam. et Ocean. Op. Om. Tom. 2. p. 131.
BURLINGTON:
VERNON HARRINGTON.
1837.
t
<
,
'
' *
Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1837, by
VERNON HARRINGTON,
in theCJlerlc's office of the District Court, for the District of Vermont.
HIRAM JOHNSON & Co
P'RINTERS, COLLEGE -ST.
TO THE CAUSE OF
CATHOLIC UNITY,
<# '
AS IT EXISTED IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH,
AND AS IT STILL EXISTS
IN THE HEARTS AND HOPES OF CHHISTIANS,
v
T H I S V O L U M E ,
AN HUMBLE OFFERING
TO THE GOD OF TRUTH AND PEACE,
IS DEDICATED BY
THE AUTHOR.
PREFACE .
THE author of the ensuing work, in undertaking a formal dis-
cussion of Roman-Catholic claims, has desired to confine
himself, rigidly, to those authorities and to that kind of argu-
ment, which he '.bought best calculated for the candid consi-
deration of his Roman brethren, and most becoming in every,
man, who seeks to contend for the principles of Christian
truth, without forfeiting the blessings of a Christian spirit. It
will be immediately obvious, to those who are at all familiar
with the controversy, that he has not followed any beaten
track ; nor taken his model from any of the justly celebrated
writers who have gone before him. With those writers, he in-
stitutes no comparison he holds no competition. A sincere
admirer of their learning and their genius, he would not, if he
could, detract one word from the well-earned praise accorded
to them. But still it seemed to him, that there was abundant
room for a more simple, and; possibly, effective method of ex-
hibiting the evidence of antiquity, upon the points in question.
The track which his own mind had pursued, in examining
the subject,, appeared to him the most satisfactory : and
in presenting the result to the lovers of primitive Christianity,
he trusts they will not have reason to think that he has labored
in vain.
For the plan and special motives of the work, the author
refers to the opening chapters of- the book itself. One slight
change, however, he has made; since^the second chapter was
printed. Instead of the Preelections- of ; Tournely, and Dr.
Challoner's Catholic Christian, which he intended to hars cited
A*'
VI PREFACE*
as mentioned on page 15, he thought it would be mote accepta-
ble to substitute Mr. Butler's Letters to Dr. Southey, chiefly
because this latter work is more generally known among us,
and possesses, in some respects, a peculiar kind of authority.
It was not the author's design to discuss, at present, any topics
except those which belong to the pope's supremacy, and the
dominion claimed over the whole Christian world by the
Church of Rome. The other points of the controversy, how-
rver, have been equally the subjects of his study, for many
years; and the materials are collected for a similar discussion
of them all, should it please Providence to favor the underta-
king.
The author is sensible that some apology is due to his dis-
tant friends for the length of time which has elapsed since
the first announcement of this volume. Those who are near
do not need to be reminded, that the pressure of many other
toils and cares rendered this delay inevitable.
BURLINGTON, VT. )
July 1st, 1837. {
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I. The author's motives for the work qualifications plan*
Why addressed to the Roman Hierarchy. The principle pursued is
that which the Canon law allows, and the appeal is made in every
instance, to their own acknowledged authorities. .From these it
will be demonstrated, that the system of the present Church of
Rome could not have been the system of that Church, in the primi-
tive day. ' 1 10
CHAPTER II. The canon law set forth, recognizing the Scriptures aa
the fountain of truth; next to them, General Councils, and then the
writings of the fathers. Eighteen of the fathers specified by name
in the canon law. Others specified by character, as approved by
Jerome. Jerome's account of them extracted accordingly. The oth-
er works designed to be quoted for the present doctrine of the
Church of Rome. 1116
CHAPTER III. The present doctrine of the Church of Rome, concern-
ing the definition of the Holy Catholic Church, and the pope's su-
premacy, set forth at large in the words of the Doway Catechism
and the canon law. 17 21
CHAPTER IV. Examination of the Scripture texts, appealed to in
support of the pope's supremacy, as given in the Doway version.
The latin vulgate. The modern versions. The other evidence of
Scripture. The apostolic Council. Testimony of St> Paul. He,
and not Peter, designated in Scripture as the founder of the Church
of Rome. 2233
CHAPTER V, Testimony of the Apostolical Canons, inconsistent with
the doctrine of the pope's supremacy. 39 43
Vlll CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VI. Testimony of the Apostolical ConstitutionSj irreconci-
lable with the doctrine of the pope's supremacy. 43" 48
CHAPTER VII. The Decretal Epistles strongly in favor of the pope's
supremacy, but shewn to be a forgery. Candid acknowledgment of
the Roman critics. The fact of a forged document in suppoit of any
claim, becomes evidence against it. 49 52
CHAPTER VIIL Testimony of Clement of Rome inconsistent with
papal supremacy. 53 57
CHAPTER IX. Testimony of Irenaeus set forth at large, and shewn
to be adverse to the doctrine of papal supremacy. The narrative
of Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, and Anicetus, bishop of Rome, to-
tally irreconcilable with the claims of the papacy. 58 71
'CHAPTER X. Probable origin of the doctrine of supremacy.
was the mistress-city of the worldj and the Church established
there must needs have had a superiority of influence, derived from
the secular advantages of its location. Various reasons concurring
to favor the establishment of this secular dominion. Not necessary.
to attribute the doctrine of papal supremacy to evil motives in its
origin. It was probably intended fopthe peace and unity of Christ-
endom ; but it gave no warrant-for the change by which it became
a spiritual yoke, invested with the : ' attributes of a divine right, and
entitled to exact an universal homage at the peril of salvation.
72^-80
CHAPTER. XI. Testimony of Tertullian adverse to-the papal supre-
macy. 81' 94
CHAPTER XII. Testimony of Clement of Alexandria, though negative
and indirect, inconsistent with papal supremacy. 95 101'
CHAPTER XIII, Testimony of Origen,. set forth very fully. Totally
irreconcilable with -the papal supremacy. His character impeach-
ed of heresy. Defended by the learned Huet, and by St.. Jerome.
102115
CHAPTER XIV. Testimony of Cyprian. Some passages look favor-
able to the papal claiin;-but w-hen compared with others, it is plain.
that Rome was not then invested with any supremacy. The con-
CONTENTS. IX.
troversy between Stephen the pope and Cyprian seems conclusive
on that point. Testimony of Firmilian. Testimony of the bishops
of Africa. The whole of this is inconsistent with the canon law.
116131
CHAPTER XV. Testimony of Lactantius, though negative, is unfavor-
able to the Roman doctrine. Testimony of Eusebius at large. His
commentary on the psalms affords a passage which gives St. Paul
the first place among the apostles. In his Evangelic Demonstration
there is testimony of the same character. But in his Ecclesiastical
history there is abundant evidence circumstantially disproving the
papal claims. Testimony of the emperor Constantine. Canon of
the Council of Aries. 132165
CHAPTER XVI. The doctrine of the canon law on general Councils
set forth at large. Four chief points in this doctrine which are con-
tradicted by the testimony of the first general Councils, and the
fathers. 166 174
CHAPTER XVII. The person who summoned the Council of Nice,
according to the canon law, should have been the bishop of Rome;
but in point of fact, it was the emperor Constantine. The emperor's
oration cited on this topic, with the answer of Eustathius, bishop of
Antioch. Both strong against the pope's supremacy. The admission
of the canonistGibert,that not only the Nicene Council butmany oth-
er General Councils were convened by the emperors. The second re-
quisite to the holding a general Council, according to the canon law,
is that the pope should preside in it. But he did not preside in the
Council of Nice, nor in many other of the general Councils. The
subscriptions to the Nicene Council as stated by Gelasius, compared
with the more ancient copy. 175 193
CHAPTER XVIII. The canons of the Connr.il of Nice which bear up-
on the point of Roman supremacy, altogether inconsistent with the
doctrine. No infallibility claimed for the decrees of the Council.
Many, of its canons not observed by the Church of Rome .at this
day. 194206
CHAPTER XIX. Testimony of Athanasius, irreconcilable with the
doctrine of the infallibility of general Councils. 207212
CHAPTER XX. Testimony of Athanasius, against the doctrine of pa-
pal supremacy. 213 218
X CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XXI. Some other matters in the writings of Athauasius
Frauds committed under his name, in favor of papal supremacy
219220
CHAITER XXII. The testimony of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, oppo
sed to the doctrine of supremacy, and the present definition of the
Holy Catholic Church, by necessary inference. Fraud on Cyril ac
Icnowledged by Touttee. . 227242
CHAPTER XXIII. The testimony of Hilary of Poictiers irreconcilable
with the doctrine of supremacy and with the infallibility attributec
to General Councils. 243 25(
CHAPTER XXIV. The, testimony of Basil the great. The liturgy at
tributed to him. His language concerning the Council of Nice
The whole together is decidedly hostile to the doctrines of the ea
non law upon the points in question. 257 ; 27(
CHAPTER XXV. The testimony of Gregory Nazianzen. The equal
ity of the apostles. The mother-church of Nazianzen, and of Ni
copolis. The Catholic Church. Its distracted condition owing tc
there being no chief ruler in Israel. His opinion against Councils
Tin: whole strongly opposed to Roman supremacy and infallibility
271 28C
\
CHAPTER XXVI. The testimony of Ambrose, bishop of Milan. Faitl
is the foundation of the Church. All believers are foundations o
the Church. What is said to Peter is said to all. The Church o
Rome charged with error. The Council of Aquileia. The whol<
irreconcilable with the doctrine of the canon law. 281 29<
CHAPTER XXVII. The testimon}^ of Jerome. His epistle to popt
Damasus. His epistle to Evagrius. The Church built on all tin
apostles. The rock is Christ. Bishops and presbyters originally
equal. Rome is Babylon. The traditions and customs' of Rome no
more to be obeyed than those of other provinces. Jerome's enu
meration of Origen's errors. The whole compared together, anc
shewn to be hostile to Roman supremacy. 295 31(
CHAPTER XXVIII. The testimony of Augustin. His explanation o
1 Thou art Peter,' &c. directly opposed to the Roman doctrine. Pow
(M- of the keys explained in like manner. St. Peter represented tin
CONTENTS. XI
Church, and St. John also. What was committed to Peter was
committed to all the apostles. Augustin describes the Catholic
Church without any allusion to the papacy.. The customs of Rome
not binding. List of 88 heresies. Augustin, on the whole, irre-
concilable with the Roman doctrine. 317 330
CHAPTER XXIX. The testimony of Chrysostom. He interprets the
proof-texts of the Doway Catechism in a manner which cannot con-
sist with the Roman claim. 331 335
CHAPTER XXX. The testimony of Isidore of Pelusrum. Peter's con-
fession was the foundation of the Church. The testimony of Pros-
per of Aquitain concerning the Catholic Church. The testimony
of Vincent of Lerins. His famous standard for trying heresy
altogether decisive against the present doctrine of the Church of
Rome. 336341
CHAPTER XXXI. Recapitulation of the witnesses. Their writings con-
fessed to be still interpolated and impure. Yet even as they s^and,
the evidence is conclusive. 342 345
CHAPTER XXXII. The rise of the doctrine of supremacy, from the
secular preponderance of ancient Rome. The imperial laws aided
in establishing it. Also., the Councils. The change which took
place acknowledged and deplored by the candid Roman-Catholics.
Extracts in proof from Fleury. 346 356
CHAPTER XXXIII. The creed of pope Pius IV. quoted from Mr. Butler.
Admitted to be the universally received summary of the present sys-
tem. Statement of the various opinions professed concerning the
extent of the papal powers among Roman-Catholics themselves.
The Transalpine doctrine. The Cisalpine doctrine. The canon of
the Council of Florence. 357364
[CHAPTER XXXIV. These doctrines irreconcilable. No definition
agreed on. The declaration of the French clergy in 1G82. Disap-
probation of the pope. The difficulty passed over by his successor.
The oath established for the British Roman-Catholics in 1791. The
five universities consulted by Mr. Pitt. The Cisalpine doctrine
professed without any authority, and in the face of the declared sys-
tem and practice of Rome for centuries. Cisalpine divines admit
the facts. Their argument examined and shewn to be inconclusive.
The Transalpine doctrine which accords the right of dethroning he-
Xll CONTENTS.
retioal sovereigns &c. to the pope, is the only authoritative doctrine
of the present day, 365 381
Cii AFTER XXXV. The change of primitive practice in the mode of
electing the pope ceremonies of his installation adoration pla-
cing him on the altar triple crown, &c. 382 386
CHAPTER XXXVI. Points of agreement. Reformed Christians are
Catholics in al! that is primitive, but Protestants in all that has
been changed. Questions of practical importance. 1. Why the
unity of the Holy Catholic Church should be confined to the com-
munion of the Church of Rome, instead of being, as at first, co-ex-
tensive with the creed of the Church universal. 2. Why a vow of
true obedience to the pope should be added to the creed, and made
a part of faith, necessary to salvation. 3. Why the same creed ob-
liges the professor to say that he holds all apostolic traditions and
observances of the holy Catholic Church, when so many of these
traditions and observances are done away. 4. Why the same creed
exacts the promise to understand the Scriptures no otherwise than
as the fathers unanimously interpret thern,when their interpretations
are so directly opposed to the present system. 5, Why all the canons
of the Councils are professed to be holden, when so many of them
are obsolete; and especially, why the anathemas of the Council of
Trent, should be considered binding on the conscience of every in-
dividual. Remarks on the curses which the Roman-Catholic is thus
compelled to denounce on all out of his own pale. Lastly, Why the
. phantom of infallibility should be retained, when the professed doc-
trines of the Court of Rome have confessedly undergone such a
change, and when, to this day, there are several inconsistent theo-
ries concerning the papacy afloat, without any acknowledged mode
of deciding between them. 387 393
CONCLUSION. Attempts made in the 17th century, to unite the reform-
ed Churches with the Gallican Church of Rome. Circumstances
existing at present more favorable to such an enterprise. The Church
of Rome chiefly concerned to improve the opportunity. A disposi-
tion to return to primitive principles, a discussion of those principles
for the sake of truth and peace, with the encouraging aid of those
governments which have an established religion, would probabl)"i
under God, soon settle every difficulty. The peril of the distracted
etatc of Christendom. The responsibility of the present generation.
The author's prayer for peace.
CHAPTER I.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST,
AN address to an ecclesiastical body so numerous, so
powerful, so august, as the Hierarchy of the Church of
Rome, from an individual of humble name and small repu-
tation, may well seem, if not to others, at least to you, in
need of an apology. Let me state, therefore, in all simpli-
city, the motives which have incited me to the present un-
dertaking.
I belong to the communion of the Protestant Episcopal
Church, descended from the Church of England, which
you call heretical and schismatic. Unworthy, as I freely
acknowledge myself, of such a distinction, it has pleased
Divine Providence to place me in the office of bishop in
that Church, the least among my brethren. On the ground
then, in the first place, of official duty, I ask the privilege
of reasoning with you on the authority by which you deny
us a place in the Catholic Church, and condemn us as ha-
ving neither part nor lot in the heritage of the faithful.
But besides this official right, I confess, even at the
hazard of being accused of egotism that I have a personal
feeling of more than usual depth and earnestness upon the
subject of your claims. Although a constant inhabitant of
the United States for almost forty years, yet I cannot forget
that ray first breath was drawn in that ill-fated, island, which
2 REASONS FOtt THE UNDERTAKING. ' [CHAPTER f .,
has felt the evils of religious discord so bitterly, and so long*
True, the associations of my childhood have all been bro-
ken, and their faded relics are like the dim memory of a
dream : but I never expect to see the day when I shall
contemplate the religious distractions of Ireland without a
lively emotion ; nor can I shake off the strong conviction,
that tranquillity will never be restored to that unhappy coun-
try, until the exclusive spirit of bigotry lies prostrate before
the gospel of peace. May I not be allowed, therefore, to say
that I possess a sort of birthright in the discussion of your
claims, which should obtain for me a patient and indulgent
hearing ?
There is a third ground, however, on which I should de-
fend my work, derived from the fact, that the controversy
between our respective Churches deserves to be considered
the most exciting and important religious topic of the age.
In comparison with this, all other controversies sink into
insignificance. Your assertion that the Church of Rome is
the mother and mistress of all the Churches-, ancj that out of
her pale there is no salvation your numbers, which are
stated to exceed all the other branches of the Christian
Church together, by a proportion nf nearly two to one
your vast and well disciplined influence over the education
of the civilized world your hosts of devoted laity, men
and women whose property, and time, and talents, are
consecrated to your service -the imposing magnificence of
your ritual, so well adapted to captivate the imagination and
the feelings of your votaries your deep and various learn-
ing, so skilfully displayed in the defence of your system,
the venerable air of antiquity which invests your peculiar
doctrines with a special charm and the aspect of unbroken
unity with which you stand before the divided and jarring
ranks of your opponents, all this does assuredly confer an
CHAPTER 1.] - QUALIFICATIONS. 3
importance on the subject of your elsk&s, which can bardlj
be too highly estimated ; and watch fcrr^s, of itself, a justi-
fication of ever/ attempt to ascertain the strength of the
* A
evidence on which they are sustained,
Nor do I think it the least important part of ihe case, that
the temper of the times in which we lire calls Br a peculiar
effort to investigate the merits of this coDtrovf-rsv, Your
-* W
enemies, particularly in this country, are numerous, deter*-
mined, and unsparing. The most unparalleled assaults of
violence have been directed against jcrj. and a community
distinguished for its liberality and refinement bare refused
O w
you any adequate redress. The press has teeraed with ibe
darkest and roost shameless accusations against your insti-
tutions, and no calumny of which you are declared to be the
object seems too gross for the public ear. The gaze of un-
kind suspicion is every where upon you: the very kenneb
of history are industriously raked for evidence against you :
the bitterest intolerance thinks itsslf justified in alarming
the communitv by terrific statements of voux alleged eaor-
J (rf CJ
mities ; and the veil of your monastic seclusion and jour
vo-ws of celibacy are currently represented 3 as the contri-
vance of systematic guilt, and the covering of sensual abomi-
w O * O
nation. It is surely, then, required, by the voice of chari-
ty and truth, that some one should examine the questions
at issue between us. upon their real merits, without the ar-
tificial and fallacious coloring in which a wild and intolerant
zeal has depicted them: and it is equally required by the
precept which commands u?to judge as we would be judged,
that your motives and your character should be kindly re-
garded, even when your doctrines are condemned.
But you will naturally ask ? what qualifications I possess
for my undertaking ; on what principle I design to proseeuts
it ; and why I choose to address it to the Hierarchy, ih*
4 QUALIFICATIONS. [CHAPTER 1.
Clergy of your Church, rather than to the people, or the
public at large.
To the first question, I frankly answer, that my qualifica-
tions for this or any other good work are far below those of
very many amongst my brethren. But it is nearly twelve
years since my attention was first directed to the merits of
this controversy ; and my best faculties, such as they are,
have been long occupied in ascertaining the truth from every
accessible source of information.^ Your own books have
been my study, your own editions of the fathers and the
councils. Not only your canon law, but the decretal epis-
tles, and many of those apocryphal writings under the name
of Clement and others, which the learned of your own
Church condemn, have been industriously examined during
this period, in order that I might be capable of a fair judg-
ment on the real evidence of antiquity. I had read the
leading works on both sides, and saw that both parties ap-
pealed to the same Bible, the same fathers, and the same
councils, while yet the conclusions which they drew were
not to be reconciled. It was obvious, therefore, that the
labor of perusing these authorities in their own connexion,
was the only perfect method of arriving at the whole truth
a labor that few men, perhaps, in our day, are willing to
undergo. But for myself, I can say, that I found it not
only a work of toil, but a work of the deepest interest and
gratification. And the results of these studies, which I de-
sire, in part, to offer you however humble the claims of
my work may otherwise appear, are at least the fruits of
sincere and honest investigation. (
Next to the qualification derived from a patient and labo-
rious examination of your authorities, permit me ito say,
that my personal and local circumstances are calculated to
preserve me from any bias. Whatever influence the inter-
CHAPTER 1.] THE PRINCIPLE ADOPTED. 5
est of a powerful religious establishment may be supposed
to exert over the minds of my British brethren, the Church
in this country has neither honors nor wealth to tempt our
integrity in the pursuit of truth. Whatever prejudice the
unhappy collisions of Europe, or the morbid fears of the
United States may excite, to warp the judgment by the force
of the passions, my lot has been so cast, in the mercy of
Providence, as to be altogether exempt from them. On the
contrary, the little intercourse which I have had with you,
has been the intercourse of kindness and courtesy ; and it
has been my fortune to know several of your people, whose
virtues would have done honor to any creed. Hence, so
far as the qualifications of circumstances and feeling are
concerned, 1 think that I am under no inducement to do
you the slightest injustice : and greatly am I mistaken if
you shall be able to detect, in the following pages, a single
instance of asperity, of irony, of bitterness, or any other
unseemly exhibition, on which a Christian disputant could
look back with sorrow at his dying hour.
In reply to the second question, I have to say, that the
principle on which I shall proceed will be your own prind^
pie, and no other. I am perfectly willing that the Church
of Rome should be the standard of Primitive Christianity,
provided the Church of Rome be taken AT THE PRIMITIVE
DAT. But if the Church of Rome has varied from her-
self, and this can be demonstrably proved by her own ac-
knowledged authorities, then, surely, it will be admitted,
that the older pattern must be the Apostolic pattern, and
that the present Church of Rome SHOULD RETURN TO HEK
ORIGINAL. SELF, before she accuses us of innovation. In
the evidence which I shall adduce to establish this change,
I shall have recourse to your own witnesses. The Scriptures,
b your own version, the fathers, the liturgies, the councils,
t> WHY ADDRESSED [CHAPTER 1.
the canon law, and the accredited declaration of your clergy
in France, will furnish my principal vouchers : and in every
instance the original shall be quoted in full, that you may
judge, without the trouhle of a search, whether I have given
a lair translation. You will surely grant that the principle
here stated is just and true ; and I trust that you will find it
faithfully maintained throughout these pages.
To the third question, namely : Why I choose to address
you, the Clergy or Hierarchy of the Church of Rome, rather
than your people, or the public at large, I beg leave to offer
the following reply.
If the object of my humble work were to cater for the
public appetite, to excite the public odium, or to inform the
public intellect, I should have no desire to be its author.
The' public that is, the community at large take small
interest in religious truth, even when dressed in that poor
invention of sentimental pietism, the religions novel. Those
of the public whom my subject would attract, are ' few and
far between ;' and therefore, I address them not. Religious
controversy, lam well aware, has often been made interest-
ing to the public, when it was strongly seasoned with gross
abuse, slanderous mis-statements, personal invective, amu-
sing or romantic narrative, wit, sarcasm, highly wrought elo-
quence, or other attractions which the public taste admires.
But religious argument composed with sobriety and put forth
in the spirii of truth and peace, has no right to expect popiir
/#; favor.
As to your people, I address ihem not, because, for the
most part) they have neither tte liberty nor the inclination
to read what any Protestant would set before them. The
laity are not qualified, in general, to understand or to relish
such discussions. True, there are many honorable excep-
tions to this remark; but not enough to justify writers, far
CHAPTER 1.] TO THE PRIESTHOOD. 7
more attractive than I pretend to be, in addressing them. But
the laity of the Church of Rome, especially, are altogether
unlikely to read any thing which their Clergy would not
sanction. Your rules of confession, and your strict superin-
tendance over your flocks, confine their religious studies
within an approved circle ; and, therefore, controversy must
reach them through you, if it reaches them at all.
I have, then, concluded to address you, on this occasion,
as being, on the whole, the proper body. I do it, because
I take for granted that ' you are bound, above all men, to
examine the foundation of your system, and to be thorough-
ly'' satisfied that it is justified by the truth of God. You are
the absolute guides of millions of your fellow beings, who
look up to you with the most implicit faith, the most un-
doubting confidence; not pretending to judge for themselves
in any religious matter, but trusting all their immortal hopes
to your presumed infallibility. Many there are very ma-
ny in the Protestant ranks, who think you dishonest, prof-
ligate, hypocritical dissemblers preaching what you do not
yourselves believe, for the sake of your priestly influence
over the bodies and souls of men. God forbid that I should
think so ! I judge you, as I would desire to be judged. I
have no right to question your sincerity and truth. I pro-
ceed on the presumption that you estimate aright the tre-
mendous responsibility of your office tremendous in all
cases, but emphatically so in yours, since your power over
your people, and their confidence in your guidance, are so
far beyond the ordinary standard throughout the rest of
Christendom. And therefore I address you in the steadfast
hope, that you will look at the authorities and arguments
here presented, with candid minds, as men who feel their
accountability to Christ, the great Shepherd, and who know
that there is but a step between them and death. Yours
8 THE RESULT. [CHAPTER 1.
is not the common case of a Church, confessing themselves
to be only a portion of the Lord's kingdom, and doing their
work according to their ability, without any exclusive pre-
rogative beyond their brethren. You CLAIM THE WHOLE.
You identify the Church of Rome with the Church Catho*-
lie or Universal. You call the Bishop of Rome the vicar
of Christ. Out of your communion you deny that any one
can be saved. Your doctrines are all placed on an equality
with the Word of God, for in them all, you claim the same
infallibility. You hold in your hands the peace of nations*
You assert your empire over the unseen world, promising
to deliver the disembodied soul from purgatorial pains, and
deciding the title of departed saints to the mansions of glory,
O brethren ! if you have indeed a right to claim all this
if the almighty Redeemer has indeed invested you with such
powers far be it from me to desire the invasion of your
prerogatives. But if not if these claims are not the ori-
ginal characteristics of the Church of Rome, but are the
accumulated changes which time and opportunity brought
in upon the Apostolic system look to it, I beseech you, for
they are fearful assumptions if they be not warranted by
the King of kings. Before Him, you and I shall meet in
judgment. To Him, you must justify your claims, and I,
my feeble attempt to question them. May His truth, which
is ONE, be, found our defence in that day ; for the prejudice
of education, the pride of place, the ignorance which we
might have overcome, or the glory of this world's dominion,,
will yield us no apology for error, before the throne of God.
I shall only add a few words on the results expected from
my present labor, lest you might suppose that I attach an
importance to it, which it cannot justly claim. Let me, then,
observe, that the question of results has not entered into
my circle of calculations. In the mind of the politician,
CHAPTER 1.] THE RESULT. . 9
the mechanist, the man of science, the man of trade, or any
of the numerous classes which spend their intellectual en-
ergies on the things of time and sense, the expected result
of their operations must occupy the first place, since it fur-
nishes the only efficient motive for their exertions. But
the defender of religious truth acts in obedience to the prin-
ciple of duty, and leaves the result with God. The men
who are by office, the especial standard bearers in the army
of Christ, are bound to ' contend earnestly for the faith
once delivered to the saints,' whether their efforts are likely
to be accounted the greatest or the least, in the annals of
human achievement. For me, therefore, it is enough to
know, that the servant who had but a single talent of his
Lord's money committed to his trust, was punished because
he employed it not according to his Master's will. In the
cause of the divine Gospel in the service of the Church
of God in the defence of its primitive and Apostolic truth
and order, I hold myself bound to strive with all men not
in the spirit of bitterness, nor in the bigotry of intolerance,
nor in the pride of self-opinion, but in charity and kindness
and good will according to the small measure of ability
which it has pleased heaven to bestow. And thus proceeds
ing, the question of results gives me no concern. I may be
vilified, because I condemn the coarse vituperation with
which so many good men, in their mistaken zeal, have
thought fit to assail you. I may bear the doom so often ex-
perienced by those, who, in times of high and strong excite-
ment, presume to follow the sober track of justice and of
candor. Or, worse than all, my humble work may possi-
bly be like an arrow shot into the air, which strikes no mark,
creates no noise, leaves no track behind it, and is discover-
ed, after a little space, lying idly on the ground. But what
have these fears to do with the course of duty ? And how
IO CONCLUSION. [CHAPTER 1.
precious a consolation is afforded to the servant of Christ,
when he is able, in the language and the faith of the great
Apostle, to say, l It is a small thing with me that I be judg-
ed of you or of man's judgment He that judgeth me is
the Lord.'
In his name, then, brethren in the service of his truth,
and as the advocate of his ecclesiastical polity, I address
you. I desire no better standard of my faith and practice
than your own Church displayed, in the early ages of her
first love ; I ask no better evidence of what she then was,
than your own witnesses have set belore me : and my de-
sign is to exhibit the testimony of these witnesses in its own
simplicity and power, and to shew how you have changed
your original system, not as some suppose, by the willing
adoption of any principle of evil, but BY AN EXCESSIVE
OVERSTRAINING OF WHAT WAS INTENDED TO BE GOOD, ON
MISTAKEN VIEWS OF EXPEDIENCY.
The motives to my undertaking its principle its gene*
ral plan are now before you. For the result I ask no oth-
er security than the Redeemer's blessing, nor do I covet
any other praise for my reward.
CHAPTER II.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST,
I have said that the principle on which this address should
proceed, is your own principle, that I should make my
appeal in every case to the authorities sanctioned by youi
own Canon law. Let me premise the list of those on which
I rest, because the witnesses which I wish to cite, must be
above all exception. ' Proofs,' as your favorite Aristotle has
well said, ' are the only skill ; all the rest are but additions.'*
From the well known work of your famous Canon-
ist Gibert, entitled an Exposition of the Canon law, I quote
the following passages.
' Holy Scripture is the fountain of the Canon law, as re-
spects faith and manners, and also as it respects the neces-
sity, the utility, and the form of Councils.' (1)
' Next to the Holy Scripture, the principal fountain of
the Canon law at the present day are General Councils.'(2)
* ui yaQ Triffrsig erTe%rov can iiovov TO 3' a/J.a nqoa^i]xai. Ariitot.
Rhet. Lib. 1. Cap. 1. v. 3.
(1) ' Scriptura Sacra, juris est fons quoad fidem et mores, et quoad
necessitatem, utilitatem, et formam Conciliorum ;' (Corpus Jur. Can-
Joan. Gib. Tom. 1. Pars, 2. Tit. 4. Ed. Colon. A. D. 1732. p. 11.)
.(2) *' Post Scripturam Sacram, praecipuus hodierni juris canonici
fons eunt Concilia Gcncralia ;' ib.
12 LIST OP AUTHORITIES. [CHAPTER 2.
1 The Canon law expressly approves the writings of
eral doctors : viz. 1. Those of the blessed Cyprian, Martyr
and bishop of Carthage : 2. those of the blessed Athana-
sius, bishop of Alexandria : 3. those of the blessed Greg-
ory, bishop of Nazianzen : 4. those of the blessed Basil,
bishop of Cappadocia : 5. those of the blessed John Chry-
sostom, bishop of Constantinople : 6. those of the blessed
Hilary, bishop of Poietiers : 7. those of the blessed Augus-
tin, bishop of Hippo : 8. those of the blessed Ambrose,
bishop of Milan : 9. those of the blessed Jerome, Presby-
ter : 10. those of Prosper, a most religious man : 11. the
epistle of the blessed Leo to Flavian, the bishop of Con-
stantinople, whose text, even to a tittle, if any laic or illite-
rate person disputes, and does not receive it with reverence
in all things, let him be accursed : 12. those writings of
Ruffinus and of Origen, which the blessed Jerome does
not reject: 13. those of Orosius, a very learned man :
14. those of the venerable Sedulius : 15. those of Vincent :
16. those of Eusebius of Cesarea, with some restriction :
17. those of the blessed Cyril which are received by the
fifth General Council : 18. those of blessed Isidore.' (3)
(3) ' Non paucorum Scripta Doctorum Canon expresse approbat.'
'Non aliorum Scripta expresse probat Canon, quam istorum,
1. Beati Cypriani martyris et Carthaginiensis Episcopi. 2. Beati
Athanasii Alexandria! Episcopi. 3. Beati Gregorii Nazianzeni Epis-
copi. 4. Beati Basilii Cappadocise Episcopi. 5. Beati Joannis Con-
Btantinopplitani Episcopi. 6. Hilarii Pictaviensis Episcopi. 7. Beati
Augustini Hipponensis Episcopi. 8. Beati Hieronyini Presbyteri. 10.
Prosperi viri religiosissimi. 11. Epistolara Beati Leonis ad Flavianum
Constantinopolitamim Episcopum destinatarn, cujus textum aut unum
iota, siquisquam hliola disputaverit, et non earn in omnibus vcnera-
biliter acceperit, Anathema sit. 12. Rufini et Origenis quee beatus
Hierbnymus non rcpudiat. 13. Orosii viri eruditissimi. 14. Venerabi-
lis viri Sedulii. 15. Vincentii. 16. Eusebii Cfflsariensis cum quadam
CHAPTER 2.] LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 13
Besides these fathers whom your canon law thus express-
ly names, it pronounces a general approbation of all the or-
thodox fathers, and of all that Jerome approves, although
in some respects he may have seen cause to blame them.
Indeed the judgment of Jerome- is cardinal with you. He
is called, in your ,-cfanon law, most blessed, while the other
fathers are called blessed only, and in Origen, Ruffinus and
others, his censure is taken as the index to that which should
be condemned, by the plain sentence of Pope Gelasius, who
flourished in the fifth century. From the catalogue, there-
fore, which Jerome himself furnishes, I take my authority
for some others* of the fathers, which I shall have occasion
to cite, and I mention them now, in order that the ground-
work may be firmly settled before I proceed.- They are as
follows ; viz :
Irenseus, mentioned by Jerome, with great commenda-
tion, the bishop of Lyons, whose books were published
about A. D. 170. (6)
Clement of Alexandria, the master of the famous Cate-
chetical school after Pantaenus, whose books Jerome calls
' admirable volumes full of erudition and eloquence, taken
both from the Holy Scriptures,and fromeecular literature.' (7)
restrictione. 17. Beati Cyrilli opera a quinto Concilio G&nerali re-
cepta. 18. Sancti Isidori.' ib. Tit. 5. p. 12.
(6) ' Irenseus Pothini Episcopi, qui Lugdunensem in Gallia rege-
bat ecclesiam presbyter, am artyribus ejusdem loci ob quasdam eecle-
siae qusestiones legatus Romam missus, honorificas super nomine suo
ad Eleutherium Episcopum perfert literas. P,ostea jam Pothino prope
nonagenario, ob Christum martyrio coronato, in locum ejus substitui-
tur. Scripsit quinque adversus haereses libros.' &c. Sanct. Hieron-
op. om. Ed. 1684. Tom. 1. p. 180. B.
(7) Clemens Alexandriae Ecclesiae presbyter, Panteani auditor, post
ejus mortem Alexandriae ecclesiasticam scholam tenuit, et xatiz >t attor
magiater fuit. Feruntur ejus insignia volumina,plenaque eruditionis et.
eloquentiae, tarn de Scripturis divinis, quam de aecularis literatures in-
strumento. E quibue ilia sunt, guy((mr$ libri octo,' &c. ib. 181. B.
14 LIST OP AUTHORITIES. [CHAPTERS.
Tertullian, the profound and learned presbyter of Car-
thage, who flourished about A. D. 200. and whose works
were the favorite study of St. Cyprian. Jerome records the
fact that Cyprian never passed a day without reading this
author, and frequently calledhim 'the master.' He fell,
however, towards the close of his life, into the error of
Montanus, whom he followed as being an incarnation of the
Holy Spirit, and Jerome attributes his lapse to the envy and
reproaches of the Roman Clergy. Hence there are some
parts of his works that you receive with approbation, name-
ly those which were written previous to his adoption of the
error of Montanus ; but those which were written afterwards
you reject. In quoting from this writer, I shall not forget
this distinction : nevertheless, there are some things even in
his rejected pages worthy of attention. (8)
Lactantius is another ecclesiastical writer, mentioned by
Jerome with approbation, and celebrated, as you know, for
the remarkable beauty of his style, from whom I shall draw
some testimony, on the points to be discussed. (9) The
(8) ' Tertullianus presbyter provincise Africae, civitatis Carthagi-
nensis, patre Centurione proconsular!. Hie acris et vehementis inge-
nii, multa scripsit volumina, quae quia nota sunt pluribus, praetermit-
timus. Vidi ego quendam Paul urn Concordise, quod oppidum Italiae
est, senem, qui se beati Cypriani jam grandis aetatis notarium, cum
ipse admodum esset adolescens, Romse vidisse diceret, referreque sibi
aolitum, nunquam Cyprianum absque Tertulliani lectione unam diem
praetermisisse, ac sibi crebro dicere : Da magistrum : Tertullianum
videlicet significans. Hie cum usque ad mediam setatem presbyter ec-
clesiae permansisset, invidia poetea et contumeliis clericorum Roma-
nae ecclesiae, ad Montani dogma delapsus, in multis libris novae pro-
phetiae meminit, specialiter autem adversum ecclesiam texuit volumi-
n De Pudicitia, De Persecutione, De jejuniis, De monogamia, De
ectasi libros sex, et septimum quern adversum Apollonium composuit.
Ferturque yixisse usque ad decrepitam aetatem, et multa quae non ex-
tant opusculacondidisse.' ib. p. 183.
(9) ' Firminianus, qui et tactantius, Arnobii discipulus. :Ni-
CHAPTER 2.] LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 15
editions of the Councils which I shall use, are your admirable
collections by Hardouin and Mansi. When I have occasion
to speak of your rites and ceremonies, I shall cite your
Picard, and I shall quote largely from the celebrated decla-
ration of the Clergy of France, put forth by the powerful
and masterly genius of your famous Bossuet, the illustrious
bishop of Meaux.
There are three books more, to which I shall have re-
course for your doctrine. The first is the very superior
Body oi Divinity, consisting of the Prelections; of Tour-
nely, arranged by Collet, one of your best standards ; the
Venetian edition of A. D. 1751. The second is Dr. Chal-
loner's Catholic Christian, and the third is the well known
abridgment commonly called the Doway Catechism, com-
posed originally in i'649 by the Rev. Henry Tuberville of
your college at Doway, generally used by the Roman
Catholics of the British empire, and lately recommended by
the Right Rev. Benedict, Bishop of Boston. The Ameri-
can stereotype edition of 1833, is the copy before me. The
edition of the holy Scriptures from which my quotations
shall, for the most part, be made, is your own version, put
forth by the same college at Doway, first stereotype from
the fifth Dublin edition, published in 1824, with notes and
comments.
Besides the above, however, I shall consider myself
bound to notice some other relics of antiquity, viz. the wri-
tings of the Apostolic fathers, the Apostolic Canons, and the
Apostolical Constitutions. I shall also comment occasion-
comedise Rhetoricam docuit. : Habemus ejus symposium, quod
adolescentulus scripsit, (iSonto\]ixov de Aphrica ad Nicomediam, hex-
ametris scriptum versibus, et alium librum qui inscribitur Grammati-
cus, et pulcherrimum de ira Dei, et institutionum divinarum adver-
sumgenteslibrosseptem,' &c. ib. p. 189.
16 LIST OF AUTHORITIES. [CHAPTERS.
ally on those unquestionable frauds, such as the Decretal
epistles and others, which will unavoidably present them-
selves in the path which lies before me ; and in all such
cases, I shall cite the opinion of your most distinguished
scholars, as a justification of my own. That the plan of
my work will call for many repetitions, will be pardoned,
I trust, from the nature of my undertaking. But I can,
at least, promise that nothing shall be taken at second
hand nothing shall be presented out of its true connexion ;
and if I cannot shew from these, your own authorities, that
the Church of Rome has changed her original polity, and
that the Primitive Church of Rome would have corres-
ponded far more closely with ourselves, I will forthwith
conform to your standard, and publicly confess my error. -
CHAPTER III.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST,
The change of your Primitive doctrine, to the examina-
tion of which this volume is chiefly devoted, is in your de-
finition of ' The Holy Catholic Church,' which you make
inseparably dependent upon the Church of Rome, although
it anciently signified, and still in truth signifies, The Church
General, or Universal, without regard to any particular dio-
cese or city.
Your claims on this head consist in the allegation, that
our great Redeemer constituted St. Peter the prince of the
Apostles, and gave him a right of government and authority
over the rest, which right he bequeathed to his successor,
the bishop or Pope of Rome, who thereby became the VI-
CAR or CHRIST, and the head of the whole Christian
Church throughout the world. (10)
This position you undertake to establish, first, from the
twenty-first chapter of St. John's gospel, where Christ,
as you state in your Doway Catechism, (p. 20.) ' gave St.
Peter absolute power to feed and govern his whole flock,
saying, Feed my lambs, feed my sheep : therefore the rest
(10) Thus the Doway Catechism, p. 20, declares that The Church
is the Congregation of all the faithful under Jesus Christ, their invir
sible head, and his vicar upon earth, the Pope.'
2*
18 iGttts OF
of the Apostles were his sheep, and he their head or pas-
tor.'
if'
'Secondly/ according to this Catechism, 'out of St. Matt.
xvi. 18. when Christ saith, Thou art Peter, and upon this
Rock will I build my Church. Therefore the rest of the
apostles were built on him.*
Thirdly, 'Because,' as saith the same Catechism^ (p. 25)
' since the translation of St. Peter's chair from Antioch to
Rome, the particular Roman Church has been head of all
the Churches, and to her the primacy has been affixed.'
Hence, in defining the essential parts of the Church $
(p. 20) the same Catechism declares that the Church con-
sists of ' A Pope or supreme .head, bishops, pastors and lai-
ty,' and in full consistency with this, we read in the next page
that 'he who is not in due connexion and subordination to the
Pope and General Councils, must needs be dead, and can*
not be accounted a member of the Church) since FROM the
Pope and general councils, under Christ, we hate our Spir-
itual lije and motion, as Christians !'
I attach importance to this Catechism, not ^because of its
intrinsic dignity, but because it is the text book from which,
throughout great Britain and the United States, you instruct
your flocks. Besides which, it gives the latest statement of
your doctrine ; and therefore, it is to be presumed, the most
moderate and least offensive in your own opinion . Let me
next proceed, however, to make some stronger extracts from
vour Canon law.
V
'The Pope,' says your Canon, 'by the Lord's appointment,
is the successor of the blessed Apostle Peter, and holds the
place of the Redeemer himself upon the earth.' (11)
(II) Bead Petri Apostoli, disponente Domino, Papa est successor, et
ipflius Redemptoris locum in terris tenet.' Corp. Jur. Can. Joan t Gib
Tom. 2. p. 6.
C'HAPTER i3.j ACCORDING TO THE CA&ON LAW. 1$
' Thfc Roman Church, by the appointment of our Lord }
is the mother and mistress of all the faithful.' (12)
( The Roman Pontiff bears the authority not of a mere
man, but of the true God upon the earth.' (13)
' The Pope holds tfie place of God in the earth, so that
he can confer ecclesiastical 'benefices without diminu-
tion.? (14)
* Christ, the King of kings, and Lord of lords, gave to
the Roman Pontiff, in the person of Peter, the plenitude of
power.' (15)
' To the Holy Roman Church, as to the mother and
headj all the greater causes of the Church may recur, and
receive their decision according to her sentence ; nor ought
any thing to be decreed in these without the Roman Pon-
tiff.' (16)
' The greater causes of the Church, especially those which
concern the articles of faith, are to be referred to the seat
of Peter.' (17)
' The translation-, the deposition or resignation of a bishop,
(12) ' Romana Ecclesia, disponente Domino, cunctorum fidelium
IVIater est et Magistra.' ib. p. 8.
(13) { Romanus Pontifex non puri hominis ; sed veri Dei vicem ge-
rit in terris.' ib. p. 9.
(14) ' Papa locum Dei tenet in terris, ut Ecclesiastica Benefioia sina
diminutione conferat.' ib.
(15) ' Plenitudinem potestatis Cbristus Rex regum et Dominus
dominantium Romano Pontifici in persona Petri concessit.' ib. p. 10.
(16.) ' Ad sanctam Romanam Ecclesiam, quasi ad matrem, atque api-
oem, omnes majores Ecclesiee causse recurrant, et juxta ejus sententi-
am terminum sumant ; nee extra Romanum quidquam ex his debeat
uecerni^Pontificem.' ib, p. 12.
(17) ' Majores Ecclesiaj causas. pra;sortira artieuloa fidei contingen-
tes, ad Petri sedeni referendas'. ib. p. 12.
20 RIGHTS OF THE POPE, [CHAPTER 3.
is reserved to the Roman Pontiff alone, not so much by any
canonical constitution, as by the divine institution.' (18) .
' As the translation, the deposition, and resignation of
bishops, so likewise the confirmation of those who are elected,
after their election, is reserved to the Roman Pontiff alone,
by reason of the spiritual bond.' (19) .
c Although miracles may have been performed by anyone^
yet it is not lawful to venerate him as a saint, without the
authority of the Roman Church.' (20)
' Whenever there is any question concerning the privile-
ges of the Apostolic chair, they are not to be judged by others.
'The Pope alone knows how to determine doubts concern- 1
ing the privileges of the chief Apostolic seat,' (21)
' To make one episcopal seat subject to another, or to
place one before another^ or to unite two dioceses into one,
or divide one into two, are things reserved to the Primacy,
(i. e., the Chief Pontiff,) alone.' (22)
' It was becoming, since the Chief Pontiff represents the
person of Christ, that as during "Christ's earthly ministry
the Apostles stood round him, so the assembly of the Cardi-
(18) Translatio, depositio, aut r-essio Episcopi, non tarn constitu-
tione canonica, quara institutions divitta, soli sunt Romano Pontifici
reservata.' ib. p. 13.
(19) { Sicut Episcoporum translatio, flepositio, et cessio, sic et elec-
torum post electionem eonfirmatio, spiritualis ratione conjugii, soli est
Romano Pontifici reservata.' il>. p. 13.
(20) ' Etiamsi per aliquem rairacula fierent, non lioeret ipsuin pro
sancto. absque autoritate Ecclesiffi Romans, venerarii" ib.
(21.) ' Cum super privilegiis sedis Apostolics causse vertitur ; de
ipsis per alios non judicatur. ' Solus Papa cognosc.it de dubiis privv-
legioriMn sedis Apostolicae summae.' ib. p. 13.
(22.) Sunt tantum suramo Pontifici reservata : unam Episcopalem
Ecclesiam subjicere alteri, et illam praeficere isti 5 concesso sibi priri-
legio Primatias, tque duos Episcopatus unire, vel unurn dividere.'
ib. p. 13.
CHAPTER 3.] ACCORDING TO THE CANON LAW. 21
nals representing the Apostolic college, should stand before
the Pope ; but the rest of the bishops, scattered abroad
every where, represent the apostles sent forth to preach the
gospel.' (23)
These extracts may suffice for the present, to prove the
nature and effect of the prerogatives with which you invest
die Church and the Pontiff of Rome. His powers in re-
ference to Councils, will be reserved for a future chapter.
Let me now proceed to prove that you have changed your
primitive doctrine, by shewing what the Scriptures, the
ancient fathers, and the first General Council, declare upon
the matter. And, here, brethren, I must bespeak your patient
attention. The witnesses are numerous, and the examina-
tion must be thorough, if we would hope to be rewarded
by the discovery of truth. When this preliminary labor
is accomplished, I shall examine the two conflicting theo-
ries concerning the limits of Papal power, which have ex-
cited so much serious controversy amongst yourselves ; and
shall shew, as it seems to me, that the claims of your canon
law on that point have never been relinquished ; but con-
tinue to represent your doctrine fairly, to this day. A few
practical considerations for your sober reflection, will then
bring us to the conclusion.
(23) ' Decuit, cum summus Pontifex Christ! repraesentet peraonam,
ut quemadmodum Christo conversant! in terris assistebant Apostoli,
ita etiam Cardinalium coetus Apostolicum repraesentans, coram Papa
asaisteret; reliqui vero Episcopi, ubique diffusi, Apoatolos repraesen-
tant ad praedicandum per orbem missos.' ib p. 19.
CHAPTER IV.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST,
According to the principle allowed by your own Canon
law which appeals to Scripture as its fountain, I shall first
examine your alleged primacy of the Apostle Peter, as it
appears in this infallible oracle of truth.
You deduce your doctrine on the subject from the pas-
sage of St. Matthew, (xvi. 18) where Peter, declaring that
the Redeemer was Christ, the Son of the living God, re-
ceived from our Lord the gracious answer: ' Blessed ait
thou, Simon Bar-Jona ; because flesh and blood hath not re-
vealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I
say to thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the king-
dom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth
shall also be bound in heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt
loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 5
Next, you cite the passage in St. John's Gospel, (xxi.
16 &c.) where the Saviour saith to Peter : f Simon, son
of John, lovest thou me more than these ? He saith to him,
Yea Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him,
Feed my lambs.* He saith to him again : Simon, son of
*The word lambs, here, ought to be sheep \ see your own Montanus,
and the margin of your vulgate. I quote it, hoiverer, as it stands in
your Doway version, as I am pledged to do.
CHAPTER 4.] EXAMINATION OF SCRJPTCTBE. 23
John, lovest thou me ? He saith to him : Tea Lord, thou
knowest that 1 lore thee. He saith to him : Feed my lainhs.
He saith to him the third time : Simon, son of John., lovest
thou me ? Peter was grieved, because he said to him the
third time, lovest thou me ? 'And he said to him : Lord
thou knowest all things : thou knowest that I love thee.
He saith to him, Feed my sheep. 5
Upon the first of these texts, your Doway version has
this note : { The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the
vulgar language of the Jews which our Lord made use of,
were the same as if he had said in English. Thou art a
rock, and upon this rock, I will build my Church, So thai
by the plain course of the words. Peter is here declared to
be the rock upon which the Church was to be built, Christ
himself being both the principal foundation and founder of
the same.*
I shall cite to you, by and by, in their proper place, many
authorities from the primitive fathers mentioned in your own
Canon law. to prove that they gave no such interpretation
to these texts : from which the inference may be safely drawn
that the primitive Church of Rome did not hold your doc-
trine. But meanwhile, the importance of the subject de-
mands a critical examination of the first text especially, in
which I shall have no difficulty in shewing how very iar
your commentary has strayed from the true laws of inter-
pretation.
You tell us, in the note which I have quoted from your
Doway version, what our Lord must have said ' in the vul-
gar language of the Jews, 1 For what purpose is this, breth-
ren ? Do you mean that the original Gospel which is in
the Greek, is not our only sure authority ? True, indeed,
it was supposed by some of the ancients, that the gospel
according to St. Matthew was first written in Hehrew } and
EXAMINATION Off SCRIPTURE. [CHAPTER 4.
afterwards translated into Greek; but you know perfectly
that there is no positive evidence of this fact, and that the
Christian Church throughout the world possesses no other
original of St. Matthew's gospel than the Greek in which
all the rest of the New Testament Scriptures were written.
You surely, then, would not lead us from this faithful record,
to the imaginary words which our Lord might have used in
Hebrew : nor can you argue the point on any other ground
than the Greek text would justify, without prostrating the
whole authority of the Book of God.
But we are happy in the aid which we derive in this
point of controversy, from your own Latin Vulgate, decla-
red, by your Council of Trent, to be authentic, so that c no
one may dare or presume to reject it, under any pretext
whatsoever.'* And therefore,|leaving the fanciful notion of
what our Saviour might have said in Hebrew, to the actual
record 'of what he did say, as it stands in the Greek, and in
your own accredited Latin, let us examine whether your
Doway Commentary is tenable.
In the Greek the words are : rfu si Jlsrgos, xai sift
Tafaq T& nhg, but &nl Tufay Ty nha } recurring to the radi-
cal word which is of a different gender, UBTQU is the root,
signifying a rock, which rock was Christ. -T/ergaios is the
adjective, signifying rocky or stony. And nsjQog } the name
given to Peter, signifies a stone, and sometimes a rock in a
diminutive sense, being derived from -ns?Q (kepha)
the Hebrew word signifying a stone, derived from T 3 (kiph)
a rock. From this simple explanation, it is plain that the
* Mansi Concil. Tom. 1. p. 75. ' Quoniam licet omnium apostolorum
par electio, BeatoPetro tamen coricessum est, ut ceteris praemineret :
unde et Cephas vocatur, quia caput et primus est omnium Apostolo-
rum : et quod in capite praecessit in membria sequi necessum est.'
t Mansi Concil, Tom. 1. 617.
28 'TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [CHAPTER 4.
passage, properly funderstood, has no imaginable connexion
with the doctrine which has vainly sought support from
it. Doubtless, brethren, most of you know this ; but
still, the extravagance is found in your books, without any
corrective, and as it might mislead some ignorant minds,
it is perhaps as well to mention it.
Let us now proceed to ascertain how far your doctrine
accords with the other evidence of Scripture.
First, then, we read of many occasions in which the Apos-
tles were anxious about the point of supremacy, but in
every instance the Redeemer discouraged them, and incul-
cated an humble equality. Thus, (Mat. xx. 25.) 'when
the mother of James and John desired a superior place for
her sons, and the other Apostles were moved with indigna-
tion, it is recorded that ' Jesus called them to him and said;
You know that the princes of the Gentiles lord it over
them ; and they that are the greater, exercise power upon
them. IT SHALL NOT BE so AMONG YOU : but whosoever
will be the greater among you, let him be your minister ;
and he who would be the first among you, shall be your
servant.'
Again, (Mat. xxm. 8.) warning his Apostles against the
love of superior station, he saith ' Be ye not called Rabbi.
For one is your master, and ALL YOU ARE BRETHREN.'
Again, (Luke ix. 46.) wej read that ' there entered a
thought into them, which of them should be the greater.
But Jesus, seeing the thoughts of their heart, took a child
and set him by him ; and said to them : Whosoever shall
receive this child in my name, receiveth me : and whoso-
ever shall receive me, receiveth him that sent me. For he
that is the least among you all, he is the-greatest.'
Again, (Luke xxi. 24.) ' There was a strife amongst
them, which of them should seem to be greater. Aod he
CHAPTER 4.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 29
said to them : The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them,
and they that have power over them are called beneficent.
But you not so : but he who is the greatest among you,
let him be as the least, and he that is the leader as he that
serveth. For which is greater, he that sitteth at table, or
he that serveth ? Is not he that sitteth at table ? But I
am in the midst of you as he that serveth. And you are
they who have continued with me in my temptations. And
I appoint to you, as my Father hath appointed to me, a
kingdom. That you may eat and drink at my tabk in my
kingdom, and may sit upon thrones, judging the twelve
tribes of Israel.'
Now all these instances are related as occurring subse-
quently to the gift of the keys to Peter, and the promise that
the Church should be built on the rock, &c. which you in-
terpret to be the grant of his supremacy. So that neither Pe-
ter nor his brethren could have understood this promise of
Christ as you do ; for if v they had, they surely would not
afterwards have disputed which of them should be the
greatest. They must have looked on that question as per-
fectly settled in Peter's favor, and would have regarded him
with deference accordingly. Neither does our Lord's lan-
guage agree with your doctrine ; for instead of discoura-
ging the whole inquiry, and inculcating fraternal equality
amongst them, he would, as it seems to me, on your suppo-
sition, have reproved their want of acquiescence in his de-
clared will, and have reminded them that he had constituted
Peter the Governor and Chief already.
But this is not the whole of the Scriptural objection to your
notion of Peter's supremacy. For in the twentieth Chap-
ter of St. John's Gospel we read (22. v.) that after our
Lord's resurrection he came into the room where the disci-
ples were gatheied together, and said to the,m : ' Peace be
3*
&0 TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [cJHAPTEfc 4
to you* As the Father hath sent me, I also send utpote a Deo factis,'
46 TESTIMONY OF THE [CHAPTER 6.
present, and James the bishop, and the other elders and
the seven deacons.' '
' I, therefore, Peter, say first, that the bishop is to be or-
dained as we have all decreed alike already,' &c. (37)
' I, James, the brother of John, the son of Zebedee, say,
let the deacon proclaim :' (previous to the administration of
the eucharist) ' no catechumen must approach, no one of
the hearers, no one of the unbelievers, no one of the here-
tics,' &c. (38)
* Concerning the ordination of the presbyters, I, the belo-
ved of the Lord, (sc. John,) lay down this constitution to
you bishops: when you ordain a presbyter, O bishop, place
your hand upon his head, the presbyters and deacons stand-
ing present/ &c. (39) ,
1 But concerning the ordination of deacons, I, Philip, set
forth this constitution, that you, O bishop, shall ordain the
deacon, by the laying on of your hands, all the presbyters
and deacons being present,' &c. (40)
'And concerning the deaconess, I, Bartholomew, set
(37) Ibid. Lib. 8. cap. 4. p. 538. Nos igitur duodecim apostoli Dom-
ini, qui una sumus, has vobis constitutiones de omni ecclesiastica
forma indiciums, praesente Paulo vase electionis, et cos-apostolo noa-
tro, et Jacobo episcopo ac reliquis presbyteris et septem diaconis.
Ego igitur primus Petrus dico ordinandum esse episcopum, ut omnes
pariter antea constituimus,' &c.
(38) Ib. Cap. 12. p. 551. 'Dico ego Jacobus frater Joannis Zebe-
daei, ut statim edicat diaconus : ne quis ex catechumenis : ne quis ex
audientibus : ne quis ex infidelibus : ne quis ex haereticis, 1 &c.
(39) Ib. cap. 16. p. 567. ' De ordinatione presbyterorum ego dilectus
a Domino constituo vobis episcopis : Cum presbytcrum ordinas, epis-
cope,impone ipse manum capiti presbyteri, astantibus tibi presbyteris
et diaconis,' &c.
(40) Ib. cap. 17. p. 570. ' De ordinatione vero diaconorum ego
Philippus constituo, ut diaconum ordines, episcope, imponendomanus
praesentibus omnibus presbyteris, et diaconis,' &c.
CHAPTER 6.] APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. 47
forth this constitution, that you, O bishop, shall lay hands
on her, in the presence of the presbyters, the deacons, and
the deaconesses,' &c. (41)
c I, Simon, the Canaanite, lay down this constitution lor
the number of bishops necessary in the ordination of a bishop,
namely two or three,' &c. (42)
c And I, Paul, the least of the Apostles, set forth this
constitution to you bishops and presbyters, concerning the
Canons,' &c. (43)
I might multiply such passages, brethren, many fold ; but
these specimens, 1 trust, are sufficient to shew the simplicity
and equality with which the powers of the Apostles are ex-
hibited in . this interesting record of antiquity. Can these
passages be fairly reconciled with your doctrine, that Peter
was the prince of the Apostles, and the ruler over the rest,
that ' he was their pastor and they his sheep/ &c ?
But, to conclude our citations from this work, I shall ask
your attention to one passage more, where the episcopal
jurisdiction is mentioned: 'To you, bishops, it is said:
^Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in
heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be
loosed also in heaven.' (44) Here we have the very lan-
guage which the Saviour addressed to Peter, used in the
(41) Ib. Cap. 18. * De diaconissa vero ego Bartholomaeus constitno
ut manus ei, episcope, imponas praesentibus presbyteris, et diaconis
ac diaconissis;'
(42) Ib, Cap. 27. p. 575. ' Ego Simon Cananaeus constitno a quot
episcopis debeat ordinari episcopus, scilicet a duobus, aut tribus epis-
copis,' &c.
. (43) Ib. Cap. 32. 573. ' Et ego Paulus minimus apostolorum, haee
vobis episcopis et presbyteris de canonibus constituo,' &c.
(44) Ib. Lib. 2. Cap. 11. p. 298. 'Vobis episcopis dictum est: Quod-
cunque ligaveritis super terrain, erit ligatum et in coelo, et quodeun-
que solveritis super terrain, erit solutum et in ccelo.'
48 APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. [CHAPTER 6.
plural form, and applied to all bishops without distinction
or difference, agreeing admirably with the sentiment of the
final chapter, where Christ is called the ' High Priest, the
Pontiff, the bishop of all.' (45)
Surely, then, we cannot differ in the conclusion, that nei-
ther the Apostolical Canons, nor the Apostolical Constitu-
tions yield any support to your doctrine. To my mind, a
far stronger inference appears equally plain, that these relics
of antiquity are altogether inconsistent with your claim, and
do, of themselves, go far to prove, that the primitive Church
of Rome held no such principle.
(45) Ib. 594. D. E. 'Omnium episcopum, et Pontificem Christum,
Jesum Dominum nostrum. '* Primus igitur natura Pontifex unigenitus
Christus non sibi honorem rapuit,' &c. .
CHAPTER VII.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST, i
We come next to the decretal epistles, which purport, as
you know, to be the authoritative decrees and letters of the
earlier bishops or Popes of Rome, recorded in the Pontifi-
cal book of Pope Damasus. These writings are of a very
different character from the subjects of my last chapter.
The favorite topic which runs through them all, is the au-
thority of the Roman See, the Supremacy of Peter, and
the dignity of that Church which claims to be the mother
and mistress of all the Churches. And if they were gen-
uine, they would be entitled to great weight in settling the
antiquity, if not the divine right, of this your fundamental
doctrine.
But here, brethren, is the difficulty. These decretal
epistles are forgeries, and admitted to be so by all your own
enlightened men. It is believed, on the authority of Hinc-
mar, that they were the fruits of the dishonest zeal of
Riculfus, who was the bishop of Moguntum, A. D. 787,
and who, finding the .authority of the Pope needed support
in France, devised these false documents in the hope of in-
creasing it.
Certain it is, by the plain statement of your own wri-
ters, that they began to be published about A. D. 836, and
that Pope Nicolas 1, A. D. 865, contended strongly with
50 THE DECRETAL EPISTLES. [CHAPTEE 7.
.1
the French clergy, in order to have these forgeries received.
Through his efforts and those of his successors, they did by
degrees obtain credit amongst the Western Churches. But
their falsehood was exposed in full light after the Reforma-
tion, and has been ackowledged for a long period amongst all
candid men of your own communion. For proof of what
is here asserted, I refer to the extracts below, where you
will find, that although Binius and Turrianus were weak
and bigotted enough to write in defence of these frauds, yet
the great mass of your eminent scholars united in their con-
demnation. The language of your famous .Labbe is par-
ticularly strong. ' They are so deformed,' saith he, ' in the
eyes of all discerning men, that no art, no paint, whether
white or red, can disguise them.'*
Observatio Philip Labbe, S. I- Mansi Concil. Tom. 1. p. 86. ' Mi-
rum est viris doctissimis Turriano, Binio, et quibusdam aliis in tanta
eruditionis ecclesiasticse luce probari potuisse decretales illas episto-
las, a quocumque, seu mercatorc, seu peccatore fabricatas, et antiquis
Romanse urbis Pontificibus circiter annum Christians epochs octin-
gentesimum tuppositas : adeo enim perspicacibus viris deformes vi-
dentur hoc saltern tempore, utnullaarte, nullacerrussaautpurpurisso
fucari possint. Eas omnes. saltern plerasque earum repudiarunt ern-
ditissimi quique tractatores Catholici, Baronius, Bollarminus, Perro-
aius, Contius, Antonius Augustinus, Lorinus, Sirmondus, Ducaeus,
Petavius, Marca, Bosquetus, ut alios modo, sive antiquiores, sive re-
centiores, silentio obvolvam.'
Ib. p. 87. Antiquo juri universalis Ecclesiae assensu roborato, sue-
cessit Jussum Novum, quod ab anno 83G publicari coepit, et adnitente
Nicolao 1. et cseteris Romania pontificibus paulatim usu invaluit per
oecidentis provinciis.
Ib. p. 89. Riculfus autem, a quo publicatam fuisse docet Hincmar-
us, Ecclesiam Moguntiacam tenuit ab anno 787, usque ad annum 814,
et Sedem A.postolicam devote coluit ; ut testis est auctor prEefatipnis
ad Benedict! LevitEB collectioncm. Quod fortasse illi epistolarum
interpolandarum desiderium injecit, ut labantem Rosaanae Ecclesiae
auctoritatem in Galliis restauraret.
Ib. p. 90. E. Contenderat tamen Nicolaus literis ad universoB Gal-
liae Episcopos datis anno 865 ut decreta ilia reciperentur, et magno
oonntu Gallicanorum Episcoporum argumenta repulerat.
CHAPTER 7.] ACKNOWLEDGED FRAUD. 51
Brethren, what think you of the iact thus candidly ad-
mitted by your own authors ? That the admission is honor-
able to their honesty, I gladly acknowledge. That it does
them credit as lovers of historic truth, I freely allow. That
it clears the character of your Church at the present day,
from all participation in this nefarious management, is equal-
ly undeniable ; and I bear my testimony thus far, with un-
feigned satisfaction, in favor of the personal integrity, which
your frank dealing has exhibited. But may I rest it here ?
Are there not some suggestions presented to every mind of
common reflection by the existence of such a fraud, which
brings a dark cloud upon the very character of the claim it-
self? Does not the admission that the ninth century gave
birth to such an imposture, executed by a bishop and pa-
tronized by successive Popes, cast a mist of melancholy sus-
picion upon the whole sanctuary of ecclesiastical faith, and
force a sigh of deep regret over the shame of men, who
could palter with every principle of truth, while they boast-
ed of infallibility ?
Avoid them as we may, brethren, these questions will ob-
trude themselves upon us. Why were these epistles forged,
if the prerogatives of St, Peter and his successors were in
reality believed to be then, what your Canon law states
them to be now ? Why should men high in office and hav-
ing much to lose by a failure in such an attempt, actually
concoct a scheme of imposition, for the sake of establishing
a claim which was protected by divine right already ? And
if it be undenied and undeniable, that forgeries so extensive
were actually palmed upon the Churches for many ages, by
the successors of Nicolas the 1st. the presumed chief ru-
lers and governors, who held the place of Christ upon th
earth, and had committed to them the plenitude of power?
what security have we for the pure and faithful guardian-
52 ACKNOWLEDGED FRAUD. [CHAPTER 7.
ship of the other books, which come down to us through
the same hands from the same remote antiquity ?
But I turn from the prosecution of this theme, my breth-
ren. It is not necessary to my argument to press it farther :
and no mind of true Christian feeling would desire to dwell
on it, longer than necessity required. Unhappily for the
credit of ecclesiastical fidelity, other occasions will present
themselves in the progress of our inquiry, where the same
fault will call for the same reprehension. But, perhaps,
though the spirit of the bishop of Moguntum and Pope Ni-
colas the 1st, was not confined to their day nor to their per-
sons, yet the decretal epistles constitute, on the whole, the
boldest assault upon the truth of antiquity, which was ever
made in the service of ecclesiastical ambition.
CHAPTER VIII.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST.
The earliest undoubted records which you present to us,
ifter the Scriptures, are the writings of the Apostolic fathers,
as they are called, from which nothing positive can be de-
rived on the point in question. As a useful instance of cir-
cumstantial evidence, we shall by and by have occasion to
note the conduct of Polycarp on the subject of the time of
holding Easter. And in one of the epistles of Ignatius, ad-
dressed to the Romans, his entire silence on the supposed
pre-eminence of their Church and the derived supremacy of
Peter, looks altogether adverse to your claims. But the
epistle of Clement, the bishop of Rome, to the Corinthians,
expostulating with them on their deposing their ministers
and contending among themselves, will furnish us with a few
passages, marking the simplicity of that early day. The
date of this piece of antiquity, is not far from A. D. 90. I
shall cite it from your own Latin version.
' The Church of God which worships at Rome, to the
Church of God which worships at Corinth, called and sanc-
tified by the will of God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
grace and peace from Almighty God, through Jesus
Christ, to each and all of you be multiplied.' (47) An hum-
(47) Mansi Concil. Tom. 1. p. 171. Ecclesia Dei quae incolit Bo-
mam ecclesiae Dei quae incolit Corinthum, vocatia saactificatisin TO-
54 TESTIMONY OF CLEMENT, [cHAPTKH 8
ble beginning this ; for Clement, instead of affectirig to rule
the Corinthians by his official power, unites with his Church
in a fraternal expostulation.
* The Apostles,' continues Clement, ' preached to us from
Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ from God. Christ, therefore,
was sent by God, and the Apostles by Christ ; each mission
was performed in its own order, by the will of God. There-
fore, having received their command from him, and being
certainly assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and confirmed in faith by the word of God, with the
plenitude of the Holy Ghost, they went forth announcing
the approach of the kingdom of God. Preaching, therefore,
through regions and cities, they appointed the first fruits of
those whom they approved in the spirit as bishops and dea-
cons, over those who believed.' (48) Here was an excellent
opportunity to have introduced the supremacy of Peter and
the maternal authority of the Church of Rome, but Cle-
ment makes not the most distant allusion either to the one
or to the other.
< Our Apostles also/ saith this primitive witness, * knew
through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be con-
tention about the name of bishop. Therefore, on this ac-
count, being filled with perfect foreknowledge, they consti-
tuted those of whom we have spoken before, and delivered
Imitate Dei per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum in vobis eingulw
et erga vos invicem multiplicetur.'
(48) Ibid. 202. c Apostolj nobis evangelizaverunt a Domino Jeeu
Christo, Jesus Christus a Deo, Missus est igitur Christus a Deo, et
apostoli a Christo : factumque est utrumque ordinatim ex voluntate
Dei. Itaque acoeptis mandatis et certo persuasi per resurrectionena
Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et in fide confirmati per verbum Dei cum
Spiritus Sancti plenitudine et securitate, egressi sunt annuntiantes ad-
Tenturum ease regnum Dei- Praedicantes igitur per regiones ac urbes,
primitiaa earum, spiritu cum probassent, in episcopos et diaconos eo-
nim qui credituri eraat coBBtituorunt.'
CHAPTERS.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY 55
a. rul thenceforward for the future succession, that when they
departed, other approved men should take their office and
ministry. Those, therefore, who were constituted by them,
or after their time, by other approved men, with the con-
sent of the whole Church, and who fulfilled their ministry
to the sheepfold of Christ, humbly, quietly, and liberally,
and through a long period, obtained a distinguished report
from all men, those we think it unjust to depose from then-
office. For it will not be accounted a light sin, if those who
offer gifts without strife and with holiness, should be re-
moved from their episcopate.' (49) In this passage, it
seems difficult to imagine how Clement could avoid some
allusion to his own jurisdiction, if he had understood it as
being any thing like your Canon law. The Corinthians
had schismatically deposed their bishop and ministers, which
they should not have attempted under any circumstances,
according to your system. The Canon law declares it to
be, by divine right, the prerogative of the bishop of Rome,
as chief ruler and governor, to depose bishops. All, there-
fore, that the Corinthians could legally have done, was to have
preferred a complaint to the see of Peter. And in presu- *
ming to act without applying to the vicar ofChrist, the pas-
tor and prince over the whole Church under heaven, they
(49) Ibid. 203. ' Apostoli quoque nostri per Dominum nostrum Je-
Bum Christum cognovenmt futuram esse de nomine episcopatus con-
ten tionem. Earn igitur ob causam, perfectam praecognitionem adepti,
praedictos constituerunt, ac deinceps futurae successionis hanc tradi-
derunt regulam, ut cum illi decessissent, ministerium eorum ac m-
nus alii probati viri exciperent. Q,ui igitur ab illis, aut deineeps ab
aliis viris eximiis, consentiente ecclesia universa constituti sunt, et
ovili Christ! humiliter, quiete, liberaliterque ministrarunt, ac lonjpo
tempore praeclarum ab omnibus reportarunt testimonium : hoa cei*-
emusofficio injuste dejici. Non enim leve erit peccatum, si eos, qni
eitra querelam et sancte offerunt dona, ab episcopatu removerimus.'
56 TESTIMONY OP CLEMENT, [CHAPTER 8,
showed themselves manifest despisers of government, and
guilty of an open contempt of the highest authority. Why
does not Clement mention this feature in their conduct ?
Why does not the Church of Rome, writing to her subor-
dinate subjects, assert her just rights as ' the Mother and
Mistress of all the Churches ?' Why does not her bishop
recognize, on such an occasion, his own official powers, and
call the refractory Corinthians, not only to a sense of their
duty to their own pastors, but of their duty to himself, their
chief pastor ?
I confess, brethren, my utter inability to account for the
total absence of these topics from this famous document of
genuine antiquity, on any other hypothesis than this : Cle-
ment did not enforce the claims of the Church of Rome as
the mother and mistress of Corinth, nor his own as their chief
ruler, simply because those claims were not then in being.
Hence he urges them to return to their duty, by the princi-
ples of the gospel, and specially by the obligation of Christian
charity, and concludes by this beautiful supplication :
' May God. the Inspector of all, the Lord of all spirits,
the Master of all flesh, who chose our Lord Jesus Christ,
and through him elected us a peculiar people, give to every
soul who shall invoke his holy and majestic name, faith, fear,
peace, patience, equanimity, continence, purity, and tem-
perance, to the praise of his name, through our High Priest
and Advocate, Jesus Christ; through whom, to him, be
glory, majesty, power, honor, both now and forever, Amen.'
(50) Ibid. 214. * Inspector omnium Deus, Spirituum Dominue, et
herus universae carnis, qui elegit Dominum Jesum Christum, et per
enm nos in populum peculiarem, det omni animae, quae magnificom
et eanetum nomen ejus invocaverit, timorem, pacem, patientiam,
aequanimitalem, continentiam, puritatem et temperantiam, ut nomi
ni ejus gratia sit, per eummum saeerdotum et patronum nostrum Jeeuro
CHAPTER 8.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 57
Your industrious collectors give us several other epistles
of Clement, which, on some accounts, are curious and in-
teresting enough ; but as they are admitted to be apocryphal
amongst yourselves, and do not, even if they were genuine,
allude to the point before us, it would be useless to waste our
time upon them.
Christum, per quern illi gloria, majestas, potentia, honor, et rwnc et
in omnia saeeula saeculorum. Amen.'
CHAPTER IX.
BRETHREN IN CHRIST^
The next of the fathers whose testimony I shall present
to you, is Irenseus, who flourished in the second century,
and to whose writings you always appeal, although, as
I am well convinced, they may in vain be searched for any
evidence in support of your present system. He speaks
throughout of the Church as being founded by the Apostles
in general, and never mentions Peter as being entitled to any
primacy over the rest. Nay, in his relation of the establish-
ment of the very Church of Rome, he makes it the act of
both Peter and Paul ; and while he grants to that Church
on important rank, he expresses himself in such a manner
as is totally irreconcileable with your style at the present
day. The passages which are most to the purpose are as
follows :
We have not known,' saith he, ' the system of our sal-
vation, except by those, through whom the Gospel came to
tis j which then, truly, they preached, but afterwards by
the will of God they delivered to us in the Scriptures, to
be the pillar and ground of our faith.' (51.) Here, you
(51) Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus,
qnam per eos, per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos ; quod quidem
tune praeconaverunt, postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scriptures
nobia tradiderunt, fundamentum et colimmam fidei nostrse futurum.'
Iron. Coot. Hares. Lib. 3. Cap. 1.
CHAPTER 9.] TESTIMONY OF IRENJBUS. 59
perceive, Irenseus calls the Scriptures the ' pillar and ground
of our faith,' and refers this pillar and ground to the Apos-
tles generally, without distinction 1 . A little farther on, he
says that ' Matthew among the Hebrews, published the
Gospel in their own language, Peter and Paul then preach-
ing at Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. Af-
ter their departure, Mark, the scholar and interpreter of
Peter, delivered to us in writing what had been announced
by Peter, and Luke, the follower of Paul, recorded in a
book the gospel that had been preached by him.' (52) Here,
though speaking on the very point, there is not a hint of
Peter's supremacy, although you must be well aware, that
had Irenseus known of such a doctrine, every motive of
truth and interest would have combined to bring forth a
declaration of it.
But the third chapter of the same book presents a pas-
sage to which you frequently refer, and therefore I shall in-
sert it at length, that its true meaning may be clearly seen.
Arguing against the Gnostic heretics of his day, Irenaeus
says, ' The tradition of the Apostles being manifested through
the whole world, it remains to be seen throughout the
whole Church by all who wish to behold the truth. And
we are able to enumerate those who were instituted bishops
by the Apostles in the Churches, and their successors to
our own time, who taught and knew nothing like what these
men rave about. But since it would be tedious in such a
volume, to reckon the successions of all the Churches, we
(52) 'O uiv dtfeMaT&aro? Iv TOI? EfiQaioi? rij idia. SialtxT arrrvv, xai
voacph il-ijveyxsr iuayyeitou, rov ni-cgov xai lov Ilavlov Pwiir, i
,
Maqxog 6 /latfij-njs xai t^tJjvtOTJjs IltTQOv, xai avrbgTct tinb Hir^ov
QvaaofievK Jyy^af/iw? iiftiv naQadiSioxf xui Jovxag <5i 6 'axolov&os
TO vrf Ixsirov xriQvaaouevov Ivayyiliov IT (SijSAiw xari&troS ibv
60 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB 9.
confound all those, who, in any manner, whether through
self gratification, or vain glory, or through blindness and
evil opinion, infer what is unseemly, by the successsions ol
the bishops of that greatest, 
