See other formats

Full text of "The Church of Rome, in her primitive purity [microform] compared with the Church of Rome, at the present day: being a candid examination of her claims to universal dominion"

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 <rca><rrj <ry 



In the Latin Vulgate : Tu es Petrus, et swper hanc pe- 
tram cedificabo Ecclesiam meam. 

Now the closest version of the Greek in English would 
be : Thou art a stone, and on this rock I will build my 
Church. But to preserve at once, the true idea of the ori- 
ginal, and also the play upon the name, is not possible in 
any modem language. To make the Greek and the Latin 

'Decretumde editions etusu sacrorum librorum. Sacrosancta Sy. 
nodus - Btatuit et declarat ut hasc ipsa vetus et vulgata editio, qua 
longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa ecclesia probata-est, in publicis leo- 
tionibus, disputationibus, praedicationibus, et expositionibus, pro aa- 
thentica habeatur ; et ut nemo illam rejicere quovis praetextu audeat 
vel praesumat. Concil. Hard. toin. z. p. 23. 



CHAPTER 4;] EXAMINATION OP SCHIPTURE. 25 

accord with your Commentary, you know perfectly well, 
brethren, that an alteration of the phraseology would he 
necessary. Thus, in the Greek, our Lord does not say : &*> 
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<x. Therefore, as 
I shall shew you in due time, the fathers held th,at Peter re- 
ceived his name from the rock, just as the believer is called 
Christian from Christ. In like manner, your Latin Vulgate 
stands opposed to your Doway Commentary, and would 
require an alteration in its language, before it could be made 
to correspond with your doctrine. Instead of: Tu es Pe- 
trus, it would be necessary to write it: Tu es Petra, et 
super hanc petram, &c. So that in both these authoritative 
records, Peter is one word of the masculine gender, and 
the rode is a different word, of the feminine gender ; and 
yet you ask us to believe that they are both the same. 

I have before me several versions of this passage, which 
it may be not altogether useless to cite, before we leave it. 
The it&ffcef thought in the original is instructive and beautiful, 
but it does not admit of a faithful rendering in many langua- 
ges ; for PJSter became a proper name, which could only 
shew its relation to the rock in those languages where the 
term rock was derived from the Grecian fountain. Thus 
in the German version of the passage, we read : Du bist 
Petrus, und auf diesen Felsen will ich bauen meine Oem- 
eine. Here, as in the English, the turn of the original is 
altogether lost, for the structure of the German did not al- 
low of its being translated, 
3 



26 EXAMINATION OF SCRIPTURE. [CHAPTER 4 

In the French, on the contrary, the correspondence of the 
name is made so perfect, that equal injury in another respect 
is done to the original meaning, Tu, es Pierre, et sur cette 
pierre je latirai mon Egtise. Literally : Thou art Peter, 
and on this stone I will huild my Church. In this version 
the Church is truly built on Peter, but the rock is omitted 
altogether. 

In the Italian and the Spanish, the versions are more true 
to the original. Thus in the Italian : Tu sei.Pieiro, e so- 
pra questa pietra io edifichero la mia chiesa. 

And in the Spanish : Tu eres Pedro, y sobre esta piedra 
edificare mi Iglesia. The fidelity of the J^alin Vulgate is 
well retained in both these versions, but out : of ,1;he whole 
Seven languages, brethren, you see that there is not one 
which justifies your Doway Commentary. The French ap- 
proaches the nearest to it, but there, as I have she.wn you, 
instead of changing Peter into the rock, you have changed 
the rock into a stone, in order to make it agree with Peter. 

Plainly, then, as it seems to me, by no fair process of 
interpretation, can this celebrated text be made to support 
the supremacy of Peter. The Apostle was blest with the 
privilege of being a stone, yea, a foundation stone in the ed- 
ifice of Christ's Church. But he was not the foundation 
the rock on which the Church was built. That rock was 
the Redeemer ; ( For no one can lay another foundation/ 
as your own version expresses it, (1 COR. in. 11.) 'but that 
which is laid : which is Christ Jesus.' 

But there is a strange error based upon a text in the Gospel 
of St. John, which several of the popes of Rome have ad- 
vanced, in their solicitude to find authority for their favorite 
doctrine. It is thus stated by Vigilius in a letter to Eleuthe- 
rius : 



CHAPTER 4.] THE NAME, CEPHAS. 27 

'Although the election of all the Apostles was the same, 
yet it was granted to the blessed Peter that he should be 
raised above the rest, whence he was called Cephas, be- 
cause he was the head and the first of all the Apostles, and 
what precedes in the head, must necessarily be followed in 
the members.'* And again, in one of the supposititious 
decretal epistles, attributed to Pope Anaeletus, ' It was 
granted to Peter that he should go before the others as Ce- 
phas, and chief of the Apostolate,' and the same idea oc- 
curs many times, being justified &n6rfs xeyuAijg., ;as they tell 
us.f 

Now this assertion is peculiarly unfortunate, for it is di- 
rectly opposed to the Apostle John, and to the plain mean- 
ing of the language to which the word belongs. For the 
expression used by our Lord is this : ' Thou art Simon the 
son of Jona : thou shalt be catted Cephas, ivhich is inter- 
preted Peter ' In the Greek this latter name is ns-igoz } sig- 
nifying a stone, as has been explained already ; in the Latin, 
Petms : in English, Peter. But the name Cephas is a He- 
brew word ; and hence St. John, here, as in some other 
places, sets down the Hebrew first, and then adds the Greek 
interpretation. Our Lord did not give the Apostle two new 
names, but one. It appears to us in two shapes, indeed, 
because the Saviour spoke in Hebrew, and St. John wrote 
in Greek, but they have the same signification. The true 
original, therefore, of this celebrated name is xs> (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 <you. 
Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgivej 
they are forgiven them ; and whose you shall retain, they 
are retained.' Now I ask you, was not Peter included in 
this solemn transaction? The power of the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven, you alldw'to be the power of remitting 
sin, or authoritatively pronouncing forgiveness. This grant 
was indeed first promised to Peter: but was it actually con- 
ferred on him, until the Saviour gave the spiritual faculty, 
by breathing on him and saying ; Receive ye the Holy 
Ghost ? And in this actual conferring of the power, are 
not the other Apostles included, without distinction or dif- 
ference? Hence, as the character of an office is not to be 
determined by the time when it was first promised, but by 
the rights actually conferred, it seems abundantly evident 
that this passage decides the whole controversy. Peter in- 
deed was the first to acknowledge Christ, and therefore he 
was the first to receive the promise of the apostolic commis* 
sion. But as in the parable of the householder the Lord 
said : I will give unto this last, even as unto thee ; so, when 
we come to the actual conferring of the Spiritual faculty, 
by which alone the power of binding and loosing can be 
exercised, we find no difference between the first and the 
last. All the apostles are breathed upon ; All receive the 
Holy Ghost : to all it is said : Whose sins you shall forgive, 
they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, 
they are retained. Peter has his part among the rest in the 
powers of this high commission, but there is no more hint 
of any supremacy over his brethren in its exercise, than there 
is in the promise of the fiual reward where the Redeemer 
had said, that the apostles should sit on thrones, judging 
the twelve tribes of Israel. 

To that part of your theory which claims St. Pe- 



CHAPTER 4.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 31 

ter as the first bishop of Rome, there is an objection in the 
very terms of the Saviour's charge, recorded in St. Mark's 
gospel ; (xvi. 15.) ' Go ye into the whole world, and preach 
the gospel to every creature.' For it is perfectly evident 
that this precept could not consist with the apostles' confi- 
ning themselves to a particular diocese as you say St. Peter 
did, for seven years to Antioch, and twenty five to Rome. 
The whole world was the field committed to thirteen chief 
laborers ; and it seems hard to suppose that any one of 
them was authorized or intended to fix himself in a particu- 
lar city as its bishop for such a length of time. In accord- 
ance with this remark., I shall presently cite to you, from 
Irenaeus, the oldest list of the bishops of Rome extant, in 
which Linus, and not St Peter, is set down <as the first bish- 
op of that city. 

But passing over this point, let us proceed to ascertain 
how the rest of the Scripture evidence accords with your 
doctrine that fct. Peter was the Chief Ruler and Governor 
of the other Apostles. And here we shall find many diffi- 
culties in the way of your hypothesis, which I confess my- 
self unable to solve. 

In that invaluable record called the Acts of the Apostles, 
Peter appears prominently on several important occasions, as 
a speaker, a preacher, and a worker of miracles : but in no 
instance does he appear to assert or to exercise any supe- 
rior power or dominion, such as you claim for the bishop of 
Rome over the other bishops. So far from it, that on some 
of these occasions he looks like one more ruled than ruling. 
Thus, when the conversion of the Samaritans, through the 
ministry of Philip, was made known to the Apostles who 
were in Jerusalem, (Acts, vm. 14.) ' they sent to them Peter 
and John.' Here is an inversion of authority. Instead of 
Peter sending the other Apostles, they sent him. Again, 



TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [CHAPTER 4, 

(Acts, xi. 2.) when Peter returned from the conversion and 
baptism of Cornelius, and 'was come up to Jerusalem^ 
they who were of the circumcision disputed against him ;* 
and Peter explains the whole matter, concluding in the 17th 
verse hy saying : ' Who was I, that I could oppose God ?' 
Neither he nor his accusers, on this occasion, seem to have 
had any notion of his superior dignity, as ' bearing the per- 
son of Christ upon earth,' in the words of your Canon law, 
and being the Chief Ruler and Governor, to whom, in the 
gift of the keys, ' the plenitude of power' was granted, ac- 
cording to your Doway Commentary. 

Again, (Acts xv.) we read that the Apostles and elders 
came together to consider of the question, whether the gen- 
tile converts should be bound by the ceremonial law : and 
this is what is commonly called, the first Apostolic Council. 
But if it is to serve, according to your doctrine, as the exam- 
ple and warrant by which the other Councils of the Church 
should still be holden, the place of Peter seems strangely 
inconsistent with the authority claimed for him by the bishop 
of Rome, For he does not appear to have summoned this 
Council, nor to have presided in it, nor to have opened its 
proceedings, nor to have framed its definitive decree, nor to 
have performed any subsequent act of formal approbation. 

* The Apostles and ancients came together' ' When there 
was much disputing, Peter rose up and said,' &.c. After', 
he had concluded his address, Barnabas and Paul (v. 12.) 
related ' what great signs and wonders God had wrought 
among the Gentiles by them.' 'And after they had held 
their peace, James answered, saying : Men, brethren, hear 
me. Simon hath told in what manner God first visited the 
Gentiles, to take out of them a people to his name. And 
to this agree -the words ol the prophets, as it is written,' &c. 

* Wherefore J judge^ continues the Apostle James, (19th 



CHAPTER 4.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 33 

v.) ' that they who from among the Gentiles are converted 
to God, are not to be disquieted.' fee. ' Then it pleased the 
Apostles and ancients, with the whole Church, to choose 
men of their own company, and to send them to Antioch 
with Paul and Barnabas : Judas who was su manned Barsa- 
bas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren, writing by 
their hand : The apostles and ancients, brethren, to the 
brethren of the Gentiles, greeting.' &c. Now in all this 
transaction, where is the least appearance of Peter's su- 
premacy ? What is there that looks like the assertion of 
your Doway Catechism, that ' the rest of the 'apostles 
were Peter's sheep, and he their head or pastor ?' What 
is there that looks like Peter's ' holding the place of the 
Redeemer himself upon the earth,' and ' bearing the au- 
thority, not of a mere man, but of the true God,' in the 
language of your Canon law ? 

But the evidence of Scripture does not rest here. We 
find the whole of the remaining chapters of the book of the 
Acts, devoted chiefly to the labors of the great Apostle of 
the Gentiles, and Peter is hardly named again. Nor, if we 
take the record of the sacred history in its own integrity, 
does there seem any room to question, that if any suprem- 
acy had been conferred on one Apostle above the oth- 
ers, the claim of Paul to that supremacy stands on by 
far the stronger ground. Peter was indeed called first, and 
Paul last, but it is not inconsistent with the divine govern- 
ment, that the first should be last, and the last first, and thai 
the elder should serve the younger. The call of Peter was 
like that of the o.ther Apostles, but Paul was converted by 
a vision, and called in connexion with a miracle. His la- 
bors, his gifts, his sufferings, his share in the epistolary por- 
tion of the New Testament, his comprehensive, deep, and 
truly extraordinary knowledge of divine truth, his being 



TESTIMONY OF ST. PAUL [CHAPTER 4, 

raised up into heaven, where he heard things not lawful for 
man to utter take the whole together, brethren, and sure- 
ly it cannot be disputed, that the weight of the Scriptural 
evidence is greatly in his favor. 

There are two points, however, which seem conclusive 
to my mind on this branch of our subject; one, that St. 
Paul himself allows no supremacy to St. Peter : the other, 
that the Book of the Acts clearly makes him, and not St. 
Peter, the first founder of the Church at Rome. 

On the first of these points, let us hear St. Paul himself 
m his epistle to the Galatians. (i. 15.) 'When it pleased 
him,' saith this great Apostle, ' who separated me from my 
mother's womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his 
Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles, 
immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood, neither 
went I to Jerusalem to the Apostles who were before me ; 
but I went into Arabia, and again I returned to Damascus. 
Then, three years after, I came to Jerusalem to see Peter, 
and stayed with him fifteen days : but other of the Apos- 
tles I saw none, except James, the brother of the Lord.' 
' Then fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem 
with Barnabas) taking Titus also with me. And I went up 
according to revelation, and communicated the Gospel which 
I preach among the Gentiles ; but apart to them who seem- 
ed to be something ; lest perhaps, I should run, or had run 
in vain. But neither Titus, who was with me, being a 
Greek, was compelled to be circumcised, but because of 
false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privately 
to spy our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, that they 
might bring us into bondage. To whom we yielded not by 
subjection, no, not for an hour, that the truth of the Gos- 
pel might continue with you.' (Gal. H. 1 5.) 

'But of them who seemed to be something,' continues 



CHAPTER 4.] AGAINST PBTER*S SUPREMACY 35 

the Apostle, ' (what they were some time, it is nothing to 
me ; God accepteth not the person of man) for to me, they 
that seemed to be something, added nothing. But on the 
contrary, when they had seen that to me was committed the 
Gospel of the uncircumcision, as to Peter was that of the 
circumcision ; (for he who wrought in Peter to the apostle- 
ship of the circumcision, wrought in me also among the 
Gentiles :) And when they had known the grace that was 
given to me, James and Cephas and John, who seemed to 
be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fel 
lowship : that we should go the Gentiles, and they to the 
circumcision.' ' But when Cephas was come to Antiochy 
1 withstood him to the face, because he was blameabJe. For 
before that some came from James, he did eat with the 
Gentiles ; but when they were come, he withdrew and sep- 
arated himself, fearing those of the circumcision. And to 
his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented ; so that 
Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation. But 
when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth 
of the Gospel, I said to Cephas, before them all ; If thou, 
being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and 
not of the Jews, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to fol- 
low the way of the Jews ?' 

Now, I ask you, brethren, to ponder these extracts from 
the writings of St. Paul, and see how totally incompatible 
they are with your doctrine of St. Peter's supremacy* 
Here is this great teacher, whom the fathers so continually 
call the ' elect vessel,' following the Apostleship for three 
years without conferring at all with the other Apostles ; then 
visiting Peter, of whom he speaks without any note of dis- 
tinction : then fourteen years after, visiting Jerusalem again r 
mentioning those who seemed to be something, with an ex- 
press denial that they added any thing to him, and as ex.- 



36 PAUL, THE FOUNDER [CHAPTER 4. 

press a declaration, that the chief care of the Gentiles was 
committed to him, as the chief care of the Jewish converts 
was to Peter : then speaking of Peter, along with James, 
and John, as pillars, but, (observe it, brethren) not even 
giving the first place to Peter, but to James : then taxing 
Peter with inconsistency, and withstanding him to the face, 
and openly rebuking him for his dissimulation, expressly- 
declaring that Peter feared them of the circumcision, and 
I pray you, say, whether it is possible to conceive that St. 
Paul knew, all this time, that he was writing about the Ru- 
ler arid Governor of the whole Church, the Prince of the 
Apostles, with respect to whom the other Apostles were 
sheep, and he their head and pastor ; yea, who represented 
the person of Christ himself upon the earth, and exercised 
the authority, not of a mere man, but of the true God. These 
words, which are the very expressions of your Doway Cat- 
echism and your Canon law, have only to be compared in 
sober sincerity with the epistle to the Galatians, to convince 
any candid mind, as it seems to me, of their total inconsis- 
tency. And as the Apostle Paul knew the mind of the 
Spirit, and the polity of Christ's Church, with the unerring 
certainty of inspiration, his testimony surely should be deci- 
sive. 

On the other point, viz. that Paul, and not Peter, was the 
first founder of the Church of Rome, the Book of the Acts 
is clear and positive. For we read (xix. 21.) that ' Paul 
purposed in the Spirit, as soon as he had passed through 
Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying : After 
I have been there I must also see Rome.' Again, (Ch. xxni, 
11.) the Lord standing by him said : ' Be constant ; for as 
thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear 
witness also at Rome.' * Then in the 28th Chapter, his ar- 
rival in that city is related, with many interesting particulars, 



CHAPTER 4.] OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 37 

and the book ends with stating that e he remained there two 
whole years in his own hired lodging, and received all that 
came in to him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teach- 
ing the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with 
all confidence, without prohibition.' With what success 
his labors were attended, we learn from his epistle to the 
Romans, (i. 8.) where he saith, ( I give thanks to my 
God through Jesus Christ for you all ; because your 
faith is spoken of in the whole world.' Now inasmuch as 
St. Paul was in an especial manner the Apostle of the 
Gentiles as James, Peter and John had given to him the 
right hand of fellowship, (Gal. n.) and it was settled be- 
tween them that they should go to the Jews, and he to the 
Gentiles as Rome was the chief city of the Gentiles, and 
Paul purposed e in the Spirit/ that is, by divine suggestion, to 
go there, as he was encouraged in his purpose by avision, and 
safely conducted on his way, and preached successfully two 
years, while not one word appears of Peter's labors in that 
quarter, I have certainly the fullest evidence that the Lord 
appointed him and not Peter to that special work, and that 
the Holy Spirit, in dictating to the Evangelist Luke what 
circumstances should be handed down to the Church in the 
inspired history of the Acts of the Apostles, thought it good 
to t record this important fact, to be a standing memorial to 
the end of time. That after all this, brethren, St. Paul 
should be made to act a secondary part to St. Peter in found- 
ing the Church of Rome, and that the sacred oracles should 
thus become subordinate to the testimony of tradition, is 
only one of many strange things which meet the eye of in- 
vestigation, when employed upon the subject of your exclu- 
sive claims. 

To conclude this branch of the evidence, it maybe neces- 
sary to remind you, that in the two epistles of St. Peter 



38 ST. PETER'S TESTIMONY, [CHAPTER 4. 

there is not one word of intimation on the supreme rule 
and government supposed to be conferred on him. In St. 
Paul's epistles, we have several strong allusions to the 
Apostolic rod, and the delivering persons to Satan as a con- 
sequence of his ecclesiastical judgment. And St. John re 
fers very plainly to his authority where he speaks of Dio- 
trephes. But St. Peter neither speaks of his powers him- 
self, nor does any other Apostolic writer speak of them for 
him ; so that the whole tenor of Scripture seems, to my 
mind, irreconcileably hostile to your doctrine. Some of the 
proof is positive, some negative, some circumstantial; but 
the result, one would suppose, could hardly be mistaken. 
And yet, you make this very doctrine an article of faith, 
necessary to salvation ! Have you never wondered, breth- 
ren, that the Acts of the Apostles, and the twenty-one epis- 
tles of the New Testament, should contain so much that 
might have been omitted, in the rich abundance of their 
treasures, while yet the supremacy of Peter, although essen- 
tial, as you imagine, to the very being of the Church, should 
have been so strangely passed by ? 



CHAPTER V. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The first writings which your voluminous works on the 
Councils of the Church offer to their readers, are the Apos- 
tolical canons, the Apostolical Constitutions, and the Decre- 
tal epistles of the early bishops of Rome. 

Of the first of these, the Apostolical Canons, your au- 
thors, as you are aware, speak with high respect. They 
do not indeed, consider them the true productions 'of the 
Apostles ; but yet they are supposed to be recognized by the 
Councils, and are therefore entitled to great regard. (28) Be 
this supposition right or wrong, it is enough for our present 
purpose to state the fact, that not one of the eighty-four 
Canons according to one version, or the fifty according to 
another, furnishes the slightest warrant for your claims to 
universal dominion. They speak largely of the bishop, 
priest and deacon, but not a word of Peter's supremacy, of 
the high prerogatives of the Roman bishop, of the mother 
and mistress Church of Rome, or of any thing which resem- 
bles in the least your present doctrine. To shew,diowever, 

(28) Of the Apostolical Canons, Dionysius Exiguus says : (see 
Mansi Concil. Tom. 1, p. 3.) ' In principio canones qui dicuntur 
Apostolorum, de Graco transtulimus, quibus plurimi consensual non 
praluere facilem.' And Isidorus Mercator says, (ib. p, 6.) ' Deni- 
que propter eorum auctoritatem cteteris conciliis prssposuimus canones, 
qui dicuntur apostolorura, licet aquibusdam apocryphi dicantur.' 



40 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 5. 

distinctly, my authority for this assertion, it may be as well , 
to quote those Canons which exhibit the genuine ecclesias- 
tical polity of the' primitive day. 

Thus, Canon 13th (in the Greek code) stands thus : ' It 
is not lawful for a bishop to leave his diocese in order to 
take charge of another, even although he is constrained by 
many : unless it be for some reasonable cause, as for the 
greater gain which he may confer on the inhabitants thereof 
in respect of piety, and this shall not be decided upon by 
himself, but by the great exhortation of many bishops.' 
(29.) 

You remember, brethren, that yotir Canon submits the 
translation of bishops to the Pope alone. Here it is sub- 
mitted to the judgment of many bishops, of course, to a 
council. The difference is too manifest to be mistaken. 

The thirty-third Canon gives us a further proof of the 
same kind. ' It is necessary that the bishops of each na- 
tion should know him who is first amongst them, and es- 
teem him as their head ; and that they should do nothing of 
difficulty or of great moment, without his opinion; and 
each of them should take heed to do those things which be- 
long to his own diocese, and to the villages which are under 
his authority. But neither should the primate do anything 
without the opinion of all. For thus shall concord continue, 
and God will be glorified, through our Lord Jesus Christ.' 
(300 

(29) Mansi Concil. Tom. l.p. 31. ' Episcopo non liceat sua relicta 
parochia ad aliam transilire, etiamsi a pluribus cogatur : nisi sitaliqua 
causa rationi consenlariea, quae eum cogat hoc facere,utpote ad majus 
lucrum, cum possil ipse iis, qui illic habitant, pietatis verbo conferre ; 
idque non ex EG, sed multorum episcoporum judicio et maxima exhor- 
tatione.' 

(30) Ibid. 35. ' Episcopos uniuscuj usque geiitis nosse oportet eum 
qui in eis est primus, et existimare ut caput : et nihil facere, quod $& 



CHAPTERS.] THE APOSTOLIC CANONS. 41 

The comment of Binnius himself upon this Canon, zeal- 
ous as he is for your claims, interprets it rightly of the me- 
tropolitan bishops. ' The Council of Nice/ saith he, * and 
the council of Ephesus followed these Apostolic Canons, 
decreeing that every bishop should acknowledge Ms primate 
and metropolitan.'' But here is not one word of your fun- 
damental doctrine of obedience to the supposed chief ruler, 
the bishop of Rome. (31.) 

Once more, the thirty-sixth canon provides, that ' Twice 
in the year, a council of bishops shall assemble and exam- 
ine amongst themselves the decrees of religion!, and com- 
pose all the ecclesiastical controversies that may occur : 
once in the fourth week of Pentecost, and again on the 
twelfth day of October.' (32.) 

The same principle is here carried out, viz : the deter- 
mining disputes on all religious questions in a council, instead 
of taking them by appeal, according to your doctrine, be- 
fore the single judgment of the Pope. 

Lastly, the seventy-eighth Canon has these words : ' A 
bishop accused of any delinquency by men of credit, must 
be called to answer by the bishops : and if he appears and 
confesses or is convicted, he must suffer the punishment. 

arduum aut magni momenti, practer illius sententiam : ilia autem 
facere unumquemque, quae ad snam parochiam pertinent, et pagos qui 
ei subsunt. Sed nee ille absque omnium sententia aliquid agat. 
Sic enim erit concordia, et glorificabitur Deus per Dominum Jesum 
Christum.' 

(31) Ibid. 61. E. ' Nicaena Synodus can. 6. et Ephesina illis actis 
quae post 7. Can.editasunt, hos canones Apostolorum sequuntur, sta- 
tuentes ut singuli Episcopi suum primum et metropolitanum agnos- 
cant,' &c. 

(32) Ibid. 35. E. Bis in anno fiat episcoporum S^nodus, et inter se 
examinent decreta religionis, et incidentes ecclesiasticas controversias 
componant; semel quidem quarta hebdomada pentecostes, iterum 
autem Hyperberetaei duodecimo.' 

4* 



4 AfOSTOLtC CANONS. [CHAFTEB 5* 

But if "being summoned, he does not appear, let him be 
called the second time, by two bishops sent to him for that 
purpose. And if he does not obey this call, let him be 
summoned a third time, by two bishops more. But it he 
then, contumaciously despising them, does not appear, the 
council may pronounce against him those things which they 
see proved, lest he should profit by flying from judgment/ 
(33.) 

Here is the precise course taken by the primitive Church 
against all the early heretics : viz. they were called before 
a council, and not before the Pope. So that we have the 
decisive testimony of this most venerable relic of antiquity, 
directly adverse to your doctrine. How the evidence can 
be fairly evaded, brethren, I confess myself unable to ima- 
gine. 

(33) ibid. 43. ' Episcopum a virisiide4ignis ob aliquid accusatum, 
ipaum ab episcopis vocari necesse est : et si sc quidern stiterit, et con* 
fessus vel convictus sit, stataatur pceua. Si autem vocatus non paru- 
erit, secundo etiam vocetur, missis ad ipsum episcopis duobus. Si 
etiam sic non obedient, vdcetur et tertio, duobus ad eum rursus missis 
epiacopis. Si autem vel sic aspernans et contuma.x se non stiterit, 
Synodus ea quae videntur, adversus eum pronunoiet, ne lucrifacera 
Tideatur, duia judicium subterfugit. 1 



CHAPTER VI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, ; 

The next piece of antiquity which comes under the name 
of the Apostles, is called the Apostolical Constitutions, and 
purports, as you are doubtless well aware, to be a com- 
plete body of ecclesiastical doctrine, government, and wor- 
ship, set forth by all the Apostles in Council, Clement of 
Rome acting as their notary. This claim of Apostolic au- 
thority is universally denied by your writers ; but neverthe- 
less they warmly applaud the work, as containing nothing 
inconsistent with the system of the first four centuries, as 
being the chief fountain of ecclesiastical doctrine and prac- 
tice in the Greek Church, and as being very useful, nay, 
necessary to be known by every one studious of Christian 
antiquity. Your scholars think its probable age was A. D. 
309, but as it is styled apostolical, and as you present it, 
for that reason, amongst the earliest records of the Church, 
I take it as you give it to me. (34) 

(34) Your learned Philip Labbe S. I. (Mansi Concil. Tom. l.p.254. 
declares the Apostolic Constitutions to be 'Uberrimum ilium universi 
fere apud Graecos canonic! juris fontem et discipline Ecclesiastics 
thesaurum in plerisque locupletissimum jraaav xavovixyv rd^iv, ut doce 

Epiphanius, complectentem,' ' Satisque constare, nihil quicquam 

in iis reperivi, quod Ecclesiastical quatuor primorum sseculorum disci 
.-plinae consentaneum non sit,' &c. And again, your learned Editor says: 
(Mansi Concil. Tom. ] . 254.) ' Constitutiones quas vocant apostolicaa 



44 TESTIMONY OF THE [CHAPTER 6. 

For myself, I must frankly say, that I have read nothing of 
ancient times with such interest as these constitutions. They 
are rich in doctrine, in eloquence, and in forms of devotion, 
and curious in point of ceremonial detail. But I have 
searched them in vain for any trace of your doctrine on the 
primacy of Peter, the vicarious authority of the bishop, or 
the maternal dignity of the Church of Rome. So far from 
this is the aspect of the primitive Church presented through- 
out the eight books of the Apostolic Constitutions, that the 
most absolute equality appears in the episcopal office, and 
amongst the apostles themselves. A few specimens of the 
mode in which the subject is treated may be desirable. 

The caption of the whole work is a specimen of this 
equality. ' The Apostles and elders, to all who believe in 
the Lord Jesus Christ, throughout the nations, Grace be to 
you and peace from Almighty God,' &c. (35) 
- Another specimen is furnished in the following passage ; 
' On account of these things also, we ourselves, being gath- 
ered together in one, Peter, Andrew, James and John, the 
sons of Zebedee, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, and Mat- 
thew, James of Alpheus, and Lebbeus whose surname is 
Thaddeus, Simon the Canaanite, and Matthias, who was 
elected in our number in the place of Judas, and James the 

opus esse spurium, ab.iis, quibus adscribuntur, apostolis, tum.et ab ipsa 
apostolorum aetatepenitusalienum,nenioTheologos modo jgnorat vel 
dissitetur. 

Ibid. 256. ' Q,UBB si conjecturae admittantur, intra spatium iliud, 
quod anno 309 et 325 concluditur, vulgatarum Constitutionum sedes 
figenda est.' 

' Utcumque res habeat se se, utile est opus ad multa, et dogmatum 
nostrorum vetu'stati adstruehdseapprimenecessarium.' 

(35) Mansi. Concil. Tom. 1. p. 274. Constitutione* qute tribunntur 
apostolis. 

'Apostoli,etpresbyteri omnibus qui exgentibus in Domimnn Jesum 
Christum credidietis, gratia vobis, et pax ab Omnipotente Deo, &c.' 



CHAPTER 6.] APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. 45 

brother of our Lord, the same who is the bishop of Jerusa- 
lem, also Paul, the Doctor of the Gentiles and the chosen 
vessel, all, I say, gathered together in one, have written to 
you this Catholic doctrine to support "and confirm you, to 
whom the Episcopal office every where is entrusted. In 
which doctrine we set forth these things to you : that there 
is only one God, Almighty, and besides him there is no 
other, and he can only be worshipped and adored through 
Jesus Christ our Lord by the Holy Spirit : also, that the 
Holy Scriptures must be used, the Law and the Prophets, 
that parents must be honored, that every evil action must 
be avoided, that the resurrection and the judgment must be 
believed, that a final reward must be expected, that all crea- 
tures may be used in food, with giving of thanks, since they 
are of God,' &c. (36) 

Another specimen of the same : ' Therefore, we, the 
twelve Apostles of the Lord who are together, have marked 
out to you the constitutions of every ecclesiastical matter, 
Paul, the chosen vessel, and our brother Apostle, being 

(36) Ibid. Lib. vi. Cap. 14. p. 458. ' Propter quse et ipsi nunc in 
unum congregati, Petrus, Andreas, Jacobus et Joannes filii Zebedsei, 
Phiiippus, Bartholomaeus, Thomas et Matthseus, Jacobus Alphaei, et 
Lebbseus cognomento Thaddaeus, Simon Chananaeus, et Matthias, 
qui loco Judge in numerum nostrum electus est, et Jacobus frater Dom- 
ini, idemque Hierosolymitanus episcopus, item Paulus Doctor Genti- 
um ac vas electionis, omnes, inquam, in unum congregati scripsimus 
vobis catholicam hanc doctrinam ad fulciendum ac confirmandum vos, 
quibus universalis episcopatus creditus est. In qua doctrina haec vobig 
exponimus : Deum omnipotentem unum tantum esse, ac praster hunc 
ueminem alium esse, oportereque huncsolummodocolere ac venerari 
per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum in Sancto Spiritu : item uti 
ecripturis sacris, lege et prophetis, honorare parentes, omnem actio- 
nem pravam fugere, resurrectionem et judicium credere, remunera- 
tionem expectare, omnibus creaturisin cibouti cum gratiarum actione, 
>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, most ancient and universally 
known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the 
two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, which shows the 
tradition which it has from the Apostles, and the faith an- 
nounced to men, and descending even to us. For to this 
Church, on account of the more powerful principality, it 
must needs be that the whole Church should resort, that is, 
those who are faithful, from all places round about ; in which 
Church the tradition which is from the Apostles has always 
been preserved by those round about it.' (53) 

'The blessed Apostles therefore founding and establish- 
ing this Church, delivered to Linus the episcopal right of 
governing it, of which Linus Paul makes mention in his 
epistle to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus, after 
him in the third place from the Apostles, Clement is cho- 
sen to the episcopate, who saw the Apostles themselves, 
and resided with them, and had as yet their preachirig 
sounding in his ears, and their tradition before his eyes, nor 

(53) 1. ' Traditionem itaque apostolorum in toto mundo manifes- 
tat am, in omni Eeclesia adest respicere omnibus qui vera velint vid*- 
re : et habemus armunierare eos qui ab apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi 
in Ecclesiis, et successores eorura usque ad nos, qui nihil tale docue- 

runt, neque cognoverunt, quale ab his deliratur.' 2. 'Sed quoniam 

valde longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enume- 
rate succession es ; maximse, et antiquissimEe, et omnibus cognitse, a 
gioriosissimis duofous apostolis Petro et Paullo Romse fundatse et con- 
stitutes Ecclesise, earn quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem, etannun- 
tiatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientem 
usque ad nos indicantes, confundimus omnes eos, qui quoquo modo, 
vel per sibi placentia, vel vanam gloriam, vel per caecitatem et malam 
sententiatn, praterqiiam oportet colligunt. Ad hanc enim ecclesiam 
propter potiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem conveiiire E- 
cleeiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab his, 
qui sunt undique, conservata est eaquas est ab Apostolia traditio.' 



CHAPTER 9.] IBENJEUS. 61 

be alone, for at that time many survived who had been 
taught by the Apostles. Under this Clement, a serious 
dissension having arisen among the brethren at Corinth, the 
Church which is at Rome wrote very powerful letters to 
the Corinthians, bringing them to peace, and repairing their 
faith, and enforcing the tradition which had been recent- 
ly received from the Apostles, announcing one Almighty 
God, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, 
who had sent the deluge, and had called Abraham, who 
had brought forth his people out of Egypt, who talked with 
Moses, who appointed the law and sent the prophets, who 
prepared fire for the devil and his angels. That this Father 
.of our Lord Jesus Christ was announced by the Churches, 
those who wish to be informed can learn from the Scrip- 
ture itself, and can also understand the Apostolical tradi- 
tion, since this is a more ancient epistle for these men, 
who now teach, falsely, and pretend that there is another 
God above the Demiurgus who is the maker of all things. 
To this Clement Evaristus succeeded, and to Evaristus Al- 
exander, and then the sixth after the Apostles Sixtus was 
constituted, and then Telesphorus, who also made a glorious 
martyrdom, and then Hyginus, afterwards Pius, after whom 
was Anicetus. To Anicetus succeeded Soter, and now, in 
the twelfth place from the Apostles, Eleutherius holds the 
episcopate. By this ordination and succession, that tradi- 
tion which is from the Apostles in the Church, and the 
preaching of the truth, reach even to us. And this is a 
most abundant proof, that it is the same life-giving faith, 
which has been preserved in the Church from the Apostles 
until now, and delivered in truth.' 

1 And also Polycarp, who was not only taught by the 
Apostles, and had conversed with many of those who had 
seen our Lord, but was even constituted bishop in the 



68 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTJBB 9. 

i 

Church of Smyrna by the Apostles who were in Asia, 
whom we also saw in our early youth, (for he persevered 
greatly, and at a very great age, making a glorious martyr- 
dom, he departed this life,) he likewise taught always those 
things which he had learned from the Apostles, which he 
delivered to the Church, and which alone are true. To 
these things, all the Churches which are in Asia bear testi- 
mony, and those who, even to the present day, have suc- 
ceeded Polycarp, who was a man of much greater authority, 
and a more faithful witness of the truth than Valentinus and 
Marcion, and the rest who hold their perverse opinions. 
For he was the man, who, when he came to Rome, in the 
time of Anicetus, converted many heretics from those of 
which I have already spoken, to the Church of God, de- 
claring that he had received from the Apostles that one and 
'only system of truth which he delivered to the Church.' (54) 

(54) 3. 0cfisita>aavTtg 'ovv xai oix5o/njfeavTtg 01 iiaxanioi anudtoioi Tip 
ixliijaiccv, 4ivco Ttjv TJ; smaxonijg isiTovgyiav Ivext'iQiaav. TOVTOV TOW 
Jivov HavHog iv rat; TiQog Ttfib&fov tmotoJ.atg fitfivrjTai. diaSt^fTat 61 
avTOf d.vtyxJLt]Tog, fierce TOVTOV <5e T^'ITOI Tonco ano TK>V anoOToiuiv Tip 
fmaxonyv xHtjQoVTai KJ.r^it]g, 6 xai iwQaxwg Tovg /.taxctQiovg anoaiviovs, 
xai ov^f^7.t]y,oig avroig, xai sri svaviov TO xtfavyfia Tcor anoaroitav, xai 
T>jr naquSoaiv TCQO o(p&aifi<av s'^ftov, 6v f.iovog, 'STL yctq noUoi vnsMmQvro 
TOTS ano T&V anoaToiiav dsSidayfiivot. ini TOVTOV ovv TOV K^jftsrTos aror- 
01(0$ ovx ollyrig Tofg tv KoQiv&o) ysvofiiftig aotl.yoig, fniaTtrf.sr / iv 
ixx/lTjoJa txavtoToTtjv yQatpyv roig KoQiv-&ioig, tig itpj]r?jv ovjiijS 
Tovg, XK'I avavtoiiaa, rtjv niariv uVTcov, xai i t v vswaTt ano TOJV 



annuntiantem unum Deum omnipotentem, factorem cceli et terrafl, 
plasmatorem hominis, qui induxerit cataclysmum, et advocaverit 
Abraham, qui eduxerit populum de terra ^Egypti, qui colloquutus eit 
Moysi, qui legem disposuerit, et prophetas miserit, qui ignera praepa- 
raverit diabolo et angelis ejus. Hunc Patrem Domini nostfi Jest 
Christi ab Ecclesiis annuntiari, ex ipsa Scriptura, qui velint, discere 
possunt, et Apostolicam Ecclesiae traditionem intelligere ; quum sit 
vetustior epistola his qui nunc falso dooent, et alterum Deum euper 
Demiurgum et factorem horum omnium, quae sunt, commentiuo* 
tur. 



CHAPTER 9.] IRENJEUS. ' 63 

Here is the passage with its context, shewing the argu- 
ment of Irenaeus fully. And I beseech you, brethren, to 
have a little patience, until we can examine the testimony 
and understand its real bearing. 

The words on which you rely, are those in which Irenseus 
declares, that ' to the Church of Rome, by reason of the 
more powerful principality , it must needs be that the whole 
Church resort, that is, those who are faithful from all 
places round about ; in which Church the tradition which 
is from the Apostles has always been preserved.' And 
these, you say, prove Irenaeus to be a witness, that the 
Pope then possessed supreme authority over the Christian 
world, and that the Church of Rome was acknowledged 
of right as the mother and mistress of all the Churches. 
But do the words of Irenaeus authorize your conclusion ? 
Does he not, in the first place, speak of all the Apostles in- 



Toy <Ji JCf.rjusvra TOVTOV diade%eTai EvuQEdTog, xal TOV EVUQSCITOV 

avdQog' iixP ovrtag szrog 7ro TK>V 3 aTioaToJltav za-friaiaTcci JjTi/'o'Tog 

31 Tot/Toy TeHeffyoQog, 6g xai tvSo^tog liiuQTVQrfiev trreiTa Yytvog, SIT 

Utog. ns-&' ov -AvixtjTog. SiadE^auivov lov ^LvixijTov SiarijQog, rvv 

ta TOTCCO TOV Tfjg iTtiaaoTcfjg ariorcav ctTroaroiiav -/.uTe%Ei xir^ 

T?)" 'awTij TU'^SL, y.ai TI; *avTii JiiJa^Tj ^rs 'ano -KOV 'aTcoarolw iv T/ - 

xitjalcc haqaSoctig, xal -zV rfjg 'ain&tias xi'jQvyuu y-ari'fVTr^.tv iig i,iiag. 

4. Kai UolvKa.Qno<; Se ov uovov *&n<t 'arcoctTo/.iav ua&ij-iev-S-eis, r.al 
avvavaoiQatpsignoZlotg roCgrov Xqicrtov swQaxoaiv, *u/.f.u -/.al 'a/ro 1 } anoff- 
IO)MV y.aTttOTad-sig iig -tip ^taiav, 'sv -iy 3 sv Suvqvif ^sxxitiaict, 'sniaxo^ 
nog, ov r.ai r^isf? i s<a(>axtt^sv 'sv ry Tf^iortj i^.ixin (tTimoJ.v yctQ naqiutt- 
, xi l navv y>;(jAtos, ^svdo^uig y.ai 'sTTKfaviGTUTa [laQivQ^aag 'at^P.-^i 
TOU^IOD) ratJTW 8iSa$ag 'ati\ (i 1 xai -rcaqurSiv 'anoa-rulwv tiia-Stv, a xi l 
^ exxlriaia Ttaqadidwaiv, a xaf /.IOVK ^tanv 'aliy^by MetQTVQOvat rovrotf 
ftt HUTa trfv ^toiuv ixx^ijolat Ttctaat, v.a.i 61 ui%Qi i>i)v SiaSsStyutvoi Tor 
Xlohjy.aQnov , noM.to ^a^ioTciarorfQov xai ^E^UIOTSQOV 'aty- 
2vra, Ovaltvrivov xal JMaQxiiovog, xai 1 TWV iomtav xaxoyrw^iovwv. of 

fj 'P<b t uy, noMLovg 'ano* TWV TIQOUQIJU fvttr 
*tig T^V 'exxhialav TOV Psov, fiiav xa fioryv Tad- 
Tip 'ali'j-d-siav xtjQv^ag 'area? Ttav 'anoOTo).(ov nctQciK.j](pivai, TJJV 'ano TIJS 

.' lien. cont. Haer.Lib. 3. Cap. 3. p. 176. 



60 TESTIMONY OT [CHAPTBB 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, most ancient and universally 
known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the 
two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, which shows the 
tradition which it has from the Apostles, and the faith an- 
nounced to men, and descending even to us. For to this 
Church, on account of the more powerful principality, it 
must needs be that the whole Church should resort, that is, 
those who are faithful, from all places round about ; in which 
Church the tradition which is from the Apostles has always 
been preserved by those round about it.' (53) 

. l The blessed Apostles therefore founding and establish- 
ing this Church, delivered to Linus the episcopal right of 
governing it, of which Linus Paul makes mention in his 
epistle to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus, after 
him in the third place from the Apostles, Clement is cho- 
sen to the episcopate, who saw the Apostles themselves, 
and resided with them, and had as yet their preachirig 
sounding in his ears, and their tradition before his eyes, nor 

(53) 1. ' Traditionem itaque apostolorum in toto mundo manifes- 
tatam, in omni Ecclesia adest respicere omnibus qui vera velint vid- 
te : et habemus annumerare eos qui nb apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi 
in Ecclesiis, et successores eorura usque ad nos, qui nihil tale docuo- 

runt, neque cognoverunt, quale ab his deliratur.' 9. 'Sed quoniam 

valde longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enume- 
rare successiones ; maxima, et antiquissims, et omnibus cognitae, a 
gloriosissimis duotms apostolis Petro et Paullo RomgB fundatae et con- 
stitutse Ecclesias, earn quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem, etannun- 
tiatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientera 
usque ad nos indicantes, confundimus omnes eos, qui quoquo modo, 
vel per sibi placentia, vel vanam gloriam, vel per ccecitatem et malam 
sententiam, prffiterqiiam oportet colligunt. .Ad hanc enim ecclesiam 
propter potiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ee- 
cleeiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab hi, 
qui sunt undique, conservata est eaquce ost ab Apostolis traditio.' 



CHAPTER 9.] IREN.EUS. 61 

he alone, for at that time many survived who had been 
taught by the Apostles. Under this Clement, a serious 
dissension having arisen among the brethren at Corinth, the 
Church which is at Rome wrote very powerful letters to 
the Corinthians, bringing them to peace, and repairing their 
faith, and enforcing the tradition which had been recent- 
ly received from the Apostles, announcing one Almighty 
God, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, 
who had sent the deluge, and had called Abraham, who 
had brought forth his people out of Egypt, who talked with 
Moses, who appointed the law and sent the prophets, who 
prepared fire for the devil and his angels. That this Father 
.of our Lord Jesus Christ was announced by the Churches, 
those who wish to be informed can learn from the Scrip- 
ture itself, and can also understand the Apostolical tradi- 
tion, since this is a more ancient epistle for these men, 
who now teach, falsely, and pretend that there is another 
God above the Demiurgus who is the maker of all things. 
To this Clement Evaristus succeeded, and to Evaristus Al- 
exander, and then the sixth after the Apostles Sixtus was 
constituted, and then Telesphorus, who also made a glorious 
martyrdom, and then Hyginus, afterwards Pius, after whom 
was Anicetus. To Anicetus succeeded Soter, and now, in 
the twelfth place from the Apostles, Eleutherius holds the 
episcopate. By this ordination and succession, that tradi- 
tion which is from the Apostles in the Church, and the 
preaching of the truth, reach even to us. And this is a 
most abundant proof, that it is the same life-giving faith, 
which has been preserved in the Church from the Apostles 
until now, and delivered in truth/ 

c And also Polycarp, who was not only taught by the 
Apostles, and had conversed with many of those who had 

seen our Lord, but was even constituted bishop in the 
6 



68 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTJEB 9. 

; 

Church of Smyrna by the Apostles who were in Asia, 
whom we also saw in our early youth, (for he persevered 
greatly, and at a very great age, making a glorious martyr- 
dom, he departed this life,) he likewise taught always those 
things which he had learned from the Apostles, which he 
delivered to the Church, and which alone are true. To 
these things, all the Churches which are in Asia bear testi- 
mony, and those who, even to the present day, have suc- 
ceeded Polycarp, who was a man of much greater authority, 
and a more faithful witness of the truth than Valentinus and 
Marcion, and the rest who hold their perverse opinions. 
For he was the man, who, when he came to Rome, in the 
time of Anicetus, converted many heretics from those of 
which I have already spoken, to the Church of God, de- 
claring that he had received from the Apostles that one and 
qnly system of truth which he delivered to the Church.' (54) 

(54) 3. Gtfifiiojaarrsg'ovv xul oX(5oKijcrarTg 6t uaxaQioi artudTof.oi TIJT 
Ixllydiav, divco trjv T/;S Inioxonf^ /.tiTovQyiav lre/ r ciQiaav. TOVTOVTOV 
^fivov Haviog tv Ttg rcqag Ti/uo&tov ImoroXatg fttitr^Tctt. dtaSt/erai Si 
uvTov d.vtyzXijTos, fisTa TOVTOV de TQ'ITCO TUTKO ano T&v oTTOOTo/.tar TJJ 
ijtiaxonrjv xfajQovTat Kli'jtt]?, 6 xal itaqaxaig TOV$ paxaQiov? oOToaroiovc, 
xal avfipcpltixios avroi?, xai trt evavlor TO xt'fOv/ua r<av anoaTof.err, zai 
TJJ* naQuSoOiv TtQo {np&uZ(itav serial 1 , 6v fiuvog, trt yaQ rroZlol vjifZitTiovm 
TOTS ano T(5v anoaTO^wv SsSiday^dvoi. ini TOVTOV ovv TOV KZifatfTos arse- 
oetug ovx 67.ty>;s Totg tv K.oQiv&a) ytvo^tn;? adf'.tf.oig, 'tTiiartir.iv 7; tv P&n] 
Ixxirioia. fxcmoTuTifv yQK<pt]v roig KoQiv&iotg, tig iiQi'ji-ijv avufli(iaLOVGaav- 
TOI/S, xai aravtovaa TJJV niaTiv avrSv, xai t t v TEtodTt ano rwv 



annuntiantem unum Deum oinnipotentem, factorem coeli et terras, 
plasmatorem hominis, qui induxerit cataclysmum, et advocaverit 
Abraham, qui eduxerit populum de terra ^Egypti, qui colloquutus sit 
Moysi, qui legem disposuerit, et prophetas miserit, qui ignera praepa- 
raverit diabolo et angelis ejus. Hunc Patrem Domini nostri JeeB 
Chriati ab Ecclesiis annuntiari, ex ipsa Scriptura, qui velint, discera 
possunt, et Apostolicam Ecclesiae traditionem intelligere ; quum sit 
vetustior epistola his qui nunc falso dooent, et alterum Deum eaper 
Demiurgum et factorem horum omnium, quie sunt, commentiun- 
tur. 



I 



CHAPTER 9.] IREN2EUS. 63 

Here is the passage with its context, shewing the argu- 
ment of Iren33us fully. And I beseech you, brethren, to 
have a little patience, until we can examine the testimony 
and understand its real bearing. 

The words on which you rely, are those in which Irenaeus 
declares, that ' to the Church of Rome, by reason of the 
more powerful principality j it must needs be that the whole 
Church resort, that is, those who are faithful from all 
places round about ; in which Church the tradition which 
is from the Apostles has always been preserved."* And 
these, you say, prove Irenaeus to be a witness., that the 
Pope then possessed supreme authority over the Christian 
world, and that the Church of Rome was acknowledged 
of right as the mother and mistress of all the Churches. 
But do the words of Irenaeus authorize your conclusion ? 
Does he not, in the first place, speak -of all the Apostles in- 



Tor <5* JL'f.T t uivTa TOVTOT diaft ;KETCU Evtz'Jto'Tu:, r.sl Tor Ei-L 

ar$Qo;~ ti-9^ <JVTK: ixTfj; 'UTTQ Tar ^arrociTO/.tuT xc-SiaraTai < OTO<;- ,/ueTa 

it tovfov TS,?.CTC/!O>O?, 6; x<il irSo^a: fuaOTT/iTjos?" tmira. 2~yrroc, SI 

Hiog. /js&* or ^drixjjTo:. Si-ade^ctiitrov luv ^IrLx^ttiv ^laT^gof, rvr 

fa TOJTCO T07' TTf tJTicrxorrjyc K.TO Tear aTTuOTvJ'.cjr Kurt^st y.t.^ 

Tif 'UVTIJ Tii;Jt, r.ai rr; 'tft'TJj Sidajrri J,'T 'arru Twr 'arromui.wr tr TT; tx- 

guSoaic, xai TO' T^; 'e/.j;-5'E/ac r.i]QV)-i.i& xuT.ijrirqztv tic ^iiac. 
4. Kui HtJArxacirrof Si iiv iioror 'KTTO *a^u>ctTulan' uu-S-r^cv-d-fis, xai 

ijitif n<jJif.<jif TofcTor XUIOTOT itoQaxoaw, ''uO.t.lz xai ''U.TTO 
v xvTaOTadtt; it: T^r -.4oiar, *tr rr, "IT ^uvQj'y 'fKx/.; ; Oi'c, 
nog, 6v XUL ^utig 'f&Daztxitfr 3 sr T^J Trtxirrj i^.txLit : (srti7rtjf.v yc.o T 
tt, xai 1 jrai'W yTyoa/.toj, 'trSo:ia:; xai 'tn iqwiOTana: USQT vo iloitf '*'tf2i 
TOU |?ou) Tai/Ta 5/t5'a;a:; 'af/', ii l xai' rraour rcSr -"a.-TooroAt-jJ 1 1'ita-ffn-, u jso 
^ txx/lijo/a rra:o3i^&)air, u 1 xai' uors. 'taT/r 'Kir-9'tJ. Alav 
ei *aT TT;?' ,4aic:r fxx/.^olat rri-oari, jra/ o; *'jrt rw fitasciEdfyiiiroi Tor 



ovra, QvaJLtrTirov xai Jlaoziuro;, xai TV ioiTiav zaxoyTtiuortnv. 6f 
tTii ^d.viX]]T:ov 'fTrid'TjiuJCTas TJ "PiouTj, n'oiJtou^ ^an.ci rtor TlQo 
aiQtrixtov 'tniaTQttysv '*if Tip 'tjfxA^aia?' TOV -5-fov, wd-csrjtai' U.OTIJV 

Tijy *a2ij5-*ia7' -xijot^a; 'cars' Tor 'ijrrrooToiair mixQttlyftjrtiw, T%V 'CLTIO 
ouirijv.' Iren. cont. Haer.Lib, 3. Cap. 3- p. 176. 



64 TESTIMONY OF [CH AFTER 9. 

differently, and expressly declare that the tradition of the 
Apostles was given to us ' in the Scriptures, to be the pil- 
lar and ground of our faith 1 !' Does he not make the es- 
tablishment of the Church of Rome the joint act of both 
Peter and Paul, saying in positive terms that they set Linus 
over that Church as its bishop, and not intimating, in the 
slightest, degree, that Peter ever established himself as bishop 
there, or, as the Doway Catechism states it, transferred his 
chair from Antioch to Rome ? And with respect to the 
more powerful principality of which Irenseus speaks, he 
does not use one word which connects this principality with 
the Church, or with its bishop ; but refers simply to its lo- 
cation in that city, which was then, and for many centuries 
before and after, the acknowledged mistress of the world. 
That on account of the more powerful principality of Rome, 
where was held the seat of the imperial government where 
was the capitol, from which the decrees of the Roman 
Senate went forth throughout the globe in which were 
concentrated all the wealth, the learning, the ambition, 
the pleasures, and the interests of millions, and whicji was 
at once the head and the heart of that most mighty of em- 
pires, it must needs have been that the Church established 
there was regarded with peculiar interest by the minor 
.Churches around it that it was the richest, the most nu- 
merous, the most influential, and the most important Church 
in the general esteem of Christians, by reason of its peculiar 
location all this I freely concede. Irenaeus calls it by a 
term which is in the superlative, most ancient, or, otherwise, 
very ancient, (antiquissima) The first meaning cannot be 
the true one, because we all agree that Jerusalem, Antioch, 
and many other Churches, were prior to Rome in the order 
of time. But taking the other sense of this word for the 
meaning, I adopt most cheerfully the whole of his descrip* 



CHAPTER 9.] IBEN.EUS. 65 

tion, and agree that the Church of Rome was then rightly- 
called the greatest, the very ancient, and the most univer- 
sally known Church, to which, on account of the greater 
principality you say, of the Church, but I say, of the city 
all Christian Churches, every where round about, must of 
necessity resort. The distinction here granted, and the 
necessary results of it, were equally suited to the argument 
of Irenseus, whether St. Peter had any connexion with the 
establishment of that Church or not. It was purely secular, 
arising out of the advantages of its position ; and our author 
does not use one word which attributes to it any oilier cha- 
racter. 

I am not fond, brethren, of resting any religious question 
on mere verbal criticism ; but the importance you attach to 
the passage before us, seems to require that I should ex- 
amine it closely. The words of the original, as you know, 
are lost ymd we are obliged to take for the original a very 
poor latin version. Such as we have it, the passage stands 
thus : ( A.d hanc enim ecdesiam, propter potiorem princir 
palitatem,necesseest, fyc., literally: { To this Church, on ac- 
count of the more powerful principality, it must needs be,' 
&ic. Irenseus does not say : propter potiorem principali- 
tatem EJUS, on account of ITS more powerful principal- 
ity, but leaves out all connexion of the kind : which it is 
strange he should have done, if he intended to convey the 
meaning you attribute to him. Hence, I conceive myself 
strictly authorized to infer that such was not his intention : 
but that he referred to the principality of the city, and that 
he had no idea of the spiritual supremacy of ecclesiastical 
dominion, to which you would suppose him to bear testi- 
mony. 

A little reflection upon the scope of Irenseus' argument 

will perhaps shew this point more clearly. He had been 

6* 



66 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB 9. 

employed in refuting the wild absurdities of the Gnostic 
heretics from the authority of Scripture, and now he de- 
sires to put them down by the authority of tradition. If 
these heretics were right, the apostles of Christ must have 
taught the same doctrine : and if the apostles had taught this 
doctrine, the bishops who succeeded them, and the Churches 
planted by them, must still hold the same. To them, 
therefore, in the second place, Irenseus confidently appeals ; 
and after confounding the heretics from Scripture, We also 
confound them, says he, by the succession of the bishops 
in the Churches which the apostles planted. : But since 
it would be tedious,' continues he, ' to reckon the succession 
of all the Churches,' let us refer to the greatest and best 
known of all, the Church planted in the chief city, the prin- 
cipality of the Roman empire. He then counts up the suc- 
cession since the beginning, in the Church of Rome ; and 
after this, turns to the testimony of the Church of Smyrna, 
and draws the same argument from the character of Poly- 
carp, a celebrated martyr,' and from all the Churches of Asia. 
I am aware that there is an ambiguity in the word which 
I have translated, resort, which sometimes bears the sense, 
consent ; and this latter sense you doubtless prefer, because 
it gives the whole a much more favorable meaning. You 
would probably, therefore, say, that ' To this Church, by 
reason of the more powerful principality, it must needs be 
that the whole Church consents,' would be a more correct 
translation : to which I have to object, that your version 
would not only lack grammatical accuracy,* but the idea 
conveyed by it would have no connexion with the argu- 
ment. The testimony of the Church ol Rome to the prin- 

* No scholars are better aware than yourselves that when the verb 
convenio, refers to place, it is usually followed as in the passage before 
us, by the accusative, but when to sentiment, as when it means to con- 
sent or agree, it generally takes the dative. 



CHAPTER 9.] IRENJEUS. 67 

ciples of the faith, was what Irenzeus wanted to adduce 
against the heretics : and this testimony could have been' in 
no wise affected by a point of spiritual supremacy. But he 
adduced this Church in preference, because it was the great- 
est, and the best known, in consequence of the concourse 
of all the surrounding Churches to the Church of the chief 
city of the empire ; and therefore its testimony suited his 
purpose in arguing against heretics, for the plain reason, that 
it was the testimony of a more numerous, important and 
distipguished body. 

I am happy to find your learned Touttee, the translator 
of Cyril, concurring in this view, in his appendix to the 5 
Catechesis, (p. 82) where, speaking of the Church in Jeru- 
salem, he says that, ' The concourse of all strangers from 
every part of the world, produced the same result as Ire- 
nseus had remarked of Rome, that novelties could not there 
increase against the force of tradition, since they would 
be more readily discovered and corrected. '(5 5) 

There is, however, another and a much more conclusive 
justification of the sense which I have attached to the word 
in question, derived from a fact related by Irenseus, and re- 
corded by Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian of the 4th 
century. 

You know, brethren, that there was a controversy in the 
second century, between Victor, the bishop of Rome, and 
the Churches of Asia, about the time of keeping Easter : 
and the eastern Churches refusing to change their custom for 
the sake of conforming to the practice of Rome, Victor 
undertook to excommunicate them. For this high-handed 
stretch of power, he was generally censured ; and amongst 

(55) 'Concursum omnium ex toto orbeperegrinorum, simile quidquam 
effecisse, quod Ireriaeus Romae factum observat, ne ibi facile posset 
novarum contra traditionem opinionum soboles increscere ; citiusenhn 
deprehensa et correcta fuisset.' 



68 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB, 9. 

the rest, Irenseus wrote him a letter of expostulation;, of 
which the following is a part. 

(56) < But those elders, who, before Soter, governed the 
Church over which you now preside/ (i. e. the Church of 
Rome) ' namely Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus, with Te- 
lesphorus and Sixtus, neither observed this custom them- 
selves, ncfr allowed those who were with them to observe it. 
Nevertheless, although they did not observe it, yet they 
preserved peace with those who came to them from these 
Churches in which it was observed. 7 - ' And when 
the most blessed Polycarp came to Rome, in the time of 
Anicetus, and there was a little controversy between them 
about other things, they embraced each other presently 
with the kiss of peace, not greatly contending about this 
question. For neither could Anicetus ever persuade Poly- 
carp to cease this thing, because he had lived familiarly 



(66) Kal 6t Ttgb Siar^igog Ttqtafi-uTegoi, ol TtqooT&vceg 
Ixxlyalag, T\g vvv uq>i]yri, Avtxrjtov "kiyoftsv xal Ulov, Yylvdv TS 
xal TsleacpoQOv, xal Svawv, oute duiol h^grjaav, Sure 1015 

&VTOilS SrtSTQSTlOV, XUldvdkv ShotTTOV UVTOl fl^l T1)QOVVTS$, 

TOV naQOiy.i&v, &v cac ^geno, ^%o^ilvoig nqbg &vi;oi)$. 
xal TOV fiuxaglov Holvx&QTtov tmt^t'/ycrai'TOj TTJ P(bfii) 
, y,ul 



vdi>g liQi/vsvcrav, neql roinov TOV xeqxxkatov ju^ 

roiig. OVTS yag 6 AvLy.^wg wv JJotoxagnov nelacn edvvdno 
, &TS /LISTIX Iw&vvov TOV fiadyiov Kvglov fyi&v, xal 

dig avvditJQiyiev, &el IBT^QI^XOTK. OVTS ^v o 
nog lov Avlxrjiov Sneiae TJjgetf, hsyovra, TIJV ovvi^dsiav t(bv 
&VTOV ngsagvTsgcav ocpe&ekv xaT&%ew. xal 
havrolg. xal sv ir\ exxlqai 

a> IIolvx&gTtQ, xai Svrgomjv dt]^ov6ri>, xal 
&ri d&Krfiuv ^.m]ll&p]oav , miai]? tr^g Ixxlrjalug 
xal i&v ^ Tygovvicai'. Fragmentum Epistolae ad Victorem 
Papam Romanum, ex Euseb. lib. v. Histor. cap. 24. Iren. op. p. 341. 



CHAPTER 9.] IRENJ3US. 69 

with John, the disciple of our Lord, and with the other 
apostles, and observed their custom continually. Nor on 
the other hand, could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to ob- 
serve it, since Anicetus said that he retained the, custom of 
those elders who were before him. When matters were 
thus situated, they communed together; and Anicetus 
yielded to Polycarp, as a token of respect, the office of 
consecrating the offering in the Church ; and at length they 
departed from each other in peace, as well those who ob- 
served this custom, as those who observed it not, peeping 
the peace of the whole Church,' 

Now, I beg you to observe this statement of Irenaeus 
carefully, and you cannot fail to see that it is totally irrecon- 
cileable with the sense which has sometimes been put upon 
the other passage ; and that it fully justifies nay, indeed, 
demands the translation which I have given. For if Ire- 
naeus in that place intended to have said, that on account of 
the greater principality, it was necessary that the whole 
Church should agree with the Church of Rome, how could 
he justify Polycarp in differing with that Church upon the 
time of keeping Easter ? How could Anicetus be set forth 
as a worthy example for Victor, in giving the kiss of peace 
to the bishop of Smyrna, at the very time that he was ob- 
stinately refusing to conform to the supremacy of Rome? 
If, according to your doctrine, Rome was even then ac- 
knowledged as the mother and mistress of all the Churches 
if her bishop, as your canon tells us, held by divine institu- 
tion the place of God and of Christ upon the earth tell me, 
I beseech you, how Polycarp, the scholar of St. John, and 
the companion of the other apostles, could be so ignorant 
of these mighty prerogatives, as to hold a controversy with 
the then Pope, and to maintain such absolute independ*- 
ence in a practice which his supposed superior condemned? 



70 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 9. 

It is in vain that the force of this testimony is impugn- 
ed by considering the subject of the controversy as a trifle. 
It was no trifle, but a very serious question of ecclesiastical 
order. For you know, brethren, that then, as now, there 
was always a fast preceding the festival of Easter ; that on 
the Friday before Easter the Church commemorated the last 
sufferings of the great Redeemer, and on the following Sun- 
day threw off her mourning, and appeared in her utmost joy 
to honor his resurrection ; and that the consequence of the 
discrepancy between the Eastern and Western Churches 
was, that this whole beautiful order was thrown into confu- 
Bion. One part of the Church was sometimes fasting, while 
another part was feasting. One part was mourning in sym- 
pathy with Christ's passion, while another part was cele- 
brating his resurrection with psalms of triumphant praise : 
and therefore, Christians from different Churches, who 
agreed sufficiently in all other things, could not even worship 
together with comfort during the most interesting portion of 
the whole ecclesiastical year. Hence it was a matter of 
considerable importance, and produced much warm dis- 
cussion ; but it could have produced none, if your present 
doctrine had been the doctrine of that day. Polycarp would 
have been taught by St. John to reverence the primac^ of 
St. Peter and his successors, if -any such thing had been 
contemplated in the original polity of the Christian common- 
wealth. Polycarp would have known that there was some 
other prince in the Church besides the Lord Jesus Christ, 
viz. his vicar on earth, representing his person, and holding 
the place of God, as your canon law expresses it. And he 
would have approached Anicetus, the bishop of Rome, not 
in the independent frankness of an equal in authority, but 
in the ready and suppliant temper which became his infe- 
rior station. 



CHAPTER 9.] IREN2EDS. 71 

I ask you, then, this simple question, brethren : Was 
Polycarp right in maintaining this independence, or was he 
wrong ? Anicetus, the bishop of Rome, acknowledged that 
he was right in his independence, though he differed with 
him in opinion and in practice ; and therefore he gave him 
the kiss of peace, and desired him to exercise the honorable 
office of consecrating the communion. Irenseus plainly 
takes the same ground, and therefore maintains the liberty 
of the Eastern Church against Victor on the very same ques- 
tion in his own day. And will you still think that Ii/enasus 
regarded the Pope of Rome as you regard him? Is not the 
difference between the fraternal and equal rights of the 
primitive bishops of Rome and Smyrna in the second cen- 
tury, and the most unequal rights of their successors in our 
time, great, even beyond the power of any common terms 
of comparison ? Try the experiment, I pray you ; imagine 
any bishop of your Church, of equal rank with the bishop 
of Smyrna, to act as Polycarp acted ; and conjecture, if you 
can, the reception he would meet with at the court of Rome.: 
and then say, as men who love the truth, whether the sys- 
tem of your canon law has not an irreconcileable enemy 
rather than a friend, in the testimony 



CHAPTER X. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

After examining the testimony of this most unimpeacha- 
ble witness, suffer me to pause awhile before adducing 
any other, in order to present to you the general view which 
I believe the truth will be found to sanction. The language 
of Irenseus I regard as furnishing a most satisfactory key to 
the whole mystery, with which the question is connected in 
the ordinary mind. For many centuries, Rome has been 
a city of splendid ruins, with no empire except that vast 
supremacy which is rested upon the supposed grant of the 
Almighty. I do not wonder, therefore, that the very fact 
of this supremacy existing so long without any apparent 
support from the temporal power, should strike your imagi- 
nations as being almost conclusive evidence in its favor: 
so that when you look at the real language of antiquity, you 
read it under the strong bias of a settled belief, which bends 
it either way, according to circumstances, without being 
sensible of any violence to the rights of truth. But if you 
will take the assertion of your own witness for the founda- 
tion of the matter, I think you will be able to see how your 
present doctrine was likely to have obtained its growth by 
the operation of causes wholly secular. At least, my reflections 
have led me to this result ; and I beg your indulgence for a 
little while, in order to state the course my mind has taken 



CHAPTEE 10.] ORIGIN OF THE PRIMACY. 73 

so as to account for the rise of this doctrine, on the one 
hand, and avoid charging you with intentional tyranny or 
deception on the other. 

At the time when the Apostles, Peter and Paul, estab- 
lished the Church in Rome, it was, as I have said, the cap- 
ital city of the civilized world. On such a capital, perhaps 
the sun never shone. It is saying much less than the truth 
to assert, that what Paris is to France, or London to Eng- 
land, Rome was to the world : because France and Eng- 
land know that there are other powers upon the earth 
independent of their respective governments, but the sub- 
jects of that empire city saw no power upon the earth, 
independent of Rome. The ambassadors of every poten- 
tate, came to do homage before the majesty of a single 
throne. Dissensions amongst nations were brought for set- 

O C; 

tlement before the Senate. Rival kings contending for the 
same tributary diadem, submitted their claims, to that august 
tribunal. The very name of Roman citizen was a protec- 
tion and a privilege in every land, and an appeal to Rome 
was the final recourse of universal justice. 

In our age, brethren, it is not easy indeed it is hardly 
possible to conceive aright oi such a city. Divided as 
the nations have been ever since her decline and fall, and 
each government displaying but a fractional part of her 
whole dominion, it is hard for us to imagine the majesty, 
the force, the concentration, the harmony, the glory, the 
beauty, the overpowering splendor of the spectacle which 
ancient Rome, in the days of Augustus, displayed to 
the admiration of a subject world. To the moral sense, 
the picture was as sublime as it was beautiful. The whole 
earth in peaceful subordination to one man, and he content 
with the kind and moderate titles of General and father 

the temple of Janus shut, and wars and commotions al- 
7 



74 PROBABLE ORIGIN [CHAPTER 10. 

most done away by the wise administration of supreme jus- 
tice the whole of the mighty empire bringing its treasure 
and its allegiance to the great centre, which was its fountain 
head of power ; and enjoying in return, the rich advan- 
tages of protection and government, the valor and the la- 
bour of its legions, its science, and its literature, which, like 
the nerves and life-blood of the natural body, were diffu- 
sed freely to the remotest extremities all this displayed a 
picture of human unity, on which, in its theory, the philan- 
thropist and the philosopher might well gaze with delight ; 
nor can I imagine, how, with such a picture before them, 
the minds of the best of men at that day, could help being 
strongly affected. 

About the time when the last touch of perfection had 
been given to this wonderful empire, Christianity arose ; 
and a Church was established in the imperial city. In 
wealth, in numbers, in importance, it is obvious that it must 
soon have surpassed all others. Every thing in the chief 
city of an ordinary kingdom acquires a kind of practical 
supremacy over the whole of that territory. The profes- 
sions, the trades, the fashions, the literature, the amuse- 
ments of the capital, give a sort of law to the rest by a 
perfectly familiar principle of deference, which is acknow- 
ledged and understood by all men. What must have been 
the strength of that principle in regard to imperial Rome ! 
But, perhaps, it may not be useless inasmuch as the 
mind is often aided in its reflections on the force of 
circumstances, by transferring them to some familiar object 
of our own day, if I try to simplify my idea of a secu- 
lar supremacy by an obvious illustration. 

Let us suppose, then, that we had sent a number of mis- 
sionaries to plant the Gospel in China, who had succeeded 



CHAPTER 10.] OF THE PHIMACY. 75 

in establishing Churches in several of the provinces of that 
extensive country. In the progress of their labours we are 
informed that a Church is gathered in the capital it- 
self. The emperor, the powerful mandarins, the officers 
of government, the men of influence, are now likely to be 
brought under the blessed yoke of the Gospel. Is it not 
reasonable that we should attach tenfold more impor- 
tance to that Church than to the Provincial Churches that 
for its support we should be most anxious that into its 
progress we should most fondly inquire, and that we should 
expect nay advise all the other missionaries through the 
nation, to be most solicitous for its welfare, and most ready 
to make its advancement the primary object of then* pray- 
ers and toils ? 

If, however, such would be our views, at a distance from 
the field of action, how much more would the same princi- 
ple of expediency operate on the missionaries themselves ? 
Of what vast importance would they esteem the progress 
of truth in the capital of the Chinese empire ? How sure- 
ly would they calculate that success there, was, in fact, 
success every where? How thankfully would they count 
the numbers of converts from the ranks of the influential 
and the great, not because their souls were of more value, 
but because the conversion of such as these was the readi- 
est mode of breaking down the kingdom of darkness, and 
inducing multitudes to examine, with favorable dispositions, 
the system of truth; and how manifest it is, that in 
such a case, the missionaries settled in the provincial Church- 
es, would readily grant a primacy of influence and conse- 
quence to their brethren in the capital city, which would 
make them the chief leaders, advisers, and, in fine, direc- 
tors of the whole ? And yet, in all this, we see at a glance 
that it is simply to be resolved into the importance of the 



76 PROBABLE ORIGIN [CHAPTER 10. 

local situation, that it has no connexion whatever with the 
spiritual rank or ecclesiastical dignity of the missionaries 
themselves, but is purely the result of judicious views of 
practical expediency. 

Now then, if we were called to draw up a code of reg- 
ulations for a body of missionaries thus circumstanced, 
should we not, perhaps, think it proper to advise all due 
regard to these principles ? Should we not say, Be care- 
ful about union, and in all your proceedings consult togeth- 
er : but especially, do nothing without consulting with your 
brethren of the capital city. In order that the good cause 
should prosper, it is necessary that you should resort to the 
Church established there as often as you can ; by reason 
of its more powerful principality, being the seat of govern- 
ment and the very heart of the empire, the Church located 
' there is the most important of the whole, and the breth- 
ren placed over it should have the chief direction in all your 
councils. Would not such advice as this be deemed pru- 
dent and wise by all men ? And hence, is it not plain, that 
we could go farther than Irenseus has done in support of a 
primacy, without departing in the least from the ground of 
secular superiority, derived simply from the importance of 
the location ? 

But in the situation of the Christian Church, as planted 
in ancient Rome, there was much more than any modern 
analogy can furnish, to contribute to the same result. Du- 
ring seasons of persecution, when heathen rage was excited 
against the faithful, The Christians to the lions was the 
first cry, and the Church in Rome was usually called upon 
to take the lead in the glory of martyrdom. In times of 
peace, the crowds of philosophers and disputers which 
thronged the imperial city, drew out the best talents and 
strongest energies of the priesthood in the defence of truth. 



CHAPTER 10.] OF THE PRIMACY. 77 

And the influx of strangers, the applications for aid, and 
the calls on liberality which were sure to be most abundant 
where there was most inducement to attract them, would 
keep the sympathies, the hospitality, arid the beneficence of 
that Church in the fullest action. Add to all this, that 
if the Christians in the Provinces needed any indulgence 
from the government, their requests could be best presented 
through the brethren at Rome ; that the bishop of Rome 
was on the very spot where he had the best opportunity of 
appeasing the imperial wrath, or conciliating the 1 imperial 
favour; that when the clergy or others had occasion to 
travel, his letters would have the greatest weight by reason 
of his local superiority; that when any of the Praetors or 
Provincial magistrates were likely to prove hostile to the 
Christian cause, the bishop of Rome was the only man who 
could hope to have influence sufficient with the officers of 
the Court, to have him counteracted or recalled ; that writers 
on the Christian religion would first seek patronage and praise 
from the same dignitary, and that all who thought them- 
selves aggrieved throughout the rest of the Church, would 
naturally endeavour to strengthen their cause by the sen- 
tence of his approbation all this, brethren, and much more 
of the same character, suggests itself to a mind of common 
reflection, in following up the various causes of the secu- 
lar primacy obtained by that Church, which was estab- 
lished near the throne of the Csesars, in the empire city of 
the world. 

The last feature of the case presents the influence which 
these circumstances must have exerted on the minds of the 
Roman clergy themselves, when connected with the impor- 
tant fact that the secular empire of Rome was one mighty 
whole the earth under one head the world under a sin- 
gle prince, and that prince called a father. Dull and stu- 
7* 



78 PHOBABLE OEIGIN ^CHAPTER 10. 

pid must the intellect have been, that could fail to discover 
Uie application of this idea to the Christian Church ; 
for was it not,m truth, one kingdom under a single King 
one family under a Father? And why not give the benefit 
of this consolidation to the Hierarchy on earth ? Why not 
secure to the whole Church, that order and subordination 
;\nd peace under a single earthly head, as the Lord's Vice- 
gerent, which heathenism had brought, in the affairs of hu- 
man government, to such a marvellous system ? Should 
the hosts of Satan be better marshalled than the hosts of 
God ? Should one single will be felt and obeyed to the re- 
motest bounds of that mighty empire, and should not one 
single Church, which is the spouse of Christ, be much rath- 
er the ruler and mistress through the whole of Christendom ? 
On such a plan, how much more union might be expected, 
how much more peace, how much less opportunity for her- 
esy and false doctrine ; and how much more glorious would be 
the victory of the Lord's people, when they should appear 
to the heathen one mighty host, ' bright as the sun, fair as 
the moon, and terrible as an army with banners.' 

Brethren, I can easily conceive that the best men of the 
primitive age, being accustomed to have this astonishing 
empire of the world continually before their eyes, and to 
hear it as the common and favorite theme of the orators, and 
courtiers, and civilians, and soldiers, and travellers around 
them, might readily, in this manner, be led to contemplate 
the desirableness and practicability of a similar system in 
the Church, and to cherish and encourage every advantage 
they possessed for its perfect consummation, as Providential 
instruments placed in their hands by divine wisdom, for this 
especial purpose. I can easily conceive, that under this in- 
fluence of their habitual views, they would find in Scripture 
analogies and even precepts, which, had not the idea of 



CHAPTER 10.] OF THE PRIMACY. 79 

universal empire been first rendered familiar by the political 
state of the world, would never have occurred to them. 
That thus disposed, they would derive a supposed parallel 
in principle from the High Priest of ancient Israel, and 
instead of applying it to the single district of a bishop, 
would apply it to the whole of Christendom that they 
would lay hold on our Lord's addresses to Peter (the only 
passages in the New Testament which ingenuity itself 
could put into the semblance of divine authority,) and begin 
to interpret them in favor of their ecclesiastical empire, 
that all who were connected with Rome, who had obliga- 
tions to the Church there, who feared their censure or lo- 
ved their praise, or who had any thing to expect from their 
influence, would readily fall in with the idea ; and that the 
converts amongst the great and noble, who had always been 
accustomed to the maxim that Rome was the mistress of 
the world, w~ould be prompt and zealous in defence of an 
idea which harmonized so well with their own political 
and patriotic feelings all this I can conceive, most read- 
ily, as easily accounting for the rise and progress of 
a secular primacy, without calling it by any harsh or offen- 
sive name. I do not, therefore, look upon your doctrine 
as having its origin in tyranny, in iraud, or in a desire to 
lord it over mankind. Its beginning I think I have traced 
to a much better set of principles. And as I hold myself 
bound in all cases, to look for the most favorable motives 
and causes of human action, (for otherwise how can I 
judge, as I would be judged ?) so I attribute to the policy of 
the primitive Church of Rome, nothing more than can be 
fully explained by the favorable influence of their location, 
their habits of dwelling on the theory and practice of uni- 
versal empire, and their desire to secure the unity and peace 
of the Church ; on the supposition that they were, what I 



80 ORIGIN OF THE PR1MACT. [CHAPTER 10. 

willingly esteem them to have been holy and well mean- 
ing men. 

The change from this local primacy, to that which you 
now assert, will be shewn distinctly before I conclude. I shall 
only, for the present, observe, that the one was secular, the 
other is spiritual ; the one was human, the other is divine : 
the one interfered with the liberty of no other Church, the 
other claims authority over the whole. The one grew, out 
of the political pre-eminence of ancient Rome, and should 
now be yielded, of right, in their respective proportions, to 
the other cities which, in the order of Providence, have at- 
tained a far larger measure of influence over the affairs of 
men ; but the other insists on the fiat of the Almighty, su- 
perior to all earthly mutation, that Rome shall be the mo- 
.ther and the mistress of the Christian world to the end of 
time. And this divine supremacy, you call on all to be- 
lieve, at the peril of their salvation I How badly your 
present doctrine accords with the evidence of antiquity, I 
have already shewn in part ; and I shall now resume the 
examination of your witnesses, from whose testimony it will 
be sufficiently apparent, that many centuries elapsed before 
the establishment of your exclusive claims. 



CHAPTER XI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

Our next witness in order of time, is the famous Ter- 
tullian, that extraordinary writer, whom Cyprian himself 
a 'burning and shining light was accustomed to call his 
master. 

In this writer's account of the establishment of the 
Church, we have the following strong passage : 

(56) c About to return to his Father, after his resurrec- 
tion, he (sc. Christ) ordered the eleven to go and teach 
the nations, baptizing them in the Father, and the Son, 
and_the Holy Ghost. Immediately, therefore, the Apostles 

(56) ' Reliquos undecim digrediens adPatreoi post resurrectionem, 
jussitire et docere nationes, ntingnendas in Patrem, et in Filium, et 
in Spiritum Sanctum . Statim igitur Apostoli (quos haec appellatio 
missos interpretatur) assumpto per scirtem duodecimo Matthia in lo- 
cum Judas, ex auctoritate prophetic, quce estin psalmo David, conse- 
cuti promissam vim Spiritus Sancti ad virtutes et eloquium primo per 
Judseam contestata fide in Jesum Christum, et Ecclesiis institutis; 
de hinc in orbem profecti, eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus 
promulgaverunt, et proinde Ecclesias apud unamquamque civitatem 
condiderunt, a quibus traducem fidei et seinina doctrinas, cetera? ex- 
inde Eeclesice mutuatse sunt, et quotidie mutuantur ut Ecclesias fiant. 
Ac per hoc et ipsas Apostolicce deputantur, ut soboles Apostolicarum 
Ecclesiarum. Omne genus ad originem suam ccnseatur necesse est. 
Itaque tot ac tantas Ecclesia3, una est ilia ab Apostolis prima, ex qua 
omnes. Sic omnes primae et Apostolicee dumunaoranesprobantuni- 



82 TESTIMONY OF TERTULLIAN [CHAPTER 11. 

(whom this appellation styles messengers) a twelfth named 
Matthias, being chosen by lot in the place of Judas, by the 
authority of the prophecy in the Psalm of David, having 
attained the power promised, by the Holy Spirit of tongues 
and other virtues ; first throughout Judea, bore testimony to 
the faith of Jesus Christ, and established Churches, and 
thence going out into the world, promulgated the same doc- 
trine of the faith among the nations, and established Churches 
in each city, from which the other Churches thenceforward 
borrowed, and daily borrow as new Churches are formed, 
and on this account they are considered apostolic, as being 
the progeny of the Apostolical Church, for every race must 
needs be esteemed according to its origin. Therefore, though 
there are so many and various Churches, that one Church 
is the first from the Apostles, from which are all. Thus 
all are first and Apostolical, for all being one proves unity, 
while there is the communication of peace, and the name 
of brotherhood, and the symbol of hospitality, which rights 
are regulated by no other principle than the one delivery 

of the same mystery of faith. If these things are so, 

it results, that thenceforward every doctrine which accords 
with those Apostolic Churches, the wombs and originals of 
faith, should be reputed for truth: and that is without 
doubt to be holden, which the Churches received from the 
Apostles, the Apostles from Christ, and Christ from God : 

tatern : dum est illis communicatio pacis, et appellatio fraternitatis, et 
eontesseratio hospitalitatis, quae jura non alia ratio regit, quam ejus- 

dein sacrament! una traditio.' ' Si haec ita sunt, constat proinde 

oinnem doctrinam, quae cum illisEcclesiis Apostolicis, matricibus et 
originalibus fidei conspiret, veritati deputandam; sine dubio tenen- 
tem quod Ecclesiae ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo 
accepit : omnem vero doctrinam de mendiicio praejudicandam, quae 
eapiat contra veritatem Ecclesiarum, et Apostolorurn, et Christi,et 

Dei, 'Solent dicere, Non omnia Apostolos scisse, eadem agitati 

dementia qua rursus convertunt, Omnia quidem Apostolos soissse, 



CHAPTER 11.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 83 

but every doctrine is to be prejudged of falsehood which 
pretends to be wise against the truth of the Churches, and 

of the Apostles, and Christ, and God. But some of 

these heretics say, the Apostles did not know all things ; and 
others, moved by the same madness, say that the Apostles 
truly knew all tilings, but they did not deliver all things to 
all ; in both ol which they subject Christ to censure, as send- 
ing forth for .Apostles, persons deficient in knowledge, or in 
integrity. But what man of sound mind can believe that 
they were ignorant, whom the Lord gave us for teachers, 
having them individually in his companionship, in his tuition, 
at his table ; lo whom, whatever obscure matters he put 
forth to others, he explained, saying that to them it was gi- 
ven to know mysteries, which it was not lawful for the 
people to understand ? Was any thing hidden from Peter, 
who was called the rock of the Church to be erected, ha- 
ving obtained the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the 
power of loosing and binding in heaven and on earth ? Was 
any thing hidden from John, the most beloved of the Lord, 
lying on his breast, to whom alone our Lord shewed before- 
hand the traitor Judas, and whom he asked to be the son 

sed non omnia omnibus tradidisse, in niroque Christum reprehension! 
subjicientos, qni ant minus instructos, aut parum simplices Apostolos 
nriserit. Cluis igitur integrae mentis credere potest illiquid eos igno- 
rasse, quos magistros Dominus cledit, individuos luibens in comitatu? 
'n discipulatu, in nonvictu j quibus ohseura quaeque soorsum dissere- 
bat, illis diccns datum esse cognoscere arcana, quae populo intelligere 
non liceret ? Latuit aliquid Pctrum, aedificandae Ecclesiae petram 
dictum, claves regni coolorum consecutum, et solvendi et alligandiin 
ccelis et in ton-is potestatem ? Latuit et Joanncra aliquid, dilectissi- 
mum Domino, pectori ejus incubantem, cui soii Dominus Judam tra- 
flitorem praemonstravit, quern loco suo filium Mr.riae demandavit ? 
Quid eos ignorasse vbluit, quibns etiam gloriam saam exhibuit, et 
^oysen et Keliam, et insuper tie ooelo Patris vocera ?' Tert. De Pne- 
wrip.Haeret. xs. xxi. xxii- (p. 2089.) 



84 TESTIMONY OF TERTULLIAN [CHAPTEE II. 

of Mary in his place ? What did he desire them not to 
know, to whom he exhibited his glory, with Moses and 
Elias, and the voice of his Father from heaven ?' 

Now here we find Tertullian, only one century after the 
death of the Apostle John, giving an account of the plant- 
ing of the Church, speaking of its unity, and insisting strong- 
ly on the argument of prescription and tradition with the 
heretics, as Irenseus had done before him, without the 
slightest allusion to the Church of Rome, or the superiority 
of one Apostle over the others, or the primacy for the suc- 
cessors of St. Peter, which you claim for the Pope at the 
present day. True it is, indeed, that Tertullian seems to 
authorize your interpretation of the passages of Scripture, 
which speak of Peter's being a rock, and the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven being given to him. But since it is a rule 
of universal application that every author shall explain his 
own meaning, I shall turn to Tertullian himself, in order to 
shew you, that he did not use these expressions in the sense 
which you affix to them, but in one which you utterly dis- 
claim. 

Speaking on the very point of the privileges which our 
Lord granted to Peter, and the powers which the Church 
derived from him, Tertullian uses the following strong lan- 
guage. 

(57) e But now from your own argument I would know, 
from whence you derive this right which you claim for the 
Church ? If from our Lord's saying to Peter, Upon this 
rock I will build my Church, To you I have given the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven, or, Whatsoever you shall bind or 

(57) De tua nunc sententia quaero unde hoc jus Ecclesiae usurpes. 
Si quia dixerit Petro Domimis, super hanc petram aedificabo Ecelesi- 
am meam, Tibi dedi claves regni ecelestis, vel, Quaecumque alliga- 
veris vel eolveris in terra, erunt alligata vel soluta in ctelis, idcirco 



CHAPTER. 11.] ADVERSE TO*TH SFFBEMACT. 85 

loose on earth shall be bound or loosed in heaven ; do you 
therefore presume this power of loosing and binding to have 
descended to thee, that is, to the whole Church which is 
related to Peter? If so, you are overturnuv- and chancon" 

' J -, O O 

the manifest intention of our Lord, who conferred this on 
Peter individually. Upon thee, he says, I will build my 
Church ; and, To tJiee I will give the keys, noi to the 
Church ; and, Whatsoever thou shalt loose or bind, aot 
whatsoever they shall loose or bind. So likewise the event 
teaches. On him the Church was built, that is. through him, 

> > ij 7 

he furnished the kev : behold what kev : ' i~e men of Is- 

w ' v * 

rael, hear these words : Jesus of Nazareth, a man destined 
for you by God/' and so on. He too. first, in the baptism of 
Christ, unlocked the gate of the celestial kino-dom. by which 

> cr- < i ' 

the offences which were formerly bound are loosed, and 
those things which might not be loosed are bound, accord- 
ing to the true salvation : and he bound Ananias with the 
chain of death, and he loosed the impotent man from his 
lameness. Likewise in that disputation which occurred about 
keeping the Mosaic law. Peter, the first of all, filled with 
the Spirit, foretold the calling of the nations. And now, 
saith he, why do ye tempt the Lord by placing a yoke 

praesumis ct ad te derivasse solvendi et alligandi potestatem. id est 
ad omnern Ecclesiam Petri propinquani. qualis es evertens atqae com- 
mutans manifestain Domini intentionern .'personaliter hoc Petro con- 
ferentem, Super te, inquit. sdificabo Ecclesiam meam, et, Dabo tibi 
claves, non Ecclesise. et. Quscumque solreris vel alligaveris, non 
quEB solverint vel alhgaverint. Sic enim et esitus docet. In ipso 
Ecclesia exstructa est. id est per ipsum, ipse clavem imbuit: nd 
quam ; Viri Israelita?. auribus mandate quE dico; Jesum Nazarenam 
virum a Deo vobis destinatum. et reliqua. Ipse denique primus in 
Christ! baptismo reseravit aditum ccslestis regni, quo solruntar alli- 
gata retro delicta, et alligantur quse non faerint soluta, secundum vc- 
ram salutem, et Ananiam Tinxit vinculo mortis, et debilem pedibu 
absolvit vitio valetudinis, Sed et in ilia discept&tione cuitodiond* 
8 



86 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB 11, 

upon the brethren, which neither we nor our fathers were 
able to bear. But by the grace of Jesus we believe that 
we shall obtain salvation, even as they. This opinion both 
loosed the things of the law which were omitted, and bound 
those which were retained. So that the power of loosing 
and binding conferred on Peter has nothing to do with the 
mortal sins of believers. For to hirn the Lord had com- 
manded forgiveness of his brother even if he had sinned 
against him seventy times seven, and surely he would not 
afterwards have commanded him to bind these sins, that is, 
to retain them, unless perhaps those which any one might 
have committed not against his brother, but against the Lord. 
For the very command given to forgive offences committed 
against man, seems to imply that no authority was intended 
to forgive sins against God. What now has all this to do 
with the Church, and especially with yours, O Psychi- 
cus ? According to the person of Peter, this power will 
suit spiritual men, such as an apostle or a prophet. For the 
Church properly and principally is (the temple of) that 
Spirit in whom is the Trinity of one divinity, the Father, 
and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. He gathers that Church, 

necne legis, primus omnium Petrus Spiritu instinctus, et de nationum 
vocatione praefatus, Et nunc, inquit, cur tentastis Dominum de impo- 
nendo jugo fratribus quod neque nos, nequepatres nostri sufferre val- 
uerunt ? Sed enim per gratiam Jesu credimus nos salutem consecu- 
turos sicut et illi. Hasc sententia et solvit quae omissa sunt legis, et 
alligavit quae reservata sunt. Adeo nihil ad delicta fidelium capitalia 
potestas solvendi et alligandi Petro emancipata. Cui si praeeeperai 
Dominus etiam septuagies septies delinquent! in eum fratri iadulgere ; 
utique, nihil postea alligare, id est, retinere mandasset, nisi forte ea 
quae in Dominum, non in fratrem quis admiserit. Prsejudicatur enim 
non dimittenda in Deum delicta, quum in homine admissa donantur- 
Quid nunc et ad Ecclesiam, et quidem tuam, Psychice ? Secundum 
enim Petri personam Spiritalibus potestas ista conveniet, aut Apo- 
tolo, aut Prophetse. Nam et Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est 
Spiritus in quo est trinitaa unius divinitatia Pater et Filius et Spiritu* 



CHAPTER 11.] TERTULLIAJ?. 87 

which the Lord has placed in three. And therefore, from 
that time, every such number who unite in this faith, is es- 
teemed a Church by its Author and Consecrator. And thus 
indeed the Church will forgive offences, but this is the 
Church which |is the Spirit by the spiritual man, not the 
Church which is the number of bishops. For this is the 
prerogative and will of the master, not of the servant ; of 
God himself, and not of the priest/ 

You will doubtless say, that this interesting passage is a 
part of Tertullian's work after he bad become a follower of 
Montanus. It is so, but I do not see any reason for discard- 
ing it on this account, when used as a commentary on his 
own meaning in another part of his writings, and on the sub- 
ject now before us. For the errors of Montanus had no 
relation, that ever I have heard, to the doctrine of St. Pe- 
ter's pastoral authority over the other Apostles, and the 
derivation of that authority to the particular Church of 
Rome. Nor do I find that Tertullian was impeached of 
heresy in his own day. But as a man of the most austere 
and pious life, strong in his general orthodoxy, eminent for 
learning and genius, bold, fervent, and sincere, the special 
favorite of St. Cyprian, and held in reverence by yourselves 
to the present hour. I cite Ijirn as an unimpeachable wit- 
ness to prove that the Spiritual supremacy of the Church 
of Rome was not the doctrine of his age even in the Church 
of Rome itself. 

There are a few other passages from the same author,. 

Sanotus. Illam Ecclesiain congregat. qnam Domimis in Irsbas posuil 
Atque ita esinde etiam numerus omnis qui in hanc lidem coBspirare- 
rint, Ecclesia ab auctore et cousecratore ceasetur. Et ideo Ecclesia 
quidem delicta donabit, sed ecclesia spiritas per spirilualem hominem, 
aon ecclesia numerus episcoporum. Domini enim, non famuli est 
jus et aibitrium ; Dei ipsius, non sacerdotis. 1 Tertul. de Pad. 
p. 574. 



88 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 11. 

which I may, perhaps, do well to add^ for your greater satis- 
faction. 

Although he admits the application of the term rock to 
Peter, in which we shall find that he differs from the other 
fathers, yet he acknowledges that Christ is the rock in many 
ways. Thus, speaking of the circumcision of the Jews 
with a knife of stone, he explains it to refer to the precepts 
of Christ, ' For Christ/ saith he, c is preached as the rock, 
under many modes and figures.' (58) ; 

There is also a place in his fourth book against Marcion, 
where he seems to account for Simon's name being changed 
to Peter, in a manner very different from what your doc- 
trine would require. (59) ' Christ changed the name from 
Simon to Peter,' saith he, ' because the Creator reformed 
.also the names of Abraham, and Sarah, and Joshua, calling 
this last Jesus, by adding to them syllables. But why 
Peter ? If on account of the vigor of his faith, there are 
many and solid arguments which would accommodate this 
name to him. Or whether was it because Christ was a 
rock and a stone ? Since we read that he was placed as a 
stone of offence and a rock of scandal. I omit other mat- 
ters.' And here, accordingly, Tertullian leaves the ques- 
tion, without seeming at all .conscious that Peter could be 
called a stone by reason of the whole Church, Apostles 

(58) 'Circumcisis nobis petrina acie; id cst, Christi prseceptis,pe- 
tra enim Ghristus njuJtis modis et figuris prsedicatus est." Tertul. adv. 
Jud. ix. p. 194. A. 

(59) 'Mutat et Petro nomen de Simone , quia et Creator Abraho 
et SaroE, ot Auseae nomina reformavit, hunc vocando Jesum, illis syl- 
labas adjiciendo. Sed et cur Petrum ? Si ob vigorem fidei, multffl 
materise solideeque nomen de suo accommodarcnt. An quia et petra 
et lapia Christus ? Siquidem et legimus positum eum in lapidem of- 
fendiculi, et in petram scandali. Omitto cetera, Tertul. Adv. Mar- 
ion. Lib. IT. xiU. p. 425, 



CHAPTER 11.] TERTULLIAN. 89 

and all, as your Doway Catechism assures us, being built 
upon him. 

His reference to the Church as consisting of three, in al- 
lusion to the Trinity, he explains more fully in the following 
passage : ' Are not we laymen priests also ? It is written : 
He has made us a kingdom and priests to God and his Fa- 
ther. The authority of the Church has established the dif- 
ference between the clergy and the laity, and this honor is 
sanctified by the council of the clergy, but wherever there 
is no council of clergy, you offer and you baptize, .and you 
are a priest alone. But where there are three, the Church 
is, although they be laymen. For every one lives by his 
own faith.' (60) 

The phrase, ' keys of the kingdom of heaven,' which is, 
manifestly, a figure, is explained in a somewhat different 
manner by Tertullian, in different parts of his works. Thus, 
in one passage he says, f What key had the doctors of the 
law, but the interpretation of the law,' where he presents 
an idea similar to that we have quoted already. (61) But 
in another place he says : ' If you still think heaven is clo- 
sed against you, remember that the Lord gave the keys of 
it here to Peter, and through him, he left them to the 
Church, which keys every one here, being interrogated and 
making a good confession, shall carry with him .' (62) Here 

(60) Nonne et lai'ci sacerdotes sumus ? Scriptum est, Regnum 
quoque nos et sacerdotes Deo et Patri suo fecit. Differential^ inter 
ordinem et Plebem constituit Ecclesiae auctoritas, et honor per ordi- 
nis concessum sanctificatus, adeo ubi Ecclesiastici ordinis non est con- 
sessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos es solus. Sed ubi tres, eccle- 
sia est, licet laici. Unusquisque enim sua fide vivit.' Tertul. de Exhort. 
Castit. vii. p. 522. 

(61) ' Q,uam vero clavem habebant legis doctores, nisi interpreta- 
tionem legis?' Tertul. Adv. Marcion. Lib. iv. 27. p. 444. 

(62)' Nam etsi adhue clausum putas coelum, memento claves ejua hie 
8* 



$0 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTEK 11. 

again we have an interesting variety in the idea, but none 
of them are at all suited to your doctrine. 

There is another passage of this author, often cited, in 
which he mentions the principal Churches, in his argument 
against heretics; advising them to apply to those which were 
of apostolic planting. (63) ( Come then,' saith he, ' you who 
wish to exercise your curiosity welt in the concerns of your 
salvation, go through the Apostolic Churches, amongst 
which the very seats of the Apostles continue in their places, 
and their original epistles are recited, sounding forth the 
voice, and representing the countenance of each one. Is 
Achaia near to you ? You have Corinth. If you are not 
far from Macedonia, you have Phillippi, you have Thessa- 
lonica. If you cannot go throughout Asia, you have Ephesus. 
. But if you are convenient to Italy, you have Rome, whence 

- ________ i 

Dominum Petro, ot per cum, Ecclesiao rcliquisse, qnas hJc unusquisquo 
interrogates atquc eonfessus fcret secum.' Tertul.Scorp. x. p. 496. A. 

(63) 'Age jam qui voles curiositatem mclius exercere in negotio 
aalutis tuac, percurrc Ecclesias Apostplicas, apud quns ipsaeadhuc ca- 
thedrae Apostoloruni suis locis praesidcnt, apud quas ipsae authenticae 
litterae eorum rer-itantur, sonantes voccm, ot repracsentaiites faciem 
uniuscujusque. Proxima est tibi AchaTa? Habcs Corinthum. Si 
rum longe es a Macedonia, habes Phillippos. habes Thessalonienses. 
Si non poles iu Asiam tendero.. babes Bphesum. Si autem Italiae ad* 
jaces, Roman), undo nobis quoque authoritas praesto cst. Ista quam 
felix Ecclesia : cui totam doctriuarn Apostoli cum sanguine suo pro- 
fuuerunt : ubi Petrus passion! Dominicao adaeqnatur : ubi Paulus Jo- 
amiis exitu coronatur : ubi Apostolus Joannes posteaquam in oleum ig- 
neum demersus, nibil passus est, in insulam relegatur. Videamus quid 
didicerit. quid docuerit, cum Africanis quoque Ecclesiis contesseravit- 
Ununi Deum novit, creatorem univcrsitatis, et Clu'istupi Jesum ex 
virgine Maria Filiuni Dei creatoris, ct carnis resurrectionem,, Legem 
et Prophotas cum Evangelicis et Apostolicis litteris miscet,et inde 
potat fidem : earn aqua signat, Sancto Spiritu vestit, eucharistia pas- 
cit, martyrium cxhortatur, et ita adversus hanc institutionem nemi- 
nera recipit. Hacc est institutio, non dico jam qiiae futuras haerescs 
praenuntiabat, sed de qua haeresesprodicrunt. Te2tul. de Praescrjp 
Haeret. xxxvi. p. 215. , 



CHAPTER 11.] TERTULLIAN. . 91 

authority for us is nigh at hand. How happy is this Church 
to which the apostles gave their whole doctrine, with their 
blood : where Peter was made equal to the endurance of 
the passion of his Lord : where Paul was crowned (with 
martyrdom) at the exile of John : where the apostle John 
was afterwards plunged into hoiling oil. and suffering no- 
thing, was banished to an island. Let us see too, what one 
might learn, what he might teach, when he should also have 
compared his symbol with the Churches of Africa. He 
acknowledges one God the Creator of the universe, and 
Jesus Christ, from the Virgin Mary, the Son of God, the 
Creator, and the resurrection of the flesh ; he mingles the 
law and the prophets with the Gospels and the Epistles, 
and thence he drinks his faith ; water signs it ; it is clothed 
with the Holy Spirit ; the eucharist nourishes it ; martyr- 
dom exhorts it, and thus, against this institution it receives 
no one. This is the institution, 1 do not say which pre- 
monished men that there would be heresies, but from which 
heresies must go forth.' Here is a beautiful passage, shew- 
ing an admiration of the Church of Rome on the part of 
Tertullian, and certainly displaying every disposition to do 
justice to her claims ; yet there is not one word about the 
Chair of Peter about the bishop of Rome holding the 
place of God and Christ upon the earth, about Rome being 
the mother and mistress of the other dioceses, nor indeed, 
any thing that looks like her having a superior authority. 

But it is time that this witness should be dismissed, for 
there are many others to be examined. And yet I cannot 
in justice close the testimony of Tertullian, without pre- 
senting to you, brethren, the opinion of one of yourselves, 
the learned and candid Rigault, on the subject of the as- 
persions, which those who relished not his honesty have en- 
deavored to cast upon him. 



92 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB 11. 

(64) 'The heresies of Tertullian, so called,' saith this in- 
genuous critic, ' can hardly be discovered in any thing unless 
in his advocacy of braver martyrdoms, severer fasts, more 
holy chastity, namely in" one marriage or none, in which 
things whatever may have been a sin, seems to have been 
such through a more absolute and vehement love of virtue. 
This indeed appears a graver accusation, that he acknow- 
ledged and defended the Paraclete of Montanus. But the 
school of Montanus, as Baronius himself observes, stood for 
a long while innocent, and his disciples were commendable 
for the sanctity of their manners, reverenced for their benefi- 
cent power of miracles, and strong in the constancy with 
which they endured martyrdom. So tjiat no one could 
recognize elsewhere, a more manifest exhibition of the Deity.' 
The conclusion of Rigault from these and other facts which 
may be omitted, is the conclusion, I doubt not, of truth, that 
Tertullian's adherence to Montanus must have been at the 
beginning of his course, when Montanus was applauded by 
all Christians, for his extraordinary zeal, and not towards the 
end, when his orthodoxy became infected, and he sunk into 
contempt. (65) 

I conclude this chapter, brethren, by reminding you of 

(64) Haereses Tertulliani quae dicuntur, ea vix aliud praecipiebant 
quam martyria fortiora, jejunia sicciora,castimonium sanctiorem, nuptiaa 
scilicet unas, aut nullas. In quibus quidquid peccavit, id omne virtutis 
amore vehementiore peccasse videatur. Illud certe gravius, quod Mon- 
tani Paracletum agnovit atque defendit. Sed Montani schola, sicut et 
Baronius observat, aliquamdiu stetit innoxia, discipulos habuit adeo mo. 
rum sanctitate commendabiles, beneficia miraculorum potentia reveren- 
dos, martyriorum constantia fortes, ut nemo praesentiores alibi numinis 
vires agnosceret.' Rigault. in not. Tertul. op. p. 501. 

(65) 'Unde verosimile fiat, Montani dogma quale extitit, primordi 
quidem sui Cbristianis austerioribus probabili, Tertullianum tenuisse, 
non qualc postea, cum sequacium quorumdam imposturis et fraudibus,acn 
Phrygia interpolatum, ab Ecclesiis Catholicis despui cospit.' ib. 



CHAPTER 11.] TERTdLLlAN. . 93 

Tertullian's maxim,which is a favorite one with yourselves) 
that 'What is first is true, and what is subsequent is adulterar 
ted.' (66) May you be enabled to apply it aright, and then 
you will have no difficulty in acknowledging that the spiritu- 
al dominion which you now claim over the Christian world, 
was not a doctrine of the primitive Church of Rome, but 
one which sprung up at a much later day.* 

(66) 'Id esse verum quodcumque primum, id esse adulterum quod- 
cumque posterius,' Tcrtul. adv. Prax. II. p. 501. ; 

* I have been somewhat surprised at a remark published by the 
learned author of the Difficulties of Romanism, (p. 261 of the Ameri- 
can edition, in the note) where he says that 'in the time of Tertullian 
a considerable advance had been made by the See of Rome in the 
claim of the primacy, inasmuch as he (Tertullian) calls the bishop of 
that Church the supreme Pontiff, and distinguishes him with the au- 
thoritative title of bishop of bishops.' This concession is gladly used, 
I perceive, in the book of the bishop of Strasburgh, published in an- 
swer to Mr. Faber; but I cannot see that either of those learned writeri 
has understood Tertullian fairly. The passage is taken from his book 
De Pudicitia, and occupies its first page. I quote it with its context, 
in justice to the argument, and leave it to your candor to say whether 
he does not apply these titles rather in irony than in sober allowance. 
'I hear, says Tertullian, : that an edict is proposed, and truly a per- 
emptory one. The. Pontiff.namely,the Chief, which means the bishop 
of bishops, declares: I remit the sins of fornication and adultery, to 
all who have completed their penitence. O edict, which cannot be 
called a good deed. And where is this liberality displayed ? There, 
as 1 think, on those very gates of lust, under those very titles of lust. 
There this kind of penitence is to be promulgated, where iniquity 
itself shall be most familiar. There pardon is to be read, whenever ona 
shall enter with the hope of it'. But this is read in the Church, and 
is uttered in the Church, and yet the Church is a Virgin. Away, 
away with such preaching from the Spouse of Christ. That Church 
which is true, which is modest, which is holy, should not have such 
nncleanness offered even to her ears.' 

To my mind, the character of this whole passage shews that Tertnl- 
lian had no idea of doing honor to the bishop ol Rome,but the contrary- 
Be this as it may, however, and granting that these titles had been 
applied in the sobriety of historical narration, still they would 



94 TERTULLIAN. CHAPTER 11.] 

not sustain your doctrine. For every Metropolitan bishop who had 
bishops under him, might be called a chief Pontiff, and a bishop of bish- 
ops; and the supremacy of the bishop of Rome by divine right over the 
whole Church,could by no fair reasoning be supported from such titles 
merely, since they were given to others as well as to himself. That 
Tertullian could not have designed to concede any thing in favor of 
your present doctrine is incontestably plain from this single considera- 
tion : that the passage occurs in the opening of the same book from 
which! have quoted the extract on pages 85 und 86, so utterly hostile 
to your whole system. I add the original in full. 

'Audio etiam edictum esse propositum,et quidem peremptorium 
Pontifex scilicet maximus, quod est, Episcopus Episcoporum, edicit: 
Ego et moechiae et fornicationis delicta, poenitentia functis dimitto. 
O edictum, cui adscribi non poterit, Bonum factum ! Et ubi propone- 
tur liberalitas ista? Ibidem, opinor, in ipsis libidinum januis,sub ipsis 
libidinum titulis. Illic ejusmodi poenitentia ^promulganda est, ubi 
delinquentia ipsa versabitur. Illic legenda est venia, quo cum spe ejus 
intrabitur. Sed hoc in Ecclesia legitur, et in Ecclesiapionuntiatur,jet 
virgo est. x Absit, absit a Sponsa Christi tale praeconium. Ilia qua 
vcra est, qua? pudica, qua? sancta, carebit etiam aurium maculis,' 



CHAPTERXII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

About the same time with Tertullian, though as some 
think, rather earlier, flourished Clement of Alexandria, 
whose eulogium I have already quoted from Jerome, and 
whose name appears in your own Canon law, among the 
' blessed.' 

The testimony of this eminent writer with respect to the 
supremacy of the Church of Rome, is purely negative, 
and yet, to a candid mind, decisive. He mentions the 
Church, times without number, speaks of her unity, partic- 
ularises the leading heresies, takes notice of the ' keys/ re- 
marks on the preaching and acts of Peter, and yet never, 
by the slightest allusion, leads the reader to think that the 
Church was founded on Peter, that he had any authority 
over the other Apostles, that this authority was transferred 
to the Roman bishops, or that any one Church held a pow- 
er of government over the rest. The kind of evidence 
here furnished, cannot be exhibited by extracts. But the 
inference is irresistible, that had the doctrine of Rome been 
then received as it is now, no writer of intelligence, travel- 
ing over the extensive field which the works of Clement 
cover, could have avoided a plain statement of the fact ; 01 
at least, some intelligible allusions to it. 

I add a few passages from this celebrated author, as a 



86 TESTIMONY OP [cHAPTEB, 

specimeq of the whole. (68) ' To believe and to be re* 
generate, is perfection in life. There is no weakness with 
God. For as his will is work, and this is named the world, 
so his will is the salvation of men, and this is called the 
Church. He knew therefore those whom he called, and 
saved them, for he called and saved together.' 

(69) ' But demonstration being required, it is necessary 
to descend to controversial questions, and to learn from the 
Scriptures themselves, demonstratively, in what manner 
heresies have fallen from truth, and how in the only truth 
and in the ancient Church, the most perfect knowledge is 
found. 5 Here he uses the phrase, Ancient Church, as Ire- 
nseus and Tertullian do, to signify the Church as it was first 
planted, without distinction of place, or of one Apostle 
over another. 

(70) ' The Lord alone,' saith he, c drank the cup for the 
purification of those who rejected and betrayed him. Whom 
the Apostles imitating, as being indeed gifted and perfectin 



(68) ' OvTCi) TO nicrievattt, [.iovov xal 

'eauv 'sv 'Cra?;' ' Ou JUQ Ttore baOsvei, 6 0e6g. c Os y& TO 
ua dvwv I'^yoJ' 'earl, xal ToBro xoa^iog uvo^a'^erai" ovitag teat 
fidvhjpu 'otuzoO "avdqKtTCwv 'eaw aojT7jgla' xat IOVTO Exxhij 
B^xJUfrat. " Oidsv ovv 6i>g xiv.lrjnsv, ovg asacaaev xexlrjxev 
&fta xat a^awxsv. Clem. Alex.Paedag. Lib. 3. Cap. 6. (p. 93.) 



(69) 'Ano8el%eo)g d' 6W//, 'av&yxrj ovyxaTafiawew 'sis 
, xai 81' 'aviuv r&v y^aqpwv 'expavd&vsiv ' 



!*BV aTfSdcf&lriaav dt dlQ^asig, 6noig d xctl Iv 
Qslq, xal TTJ~ &QXlq. Exxlrjaia, rps fagifisafae yvdais.' Clem. 
Alexan. Strom. Lib. 7- (p. 755.) 

(70) * ttbvos lolvvv 6 IZuqiog di& ity -iav emfiovXsvdvTKrp of- 
*(S &v6g<f>rt(av, xal TTJV i<$v dwlcncov dmox&dagtuv , Isniev td rtor^- 
aiav* ot> fiifio^svot ol Artbaiokoi, &g &v ToT 6'yTe. yvworixoi, xal 
fjli.8toi> -bneg ivv exxlrjCfiGir, &s enrj^av, $7ta6ov. Ib. Lib. 4. (p- 
503.) 



CHAPt ER 1 2.] CLEMENT OF ALEXAHDRJi* 9T 

knowledge, suffered for the Churches which they founded.' 
He adds no note of distinction, but speaks of all alike. 

Again, it is worthy of remark, that the only preference 
Clement seems to express for one Apostle above the others, 
is expressed not for Peter, but for Paul ; calling him in one 
place, (71) ' the good Apostle,' in another, (72) the 'noble 
Apostle,' and in two other places, (73) the ' divine Apos- 
tle,' whereas he gives Peter no such distinction. . 

Again, he speaks of the keys, of the Church, and of 
the Apostolical tradition, in a passage, which, though long, 
it will be proper to give in his own words. 

(74) Alluding to the heretics of his 'day, he says, 'Who 

(71) <5 xulog Anoaiolog. Strom. Lib. 5. p. 562. 

(72) TOV "few mo v Anuajolov Strom. Lib. 2. p. 420. 

(73) <5 f.dv ovv Oeoneoiog Anbatolog. Strom- Lib. 1. p. 

316. 

11 TOP Q&ov Anbawlov. Strom. Lib. p. 274. 

(74) ot Tolvvv T&V v.o~?8&v umofievoi Ibytiv, alloig TB &g- 

jdd cv ToTg J.uyoig ToTg Oeloig &IM iSrjfia^Tij^vwg avy- 
i, OVTS uviol tualauiv sialaaiv sig T^V @acri},Elav ?&v du- 
gav&v, OVTS 01)5 $Tj7i&Tijaciv, tuuiv tvyjfu.veiv T^g .&),r t 6etag. 
(iv8 TI]V y.heiv zzovTcg'otVTol TTJC ia6dov, ifjsvdri d& iiva y.al 
<pyo~i,v ^ o-vv^Oeia'avTixlsida, Si,' ^g UVTTJV 'av'kaiav 'uvuriET&aa 
?sg, &o~nsg -ffUeig dtu TTJJ TOW Kvgiov nugadoaewg siaifisv n 
dvguv ds 3 avaTe[.iovTsg, y.ul di&QuZavTeg 'k&dqa TO Tei%lov T 



i/JV%T]g KuQiGTavTav, OTI yag ^sia^svsoTSQag ir[g 

g Talg 'avdguTttvag avv^iiaeig nEnoirjxao~iv , dv yroA>l5>' 
-ff y&Q TOV Kvgiov KaTtj. TTJV itagoiaiuv didaaxetJiia 
W6 'Avyotiawv xul Tt^egtov K&iaaQog 'ct 



y.Q<> ye Tr^g IJctii^ov J.enovQyiugi inl Nigtavog TeAetourat- xcct 
negl toiig Adgiuvov TOV ^aatA^wg xgovoig, oi> idg 

v yeyovKai, v.al p&%Qi> ye i^g AVTWVIVOV TOV 
?ou diiiswav ^hxias, xad&nsg 6 Baai^Btdijs, x'&v 



9 



98 TSiSTIMOHY OF [CHAPTER 12. 

use the divine word not rightly, but perversely, neither do 
they enter the kingdom of hraven themselves, nor suffer 
those whom they deceive t-,> follow the truth. But they 
have not the key of the entrance themselves, but a certain 
false key, or as the common suy'iivc is, an anti-key, by which 
the veil is not; unloosed, as it is to us who enter by the tra- 
dition of the Lord ; but the door is cut off, and the wall of 
the Church privately (lug through. Transgressing the truth, 
they become the rulers and leaders of the impious mysteries 
of the soul. But to prove that their conventicles are 
more recent than the Catholic Church, there is no need of 
many words. For the doctrine which was set forth at the 
coming of our Lord, as it began with Augustus, so it was 
finished in the middle of Tiberius' reign ; and the teaching 
of the Apostles, to the end of the ministry of Paul, was 
finished in the time of Nero. But those who have put forth 
heresies were about the time of the emperor Adrian, and 
progressed until the age of the elder Antonine, such as Ba- 
silides, although he assumed to himself the mastership of 
Glaucia, who, as they boast, was the interpreter of Peter. 
In like manner they say, that Valentinus heard Theodades, 
who was the companion of Paul. But Marcion, who was 
born in the same age with these, consorted with them as an 
old man amongst youth, with whom was one Simon, who 
had listened for a little, while Peter preached. Which things 



s7Uy(j(/>;Ti Siduaxalov, o>? ccu^ovaiv UVTO'L, idv nirQov s^urjvict. a>g a 
<5t- y.ai OvaisvTivov GtudfcSi ax)]'/.oirui (plqoiaiv yrwQiuog ds ovrog i 

auy.iiav y(>, r.ar'a ri]v avTyv avroig r t ?.iy.lav 'YEVOI.IEVO?, >( 
ig, rcuiTtQois avvsytvfro^us-d'ov Siutav in 1 bliyov, xrjQvaaovTOfTOV 
V7c>]Kovfifv. K>? ovrcng f%<JVTun>, avtcyavtg Ix rfjg n^oysvtota fifi 
xai aiti-S-foruirfc: iz%).iiaiag. Tag fitTayfreaTiQag TUVTCCS, xui Tag eft -rotJ- 
Ttar aTtopefiyxviag, Tea jjf^ovu) y.sy.atroToufjCi-9Ki nuQK^a^a^-9-siaag aiQiatif, 
IK r&v SIQIJUSVUV aQct (p<xvs(>ov o<^i yiytr>]a-dat, piav siren TJJV ^jj^ - 



CHAPTER 12,] CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 99 

if they were so, it is clear from the most ancient and true 
Church, that these are more recent, and those which are 
still lower down were, in their time new heresies of spurious 
origin. From what has been said I think it manifest, that 
there is one true Church, that truly which is ancient, in the 
catalogue of which are reckoned those who are just, ac- 
cording to the divine purpose.' - ' And with respect to 
the substance, with respect to knowledge, with respect to 
its beginning and excellency, we say that there is one only 
ancient and Catholic Church, in the unity of that one faith 
which is from the proper covenants, or rather from that 
covenant which is one in diverse times, in which are gath- 
ered together by the will of God, through one Lord, those 
who are already ordained to life, whom God predestinated, 
and knew they would be righteous, before the foundation 
of the world. And the eminency of this Church, as well 
as the beginning of its construction, is from unity, overco- 
ming all other things, and having nothing which is its re- 
semblance or its equal.'* 

Now here it is manifest that Clement regards the keys 
in the sense which Tertullian recognizes, namely, the inter- 
pretation of Scripture ; which the heretics not having, by 
reason of their false doctrine, they attempt to enter the 
Church, not by the door, which they cut away, but by un- 
dermining the wall of the Church ; all which figurative 



xitjatav, Tyv Tto dm aQ/aiav, tt$ fjv 61 zaTanQu&saiv dixaioi 'eyxctTu/.tyov- 
Ti.../aTaTe ovv arcoaraan 1 , y.araTs snivoiav xaraTe c<^yi]i\ xcm'cT* sfco^-TjT, 
fiovtiv 'eiTUi (pccpsv Ti]v aQjraiav xal Ka&oiixijv exxiijtiiav, fig EJ-OTJJTK niars- 
rag tues li/e y.arrarag oixeiag ia&ij%ag, fiailov Js xaraTJjv Jt5'ij'xijv Ttjv uiav 
Sia<p6()oi? 101? xQuvoig st-og TOV 0tov rco |9oi/'/.?;i<aTi, <?t' srbc rov KVQIOV 
avvayovaav lovg f/di] xa.Ta'tstayi.i.ivQig ovg nQoia^iasv 6 so;, dixaiotg 'sao/t- 
TUQO y.arafioJ.tjg xbaiiov 'syrtoxai?. '7.Aa xal i\ 'st-oxy rf/g 'sHxlycias, 
c ij *ccn%i] rijg Gvaraasiag, xaTa TJ/V fiovada 'ECTTIV, navra ta aiia 
, xai ^r\8tv t^ovaa o/oiov / iaov iavry.' CJom. Alex. St rom 
Ub. 7. p. 7645. 



100 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 12. 

language is ill adapted to the idea, that the Church of 
which Clement spake was a society to be discovered by 
its ecclesiastical connexion with one particular apostle, 
or by having its seat at Rome. He goes on to speak of the 
Catholic Church, as being orie ; but he refers this unity 
to its substance, its knowledge, its beginning, its ex- 
cellency, and to the unity of the faith, as handed down 
from the apostles. And the mode in which he ( presents 
his argument seems hardly consistent with the ' notion 
that any one apostle was made pastor or governor over the 
rest, that the whole Church was built on Peter, and that 
his prerogative as chief ruler was committed to his succes- 
sors in the See of Rome. For under these circumstances, 
would he not have confuted the heretics by the short and easy 
argument, derived from the principality of that Church, in- 
stead of resting all his reasoning on a different basis ? 

How natural and simple would it have been to say : ' The 
Church of Rome, to which the government of the whole 
kingdom of Christ has been committed, disclaims these here- 
tics. Marcion, Basilides, and Valentinus, have been con- 
demned and cast off by the infallible decision of the vicar of 
Christ. This is the test of faith, the standard of sound doc- 
trine, the bond of unity.' But nothing of the kind, breth- 
ren, can be found in the works of Clement. Is the infer- 
ence unfair that he did not use your present reasoning sim- 
ply because he did not hold your doctrine? Or must we 
suppose, in the face of all probability, that he did truly pro- 
fess your sentiments with regard to the supremacy of Peter 
and the material domination of the Roman See, and yet 
omitted the slightest allusion to them in the very argument, 
where they would have been the most appropriate ? 

The force of this negative testimony, I am well aware, 
may make very different impressions on different 



CHAPTER 12.] CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 101 

Neither, as I have already intimated, can justice be done to 
it, by extracts. What I have cited, however, is a fair speci- 
men of the mode in which this distinguished father treats 
the subject throughout : and if you, brethren, can reconcile 
it ^with the hypothesis, that he did, notwithstanding, teach 
your present doctrine, it must be by some process either 
of faith or of logic, altogether beyond my comprehension. 



CHAPTER XIII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, \ 

Next in the order of chronology, I turn to the celebrated , 
Origen, whose name your canon law recognizes expressly, 
those things only being excepted which Jerome disapproves, 
The judgment of Jerome. 1 shall extract in full, by and by; 
to shew that the passages which are important for our pres- 
ent subject, are not in the least affected by it. So far from 
this, indeed, is the fact, that Jerome himself will furnish, in 
due time, strong confirmation. 

First, then, let us look at a fine application of the figure 
of the keys, which will prove, in accordance with the other - 
fathers, how well this term was understood, to signify the, 
science of interpretation, 

(76) 'On account of its obscurity,' says Origen, 'the;, 

(76) 'Similem esse universam Scripturam divinitus afflatani prppter 5 
obscuritatena quae in ea est, multis domiciliis uno aedificio conclude / 5 
unicuiqiie domicilio appositam clavem non ipsi convenientem, sicquB 
dissipatas esse claves per domicilia, non respondentes singulas iis; : 
domiciliis quibus appositae sunt : o,pus vero longe difficillimum esse, in- 
venire claves et eas cellis aptare, quas aperire possunt: itaque etiatn. 
Scripturas abstrusas quidem illas intelligi, non aliunde sumptis quam 
ab ipsis ihvicem argumentis intelligentise, quae in se habent dispersam 
exponendi rationem.' Origen. Cora, in Psal. Vide ' Origenisin Sacras ' 
Scripturas Commentaria,' Ed. Col. 1684. Tom. 1. p. 39. For conveni- 
ence sake, I have cited, instead of the original Greek, your own latin 
TQrion. 



OHAPTER 13.] TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN. 103 

**" 

whole Scripture, divinely inspired, is like to many cham- 
bers within one house : but when the key applied to each 
chamber is not fitted to it, the keys become scattered through 
the chambers, not answering to those chambers to which 
they are applied ; and it is truly a difficult work to find the 
proper keys and adapt them to the locks so that they may 
open them : thus it is that the more abstruse Scriptures are 
to be understood, the argument of our "knowledge being ta- 
ken no otherwise than from the Scriptures themselves, 
which have 'dispersed amongst them the reasons of their ex- 
position.' 

But in Origen's commentary on Matthew, we have his 
sentiments in full upon the subject, where we shall plainly 
see -the clearest testimony, to the point in question. It 
will require a Very long extract to do it justice, but no la- 
bor should be thought too great for the searcher after truth. 

After having commented for sometime on the confession 
of Peter: Thou art the Christ, Sec. Origen proceeds as 
follows : (77) ' Which if we also shall say, as Peter did,Thou 

(77) Origen. Comment, in Matt. ib. Tom. 1. p. 274-5. ' Quod si 
postquam dixenmus et nos, quemadmodum Petrus : Tu es Christus 
filius Dei vivi, non quasi revelatum nobis fuerit a came vel a san- 
guine, sed luce cordi nostro affulgente a Patre qui in coelisest, Petrus 
effieimur ; dicatur et nobis a Verbo : Tu es Petrus, et quae sequun- 
tur. Petra enim est.omnis Discipulus Christi, de quo bibebant, qui it- 
Reliant spiritali consequente petra : et super quamlibet ejusmodi pe- 
tram sedificatur omnis sermo Ecnlesiasticus, et vitse juxta ipsum in- 
Btitutae ratio : unicuique enim perfecto habenti congregationem sermo- 
flum. beatitudmem perflcientium, et operum, et cogitationum, in- 
est Ecclesia a Deo a3dificata. Si vero super unum ilium solummodo 
Petrum totam Ecclesiam a Deo jedificari arbitraris, quid de lohanne^ 
tonitru filio, et unoquoque Apostolorum dixeris : Alioquin an aude- 
bimus dicere portas Inferi speciatim ad versus Petrum non praevalitu- 
ras, praevalitiiras autem adversus reliquoa Apostolos, et perfectos' 
Nonne vero et in omnibus et in his singulis sit istud quod snpra 
dictum est: Porte Inferi non pravalelunt adversus earn, et illud 



104 TESTIMONY OF OBIGEN [CH^PTEE 

art the Christ, the Son of the living God, not as if it hatj 
been revealed to us by flesh and blood, but by the light 
shining in our hearts from the Father who is in heaven, we 
become as Peter, and it may be said by the Word unto us 
also, Thou art Peter, (sc. a stone or a rock) and what fol- 
lows. For every disciple of Christ is a rock, from whom 
they drank who drank' of the Spiritual 'Rock that followed 
-them, and on every such rock every Ecclesiastical word is 
builded, and the system of life instituted accordingly ; and 
on every such perfect man having the combination of pre- 
cepts perfecting holiness, the Church is inwardly built by 
God. But if you suppose that the Church is built by Gpjtl 
upon one single rock, (Peter) what do you say of John, 
the son of thunder, and every one of the other apostles) 

. quoque : Super hanc petram adi/icalo Ecclcsiam meam'? An etiarij 
oli Petro dantur a Domino clavcs regni ccelorum, nee quisquara 



rum alius eas accipiet? Quod si et id aliis commune est; Dabotity 
claves regni catlorum, quombdo et non ea quae prascedunt, commuma 
aunt, ~et quBB subnectuntur tanquam in Petrum dicta? Hie etenijB 
velut in Petrum dicta videntur ea : Quacunque, ligaveris super terraiA, 
eruntligata in c&lis, et quse sequuntur : in Evangelio autem lohafi- 
nis Servator dans Spiritum sanctum Discipulis per insufflationera, .di 
cit: Accipitc Spiritum sanctum, et que suntdeinceps. Prninde muui 
dicent Servatori: Tu es Christus filius Dei WTO, at non bmnes illi/d 
dicentes, haudquaquam a ( carne et sanguine revelantibus hoc edocti 
dicent illi,' sed ablato ab ipso Patre'qui in coslis est itnposito cordi eo- 
rum velamine, ut postea rcvelata facie gloriam Domini speculantesfo 
fipiritu Dei loquantur, dicentes de illo : Dominus Icsus, et illi:" : Ito 
ts Christus filius Dei vim. Et si quis hoc dicit illi, sibi non revelatuin 
e carne et sanguine, sed a v Patre qui in coalis est, ea consequetur, 
quae ut ait quidem litera Evangelii, Petro huic dicta sunt ; utdocet ai> 
tern Spiritus illius, cuilibet qui talis evadit, qualis erat ille Petrua. 
Nomen enim trahunt a 1 Petra omnes imitatores Christi, spiritalis scili- 
et petraj consequentis eos qui salvi fiunt, ut ex ea spiritualem porti* 
nem ebibant. Illi autem nomen trahunt a 1 Petra, quemadmoduro 
Christus; sed et cum Christi membra sint, nomine ab illo ducto 
Christiani appellati sunt ; a' Potra autem, Petri.' 



13.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 1QS 

Or shall we say that the gates of hell were not to prevail 
specially against Peter? Were they then to prevail against 
the other apostles and perfect believers ? Is it not plain, 
that to all and each the assurance is made good, that the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it ; and this, also, Upon 
this rock 1 will build my Church ? Or was it to Peter 
alone, that the Lord gave the keys of the kingdom of hea- 
ven, and did none other of the blessed receive them? And 
if this is common to the others : I will give you the keys of 
the kingdom of heaven, how should not those thing? which 
precede it and which are evidently connected with it }! as 
also said to Peter, be common likewise ? For here it seems 
to be said to Peter : Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, 
shall be bound also' in heaven, and what follows ; but in the 
.Gospel of John, the Saviour, giving the Holy Spir.it to the 
disciples by breathing on them, says : Receive ye the Holy 
"Ghost : whosesoever sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven 
them, and whose you shall retain they are retained. At this 
itioie also, many will say to the Saviour, Thou art the 
Christ, the Son of the living God ; but not all who say this, 
do so because they have been taught by flesh and blood re- 
pealing it, but because our Father who is in heaven hath 
'taken away the veil that was on their heart : that afterwards 
'his face being revealed, they, beholding the glory of the 
Lord, might say by the Spirit of God : Lord Jesus, and to 
him : Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And 
if any one say this to him, the revelation being made, not 
~;by flesh and blood, but by the Father which is in heaven, 
that will follow, which the letter of the gospel declares was 
said to Peter ; for his spirit teaches him, that whosoever 
becomes such an one, he is the same as that Peter. For 
all the imitators of Christ derive their name from the rock 
spiritual rock which follows them who are saved, that 



106 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEB Ig. 

from it they should drink spiritual drink. They take their 
name from their rock, that is Christ : for as, because they 
are the members of Christ, by the name derived from him, 
they are called Christians, so from his being the rock, (Pe- 
tra) they are called rocks.' (Petri or Peters,) 

(78) ' Taking occasion from the same principle,' con- 
tinues Origen, 'you may say that Christians are denomina- 
ted the righteous, from the righteousness of Christ, the wise 
from the wisdom of Christ, and you may do the same with 
all his other names, applying them to the saints ; and who- 
soever shall be such as these names signify, to them it shall 
be said by the Saviour : Thou art Peter, with .what follows 
to the passage: They shall not prevail against it. What 
does this word : It, signify ? Is it the rock on which Christ- 
builds the Church, or the Church ? The word is ambigu* 
bus : whether is this because the rock and the Church 
mean the same thing ? I think this to be the truth ; for 
neither against the rock, upon which Christ builds the. 
Church, nor against the Church, shall the gates of hell 
prevail.' 

(79) ' But although the gates of hell are many and al- 

(78) Ib. p. 276. Inde vcro accepta occasione justos a ( Christ! jus- 
titia, sapientes a ( Christ! sapientia denominates esse dices ; idemque 
facies de reliquis ejus nominibus, nomina in Sanctos ducens ; et 
quicunque tales fuerint, dicetur iis a 1 Servatore-illudquod itaso habet: 
Tu cs Pctrus, et quce sequuntur ; ad id usque ; Non pravalebunt ad- 
versus earn: Quam autem, Earn? an eni'm petram, super quam 
Christus asdificat Ecclesiam ; an Ecclesiam ? ambigua quippe locutio 
est : an quasi unam, eandemq; rem, Petram et Ecclesiam? Hoc. ego 
yerum essc existimo : nee enim adversus petram, super quam Christus 
Ecclesiam aedificat, nee adversus Ecclesiam portas Inferi praevale- 
bunt. 

(79) ib. p. 277. B. At cum multse sint et vix numerandce Inferi 
portae, nulla Inferi porta praevalebit adversus Petram, vel Ecclesiam 



CHAPTER 13.] OBIGEN. lOt 

most innumerable, no gate of hell shall prevail against the 

rock or the Church which Christ builds upon it.' 

< And this is truly to be known, that as the several gates of 
cities have their appropriate names, in like manner the 
names of the several gates of heir may be taken from the 
various forms of sin : so that one gate of hell is fornication, 
through which the lewd take their way ; another is the de- 
nial of justice, through which those descend to hell who deny 
the claims of God. And truly every one of the heterodox 
who bring forth any science falsely so called, has built a 
gate of hell: Marcion has erected one, Basilides another, 
and Valentinus another. Here, therefore, these gates are 
called the gates of hell. But in the Psalms the prophet 
gives thanks, saying: Thou callest me from the gates of 
death, that I may declare thy praise in the gates of the 
daughter of Zion. And from this place we learn that no 
one can ever declare the praise of God, unless he has been 
raised from the gates of death, and has attained the gates of 
Zion. And the gates of Zion may be understood as the 
opposite to the gates of death, so that as one gate of death 
is luxury, so the gate of Zion is Chastity ; a gate of death 
again is injustice, but the gate of Zion justice ; which the 

quam super illam Christus aedificat.' ' Atque id quidem scien- 

dum est, quemadmodum urbium portae singulae propria habent nomi- 
na : eodem modo portis Inferi pro variis peccatorum formis nomina 
imperil posse ; itaut una Inferi porta fornicatio appelletur, per quam 
iter faciunt scortatores ; altera autem inficiatio, per quam in infernum 
descendunt, qui Deum inficiantur. Jam vero et unusquisque illorum 
qui diversis ab Ecclesia opinionibus adhaerent, et aliquam falsi npm- 
inis scientiam genuerunt, portam Inferi sedificavit, aliam quidera Mar- 
cion, Basilides aliam. et aliam Valentinus. Hie igitur ports Infero- 
rum dictae sunt. In Psalmis vero gratias agit Propheta dicens : Qui 
ezaltas me de portis mortis, ut annuntiem omnes laudationes tuas fa 
portis jilitR Sion. Atque ei hoc loco discimus fieri nunquam posse, ut 
qui non exaltatus fuerit de portii mortis, et ad portas Sion non 



109 ; TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTfiifl 13, 

prophet shewing ^saith: This is the gate of the Lord, - the 
just shall go in thereat ; again,. the gate of death is fear, the 
gate of Zion, fortitude ; folly is the gate of death, but wis- 
dom is the gate of Zion.' 

(80) ' We see by all this, how it may be said to Peter, 
and to every one who is as Peter : I will give thee the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven. And first, indeed,! think these 
words are to be connected with the others : The gates of 
hell shall not prevail against it ; for he who is defended 
against the gates of hell, so that they prevail not against 
him, is worthy to receive from the divine Word himself the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven as a reward, .that as the 
gates of hell could do nothing against him, he, receiving the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven, might open to himself those 
gates which are shut to all who are overcome by the gates 
of hell ; and thus the key which opens the lock of chastity 

perve.nerit, omnes laudationes Dei annuntiaro possit, Portae au- 
tern Sion coatrariae portis mortis intelligi possint. adeo ut porta mortis, 
ait luxuria ; porta autern Sion, castitas, mortis item, injustitia; Sion 
vero, justitia, quam ostendens Propheta ait : Hose porta Domini, justi 
intrdbunt in earn; et rursum mortis porta, sit timiditas; fortitude 
vero, Sion ; imprudentia, mortis : contraria autem illi sapientia, Sion. 
(80) Ib. p. 278. D. Post haec videmus, quomodo dictum sit Petro, 
et cuilibet qui Petrus est; Dabo till claves rcgui ccelorum. Etpri- 
mum quidem existimo his verbis ; Portae Inferi non praevalebunt ad- 
versus earn, convenienter id' esse subnexum ; Dabo tibi claves regni 
MBlorum : nam qui contra infer! portas munitus est, ut adversus euro 
non praevalerent, dignus est qui ab ipso Verbo claves regni coslorum 
accipiat; quasi praemium, quod nihil adversus ilium portae Inferi 
potuerint, claves accipiens regni coelorum, ut sibi portas reseret clau- 
asiisquiab Inferi portis victi sunt : et ingveditur quidem ut castua 
per portam pudicitiae, clave pudicitiam aperiente reseratam ; et pel* 
aliam, ut Justus, aperta justitiae porta clave justitiae : ct sic de caeter- 
18 virtutibus. Opinor enim pro unaquaque virtute scientiae, quaedaw 
apiehtiae mystcria virtutis formae congruentia aperiri ei qui juita vir- 
tutem vixerit ; dante scilicet Servatore iis qui ab Inferi portis subacti 
noa fuerint totidem clares quot virtutes sunt, totidem numero porta 



CHAPTER. 13.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 109 

admits him into the gate of chastity, and the key of righte- 
ousness admits him into the gate of righteousness, and so 
of the other virtues. For I think that for each virtue of 
knowledge there are certain mysteries of wisdom corres- 
ponding to this form of virtue, opened to him who lives ac- 
cording to that virtue ; the Saviour giving to those who were 
not subdued by the gates of hell, as many keys as there are 
virtues, opening as many gates and corresponding to each 
virtue according to the relation of its appropriate mysteries. 
Perhaps too, each virtue is a kingdom of heaven,: and the 
whole together, is the kingdom of the heavens ; so that he 
who lives according to these virtues is already in the king- 
dom of the heavens ; and therefore this passage : Repent, 
for the kingdom ot the heavens is at hand, would be refer- 
red not to the time, but to actions and affections. For Christ, 
who is all virtue, is at hand, and declares that the kingdom 
of heaven is not here- or there, but that the kingdom of God 
is within his disciples. But behold, what power is pO3- 

aperientes, unicuiquo virtuti juxta mysteriorum revelationem respon- 
dentes. Fortasse autem unaqua:que virtus cceli regnnm est, et tola 
simul regnum coelorum est ; adeo ut juxta id jam in regno coelorumsit 
qui vivit secundum virtutes ; atque ita ut illud ; Poenitentiam agite t 
appropinquavit enim regnum coelorum, juxta id non ad tempus, sedad 
actiones et affectiones referatur. Christus enim, qui omnis virtus est, 
praesto est, et loquitur, proptereaque regnum Dei intra Discipulosilliua 
est, non autem hie et hie. Vide autem quanta vi polleat petra, super 
quam a 1 Christo zedificatur Ecclesia, et quicunque dicit : Tu es Christus^ 
Filius Dei vim, ut illius judicia firma maneant ; quasi Deo in illo judi- 
cante, ut in ipso jure dicendo ports Inferi adversus eum non prsevale- 
ant. Adversus eumigitur quiinjuste judicat, et non juxta Verbum Dei 
ligat super terram, neque ex illius sententiasolvit super terram, ports 
Inferi prevalent: adversus quern autem portae Inferi non praevalent, 
is juste judicat. Idcirco claves habet regni ccelorum, apeviens iis qui 
soluti sunt super terram, ut et in coelis soluti sint ac liberi ; et clau- 
dens iis qui justo illius judicio ligati sunt super terram, ut et in coeli* 

Ugati ac condemnati sunt.' 
10 



110 TESTIMONY Of [CHAPTEB 1& 

sessed by the rock on which Christ builds the Church, and 
by him who says: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living 
God ; the power, namely, that his judgments may remain 
firm, as of God, justified by him, so that through this judg- 
ment the gates of hell may not prevail against him. There- 
fore against him who judges unjustly, and does not bind ao 
cording to the word of God upon the earth, nor looses ac- 
cording to his sentence, the gates of hell prevail : but that 
man against whom the gates of hell do not prevail, judges 
rightly. For this reason he has the keys of the kingdom 
of heaven, opening to those who are loosed upon the earth, 
that in the heavens they may be loosed and free, and shut 
ting to those who are bound by his just judgment upon 
earth, that they may also be bound and condemned in the 

heavens.' 

(81) ' But since there are some who interpret this passage of 
the Episcopacy, as being Peter, and teach that by the keys of 

the kingdom of heaven, received from the Saviour, those 
things which are bound by them, that is, condemned, are 
bound in heaven, and those which are loosed on earth are 

(81) Jb. p. 279. D. ' Q,uoniam autem qui Episcopatus locum vendi. 
cant, dictum hoc usurpant, sicut Petrus, et acceptis aservatore clavibufl 
regni ccelorum decent ea quae a se ligata sunt, hoc est condemnata, 
ligata esse et in coelis, et quae a se soluta sunt, soluta esse et in coelis; 
pronuntiandum est recte illos dicere, si factum etiam habuerint prop- 
tor quod Petro huic dictum est ; Tu es Petrus; ac si tales sunt, ut super 
illos aedifioetur Ecclesiaa Christo, et ad illos jure id referri possit. Por- 
tae aatem Inferi praevalere non debent advcrsus eum qui ligare vult 
tsolrere. Quod si funibuspeccatorum suorum constringitur, frustra 
etligat et solvit.' 

* Si quis autem qui Petrus non fuerit, nee ea habuerit quae hie dicta 
unt, sicut Petrus ligaturum se credit super terrain, ita ut quae ligata 
ftwrint, sint ligata et in coelis ; et soluturum se super terram, ita ut 
quae soluta fuerint, sint soluta et in coelis, superbus ille est, nesciena 
Soripturarum senaum, et superbiael&tusin criraen incidit Diaboli.' ib- 
p. 280- 



CHAPTER 13.] ORIGEN. . Ill 

loosed in heaven ; it may be said that they say truly, if they 
have the quality, on account of which it was said to Peter : 
Thou art Peter, and if they are such, that upon them the 
Church can be built by Christ, and this privilege can be 
justly granted to them. But the gates of hell ought not to 
prevail against him who would bind and loose. For if he 
is bound by the cords of his sins, he binds and looses in 

vain.' ' Therefore, if any one be not what Peter 

was, nor be possessed of those qualities which have been 
mentioned, and yet thinks that he, like Peter, can 'bind up- 
on the earth, so that those things which he binds shall be 
also bound in heaven, and that he can loose upon the earth, 
so that whatever he looses shall be loosed also in heaven, 
that man is proud, not knowing the sense of the Scriptures, 
and being lifted up with pride he falls into the crime of th 
devil.' 

It is surely impossible, brethren, to ask for language more 
plain than this, to prove that Origen had no knowledge of 
the doctrine of your supremacy. He takes notice, indeed, 
of the claim which some were beginning to put forth on b&- 
half of the bishops in general, that the power of the key* 
granted to Peter was a power belonging to the Episcopacy ; 
but that this was appropriated to any one bishop as superior 
over the rest, or that any one diocese was the mother and 
mistress of all the Churches, because it was the See of St. 
Peter, these notions had evidently not reached Origen's 
ears, or it Is manifest that he would have alluded to them 
in his Commentary. His views in the main, seem the 
same as those of Tertullian, that the keys of the kingdom 
were granted alike to every spiritual Christian. He con- 
siders the Church built by Christ upon the rock, against 
which the gates of hell should not prevail, as being the 
kingdom of God established in the soul ; and his entire vievr 



1 12 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 13. 

of this famous passage of the divine word, by which you 
endeavour to defend your title to universal dominion, is ut- 
terly subversive of your claim to the sanction of the primi- 
tive day. 

I am aware that you are accustomed to evade the testi- 
mony of Origen by condemning him as a heretic. And there- 
fore, I proceed to prove the high character given to him by 
your own writers, and especially by Jerome, the greatest 
oracle amongst the fathers, according to your own Canon 
law. 

The distinguished Huetius, one of the most learned wri- 
ters of your communion, treating on the very point whether 
Origen could be considered as a heretic, denies that he was 
so, although there were many erroneous things in his books. 
He rests his opinion on these grounds: that although De- 
metrius, the bishop of Alexandria, with the consent of many 
others, condemned Origen, yet his cause was maintained 
by Palestine, Arabia, Phenice and Achaia, and he was 
continued and died in the communion of the Catholic 
Church : that the clamour raised against him was the re- 
sult of envy ; that he delivered the profession of his faith to 
Fabian the bishop of Rome ; and that Leo III. at a later 
day, inserted many extracts from the works of Origen in 
the Roman Breviary. Huetius also well remarks, that if 
every man is to be adjudged a heretic whose works contain 
passages contrary to the approved doctrine of the Church 
of Rome, 'the greater part of the orthodox fathers must 
also be called heretics, such as Irenaeus, Pupias, Cyprian,' 
Stc. and lastly, he quotes with approbation the sentiment of 
Jerome concerning Origen, where he says : 'This one thing 
1 declare freely: I would willingly take the prejudice 
against his name, if I could have therewith his knowledge 
of the Scriptures ; and I should make very light of those 



CHAPTER 13.] OKI GEN. 113 

phantoms, those shades of goblins or ghosts, the nature of 
which is said to be, to frighten children and to gibber in 
the dark.' (82) 

In another part ol this very learned treatise, your author, 
Huetius, states the fact, that after Origen's death such was 
the universal celebrity and estimation of his doctrines, that 
Methodius, the bishop of Tyre, who had impugned them,, 
could find no one to agree with him : almost all adhered to 
Origen. And this extraordinary honor continued until the 
time of Arius, who, deriving some support for his, opinions^ 

(82) ' Qui contrarias autem sectantur panes, talia regerunt, a Deme- 
trio licet, plurimisque ipsi consentientibus Episcopis segregatus fuerit ab 
Ecclesia Origenes, ipsius tamen causara suscepisse et propugnasse Pal- 
estinam, Arabiam, Phoenician!, et Achaiam : et juxta testificationem 
Hieronymi, non ipsius errores, sed adversariorum invidiam has ei tur- 

bas peperisse :' ' Quis Ecclesiae comnmnionem simulate secretum 

eum existimet, qni fidei professionem ad Fabianum Papam dedit, exo- 
rientes haereses acerrime insectatus est, nullam cum haereticis societa- 
tern iniit, Catholicorum Episcoporum familiaritate ad mortem usque 

constanter usus est?' 'Denique suam famam et nomen satis asset- 

uit Leo III, Pontifex M'aximus,. cum inter Lectiones ex Patrum lucubra- 
tionibus decerptas, et Romano insertas Breviario, nonnullas quoque ex. 
Origenianis libris petitas eidem inseruit.' 

' Qui ergo omnem haeneseos suspicionem ab Origene abesse volunt, 
cum iis qui invidioso Haeretici nomine ipsum infamant, ita conciliari 
posse ' censeo ; si duplici notione sumi Haeretici appellationem dica- 
mus, vel ad eum significandum qui haeresin aut fabrefecerit aut secutu* 
sit, earn licet ejurare paratus, simulat que fuisse ab Ecclesia repudiata ; 
vel ad designandum eum qui non haereseos duntaxat auctor et assecla; 
ed perpetuus etiam propugnator,. et pertinax adversus Ecclesiae auc- 
toritatem assertor fuerit : priore igitur notione Haeretici nomen a Patri- 
bus Adamantio imponi, ut haereseos auctor, non assertor significetur- 
Quo sensu orthodoxi quoque Patres quamplurimi haeretici dici possunt, 
velut Irenaeus, Papias, Cyprianus et alii.' 

'Acquiescamus igitur in hoc Hieronymi placito e Traditionibus Ebrak 
cis : Hoc unum dico : vellem cum invidia nominis ejus, habere etiam sc+- 
tntiam Scripturarum, flocci pendens imagines, umbrasquc larvantm, qua* 
rum natura esse dicitur, terrere parvulos, tt in angulis garrire tenebrotif.".' 
Vide Origenianorum, Pet. Dan. Huet. Libr 2. Cap. 3. p. 194 5.. 
10* 



114 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 13. 

as was supposed, from the writings of Origen, brought them 
into disrepute with many. (83) 

But I am not concerned so much with the defence of Ori- 
gen's opinions, as with the simple question of his testimony 
on the antiquity of your claims. And I beg leave to ob- 
serve, brethren, that the universal credit which his name ob- 
tained for such a length of time, gives more than common 
weight to this testimony. If, as you say, our Redeemer grant- 
ed to Peter a power of authority and government over the 
other Apostles, and this power or authority was conferred 
upon the. successors of Peter in the Church of Rome, so 
that, by divine right, Peter first, and/the bishops of Rome 
after him, were regarded a > holding the place of Christ and 
.God upon the earth, it is impossible that any of the fathers 
whom I have cited could have been ignorant of it, and es- 
pecially was this impossible in a doctor of such reputa- 
tion and influence as Origen. But so far was Origen from 
maintaining this doctrine, that he interprets the very passa- 
ges of Scripture on which you rest, as if he had 'never 
heard of such a claim ; and is yet so unconscious of any 
wrong done to the bishop of Rome, that he sends him a 
written statement of his opinions. Mark, too, I beseech 
you, what your Huetius records, that Demetrius, the bishop 
of Alexandria, was the author and inciter of all the oppo- 
sition against Origen. (84) Why was not the bishop of 

(83) ' Sane tanta erat his temporibus Origenianae doctrinae celeb* 
ritaa et existimatio, ut hinc ad facti poenitentiatn adductum fuisse ere. 
dam Methodium, cum vix quemquam ad suas pelliceret partes ; cuncti 
ferme Adaraantio adhaerescerent.' Pet. D. Huet. Origenianomm. Lib. 
2. 3. p 197. 

4 A Methodii aetate ad Ariana tempora suus Origeni honos videtur 
constitisse. Orto autem Ario, patrocinium haeresi suae quaerentei 
Ariani, Adamantii nomen causae suae praetexere studuerunt ib. 

(84) ' Demonstratum est autem turbarum omnium, quae adversus Or- 



CHAPTER 13.] ORIGEN. 115 

Rome active against him, if that bishop then claimed his 
present prerogatives ? Why was not Origen then attacked 
on this very ground ? Nay, even when Jerome, long after- 
wards, published those censures of Origen's errors which 
are adopted as a part of your own Canon law, why were 
not his sentiments, so adverse to the primacy, exposed to 
reprobation ?* 

The answer to all this, can only be found in the fact, that 
the primitive Church of Rome advanced no such claim, 
nor had the primitive Church Catholic at this; time ever 
heard of it. 

igenera magno Ecclesiae detrimento concitatae sunt, auctorem et in. 
centorem fuisse Demetrium Alexandrinum.' ib- l.p. 196. 

*The judgment of Jerome concerning Origen's works, will be found 
in that part of the volume where the testimony of Jerome is examined. 



CHAPTER XIV. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The regular examination of the testimony of antiquity, 
brings us next to that justly celebrated man, who was so 
warm an admirer of Tertullian, the distinguished Cyprian, 
bishop of Carthage, and a martyr. He flourished about 
A. D. 250, and as there is no subject more frequent in his 
writings than the Church and the episcopate, so there is 
none on which his doctrines are more at variance with your 
present claims of supremacy. 

In examining his testimony, however, justice requires that 
all which appears to favour your doctrine should be fully 
get forth, and therefore I shall commence with the passages 
which seem to justify your ground, and then proceed to 
those which demonstrate the difference between the prima- 
cy acknowledged by Cyprian, and the primacy claimed by 
you. 

' There is one God/ says Cyprian, c and one Christ, and 
one Church, and one chair founded by the voice of th 
Lord upon Peter. That any other altar should be erected, 
or a new priesthood be established, besides that one altar 
and that one priesthood, is impossible. Whoever attempts 
to gather otherwise, scatters.' (85) 

(85) ' Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et cathedra 
oca super Petrum Domini voce fundata. Aliud altaro constitui, aut itr 



CHAPTER 14.] TESTIMONY OF CYPRIAN. 117 

Again, speaking of the election of Cornelius as bishop 
of Rome, he uses this language. (S6) ' He' (so. Cornelius) 
'was made bishop by many of our colleagues who were 
then at Rome, who sent unto us illustrious letters to his 
praise and honor, in testimony of his preaching and his or- 
dination. And Cornelius was therefore made bishop by 
the judgment of God and of Christ, by the testimony of 
almost all the clergy, by the people who were present with 
their suffrage, and by the college of ancient priests and 
good men ; and no one was appointed before him, when 
the place of Fabian, that is, the place of Peter and the de- 
gree of his sacerdotal chair was vacant, which he now oc- 
cupies by the will of God and the consent of us all.' 

I shall have occasion to advert to this passage again, when 
your change of the primitive plan of electing your Popes 
is in question. The difference between the mode in which 
Cyprian relates this matter and your present mode of 
electing by your college of Cardinals, without the slightest 
agency on the part of either clergy or people, is striking in- 
deed. But I quote it now, in order to give you the bene- 
fit of that part of it, in which the See of Rome is called 
the chair of Peter. 

Again, complaining of the schismatical attempt of No- 

cerdotium novum fieri praeterunum altare, et unum sacerdotium, non 
potest. Quisquis alibi collegerit, spargit.' Cyp. ad Plcb. Epist. p. 59. 

(86) ' Et factus est Episcopus a plurimis collegia noslris, qui tune 
in urbe Roma aderant, qui ad nos lilteras honoriScas, et laudabiles, 
et testimonio suae praedicationis illustresde ejug ordinatione miserunt. 
Factus est autem Cornelius Episcopus de Dei et Christ! judicio, de 
Clericorurn pene omnium testimonio, '"do plebis, QUEG tune affuit suf- 
fragio, et de sacerdotum, an ti quorum et bonorum virorum collegio; 
cum nemo ante se faetus esset, cum Fabiani locus, id est, cum locus 
Petri et gradus Cathedrae sacerdotalis vacaret. quo occupato de Dei 
voluntate, alquc omnium nostrum consensione firniato,' &c. Cyp.. 
Epist. ad Anlonian.p. 75. 



118 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 14. 

vatian to become the bishop of Rome, Cyprian says : (87) 
' Afterwards they presume to rest upon a false bishop cre- 
ated by heretics, and to carry letters from schismatics and 
profane persons to the chair of Peter and to the principal 
Church, from whence the ecclesiastical unity has arisen, 
nor do they recollect that they are Romans, (whose faith, in 
the Apostles' preaching is praised) to whom perfidy can have 
no access.' 

Once more, Cyprian, speaking of heretical baptisms, says, 
(88) 'there is one baptism, and one Holy Spirit, and one 
Church founded on Peter by Christ our Lord, for the sake 
and the origin of unity.' 

Now these passages look very like your doctrine, and yet, 
when faithfully compared with others from the same writer, 
do in reality prove nothing of the kind. The idea of Cy- 
prian was, that the Apostolic or the episcopal office was one, 
that the calling of Peter and the giving him his official au- 
thority was the beginning of it, and therefore that the 
Church was founded on him, in and with whom the other 
Apostles were included, for the better maintaining of this 
unity. That the Church of Rome was the seat of Peter, 
Cyprian doubtless believed ; and therefore he attaches the 
same importance to it, that he attaches to Peter in relation 
to the other Apostles ; but all this amounted to no more 
than what belongs to the foreman of a jury, the senior 
judge upon the bench, the precedency among peers, or any 

(87) ' Post ista adhuc insuper pseudoepiscopo sibi ab hcereticis con- 
stitute, navigare audent, et ad Petri cathedram atque ad Eeclesiam 
principalem, undo unitas sacerdotalis exorta est, a schismaticis etpro- 
fanis litteras forre, nee cogitare eos csse Romanes (quorum fides, 
Apostolo prtedicante, laudata est) ad quos perfidia habere non possit 
accessum.' Cyp. ad Cornel. deFortunat. et Felicis.' p. 95. 

(88) { Quando et baptisma unum sit, et Spiritus Sanctus unus, el 
ana Ecclesia a Cliristo Domino super Petrum origine unitatis et ra^ 
ttone fundata.' Cyp. epist. ad Januar. p. 133. 



CHAPTER 14.] CYPKIAN. 119 

other case, in which a number being united in the same work 
with the same powers, one, for the sake of order, goes be- 
fore the rest. That this was the extent of Cyprian's def- 
erence to the bishop of Rome will be abundantly manifest 
from the following extracts. 

'(89) ' Our Lord,' saith he, ' whose precepts we ought to 
reverence and observe, establishing the honor of the bishop 
and the system of his Church, speaks in the Gospel, and 
says to Peter : I say to thee, that thou art Peter, and up- 
on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell 
shall not overcome it, and I will give thee the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on 
earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt 
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Thence, by the 
flux of times and successions, the ordination of bishops and 
the system of the Church runs along, so that the Church is 
built upon the bishops, and every* act of the Church is gov- 
erned by those presidents, and this is by the divine law/ 
&sc. 

Again, (90) saith Cyprian, ' By Christ, there is one 

(89) 'Dorainus nostor, cujus pieecepta metuere et observare debe- 
mus, Episcopi honorem, et Ecclesise suae rationem disponensin Bvan- 
gelio loquitur, ct dioit Petro : Ego tibi dico, quia tu esPctrus, et super 
istam petram asdificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portaj inferorum non vin- 
cent earn, et tibi dabo claves regni ccelorum, et quae ligavcris super 
terram, erunt ligata ct in coslis, et queecumque solveris super terrain, 
erunt soluta t et in ccelis, Inde per temporum et successionum vices, 
Episcoporum ordinatio, et Ecclesice ratio decurrit, ut Ecclesia super 
Episcopos constituatur : et omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdcm Prsepos- 
itos gubernetur. Cum hoc itaque divina lege fundatum sit, &c.' Cyp- 
rian. Lapsis Epist. p. 42. 

(90) 'Cum sit a Christo una Ecclesia per totum mundum in multa 
membra divisa, item Episcopatus unus, Episcoporum niultorum con- 
cordi numerositatediffusus ; ille post Dei traditionem, post conneiam 
et ubique conjunctam Catholica Ecclesiso unitatem/ &c. Cypu ad 
Antonian. Epist. p. 81. 



120 TESTIMONY Off [CHAPTER 14. 

Church through the whole world divided in many members, 
for the Episcopate is one, diffused by the harmonious host 
of many bishops, and this, according to the tradition of God, 
is the connected and every where conjoined unity of the 
Catholic Church,' &c. 

Again, (91) 'The Episcopate,' says he, < is one, of 
which a part is held by each bishop, in the whole. The 
Church also is one, which is extended more widely by the 
increase of its fecundity ; in like manner there are many 
rays of the sun, but .one light ; and many branches of the 
tree, but one strength founded in the firm root ; and though 
many rivulets flow from one fountain, and although the 
number of these streams is diffused in the extent of overflow- 
ing abundance, nevertheless unity is preserved in the ori- 
gin/ 

. Again, in a passage which is full of excellent instruction 
to the ministers of Christ, Cyprian states as follows : (92) ' In 
all things,' saith he, * we ought to hold the unity of the 
Catholic Church, nor in any thing of faith and virtue should 
we yield to her enemies. We should not admit the pre 
scription of custom, but should rather be overcome by rea- 
son. For Peter, whom the Lord chose first, and upon 

(91) ' Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. 
Ecclesia quoque una est, quae in multitudincm latius incremento fe- 
cunditalis extenditur : quo modo soils multi radii, sed lumen unum: 
et rami arboris mulii, sed robur unum tenaci radice fundutum : et cum 
de fonte uno rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet diffusa videatur 
exundantis copicc largitate,unitas tamen servalurin origcne .'Cyp. De 
unitat. Eccli;s. p. 208. 

(92) Per omnia debemus Ecclesiaj Catholic.se unitatem tenere, nee 
in aliquo fidci et veriialis hostibus cedere. Non est atitem de consue- 
tudine preescribcnduin, sed ratione vincendum. Nam nee Petrusquen) 
primum Domir.us clogit, et super quern ffidificavit Ecclesiam suam, 
cum secum Paulus do circumcisione postniodum disceptaret, vindicavit 
aibi aliquid insolenter, aut arroganter assumpsit ; ut diceret se prima. 



CHAPTER 14.] CYPRIAN. 121 

whom he built his Church, when Paul disputed with him 
on the subject of circumcision, claimed nothing insolently 
to himself, nor arrogantly assumed any thing. Nor did he 
say that he held the primacy, and that it was fit that Paul 
should comply with him in his new and lately devised ways. 
Nor did he despise Paul because he had been a persecutor 
of the Church, but admitted the counsel of truth, and rea- 
dily yielded to the lawful argument which Paul set forth, 
thus leaving to us an example of concord and patience, that 
we should not love our own notions too well, but should 
yield occasionally to those things which our brethren and 
colleagues usefully and wisely suggest, and if they are true 
and lawful, prefer their suggestions to our own. To which 
thing Paul also looking forward, and consulting faithfully 
for the interest of concord and peace, placed this maxim in 
his epistle, saying : 'Let the prophets speak by two or three, 
and let the others examine. But if any thing be revealed 
to another sitting by, let the first hold his peace,' &c. 

These passages shew clearly the equality of right and au- 
thority claimed by Cyprian in relation to the bishop of 
Rome ; and his conviction that the primacy of Peter and the 
primacy of the Roman Church, conferred no right of jurisdic- 
tion on the apostle over his brethren, nor on the bishop of 
any one diocese over the rest. But the matter does not 

turn tenere, et obtcmperari a novellis et posteris sibi potins oportere. 
Nee despexit Paulum quod ecclesiae prius persecutor fuisset, sed con- 
silium veritatis admisit, et ration! legitimae quam Paulus vjndicabat, 
facile consensit; documentum scilicet nobis et concordiaeet patientia 
tribuens, ut non perlinaciter nostra amemus,sed quae aliquando a fra- 
tribus et collegis nostris utiliter et salubriter suggeruntur, si sint vera 
ct legitima, ipsa potiua nostra ducamus. Cui rei Paulus quoque pros. 
piciens, et concordiae et paci fideliter consulensin epistolasuaposuit, 
dicens : Prophetae autem duo, aut Ires loquantur, et caeteii examinent: 
ii autem alii revelatum fuerit sedenti, ille prior taceat.' &c. Cypriaot 
Epist. ad Quint, p* 140. 
11 



TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 14* 

rest upon these proofs alone. There are other passages 
Btill more conclusive, which I cannot pass by in justice to 
the truth. 

Thus, in many of the epistles of Cyprian, speaking of 
Cornelius, then bishop of Rome, he calls him (93) ' his col- 
league/ his ' fellow bishop,' ' his brother,' in no one instance 
giving him any title of superior respect or reverence, 
but invariably using the language of the most absolute 
equality. 

Again, assigning the reason why Rome takes precedence 
of Carthage, he makes not the slightest allusion to any dif- 
ference among the Apostles, or amongst the bishops who 
succeeded them ; but puts it on the ground of local advantage,, 
according to the principle mentioned before. 'Plainly, 
therefore,' saith he, ' on account of its magnitude, Rome 
ought to precede Carthage.' (94) 

But nothing tries the strength of comparative authority, 
like the occurrence of a dispute or controversy; and this test 
offers itself as the most irrefragable evidence ol the doctrine 
held on the point of supremacy by our present witness. It is 
familiarly known to you, brethren, that Stephen, the bishop 
of Rome, next but one after Cornelius, maintained the va- 
lidity of baptism when administered by heretics and schis^ 
matics, and was warmly opposed on this account by Cyp- 
rian and the bishops of Africa, who held a provincial coun- 
cil on the subject. And it ought to bs as familiarly known, 
that Cyprian and his colleagues of Africa yielded not one 
jot to their brother and colleague of Rome, but defended 

(93) 'Cum Cornelio, coepiscopo nostro.' ' Cornelium collegam 
Boetrum.' Cyp. Epist. ad Antoriian. p. 73. 

' Cognovimus, frater charissime, ficlei, ac virtutis vestrae.' Cyp. 
Epiet. ad Cornelium. p. 104. 

(94) ' Plane quondam pro magnitudine sua debeat Carthaginiffl 
Rama praecedere.' Cyp. ad Cornelium epist. 70. 



CHAPTER 14.] CYPRIAN. 

their position with the most absolute independence and 
equality. Some of the many passages which prove this 
assertion, I shall now place before you. 

The epistle written to Stephen by Cyprian and the rest, 
after the holding of the Council, furnishes our first authority. 

(95) ' In order to correct and dispose certain matters,' 
saith he, ' by the examination of common counsel, we found 
it necessary, most dear brother, to collect together many 
bishops into one, and celebrate a council. In which many 
things truly were proposed and transacted ; but that about 
which we desired most to write to you, and confer with 
your gravity and wisdom, and which concerns most nearly 
the authority of the priesthood, and the unity and dignity 
of the Catholic Church derived from the ordination of the 
divine will, was the subject of those who are baptized with- 
out the Church, stained with profane water amongst here* 
tics and schismatics, and who, when they come to us and to 
the Church which is one, we judged it fit to have baptized, 
because we .think it little worth to give them the imposition 
of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit, unless they 
have first received the baptism of the Church.' After thig 

(95) ' Ad StcphanumPapam do. Concilio. 

Cyprianus etcaeleri Stephano, Salutem. 

1 Ad quaedam disponenda et consilii comumnis examinatlone liman- 
da, necesse habuiinus frater charissime, convenientibus in unum'plu. 
ribus sacerdotibus cogere et celcbrare concilium. In quo multa qui- 
dem prolata atquo transactasunt; seel de eo vel maxime tibi scri- 
bendum, et cum tua gravitate ac sapientia conferendum fuit, quod 
magis perlineat, et ad sacerdotalem auctoritatem et ad Ecclesiae ca- 
tholicae unitatem p'ariter ac dignitatem, de divinae dispositionis ordina- 
tione venientem, ecs qui sint foris extra Ecclesiam tincti, et apud 
haereticos et schismaticog profanac aquao labe maculati quando ad nog 
atquo ad Ecclesiam, quae una est, venerint, baptizari, oportere : eo 
quod parum sit eis manum imponere ad accipiendum Spiritum eano- 
tuna, nisi acoipiant et Ecclesiae baptismum,' Cyp. opp, p. HI, 



124 TESTIMONY OT CYPRIAN, [CHAPTER 14. 

introduction, Cyprian proceeds to explain and support his 
doctrine, and concludes in the following words, viz. 

(96) ' These things we have addressed to your conscience 
most dear brother, for the common honor and for sincere 
love, believing that those things which are religious and 
true, will also be acceptable to you in the truth of your 
faith and religion. But we know that certain men are un- 
willing to lay aside any opinion which they have ever im- 
bibed, or to change readily their own purpose ; but the bond 
of peace and concord amongst their colleagues being pre- 
served, they retain whatever sentiments they have once 
adopted. In which matter, we neither give law nor offer 
violence to any one; since every bishop exercises the free 
choice of his own will in the administration of the Church, 
having to render an account of his acts to the Lord. We 
wish you, most dear brother, all prosperity.' 

Stephen, however, as you know, brethren, neither adopted 
the counsel of the African bishops, nor allowed them the 
right to decide the matter for themselves ; but asserting 
against them the custom of the Church of Rome, and claim- 
ing its descent from the time of the apostles, he took it upon 
him, as Victor had done in the days of Jrensens about the 
Easter controversy, to refuse communion with those that 
dissented from his doctrine. Had your present system been, 

(96) ' Haec ad conseientiam tuam, frater charissirao, et pro honore 
communi, et pro simplici dilectione pertulimus, credcntcs etiam 
tibi pro religionis tuuo ct fidei vcrilate placere, quac ct religiosa pari- 
er et verasnnt. Cacterum scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint 
nolle depcruro,, nee propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo inter 
colleges pju-i.i, et concoydiae vinculo, quaedam propria, quae apud se 
emel sint usurpata, reiinore. Qua in ro, nee nos vim cuiquam faci- 
mus aut legem damus ; cum liabeat in Ecclesiae adtninistratione volun- 
tatis suae urbitrimn liberiim unusquisque praepositus, ralionem actua 
ui Domino rcditurus. Optamus te frater cliarissiuie semper ben* 
yalere.' ib.p. 142. 



HgfiAPTER 14.] AND THE BISHOPS O? AFRICA. 125 

at that time, the acknowledged system of the Church, this 
act of Stephen would have produced one of those two re- 
cults : either Cyprian and his African colleagues must have 
submitted immediately, or they must have been cut off as 
obstinate schismatics. But neither of these results were 
apprehended, nor did either take place. Cyprian did not sub- 
mit, but severely censured Stephen for his course, and de- 
nied the truth of the Roman tradition. And yet so far 
was he from being condemned for his independence, that 
lie stands upon your list as a saint, and is termed the bles- 
sed Cyprian by your own Canon law. What gives the 
greater force to this example is the fact with which you are 
well acquainted, that the council of Aries, in the early part 
of the following century, long after both these parties had 
resigned their earthly stewardship, adopted the sentiment of 
Stephen on the very point in question : so that the inde- 
pendence of Cyprian and his resistance to Stephen, cannot 
be tolerated on the ground that the doctrine of Cyprian 
was right. His independence was right, although his doc- 
trine was wrong ; and hence, as we shall see when we come to 
the history of that Council, the very same men who adopt- 
ed the doctrine of Stephen on the point of baptism, confirmed 
the independence of the African Church. 

But the proofs are not yet cited for the African bishops' 
resistance to Stephen. They are the following : Arguing 
against the opinion of Stephen that the blessings of baptism 
can be conferred through the instrumentality of here- 
tics, Firmilian, one of the African bishops, in A letter 
to -Cyprian, saith : (97) ' How great is the error, how 

(97) ' dualis vero error sit, et quanta sit caecitas ejus qui remissio- 

nem. peccatorum dicit apud synagogas haereticorum dari posse, neo 

permanet in fundamento imius Ecclesiae quae aemel a Christo supra 

petram solidataest; hinc intelligi potest, quod soliPetro Chrietus di- 

11" 



126 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 

strange the blindness of him who says that the remission of 
sins can be given in the synagogues of heretics, and contin- 
ues not upon the foundation of that one Church, which 
was once built by Christ upon the rock; he should under- 
stand that to Peter alone, Christ said, Whatsoever thou 
shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven ; and what- 
soever thou shalt loose on earth, shall also be loosed in hea- 
ven. And again, the gospel, when Christ breathed only on 
his apostles, saying to them : Receive the Holy Ghost : 
whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted to them, and 
whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained. The power 
therefore of remitting sins was given to the apostles, and to 
the Churches, which they, being sent from Christ, estab- 
lished, and to the bishops which succeeded them by regular 
ordination. But those enemies of that one Catholic Church 
in which we are, those adversaries of us who have succeeded 
the. Apostles, defending their unlawful priesthood against us, 

erit: Q,uaecunque ligaveris super terrain, erunt ligata et in coelis ; et 
' cpiaecunque solveris super terrain, crunt soluta et in coclis, et iterum in 
ISyangeiio quando in solos Apostolos insufflavit Chrislus dicens; 
Accipite Spiritum sanctum : si cujus remiseritis peccata, remittentur 
illi; et si cujus tenueritis, tenebunlur. Potcstas ergo peccatorum re- 
inittendoruto Apostolis data est, et ecclcsiis quas illi a Cliristo missi 
constituerunt, ct episcopis qui cis ordinalione vicaria successerunt. 
Hostes autem tinius Catholicae ecclesia3 in qua nos sumus, et adver- 
arii nostri qui Apostolis successimus. sacerdotia sibi ilhcita contra nog 
vindicantes, et altaria prophana ponentes j quid aliutl sunt quttm Chore 
ot Dathan et Abiron, pari scelere sacrilegi, et easdem quas et illi pcenaa 
daturi cum his qui sibi consentiunt , secundum quod etiam tune illo- 
rum participes et fautores pariter cum eis perierunt. Atque ego . in 
hac parte juste indignor ad hanc tarn apertam et manifestam Stephani 
Btultitiam, quod qui sic de Episcopatns sui loco gloriatur, et so sue. 
eesaionem Pelri tenere contendit, super quern fundamenta ecclesiae 
oollocata sunt, rnultas alias petras inducat, et ecclesiarum multarum 
aora aedificia constituat, dura esse illic baptisma sua auctoritate de- 
feodit.' Firmilian. ad Cyprian. Epist. Opp. Cyp. p. 157. ; 



14.] FJRMILIAIT. . 127 

and setting up a profane altar, what else are they but Ko- 
ran, Dathan, and Abiram, in .an equal sin of sacrilege, and 
sure to obtain for all who unite with them the same punish*- 
ment; even as we know that the companions and favorers 
of these men perished with themselves. Therefore I am 
justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of Ste- 
phen, who, while he so boasts of the place of his bishoprick, 
and contends that he holds the succession of Peter, upon 
whom the foundations of the Church were placed, never- 
theless, brings in other rocks, and builds the new edifices of 
many Churches, while he defends their baptism by his au- 
thority.' 

Again, in another passage of the same epistle, we find 
the following : (98) ' Those who are of Rome do not in 
all things observe what was delivered from the beginning, 
and they vainly pretend the authority of the apostles. Every- 
one may know, that with respect to the day for keeping 
Easter, and many other rites of religion, there are diversi- 
ties amongst them, nor do they equally observe there, all 
those things which are observed at Jerusalem. The same 
diversity may be seen in many of the provinces : many 
things are varied through the changes of times and language, 
and yet there is no departure on this account from the peace 

(98) ' Eos autcm qui Romtie stint non en. in omnibus obscrvare quaa 
sint ob origino trndita, et frustra apostolorum auctoritatcra praetende- 
re : scirc quis etimninclc potcst, quod circa cclcbrandos dies paschze, 
et circa multa alia divinao rci sacramcnta, vidcat cssc apnd illos ali- 
quas diversitates, nee obscrvari illic omnia aeqnalitcr, quac Hierosoly. 
mis observantur. iSccundum quod in cactcris quoquo plurimis provin- 
ciis, multa pro locorum et nominum divcrsitato variantur; nee tamen 
propter hoc ab Ecclcsios Catholico) pace atquc unitato tiliquando disces- 
Bum cst. Q,uod nunc Stcphanns ausus est facere, rumpeus adversus 
vospacem, quam semper antecessores ejus vobiscum amore et honore 
mutuo custodierunt : adhuc ctiam infamans Petrura et Paulum beatos 
Apostolos, quasi hoc ipsi tradiderint.' ib. p. 159. 



128 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTEB 14 

and unity of the Catholic Church. But Stephen has pro. 
eumed to disturb this concord and unity, breaking towards 
.you the peace which his predecessors always maintained 
with you in love and mutual honor: even defaming the 
blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, as if they delivered his 
doctrine.' 

And again, (99) ' We,' saith Firmilian, 'join custom to 
truth, and we oppose to the custom of the Romans a cus- 
tom which is of truth, holding from the beginning what has 
been delivered by Christ and the Apostle.' 

That Cyprian fully agreed in these sentiments of his Af- 
rican colleague Firmilian, is sufficiently evident from what 
I have already cited, but I shall confirm it by a few ex 
.tracts from one epistle more, which shall close his testimony 
on the point in question. 

In a letter written by Cyprian to Pompey, one of the 
African bishops, on the conduct of Stephen, he expresses 
himself as follows, viz. 
. (100) ' Although we have embraced fully all that is to ba 

(99) ' Cffitertnn ncs veritati et consuctudinem jungimus, et con- 
suetudini Komanorum consuetudincm sed vcritatis opponimus; 
ab initio hoc lenentes quod a Christo et ab Apostolo traditum est.' ib. 
p. 164. 

(100) ' Quanquam plene ea qugs de heercticis baptizandis dicenda stint, 
complex! sumus in cpistolis,quarumad tocxcmpla trnnsmisimus, frater 
charissitne, tamen quia desiderasti in notitiani tuam perferri, quaemihi 
ad litteras nostras Stepliunus Iratcr noster rcscripserit, misi tibi re- 
gcripti ojus exemplum; quo locto magis ac ningis ejus errorem deno- 
tabis, qui hasreticorum causam contra Ghristianos, et contra Ecclesi- 
am Dei asserere conatur. Nam inter cactera vel supcrba, velad rem 
non pertinentia, vel sibi ipsi contraria, quao imperil^ aique improvidi 
Bcripsit, etiam illud adjunxcrit, ut dicerct : [si quis ergo a quacunque 
haeresi veneritad nos, nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est, ut ma- 

nus illi impon.itur in prenitentiam :' fec.] ' Undo est ista tradi- 

tio ? Utrum no de dominica et Evangelica auctoritate descendens, afl 
de Apoetoloruia mandatis atque epistolis veniens ? Ea enim facicnd* 



CHAPTER 14,] C5PRIAN. 129 

said upon the baptism of heretics in the epistles of which 
\ve sent you copies, most dear brother, nevertheless, since 
you have desired to be informed what our brother Stephen 
returned in answer to our letter, I have sent to you a copy 
of his reply ; which, when you have read, you will see 
more and more his error, in endeavouring to assert the 
cause of heretics against Christians, and against the Church 
of God. For amongst other proud and irrelevant things, 
and contradictions which he has unskilfully and thoughtlessly 
written, he has added the following ; If therefore any one, 
from any of the heresies, shall come to us, let nothing of 
novelty be brought in, beyond the tradition that hands shall 
be laid on him in penitence,' &c. 'But whence is this tra- 
dition ? Is it that which descends from the authority of our 
Lord and of his Gospel, or which comes to us from the 
precepts of the Apostles and their epistles ? For those 
things which are written are to be done, as the Lord testi- 
fies and proposes to Joshua, saying, This book of the law 
shall not depart from thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate 
therein day and night, that thou maj est observe to do all 
things which are written therein. In like manner, the Lord 

esse quae scripta sunt, Deus testatur, et proponit ad Josum Nave di- 
cens : Non recedet liber legis hujus ex ore tuo, sed meditaberis in eo 
die ac nocte, ut observes facere omnia quae scripta sunt in eo. Item 
Dominus Apostolos suos mittens, mandat baplizan gcntes et doceri, 
ut observent omnia quaecunque ille praecepit. Si ergo ant in Evange- 
lio praecipitur, aut in Apostolorum Epistolis, aut Actibus continetur, 
ut a quacumque haeresi venientes non baptizentur, sod tantum manu 
illis imponatur in poenitentiam, observetur divina haeo et sancta tradi- 

tio.' ' Ut nemo in Him are Apostolos debeat, quasi illi haereticorum 

baptismata probaverint ;' 'quae ista obstinatio cst, quaeve prae 

eumptio, humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni antoponere, neo 
nnimadvertere, indignari et irasci Deum, quoties divina praecepta 
eolvit et praeterit humana traditio?' Cy-p. epist. ad Pomp, contra 
Epist. Stephan. p. 152, 3. 



130 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 14 , 

tending his Apostles, commands them to teach and baptize 
the nations, that they may observe all things which were 
commanded them. If therefore it is either directed in the 
Gospel, or contained in the epistles of the Apostles, or 
in the Acts, that those who come from any heresy shall not 
be baptized, but only have hands laid on them in repentance, 

let this divine and holy tradition be observed.' 'But let 

no one defame the Apostles, as if they approved the bap- 
tisms of heretics.' 'How great is this obstinacy, how bold 
this presumption, to place this human tradition before the 
divine sanction, forgetting that God is always indignant and 
wrathful, whenever human traditions are exalted above his 
precepts.' i 

, Here, then, brethren, we have a practical demonstration 
of Cyprian's views upon this important question, too plain to 
-be fairly evaded, and rendering it impossible for an unpre- 
judiced mind to believe that the doctrine of the Catholic 
Church in his days was at all accordant with your present 
doctrine on the subject of Papal supremacy. For, I be- 
seech you, did Cyprian attribute to Peter any authority over 
Paul and the other Apostles, when he said that on Peter 
the first foundation of the Church was laid? Did he grant 
any power of government to the bishop of Rome when he 
called him the successor of Peter, and termed his diocese 
the principal seat? Did he believe that Cornelius and Ste- 
phen were the vicars of Christ, holding the place of God 
upon the eanh, or that his opinions were to bu controlled 
by theirs in any point of Christian theory or practice ? Does 
he not, on the contrary, plainly and repeatedly say, that the 
episcopate of the whole Church is one, of which each bish- 
op holds a part? Does he not declare that the Church i3 
built on the Apostles and on the bishops, their successors ; 
and place the unity of the Church, not on the agreement 



eHAPTER 14.] THE BISHOPS OP AFRICA. 131 

of the bishops with the Roman See, but on their concord 
and agreement together ? Does he not address the bish- 
ops of Rome precisely as he addresses the bishops of Afri- 
ca, and expressly assert their mutual independence, each 
bishop being solely accountable to God ? Does he not ex- 
plain what he meant in styling the Church of Rome 
the principal See,' by saying that l on account of its superior 
magnitude, Rome ought to precede Carthage ?' Does he not 
refuse to change the custom of Carthage to the custom of 
Rome, and call that custom a human tradition opposed to 
truth ? Does he not deny that any thing can be properly 
called an Apostolical tradition unless it be found in Scrip- 
ture ? And does he not condemn the bishop of Rome with 
the utmost freedom, when he thinks him in error, and even 
impeach him of pride, of ignorance, and of obstinacy ? 

Now, brethren, I only ask, what provincial bishop of your 
Church would dare to write and act thus at the present 
day ? Yet Cyprian was not blamed for his independence. 
Like Victor in the days of Irenseus, Stephen was censured 
for his tyrannical assumption of power, but the African 
bishops kept on their way, and continued in the communion 
of the Catholic Church, although, through his own folly, 
they were not in communion with Stephen. And Cypri- 
an closed his life by a glorious martyrdom, and stands high 
on vour Calendar as one of the blessed, and is enrolled in 

* . 

your Canon Law : while Stephen, his antagonist, though the 
Council of Aries sanctioned his doctrine, attained no such 
distinction. And can you, with these facts before you, say 
that your system has not changed ? Can you think that 
your present claims for the bishop of Rome, and the domin- 
ion of his See, as 'the mother and mistress of all the Church- 
es/ have any real warrant from primitive antiquity ? 



CHAPTER XV. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The names of Lactantius, who is commonly set down 
about A. D. 306, and of Eusebius the bishop of Cesareaj 
who is a few years later, are all that I shall place before you, 
previous to the Council of Nice. Of these, Lactantiua 
stands first in order. 

"The testimony of this author is merely negative, and yet, 
in my mind, it possesses great weight. For what writer giving 
a description of your religion at this day, and speaking of 
Peter and of Rome, would omit all allusion to the primacy ? 
If he believed that Peter was the Prince of the Apos* 
ties, having dominion over the rest, could he speak of him 
without giving the honor that was due? If he believed that 
the Church of Rome was the authoritative c mother and 
mistress' of all the Churches, and that the bishop of Rome 
was the vicar of Christ, holding the place of God upon 
earth, could he inculcate the doctrines of your faith exten- 
sively, and yet omit a point of such vast practical impor- 
tance ? Manifestly not. Therefore I must trouble you with 
a short extract from Lactantius, wherein he states the com- 
mencement of the Christian Church, and mentions Peter; 
but not in a manner at all (.suitable to the ideas which you 
hold at the present day. 



CHAPTER 15.] TESTIMONY OF LACTAUTIUS. 133 

After having discussed, at much length) the life, the cha- 
racter, and the death of Christ, and the conduct of the Jewish 
nation,Lactantius speaks of his resurrection, and of his conver- 
sing with his disciples forty days, and continues thus: (101) 
' These commands concerning the Gospel and the preach- 
ing of his name, being given, a cloud suddenly surrounded 
him', and bore him to heaven, on the fortieth day after his 
passion, as Daniel had before predicted, saying : And be- 
hold in the clouds of heaven, the Son of man coming, went 
even to the Ancient of days. But his disciples being dis- 
persed through the provinces placed the foundations of the 
Church every where, doing wonderful works in the name 
of their Lord God, and miracles almost incredible, because, 
in departing, he had endowed them with virtue and power 
by which they could establish and confirm this new revela- 
tion : and he also opened to them all future events, which 
Peter and Paul preached at Rome, and this preaching being 
written has ^remained as a memorial ; in which, with many 
other wonderful things, they declared what should come to 
pass ; that in a little time God should send a king who 
should make war upon the Jews, and should cast down ci- 
ties to the ground.' &c. 

'(101) ' Ordinata vero discipulis suis evangelica, ac nominis sui prae- 
dicatione, circumfudit se repente nubes, eumque in ccelum sustulit, 
quadragesimo post passionem die, sicut Daniel fore ostenderat, dicens: 
Et ecce in nubibus coeli ut filius horainis veniens, usque ad vetustum 
diertvm pervenil. Discipuli vero per provincias dispersi, fundament* 
Ecclesise ubique posuerunt ; f&cientes et ipsi nomine magistri Dei mag- 
na, et pene incredibilia miracula ; quia discedens instruxerat eos vir- 
tute, ac potestate, qua posset novse annuntiationes ratio fundari et con- 
firraari: sed et futura aperuit illis omnia; quce Petrus et Paulus Ro- 
mse pf sedicaverunt ; et ea prredicatio in mernoriam scripta permansit; 
in qua cum mnlta alia mira, turn etiam hoc futurum esse, dixerunt, ut 
post breve tempus immitteret Deus regem, qui expugnaret Judaeos, et 
civitatea eorum solo adaequaret.' Lactant.de Ter a Sap. Lib. iv. 21. 
p. S77--8. 
12 



134 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

Here, you perceive, Lactantius presents a brief sketch of 
.the very place where the supremacy of Peter and of Rome 
ahould prominently appear, if, in his day, these features of 
your religion had been considered essential in the Catholic 
Church. But neither here, nor elsewhere, in his elaborate 
and eloquent treatise, does this writer intimate the slightest 
conciousness that these doctrines were an accredited part 
of the Christian system. 

Eusebius, however, the bishop of Cesarea, is a much more 

'important witness of the same kind. Several of his works 

have reached our time in excellent preservation, and his 

'great work, especially, that which has obtained for him the 

title of father of Ecclesiastical history, furnishes the strongest 

circumstantial evidence against your doctrine of supremacy. 

'Let us take a few extracts from his volumes, and see ho\y 

: the question stands. 

From his commentary on the Psalms, I shall first present 
to you a passage which plainly gives Paul, instead of Peter, 
the leading place amongst the Apostles. 

Commenting on the text, where it is said : ' There is 
little Benjamin their ruler,' translated in your version ac- 
cording to the Vulgate, but not the Hebrew, ' Benjamin a 
youth in ectasy of mind,' (102) (being the 28th verse of 
the 68th Psalm, numbered in your version the 67th,) Eu- 

(102) This being one of the places where our translation differs 
from yours, permit me to state for your satisfaction, that Jerome, and 
after him, Montanus, give the passage according to the Hebrew 
oil "vyx jo^a a, which Jerome translates Hi Benjamin parvulus con- 
tinens cos, and Montanus translates Hi Benjamin pusillus dominant 
tot, both of which accord well with our version, but not at all with 
jours, which follows the Vulgate and the Septuagint. Eusebius cites 
tba Septuagint, and also refers to the other versions, but his expla- 
nation of the passage would only be strengthened still more by tb* 
triot meaning of the Hebrew. 



0HAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. ' 135 

sebius applies it to Paul, in which he agrees with the fathers 
generally, as your own note on the passage in the Doway 
Bible, correctly states : (I03)_ 'But for this word : There,' 
saith Eusebius, ' Symmachus says, Where is Benjamin the 
least or the younger : and Aquila likewise has it : There 
is Benjamin the less, ruling them. And this Benjamin,' 
continues Eusebius, 'was Paul the divine apostle, of the 
tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, as he him- 
self teaches in these words : Circumcised the eighth day, 
of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a ^Hebrew 
of the Hebrews. But he is called the younger, or the least, 
because he himself declares, I am the least of all, born out 
of due time. For this expression, however : In exctasy oi 
mind, Aquila translates : Governing them : Theodotion 
has it : Their schoolmaster, and in his fifth edition, Teach- 

(103) avil 8k iov, exei, 6 Sv^ua^og <!>nov <pj;ai Beviufilv 6 
6 slx-uhag 6[io[wg f exsi (pi](n, Bsnuf^ilv 6 ^QU^VS , 
Beviafiiv 8h vedneqog xai (.tixgoTcnog ^ Bga~ 
%VTUTOQ, n&v),og rjv 6 dtTog ctTrooroAoc, (ftwATjc &>v Bevtccfilr, 
cuog e$ EfiQalw, y.udu); uvjog di8u.ay.si 
Ix yivoig Iagai]l, cpuki\g Bsvia/ulf, EBouTog ESguttuv 
d %1-QijTai' i] iMKQQTUTog,^ ^a^vg', enel y.av dtrtog rovro dtd&crxst 
hsyaiv vajsgov <5e n&vrmv WCTTC^ TW tx Tq&ftmi wyOi] xfyiol, &VT 
i,, 6 f.isv slxvl-ag snixguTibr &vi5>v 6 d& 0to- 
rtaidsvr-rig duiwy -f\ de e. ExSocri-;, itaiStvoviu. i) SiS&crxorra 
6v dtl Ss r}fnv TI^EIUI'MV Aoj'WJ' ^tc &7i6Sei^tv TOW 
rG>i> xxhrjO'iG)v, xai Tcaidevrtjv tiurcby sivat TOV tegbv CCJTO- 
Bsviafilv ^vQ^iua^iivov. 6v f.iovo$ de o.gu 6 Bevta/ulv ^v 

g ^xx^alai-g rov Qsov- uti.u y.al 61 
lotda ffl&fiovEg livT&v ut TS ug^orreg ZuBov'k&i' xnl ol 

el/ii. aij/nalfBt de 6 Uyog di& TOVTWV Tolg loinotg &Tiooj6- 
61 



> ayiov 
HQ&IOV iov nQOcp^TOv Ae'j'oy ^ Zafiovlwv xul y?j ]\ r (pdu).El(4 



136 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

ing them. Nor/ continues Eusebius, ' does it need many 
words to prove that the holy apostle, here called Benjamin, 
was the ruler and the preceptor of the Churches. Nor was 
he Benjamin alone there, that is, in the Churches of God, 
but also the princes of Judah their leaders, the princes of 
Zebulon, and the princes of Naphtali. By these are pointed 
out the rest of the Apostles, of whom some were of the 
tribe of Juda, some of the tribe of Zebulon, and others of 
the tribe ot Naphtali. Wherefore the Holy Spirit by 
Isaiah the prophet records the country of these, saying : 
The land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali, the way of 
the sea across Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. The Sa- 
viour accordingly, passing over by the sea of Galilee, called 
his disciples from thence. He teaches plainly, therefore, 
that Paul ruled first over the Churches, the lowest and least, 
,and younger than the other apostles, placed sometimes in 
ecstacy of mind, when he persecuted the Church of God 
and wasted it, or when he saw the Saviour in a vision, or when 
he was taken up to Paradise even to the third heaven. But, 
after Paul, he prophecies that the other apostles would be fitly 
placed there, namely, in the Church, our princes of the 
tribe of Judah, and princes of Zebulon, and princes of 
Naphtali.' 



jg t nfyav TOU logdavov raidata riav idv&v, xal uvrbg S& 
6 awtty naQuyay&v naqa rqv dtikaaaav TTJ? JTaAtActiocc, ioilf hav- 
roij (Jta6i]T&g evdevds ^exaAetro, craipibg dvv 

TIQ&TOV /UEV Ilavhov -luv ^qa^viaiov xocl 
vetaTonov T&V u.noaTh'kwv ZdlSaSev \v exai&crei, nots 
ore WlaixE T\V l%z\ijal.uv T.OD &e.ov xul ^nb^Qei avity, ?J ore 
unoxu^uifjei TOV aojTTJoa redsono- ^ ore tyndyi] sis ibv 
em; TQtTGv OVQUVOV. /jezd Se ibv Havkov, TOI'J "komotg 0.7100-16^01$ 
ixei iv TTJ &vrr t ixx^ala Siu ngeneiv dsani^ei, a^o^Tag ovia? 

(pu^g lovdu y.ai &Q%ovTag Za@ovk 
Euieb. Copi. in Psalm, Ixvji. 28. p. 359, 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. . 137 

Now here is an express testimony to prove that the apos- 
tle Paul was the distinct subject of prophecy, the only one 
of the apostles so honored, for the other twelve are spoken 
of in the plural, as the princes of Judah, and Zebulon, and 
Naphtali. Eusebius too, adopts all the versions in his com- 
mentary, and says that they were all fulfilled in Paul. He 
was the ruler in the Churches, according to Aquila, the 
teacher according to Theodotion, and he might be truly 
said to have been in ecstacy of mind according to the Sep- 
tuagint and the Vulgate. But his conclusion is that ' Paul 
ruled first over the Churches,' and ' after Paul, the other 
apostles/ I beseech you to say, brethren, whether Euse- 
bius knew any thing of the principality of Peter when he 
wrote this passage. And if it were possible that you 
could find one like it in the writings of that early age, where 
Peter was the subject of an equal distinction; tell me 
whether you would not quote it triumphantly as conclusive 
on your side ? 

There is a casual expression of the same author, in his 
book on the Evangelical Preparation, where, being about to 
cite a text from St. Paul, he calls him : (104) * The holy 
apostle, and truly the first of all.' 

In his work entitled Evangelic Demonstration, he has a 
long disquisition shewing the humility and modesty of the 
several apostles, preferring each other before themselves, 
and yet faithfully recording all that is to their own disad- 
vantage. Thus he states that Matthew is the only one of 
the Evangelists who mentions the fact that he was a publican : 



(104) IlQ&Tos YS rot nftvtwv 6 leqog &n6ffTolos ZZauAog. Euseb. 
Pracp. Evangel. Lib. 1. Cap. 3. p. 7. A, 

Your own translator, Francis. Vigerus Rothomageusis, Societal, 
Jesu Presbyter, renders the above line thus : Quanquam omnium iau 
Princeps Paul us ille sacer Apostolus.' 
12* 



138 TESTIMONY 0* [CHAPTER 1& 

that Peter, out of an excessive humility, did not think him- 
self worthy to write a Gospel, and that the Gospel of St. 
Mark, written by Peter's companion and disciple, (and 
under his dirrei.ion, as all the ancients held) omits all of 
that famous address of Christ to him : Thou art Peter, and 
on this rock, &c. ' For Mark,' says Eusebius, (105) 'was 
not present at. those things which were said by Christ, and 
Peter did not think it right to tell those things which Jesus 
said to him concerning himself, by his own testimony.' (106) 
c But those things which concerned his denial of his Lord, 
he declared and published before all men: and there de- 
clares that he wept for it bitterly.' 107) 'We see, there- 
fore,' continues our author, ' that the apostles refuse what 
might bring upon them a good reputation, while they eom- 
rnit.to an eternal record,what might be charged against them-/ 
Now in this passage, it is easy to see how Eusebius re- 
garded the point of Peter's supremacy. If the Saviour.had 
been supposed by him to have granted this supremacy as 
a matter of official pre-eminence, designed to be perpetua- 
ted to his successors in a particular Church to the end of 
the world, would Eusebius have praised St. Peter's mo- 
desty and humility in suppressing it ? Was it not a sacred 
duty in St. Paul to magnify his office, while he abased him- 
self? Do not all' your bishops of Rome, the successors of 



(105) <5u jfcig nttQT[v o jM&qxog toig tinb rov tyoov 
&W vvde ndTQpg ra TiQog avTuv %al ncQi O.VTOV J.s^dsvTU T(O 
bdixfftov dl oixei'ag TtQOfpegsiv nagrvgiag. Euseb. Demon. Evangel, 
tab. 3 Cap. 7. p- 121. 

(106) roc. d rd T^V aQyi/aiv fuwcov &s n&VTag iv/igvl-sv tod- 
Q&novg, STtsl xvti 'ezlavuiv en' dur^ nixQ(>g^ ib. 

(107) 6t dri dvv TU [i&v d^avra tivioTg &ya6't}v rp^qsiv 

i, ifeg d& xu 
. ib.p. 122. 



CHAPTER. 15.] EUSEB1US. 

St. Peter, in this very prerogative which you supposa 
granted by our Lord to Peter, continually claim their offi- 
cial rights as a matter of solemn obligation ? And would a 
bishop of Rome be thought worthy of praise for his modesty 
or humility, in suppressing this distinction, and writing oo 
the concerns of the Church as if he had it not? The an*- 
swer to all this is plain and simple, and the conclusion is 
equally so. Eusebius, designing to shew the modesty and 
candor of the apostles in a strong point of view, declares 
that these things which were to their praise they mentioned 
not, but recorded all that could be brought in accusation 
against them. For an example, he instances Peter, leav- 
ing out' of Mark's Gospel (which was dictated by him) the 
whole of Christ's address to. him on which you found the 
doctrine of the primacy : Thou art Peter, and on this rock 
I will build my Church, &c., while he records his own in- 
iquity in denying his Saviour. The primacy for which you 
contend, is here opposed to the denial of the Saviour. If 
the one was personal to Peter only, so, in the opinion of 
Eusebius, must the other have been. But if the primacy 
was not simply personal, but official ; and as much a part of 
the will of C hrist as the call of Peter to be an apostle, and 
as necessary to be known and understood by the Christian 
Church for the sake of its unity, would Peter have presu- 
med to suppress it in his communications to Mark? Would 
he have dared to omit it in his preaching? And would Euse- 
bius have applauded an error which must have jeopardized,, 
so far as Peter was concerned, the peace, if not the very 
existence of the Catholic Church,, according to your defini- 
tion of it? 

But the most decisive evidence on this question is fuis 
fiished by the same author in his celebrated work, the Ec~ 



140 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

clesiastical History, in which he undertakes to give a narra- 
tive of the first three hundred and twenty years of the 
Church, from the time of Christ to the conversion of the 
Emperor Constantino. In such a book, if any where, the 
doctrine of St. Peter's supremacy and the vicarious domin- 
ion of the Roman See over the rest of Christendom must 
have appeared continually, had Eusebius known of its ex 
istence. But it is not to be found ; nay, nor any allusion 
to it, nor any appearance of it, during the annals of these 
primitive ages. On the contrary, there are many things 
recorded by this father of ecclesiastical history, which are 
plainly irreconcileable with your hypothesis,, so that the tes 
timony of this most important witness of the primitive 
Church, both negatively and circumstantially, is absolutely 
fatal to your claim. 

Of this testimony in order to exhibit it fairly I 
shall ask your attention, first, to his manner of speaking of 
Peter : secondly, to his manner of speaking of the bishops 
of Rome : thirdly, to his account of some ancient councils, 
which were held without adverting in any way to the au- 
thority of the bishops of Rome, and of the disputes con- 
cerning Easter, and baptism ; and fourthly, to some letters 
of the Emperor, distinctly shewing that there was no eccle- 
siastical difference between the authority of the bishop of 
Rome and that of the other bishops. I would gladly ab* 
breviate, brethren, both for your sake and for mine, but the 
truth is worth all our labour, and we must not expect to find 
it without toil. 

First, then, let us attend to the manner in which Euse- 
bius speaks of Peter. (108) ' The names of our Saviour's 

(108) Presuming that it might be generally more acceptable to you, 
I subjoin, instead of the original Greek of Eusebius, the Latin ver- 
sion of your own learned and celebrated Valeaiua. See Hiitori* 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. 141 

Apostles', saith he, (Book 1. C. 12.) ' are sufficiently ob- 
vious to every one from the Gospels, but of the seventy dis- 
ciples, there is no catalogue any where.' ' Clement, 

in the fifth of his Institutions,' continues he, ' mentions 
that the Cephas, of whom Paul says that he came to Anti- 
och, and that he withstood him to his face, was one of the 
seventy who had the same name with Peter the apostle/ 
This is the only reference to Peter in the chapter. 

Again, (Book 2. Chap. l.)Eusebius, quoting from Clem- 
ent of Alexandria, says, (109) ' Peter and James and John, 
after the ascension of our Saviour, though they had been 
preferred by our Lord, did not contend for the honor, but 
chose James the Just for bishop of Jerusalem.' And again, 
'The Lord imparted the gift of knowlcd'.--;? to James the 
Just, to John and Peter after his resurrection.' But at the 
close of the chapter (p. 50) mark how ho speaks of Paul: 
(110) ' In the mean while, Paul, that chosen vessel, not of 
men nor through men, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ 
himself and God the Father who raised him from the dead, 

Ecclesiastics Scriptores Graeci, Ed. Amstel.Tom. 1. Euseb. Pamph. 
Ecc. Hist. lib. I. Cap. 12. Et Apostolorum quidcm Scrvatoris nostri 
nominaex Evangeliorum libris notissinia sunt omnibus. Quodvero ad 
septuaginta discipulos attinet, eorum series nullibi prcescripta reperi- 

tur, Sic eniin refer't Clemens in libro quinto hypotyposeon, in quo 

etiam Cepham ilium, cui Antiochiam ingresso Paulus se palana resti- 
tisse dicit, quoniam reprehensione dignus erat, unum ait fuisse ex 
Beptuaginta discipuhs Petro Apostolo cognominem.' 

(109) Ibid. Lib. 2. Cap.l.< Ait enim,' (sc. Clem. Alex.) ' post Serva- 
toris ascensum, Petrum, Jacobutn et Joannem, quamvis Dominus ip- 
sos cseteris prsetulisset, non idcirco de primo bonoris gradu 'inter SB 
contendisse, sed Jacobum cognomine Justum Hierosolymoium episco- 

pum elegisse.'- < Jacobo, inquit, Justo et Johanni et Petro Dominu 

postresurrectionem scientia donum iinpertiit. 

(110) Ibid. Lib. 2. Cap. 1. Interea 1 Paulus vasillud electionis,non 
e^ hominibus nee per homines, sed per revelationem Jesu Chnsti, et 



142 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

is appointed an Apostle, being called to that honor by a 
celestial vision and the voice of revelation from heaven.' 
Here there is nothing to distinguish Peter, but much to in- 
dicate the opinion before observed of Eusebius, that Paul 
was the chief of the Apostles. 

Again, in the 14th Chap, of the same Book (p. 64) Pe- 
ter is spoken of with strong praise, where, recording the de 
feat of the magician Simon by this Apostle, he says, (111) 
that ' Peter, the powerful and great Aposile, who on ac- 
count of his ability was the advocate of all the rest, was 
conducted to Rome against this pest of mankind.' Here, 
it is manifest that Peter's supremacy would have been sta- 
ted in your own way, or at least alluded to, if Eusebius had 
acknowledged such a doctrine. He would not have spoken of 
Peter as one, who, by his ability, was the advocate of the 
rest, but as one, who by his Lord's appointment received 
authority over the rest. The primacy which an advocate 
possesses by his skill in pleading a cause for his clients, is a 
very different matter from the authoritative primacy which 

Dei Patrisqui ilium suscitavit a mortuis, Apostolus constituilur, coeleS' 
ti visions ac voce quae tempore illius revelationis ad ipsum delata est, 
ad hunc honorem vocatus.' 

(Ill) Ibid. Lib. 2. Cap. 14. I regret to find an instance of unfaith- 
fulness in Valesius' translation of this passage, altogether unworthy of 
him. The Greek is in these words : JTQUVOHX TOV xctoTnQov xai [ilyav 
rwv ctTCOOTuXtav , tov aQsTiJg 'srixu T<av iomcHv unavtw Tr^otjyo^ov TTETQOT 
ITCL Ti t v ^<aiit]v o>? 7il -Dj/.txoiJTOv Ivusiora (iiov ^fsiQayuiysL. And Vale- 
BJUS renders it : 'Dei providentia fortissimmn et maximum inter Apes- 
tolos Petrum et virtutis merito reliquorum omnium principem ac pa- 
tronumRomam adversus ilium generis humani labem et pestem per- 
ducit.' Now here his zeal for Peter's supremacy has led him into an 
extraordinary amplification. Instead of the positive degree> powerful 
and great, according to the Greek, he has given us the superlative: 
most powerful and greatest, and instead of Peter's being the advocate 
or prolocutor of the Apostles, which is the proper meaning of the 
Greek TCQoi'iyoQog, he has called him their prince andpatron. 



SHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. . 143 

the judge exercises over the clients themselves. The first 
is the thing intimated by Eusebius : the second is that which 
your doctrine demands for Peter and his successors. 

In the very next chapter, the historian relates the estab- 
lishment of the Roman Church, and the writing of St. 
Mark's Gospel, in the following words. (112) c So greatly,' 
saith he, 'did the splendor of piety enlighten the minds of 
Peter's hearers, that it was not sufficient to hear but once, 
nor to receive the unwritten doctrine of the Gospel of God, 
but they persevered in every variety of entreaties,! to solicit 
Mark, as the companion of Peter, that he would leave them 
a monument of the doctrine thus orally communicated, in 
writing. Nor did they cease their solicitations until they 
had prevailed with the man ; and thus became the means of 
that history which is called the Gospel according to Mark.' 
But there is not a word said about the Church of Rome in 
her relation to the other Churches, nor a syllable on the 
subject of Peter's authority. 

In the third Book, Chap. 1. the subject of Peter at Rome 
occurs again. (113) ' The holy Apostles and disciples of 
our Saviour,' saith the historian, ' being scattered over the 

(112) Ibid. Lib. 2. Cap. 15. Tantus autem veritatis fulgor emicuit in 
mentibus eorum qui Petrum audierant, ut parum haberent semel au- 
disse nee content! essent ccelestis verbi doctrinam viva voce, nullis tra- 
ditam scriptis accepisse : sed Marcum Petri sectatorem cujus hodieqna 
extat Evangelium, enixk orarent ut doctrines illius quam auditu acce- 
perant, scriptum aliquod monumentura apud se relinqueret. Nee pri- 
tis destiterunt quam hominem expugnassent, auctoresquc scribendi il- 
lius quod secundum Marcum dicitur, Evangelii extitissent.' 

(113) Ib, Lib. 3. Cap. 1. Apostoli et discipuli Domini ac Servatom 
nostri per universum orbem dispersi Evangelium praedicubant. Et 
Thomas quidem, ut a majoribus traditum accepimus, Parthiam sorti- 
tusest : Andreas vero Scythiam, Joanni Asia obvenit, qui plurimum 
temporis in ea commoratus, Ephesi tandem diem obiit. At Petrus par 
Pontum, Galatiam, Bithyniam, Cappadociam atque Asiam Judasis qui 
fa dispersions erant, preedicasse existimatur. Qui ad extreraum 



144 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTEH-15. 

whole world, Thomas, according to tradition, received Par- 
thia as his allotted region ; Andrew received Scythia, and 
John, Asia ; where, after continuing for some time, he died 
at Ephesus. But Peter is supposed to have preached 
through Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia, 
to the Jews that were scattered abroad ; who also, finally 
coming to Rome, was crucified with his head downward, 
having requested of himself to suffer in this way. But ol 
\Paul what can sufficiently speak, spreading the Gospel of 
Christ from Jerusalem to Illyricum, and finally suffering 
martyrdom at Rome, under Nero ?' Here again, the histo- 
rian says no more ; nor indicates, directly oiyndirectly, your 
fundamental doctrine, that Peter received authority over the 
other Apostles, that he was the first bishop of Rome, and 
that his supremacy devolved on his successors. 

So far, indeed, is Eusebius from countenancing this state- 
ment, that he expressly records, in his next Chapter, the com- 
mencement of the Roman Episcopate. (114) 'After the 
martyrdom of Paul and Peter,' saith lie, 'Linus was the first 
that received the Episcopate at Rome. Paul makes men- 
tion of him in his epistle from Rome to Timothy, saying, 
Eubulus and Pudens, and Linus and Claudia, salute thee.' 

mam veniens, cruci suffixus est capite deorsum demisso : sic enim ut 
in cruce collocaretur oraverat. De Paulo jam quid attinct dicere, qui 
a Hierosolymis usque ad Illyricum muiitis Evangelicas prsedicationis 
implevit, ac poslremo Roma; sub Nerone martyrio perfunctus est.' 

(114) Ib, Lib. 3. Cap. 2. ' Caetenum post Pauli Petrique martyrium 
primus EeclesicS Romanae episcopatum suscepit Linus. Hujus men- 
tionem facit, Paulus in epistola quam ab urbe Roma ad Timotheum 
acripsit, inter salutationes quse ad calcem cpistolas leguntur : Salutat 
te, inquit, Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, et Claudia.' Valesius adopts this 
as a general maxim, where in his annotations upon the 14th Ch. of 
the same book, he says expressly, that the 'Apostles were not reckon- 
ed in tlie number of the bishops.' Aposloli -oe.ro extra ordinem Grant 
nee in Efiscoporum numero canselaniur.' 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. . 145 

Here Eusebius accords with Irenaeus as to the important 
question, who was the first bishop of Rome, and puts a neg- 
ative upon your doctrine. 

His mode of speaking of the Church of Rome, seems to 
my mind altogether irreconcileable with your hypothesis. 
Thus in the 4th Book, 16th. Chap, he calls Rome simply 
(115) 'the great city.' And in the 6th Book, 14th 
Ch. speaking of Origen, he says that (116) ' he came 
to Rome, being desirous 'ol seeing the very ancient Church 
of Rome.' Would he say no more than this, if h 
had been taught to believe that Rome was the mother and 
mistress of all the Churches ? Such, however, is the con- 
stant style of the historian, for he gives no intimation, 
throughout his works, of any superior headship or authority 
existing in favor of the supposed See of Peter. 

I come, in the second place, to shew the mode in which 
Eusebius records the successions of the various bishops, in 
which you will see the total absence of all distinction. 

In Book 4. Ch. 4. he gives us an account of what 
the title to the chapter calls, ' the bishops of Alexandria 
and Rome, under the same Emperor.' (117) 'But in the 
third year of the same reign,' says he, ' Alexander, bishop 
of Rome, died, having completed the tenth year of his 
ministration. Xystus was his successor, and about the same 



(115) lb. Lib. 4. Cap. 16. TI } f isyul 

(116) Ib. Lib. 6. Cap.14. iv&utroc ri t v aQxaioTaTt]v (jwuccitov 
avidffv. Here again Valesius amplifies, rendering the words f Roma- 
nam ecclcsiam omnium antiquissimam,' whereas Eusebius does not 
eay the ' Roman Church, the. most ancient of all,' but, the very an- 
cient Church of the Romans.' 

(117) Ibid. Lib. 4. Cap. 4. 'Q,ui sub eodem Imperatore Episcopi Roma 
fuerint et Alexandria. 

Anno autem principals Adrian! tertio Alexander Romanes urbil 
episcopus fato functus est, cum decem annos administrationis ezplea- - 

set. Cui successit Xystus. Eodem circiter tern pore mortuo Primo 
13 



146 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

time, Primus dying, in the twelfth year of his Episcopate, 
was succeeded by Justus.' 

Again in Ch. 10. (US) we read as follows : ' In the first 
year of Adrian's reign, Telesphorus departed this life, and 
was succeeded in the charge of the Roman Church by 
Hyginus.' 

And again, in Ch. 19. (119) 'It was in the eighth 
year of the reign of Verus, that Anicetus, who had held 
the episcopate of Rome for eleven years, was succeeded by 
Soter ; but at Alexandria, Celadion, who had presided' over 
the Church fourteen years, was succeeded by Agrippinus.' 

Immediately after this, Eusebius notices that (120) ' The- 
ophilus governed the episcopate of the Church of Antioch, 
the sixth in succession from the Apostles : For Cornelius 
the successor of Hero, had sat in the same Church in the 
^fourth place from the Apostles.' In both these cases, the 
historian uses language quite as capable of bearing your in- 
terpretation as any that he uses in the case of Rome. 

anno episcopatus sui duodecimo, Alexandrine ecclesiee sacerdotium 
uscepit Justus. 

(118) Ibid, Lib. 4. Cap. 10. rourov de iv STSI TiQwrta Ttltgyvgov 161 
fiov trStXinTio r/7? f.fnovQyiuq irtuvTco usTatfJ.L&Kriog, vytvog tov Xf.iiQor 
xf/s fywfiKttu-i' in.ia-/.o7cT l cnar>us.uiiparii. Here, again, is a little specimen 
of Valesius' propensity, for whereas Eusebius says that Hyginus took 
the lot of the episcopate of the Romans, Valesius makes it look ai 
well as he can by calling it a pontificate : Pontificatum Romance urbif 
eortitus cst Hyginus. ' 

(119) Ibid. Lib. 4. Cap. 19. Porro supradicto Imperatore jamoctavum 
principatus annum agente, cum Anicetus ecclesice Romanae episcopa- 
tum undecim annis obtinuisset, Soter in ejus locum successit. Apud 

. Alexandrian! quoque cum Celadion per annos quatuordecim ecclesiai 
preefuisset, Agrippinus sedem ejus obtinuit. 

(120) Ibid. Lib. 4. Cap. 20. Antiochenaj vero ecclcsiss episcopatum 
nextus ab Apostolis Theophilus gubernabat. Q,uippe Cornelius Hero- 
nia successor, quartua ab Apostolis eidem ecclesiae pracsederat. 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. 147 

In the opening sentence of book 5th, he states that (121) 
1 Soter, bishop of Rome died, having held the episcopate 
eight years.' And in Chapter the 22d, he mentions, that 
(122) ' In the tenth reign of Commodus, Eleutherius who 
bad held the episcopate for thirteen years, was succeeded bj 
Victor.' 

Now these may serve as a specimen of the mode in 
which the father of Ecclesiastical history speaks of ths 
bishops of Rome and the Church of Rome. Nothing is here 
Said of the Apostolic See the chair of Peter t!he Chief 
See the mother and mistress of all the Churches th 
Vicar of Christ, or any other allusion or epithet which av 
cords with .the claims of your Canon law. Indeed, th 
only episcopal seat to which Eusebius attaches any pecul> 
arity, is that of Jerusalem. (123) For ' James,' saith he, 
Book 7. Chap, 19. ' being the first that received th 
dignity of the Episcopate at Jerusalem,from our Saviour hin> 
Self and the Apostles, as the sacred Scriptures show thathn 
was generally called the brother of Christ; this See, which 
has been preserved until the present times, has ever been 
held in great veneration by the brethren that have followed 
in the succession there.' 

But in the third place, I am to notice what Eusebius say* 
about the controversies concerning Easter, and the baptism 

(121) Ibid. Lib. 5. Cap- 1. ' Igitur Sotere llomanae urbis episcopo 
post octavum episcopatus annum vita functo, duodecimus ab Aposto- 
lis Eleutherius in ejus locum successit.' 

(122) Ibid. Lib. 5. Cap. 22. Interea Commodo decimum annum Un- 
peril agente, cum Eleutherius tredecim annis episcopatum administra*- 
oet, Victor in ejus locum successit. 

(123) Ibid- Lib. 7. Cap. 19. ' Sane et Jacob! illius cathedram, qui 
primus Hierosolymorum episcopus ab ipso Servatore et ab Apostolis 
est constitutus, et quern fratrem Domini cognominatum fuisse divina tB- 
tantur volumina, ad nostra usque tempora conservatam fratres illius eo- 
alesiae jam inde a majoribus magna prosequuntur reverentia.' 



148 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

of heretics, where the facts are utterly at war with your' 
theory. The first of these subjects occurs in the 23d 
Ghapt. of the 5th Book, and is related in the following 
words. 

(124) 'There was a considerable discussion raised about 
this time,' saith he, ' in consequence of a difference of 
opinion respecting the observance of the paschal season. 
The Churches of all Asia, guided by a remote tradition, 
supposed that they ought to keep the fourteenth day of the 
moon for the festival of the Saviour's passover, in which 
day, the Jews were commanded to kill the paschal lamb ; 
and thought it incumbent on them, at all times, to make an 
end of the fast on this day, on whatever day of the week it 
should happen to fall. But it was not the custom to cele- 
brate it in this manner in the Churches throughout the rest 
of the world, who observe the practice that has prevailed 
from Apostolic tradition until the present time, so that it 

(124) Ibid. Lib. 5. Cap. 23. lisdem temporibus gravi eontroversia 
dcorta, eo quod ornnes per Asiam ecclesiae vetusta quadam traditions 
nixae, quartadeeima luna salutaris Pascbae festum diem celebranduffl 
esae censebani, quo die praescriptum erat Judaeis ut agnum irnmola. 
rent : eaque omnino luna in quemcunque demum diem septimanae inci- 
disset, finemjujuniis imponendum esse staluebant: cum tamen reliquaft 
totius orbis ecclesiae alio move uterentur, qui ex Apostolorum tradi* 
taone profectus etiamnum servatur, ut scilicet .non alio qiiam resur* 
rectionis Dominican die jcjunia solvi liceat : Synodi ob id, coetusquft 
cpiscoporum convenore. Atque omnes uno consensu ecclesiasticara 
regulam universis fidelibus per epistolas tradiderunt : ne videlicet ullo 
olio quam Dominico die mysteriuin resurreetionis Domini unquam 
eelebretur : utque eo dimtaxat die Paschalium jejumorutn lerminuiQ 
observemus. Exstat etiamnum epistola Sacerdotum, qui tune in Pal 
eatina congregati sunt : quibus preesidebant Theophilus Caesureae Pal. 
Btinae, e't Narcissus Hierosotymorum episcopus. Alia item exstat 
epistola Synodi Romanae, eui Victoris episcopi nomen praefixum est 
Habentur praeterea literae episcoporum Ponti, quibus Palma utpote an^ 
tiquissimus praefuit. Epistola quoque ecclcsiarum Galliae exstat, quibus 



15.] EUSEBIUS. 149 

would not be proper to terminate oui fast on any other thaa 
the day of the resurrection of ourJSaviour. Hence there were 
synods and convocations of the bishops on this question,; 
and all unanimously drew up an ecclesiastical decree, which 
they communicated to all the Churches in all places, that 
the mystery of our Lord's resurrection should be celebrated 
on no other day than the Lord's day ; and that on this day 
alone we should observe the close of the paschal fasts. The 
epistle of the bishops who then assembled in Palestine, b 
still extant, among whom presided Theophilus, bishop of 
the Church in Cesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem. 
Another epistle of the Roman Synod is also extant, to which 
the name of Victor the bishop is prefixed. There is an 
epistle also of the bishops in Pontus, among whom Palmas. 
as the most ancient, presided ; also, of the Churches of 
Gaul, over whom Irenasus presided. Moreover, one from 
those in Osrhoene, and the cities there. And a particular 
epistle from Bachyllus, bishop of the Corinthians ; and 
epistles of many others, who, advancing one and the same 
doctrine, also passed the same vote. And this, their unani- 
mous determination, was the one already mentioned.' 

(125) c The bishops however, of Asia, who sharply con- 
tended that the custom handed down to them from their fa- 
thers, should be retained/ continues Eusebius, in the follow- 

praeratlrenaeus. Ecclcsiarum quoquein Osdroonae provincia ctin ur- 
bibus regionis illius eonstitutanim liteme visuntur. Seorsum vero 
Bacchj'lli Corinthorurn Episcopi, aliorumque complurium epistolaa ' 
exstant. Qui oinnes eandem fidem eandemque doctrinam proferentes,. 
nnam cdidere sentcntiana. Et haec quidem fuit, ut dixi, illorum dcfi. 
mtio.' 

(126) Ibid. Lib. 5. Cap. 24. Episcopis ver6 Asiae, qui morem sibi 
majoribus traditum retinendum esse acriter eontendebant, Polycrator 
praeerat. Qui quidem ia ea epistola quam ad Victorem et ad Roma* 
nrbis ecclesiam scripsit, traditionem ad sua usque tempora propagatant 
Xponit his verbia. Nos igitur verum ac genuinum agimus diem.' 



150 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

ing chapter, ' were headed by Polycrates. He indeed, had 
also set forth their tradition, in a letter which he addressed 
to Victor and the Church of Rome. We, said he, observe 

the genuine day.' ' I could also mention the bishops 

that were present, whom you requested that I might call 
together, which I did accordingly. Whose names, did I 

write them, would present a great number.' ' Upon this, 

Victor, the bishop of the Church of Rome, forthwith en- 
deavours to cut off all the Churches of Asia, together 
with the neighbouring Churches, as heterodox, from the 
common unity. And he publishes abroad by letters, and 
proclaims, that all the brethren are wholly excommunica- 
ted. . But these doings did not please all the bishops. They 
immediately exhorted him, on the contrary, to contemplate 
that course which was calculated to promote peace, unity, 
and love to one another,' 

' There are also extant/ saith our historian, c the expres- 
sions they used, who pressed upon Victor with great se- 

' Posscm etiam episcoporum qui meoum sunt, facere mentionem, quos 
petiistis ut convocarem, sicut et feci. Quorum nomina si adscripsero, 

ingens numerus videbitur.' ' His ita gestis, Victor quidern Romanae 

urlia episcopus illico omnes Asiae vicinarumque provinciarum ecclesi- 
as taniquam contraria rectae fidei sentientes, a communion abscin- 
dere conatur ; datisque literis universes qui illic erant fratres proscri- 
b'it, et ab unitate ecclesiae prorsus alienos esse pronuntiat. Verum haeo 
non omnibus placebant episcopis. Proinde Victorem ex adverse hor. 
tati gunt, ut ea potius sentire vellet quae paci et unitati caritatique er- 
gaproximum congriaebant.' 

' Exstant etiamnum eorum literae, quibus Victorera acerbius perstrinr 
glint. Ex quorum numero Irenaeus in epistolaquam scripsit nomina 
fratrqm quibus praeerat in Gallia, illudquidem defendit, solo dieDom- 
inico' resurrectionis Domini mysterium esse celebrandum : Victorem 
ttijpieh decenter admonet, ne integras Dei ecclesias morem sibi a mau 

jpribus traditum custodientes. acommunione abscindat.' &c. 'Nes 

Ve)r& ad Victorem solum, sed ad multos alios ecclesiarum antitftites do 
proposita literas in eandem sententiam misit.' 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. . 151 

verity. Among these also was Irenseus. He also admon- 
ishes Victor not to cut off whole Churches of God, who ob- 
served the tradition of an ancient custom.' Here follows 
the extract which I have already quoted as a part of the 
testimony of Jrenseus, and Eusebius concludes this chapter 
by saying that : c Not only to Victor, but likewise to many 
of the other rulers of the Churches, Irenaeus sent letters on 
this agitated question, expressing the same opinion.' 

Now in this long extract, there are several points of im- 
portance, all hostile to your claims. First, there are various 
councils held upon the question, over some of which The- 
ophilus, bishop of Cesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jeru- 
salem, are mentioned as presiding ; but. there is not one 
word of the bishop of Rome, as directing them, summoning 
them, or taking any part beyond that of his Episcopal 
brethren. 

But presently, Victor, the bishop of Rome, takes it upon 
him to request Polycrates, bishop of Samos, to summon a 
council and concur with the decision of the Western 
Churches ; threatening him, too, as it seems by Polycrates' 
answer, with the consequences of refusal. Did Polycrates 
and his brethren regard this threat, or acknowledge any au- 
thority in Victor ? Nay : although Victor had the unani- 
mous decree of the Western Churches in support of his 
opinion. And when Victor, in pursuance of his threat, en- 
deavored to have the bishops of Asia cast out of the con> 
munion of the Western Churches, did he prevail ? So far 
from it that Eusebius condemns him, and says that the 
bishops who agreed with the decree condemned him, and 
' pressed upon him with great severity.' Where then, in 
all this, is the supremacy of Rome? Where stands the 
supposed dominion of Peter, and the authority of the mo- 
ther and mistress of all the Churches ? Surely, brethren, 



152 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 15. 

no candid mind can read the narrative without seeing, that 
the primitive state of this matter could have been nothing 
like your system at the present day. 

Again, in the account of the dispute about heretical bap 
tisms, which was under review when the testimony of Cyp- 
rian was before us, Eusebius corresponds fully, stating the 
matter in such terms as are in accordance with the official 
equality of the bishops, but totally irreconcileable with you* 
doctrine of supremacy. (126) 'After Cornelius', saith he, 
(Book 7. Chap. 2.) 'had held the Episcopal office at 
Rome about three years, he was succeeded by Lucius, 
but the latter did not hold the office quite eight months, 
when dying he transferred it to Stephen. To this Stephen, 
Dioriysius wrote the first of his episiles on baptism, as there 
was no little controversy, whether those turning from any 
heresy whatever should be purified by baptism : for the an- 
cient practice prevailed with regard to such, that they should 
only have imposition of hands with prayer.' 

(127) 'Cyprian,' continues the historian in the next 
chapter, ' who was bishop of the Churcb of Carthage, was 
qf opinion, that they should be admitted on no conditions, 

(12C) Ibid. Lib. 7. Cap. 2. Interea Romao cum Cornelius tribus dr- 
after annis episcopatum tenuisset, Lucius in ejus locum- subatituitur- 
Qui vix octo rnensium spatio perfunctus eo munere, rnoriens episcopal* 
qfficium Stepliano dereliquit. Ad huncStephanum Dionysiusprimam 
earurn quao de Baptismo conscriptae sunt epistoiam cxaravit, cum per 
id tcmpus non mediocris controversiu exorta csset, utrum eos qui ex 
qualibet hacresi convertuntur, baptismo purgari oporteret. Quippe an- 
liqua cciJGUctudo invaluerat, ut in ejusmodi hominib.us sola manuuro 
iinpositio cum precationibus adhiberetur.' 

(127) Ibid. Lib. 7. Cap. 3. ' Primus omnium Cyprianus qui tune tern- 
poris Carthaginensem regebat ecclesiam, non nisi per baptismum ab 
Qrrore prius emundatos, admittendos esse censuit. Verum Stephanu* 
nihil ad versus traditionem quae jam inde ab ultimis temporibus obtinuerat 
ibnovandum ratue, gravissime id tulit.' 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. 153 

before they were first cleansed from their error by baptism. 
But Stephen, who thought that no innovations should b"0 
made contrary to traditions that had prevailed from ancient 
timeSjWas much offended at this.' Now bere,again. there is not 
a hint of your doct rine, although it is obvious that questions of 
authority and rights of official government are always brought 
prominently forward, when there is any tiling like strife or 
contention. 

The twenty seventh Chapter of the ^ame book, presents 
to us another occasion of episcopal jurisdiction, ivhen the 
heresy of Paul, the bishop of Antioch, rendered a Council 
of bishops necessary to preserve the Church. (128) 'Ths 
Other heads of the Churches,' says Eusebius, ' assembled 
in haste from different parts, at Antioch, as against one who 
was committing depredations on the flock of Christ.' 
'Among these,' (129) Ch. 18, 'the most learned wereFirmi- 
lianus, bishop of Cesarea in Ctippndocia, Gregory and Ath> 
enodorus, brothers and pastors of the Churches in Pontus; 
also Helenus, bishop of the Church at Tarsus, and Nico~ 
mas of Iconium, besides liyrnemuis of the Church at Je- 
rusalem, and Theoteneus of the adjacent Church at Cesarea* 
Moreover Maximus, who governed the Church of Bostra 
with great celebrity. There were six hundred others, whp 

(128) Ibid. Lib. 7. Cap. 27. ' At reliqni ecdesiarum pastures undiqu 
exciti, tanquam adversns gregis Dominici vastatorem, simul omnes An* 
tiochiam convenerunt. 

(129) Ibid. Cap. 23. Inter quos maxime cminebant FirmiJiannf 
Caesareae Cappadocum cpiscopus ; Gregorius et Atlienodorus fratrea, 
Scclesiarum apud Pontum opiscopi : Helenus quoquc Tarsi, et Nico 
tnaslconii antislhes. i^ed et Hymenncus qui ecclcsiam HierosolymW. 
tanam regebat, et Tlieotccnus qui Caesariensem illi finitimam admio- 
istrabat. Maximns pretorea, qui Bostrensem eeclesiam sunima cutn 
laude gubernavit. Sexcentos quoque alios qui una cum presbyteris fit 
<Jiaconis eo confluxerunt, nequaquam difficile lucrit recensere. 
ti quos dixi, illustres prae caeteris habebantur.' 



154 TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 

together with the presbyters and deacons, assembled in the 
Bald city for the same cause : it would be difficult to number 
them all, but the persons named were the most distinguish- 
ed.' (130)' But it was in the reign of this emperor, (Aure- 
lian) Ch. 29. 'when a final council was convened, in which 
bishops almost innumerable were assembled,and Paul, the au- 
thor of this nefarious heresy, was convicted at Antioch, and 
being plainly found guilty of false doctrine by all, was cast 

out from the whole Catholic Church under heaven.' 

(131) ' The pastors therefore,' continues Eusebius, Ch. 30. 
' who had been convened, having drawn up an epistle, 
by common consent addressed it to Dionysius, bishop of 
Rome, and to Maximus of Alexandria, and sent it to all the 
Provinces' ' The epistle : To Dionysius and Maximus, 
and to all our follow ministers throughout the, world, th$ 
bishops, presbyters, and deacons, and to the whole Catholic 
Church under heaven : Helenus, Hymenseus, and Theoph- 
flus, and Theotecnus, and Maximus, Proculus, Nicomas and 

^^^ 

(130) Ibid. Lib. 7. Cap. 29. 'Hujus temporibus (sc. Aureliani) post, 
rema Synodus innumerabilium fere episcoporum congregata est;. il> 
<jaa auctor ille nefarise apud Antiochiam hsreseos Paulus. convictus et 
ftb omnibus manifestissime deprehensus falsi dogmatis reus, ab uni* 
Versa quae subcoelo est ecclesia Catliolica eliminatus est.' 

(131) Ibid. Lib. 7. Cap. 30. ' Omnes itaque in unum congregati an* 
tlstites, unam ex communi sententia ad Dionysium Komanse urbis epis 
COpum, et ad Maximum Alexandrinum scripserunt epistcilain : eamquj) 

ad omnes deinde provincias transmisertint : I'orro ipsamet illoruffi 

Verba, ad perpetuarn -posterorum memoriam non incommodum fueriJ 
tic referre.' 

1 Dionysio et Maximo, et omnibus per universum orbem comminis* 
tfis nostris ; episcopis, presbyteris, et diaconis; et universa? ecclesis 
O3.tholicae qua? sub ccnlo est, Helenus et Hymenaeus, Theophilus, The* 
Otecnus, Maximus, Proculus, Nicomas, ^Elianus, Paulus, Bolanus ; 
Protogenes, Hierax, Eutychius, Theodorus et Malcliion et Lucius, et 
feliqui omnes qui nobiscum sunt vicinarum urbium et provinciaruiD 
^jpiscopi, presbyteri ac diaconi, et ecclesiae Dei, carissimis fratribua 
ia Domino salutem.' 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. 155 

jElianus, Paul and Bolanus and Protogenes, Hieras, and 
Eutychius and Theodoras, and Malchion and Lucius, and 
all the rest who are bishops, presbyters, or deacons, dwell- 
ing with us, in the neighbouring cities and nations, together 
with the Churches of God, to the beloved brethren in the 
Lord, Greeting.' The epistle proceeds to set forth the heiv 
esy of Paul, and the various accusations against him, and con- 
cludes in these words, (132) 'We have been compelled, 
therefore, to excommunicate this man, who sets himself up 
in opposition to God, and is unwilling to yield, and to ap- 
point another bishop in his place over the Catholic Church, 
and this we trust, with the Providence of God, viz. Don> 
nus the son of Demetrianus, of blessed memory, and who, 
oefore this, presided with much honor over the same Church, 
a man we believe fully endowed with all the excellent qual* 
ities of a bishop. We have also communicated this to you, 
that you may write, and receive letters of communion from 

Aim.' ' Paul, therefore,' proceeds the historian, l having 

thus fallen from the Episcopate, as well as from the true 
faith, as already said, Domnus succeeded in the administra- 
tion of the Church at Antioch. But Paul being unwilling 

(132) Ibid. ' Hunc igitur, Deo belluni indicentcm. ncc cedere vo- 
lentem, cum a communions noslra abdicassemus, necesse habuimiu 
alium ejus loco ecclesiae catholicao episcopum ordinare, non absqua 
divina ut credimus providentia. Demetriani scilicet beatae memoriao 
episcopi, qui ante hunornagna cum laude eandom resit ecclesiam, fili- 
um Domnum; virum omnibus quae episcopum decent dotibus exor- 
uatum: quod quidem idcirco vobis significavirmis, ut ad cum scribatia, 

el ab eo communicatorias literas accipiatis.' Igitur ct'im Pauluj 

a recta fidesimul etepiscopatu excidisset, Domnus ut dictum est, ad- 
ministration e,m Antiochensis ecclesiae suscepit. Sed cum Paulua 9 
domo ecclesiae nullatenus.excedere vellet ; interpellatus Imperator 
Aurelianus rectissimo hoc negotiumdijudicavit, iis domum tradi prae 
cipiens, quibus Italici Christianae religionis antistites et Romanus epii 
copua scriberent. Hoc modo vir supra memoratus cum summo ded 
ore per eaecularem potestatem abecclesia cxturbatus est.' 



156 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

to leave the building of the Church, an appeal was mad& 
to the Emperor Aurelian, who decided most equitably on 
the business, ordering the building to be given up to those 
whom the Christian bishops of Italy and Rome should 
write. Thus, then, this man was driven out of the Church 
with extreme disgrace, by the temporal power itself.' 

Now here, brethren, I beseech you to observe the con- 
trast between your present Canon law and the primitive 
Church of Rome. The Council of Antioch, though not 
reckoned a General Council, was yet more than a common 
Provincial one. The See of Antioch was of high import 
tance, the heresy of Paul was of an aggravated character, and 
more than one Council was holden before the matter wag 
determined, and yet nothing is said about the bishop of 
Rome. What these bishops did, too, you perceive, was done 
on behalf of the whole Catholic Church under heaven, be- 
cause the excommunication of Paul is expressly thus stated ; 
and the Council proceed to appoint another bishop of the 
Catholic Church in his place, and still nothing is said of ths 
bishop of Rome. 

In the next place, mark the caption of the epistle. It 
was addressed, says Eusebius, < by common consent,' to the 
bishops of Rome and Alexandria ; and by the epistle itself 
we see that it was addressed also to all the clergy of the 
'whole Catholic Church under heaven.' And in the con- 
clusion, where the Council state the purpose for which they 
write, they do not refer to any act of the bishop of Rome 
being necessary to confirm their proceedings, but taking, il 
for granted that they had as much authority as any other por* 
tionof the Catholic Church, they communicate their acts itt 
order that the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, and all the 
other bishops to whom their epistle was addressed, might 
write to Domnus, the newly appointed bishop, and receive 



CHAPTER 15.] EUSEBIUS. 157 

letters of communion from him. Where then, was your 
present doctrine of Supremacy, -which makes the consent of 
the bishop of Rome necessary even to the decrees of a 
General Council, and which expressly reserves to him, and 
that by divine right, the sole power of deposing and trans- 
lating bishops ? Can circumstantial evidence be stronger 
than this, where you have Eusebius, the father of ecclesias- 
tical history, with all the fathers of the celebrated Council of 
Antioch, acting and writing in a style at total variance with 
your modern system ? ; 

And yet there is one circumstance more, to cap the cli- 
max of proof in this matter. Paul was dissatisfied there 
was an appeal of course from the decision of the Council, 
and appeals from the decision of the bishops, saith your Ca- 
non law, must be to the bishop of Rome the chief Pontiff. 
But does the ecclesiastical record of the third century say 
so? INay brethren, for Eusebius expressly tells us that the 
appeal was made to the emperor. And the emperor re- 
ferred the question to the decision, not of the bishop of 
Rome, but of the bishops of Italy and Rome; thus plainly 
giving the bishop of Rome only a voice among his Episco- 
pal brethren of Italy. How, I beseech you, would such an 
imperial decree harmonize with your present doctrine ? 

Perhaps, however, all this was wrong irregular : per- 
haps the Council of Antioch andj the emperor Aurelian 
transgressed against the acknowledged prerogatives of the 
Church of Rome, and therefore no inference should be 
drawn from the transaction. Well, then, the bishop of 
Rome remonstrated-- complained rejected these schismatic 
doings, as was the bounden duty of the man who was the 
vicar of Christ, holding the place of God upon the earth, 
and having the authority of a shepherd over his flock in 
14 



158 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

relation to the other bishops, according to the doctrine of 
your Canon law and the Doway Catechism. 

But did he complain ? Nay, brethren, he acquiesced. 
There is not a word intimating the slightest dissatisfaction, 
but the contrary. So that here, we have the action of the 
Council of Antioch ; the appointment of Domnus ; the epis- 
tle addressed to the Catholic Church ; the appeal to the 
emperor ; the acquiescence of the Church of Rome, and the 
testimony of Eusebius, all concurring to demonstrate that 
the primitive Church of Rome knew nothing of the su- 
premacy which you now claim over the Christian world. 

I doubt not, brethren, that you are weary of this witness, 
and I would, for my own sake, as well as yours, tliat I 
might dismiss his testimony ; but. justice requires that I 
should extract from his pages the evidence of another cele- 
brated name Consiantine, the Roman emperor, under 
whose zealous patronage the Church obtained a final victory 
over heathenism. 

Eusebiu's has preserved in his invaluable record, several 
of this emperor's epistles, of which two may suffice upon 
the point before us, and to these I beg your especial atten- 
tion. 

(133) ' Copy of the emperor's epistles, in which he or- 
ders a council of bishops to be held at Rome, for the unity 
and peace of the Church.' 

(133) Ibid, Lib. 10. Cap. 5. Exemplum epistolac Coiistantini Impe- 
ratoris, qua episcoporum Concilium Romae fieri jubet pro unitate et 
concordia ecclesiarum. 

Constantinus Augustus Miltiadi episcopo urbis Romae et Marco. 
Quoniam hujusmodi plures libelli a viro clarissirno Anulino Africae 
Proconsule ad me sunt missi, in quibus continetur Caecilianum Car- 
thaginensium urbis episcopum a quibusdam collegis suis per Af'ricam 
constitutis multis de causis insimulari. Q,uod quidem permolestum 
mini videtur, in istis provinciis quas divinaprovidentia meae devotioni 



CHAPTER 15.] THE EMPEKQR CONSTANTINE. 159 

' Constantino Augustus, to Miltiades bishop of Rome, and 
to Marcus, As many communications of this kind have 
been sent to me from Anulinus, the most illustrious procon- 
sul of Africa,-, in which it is contained that Cfficilianus, the 
bishop of Carthage, is accused, in many respects, by his 
colleagues in Africa ; and as this appears to be grievous, 
that in those- provinces which divine Providence has freely 
entrusted to my fidelity, and in which there is a vast popu- 
lation, the multitude are found inclining to deteriorate, and 
in a manner divided into two parties, and among others, 
that the bishops are at variance ; I have resolved that the 
same Csecilianus, together with ten bishops, who appear to 
accuse him, and ten others, whom he himself may consider 
necessary for his cause, shall sail to Rome; that before 
you, as also Reticius, Maternus, and Mavinus, your col- 
leagues, whom I have commanded to hasten to Rome for 
this purpose, he may be heard, as you may understand 
most consistent with the most sacred law.' 

Here, it is evident, that the bishop of Rome is not ad- 
dressed as a man who already held the office of appel- 
late Judge over the whole Church, but conjointly with 
Marcus, and merely as an equal amongst his colleagues. 
The complaints of the African bishops against Caecilianus 
were not made to the supposed head of the Church, but to 
Anulinus the proconsul, and through him to the emperor. 
The authority to try the accused is Conferred on the bishop 

spontanea deditione tradidit ? et in quibus maxima est populi multitude, 
plebem quasi in duas partes divisam ad detcriora dcflectere, et episcd- 
pos inter se dissentire. Placuit mihi ut idem Caecilianus una cum 
decem episoopis qui accusare ipsum videntur. et cum decem aliis quoa 
ipse ad suamcausam necessaries esse judicaverit, llomam naviget; ut 
ibi coram vobis et coi-am Reticio, Matorno, ac Marino collegis vestris, 
quos ea causa Romam properare jussi, possit audiri, quemadmodum 
sanctissimae legi convenire optime nostis.' 



160 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

of 'Rome by the imperial appointment, and not on him 
alone, but along with Marcus, Reticius, Maternus and Mar- 
inus, bishops of Italy, the whole forming a Council. To 
shew still more distinctly, however, the true state of papal 
jurisdiction at this period, let me ask your attention to the 
next document, where you will find the emperor addressing 
the bishop of Syracuse on the same subject. 

(134) ' Copy of the epistle in which he commanded 
another council to be held, for the purpose of removing all 
the dissension of the bishops.' 

' Constantino Augustus to Chrestus bishop of Syracuse. 
As certain persons, some time ago, perversely and wick- 
edly began to dissent from the holy religion of celestial 
virtue, and to abandon the doctrine of the Catholic Church, 
desirous, therefore, of preventing such disputes among them, 
I had given orders, that this subject, which appeared to be 
agitated among them, should be rectified, by delegating 
certain bishops from Gaul, and summoning others of the 
opposite parties from Africa, who are pertinaciously and 

(134) Ibid. Exemplum epistolae Constantini Imperatoris, qua alte- 
rain episcoporum Synodum fieri jubet ut omnis episcoporum dissensio 
tollatur. 

Constantinus Augustus Chresto Syracusanorum Episcopo. Jam qui- 
dcm auiea cum nonnulli pravo ac perverse animo, a sancta religione 
cEclcstique virtute et ab Ecclesise Cat'r.olicffi sententia dissidere csepis- 
sciH, liujusmodi corum contcntionem prsecidere cupiens ita constitue- 
ram, ut missis e Gallia quibusdam episcopis ; accitis etiam ex Africans 
qui duas in panes divisi.pertinaciterjinter se alque obstinate contendunt; 
pra3seiite quoquo Romania urbis episcopo, id quod commotum fuisse 
videbalur, sub horum prsBscntia posKot diligentissima examinatione 
componi. Sed quoniam nonnulli, ut fere fit, et proprice salutis et ven- 
eraiionis qute EanctissiniEB fidei debetur obliti, privatas adliuc simui- 
tatesprorcgare non cessaut ; prolate jam sententise acquiescere nolen- 

IBS,'- ' idcirco mibi scdulo providendum fuit, ut hase quffi post de- 

proinptturj judiciuui vohml'aria assensione jam finita esse 
iiunc tandfjm multorum interventu finem possint accipere.' 



CHAPTER 15.] THE EMPEROR CO'NSTANTINE. 161 

incessantly contending with one another, the bishop of 
Rome being also present, that by a careful examination in 
their presence, that which seems to be in contest might be 
thus decided. But since, as it happens, some, forgetful of 
their own salvation, and the reverence due to our most holy 
religion, even now do not cease to protract their own enmi- 
ty, being unwilling to conform to the decision already pro- 
mulgated,' c it has appeared necessary to me to 

provide that this matter, which ought to have ceased after 
the decision was issued, by their own voluntary agreement, 
now, at length, should be fully terminated by the interven- 
tion of many.' 

1 Since, therefore, we have commanded many bishops to 
meet together from different and remote places, in the city 
of Aries, towards the Calends of August, we have also 
thought proper to write to thee, that taking a public vehicle 
from the most illustrious Latronianus, corrector of Sicily, 
and taking with thee two others of the second rank which 
thou mayest select, also three servants to afford you services 
on the way, you may meet them within the same day at 
the aforesaid place : that by thy firmness and the pru- 
dence and unanimity of the rest that assemble, this dispute, 

' Quoniaui igitur plurimosex divcvsis ac prope infinitis locisepisco- 
posin nrbein Arelatcnsein intra Calendas August! jussimus conve- 
nirc;-1.ibi quoque so rib end urn esse- censuimus, ut accepto publico ve- 
hiculo a viro clarissimo Latroriiarco Correctors Sicilies, adjunctis tibi 
duobus secundi ordinis quos tu eligeudos putaveris, tribus item servu- 
lis qui in itiuere vobis ministrare possint, intra eundem diem -ad prsa- 
dictum locum occurras: quo tum per tiiatn gravitalcm,' [the Greek word 
is oTio(juTr t ro?, which signifies firmness] ' tum per c'ctcroruin in unum 
coautittum imam-mom con-cordemque solertiam controversia IIEBC quse 
per fcedissimam aJtercationem ad hoc usque temporis perduravit, audi- 
tis omnibus eorumqui nunc inter se dissident, quos etiam adessejussi- 
inus, allegationibus, ad congruam religionis et fidci observantiam frater- 

namque conrordiam tandem aliquando possit revocari.' 
14* 



162 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 15. 

which has continued incessantly until the present time, in 
the midst of most disgraceful contentions, may be dis- 
cussed, by hearing all that shall be alleged by those who 
are now at variance, whom we have also commanded to be 
present ; and thus the controversy be reduced, at length, to 
that observance of faith and fraternal concord, which ought to 
prevail.' 

In this epistle it appears, that the peace of the Church 
had not been restored by the judgment of the bishops of 
Italy, including the bishop of Rome. The emperor, there- 
fore, summons a large council, for the purpose of composing 
the dissension, and addresses Chrestus, the bishop of Syra*- 
cuse, in a strain which would suit your doctrine admirably if 
it had been addressed to the Roman Pontiff. For the for- 
mer epistle was not addressed to the bishop of Rome alone, 
but to him and others. While here is an epistle addressed 
singly to the bishop of Syracuse, and anticipating the favor- 
able result of the council, not only from the prudence and 
unanimity of the other bishops, but especially from his 
individual firmness. Here, then, you have- not a re- 
currence to Rome as a remedy after the judgment of other 
bishops had failed, but a recurrence to other bishops after 
the judgment of Italy and Rome had failed ; and this by the 
authority of the Roman emperor, himself a Christian con- 
vert, and handed down to us as an interesting part of the 
annals of the primitive Church, by a cotemporary bishop, 
the father of ecclesiastical history. 

Now I beseech, you, brethren, as men who love the 
truth, to contemplate these documents steadfastly, and see 
how totally irreconcilable they are with the rights of the 
bishop and the See of Rome, as your Doway Catechism and 
Canon law set them forth at the present day. If, as you 
now allege, St. Peter was constituted ' the head and pastor 



CHAPTER. 15.] EUSEB1US. 163 

of the other apostles' if those apostles, and through them 
the whole Church, 'were built on him' if ' since the trans- 
lation of St. Peter's Chair from Antioch to Rome, the par- 
ticular Roman Church has been head of all the Churches/ 
if ' the Pope, by the Lord's appointment, is the successor of 
the blessed apostle Peter, and holds the place of the Redee- 
mer himself upon the earth,' bearing the authority, ' not of 
a mere man, but of the true God' if ( Christ, the King 
of kings, and Lord of lords, gave to the Roman Pon- 
tiff, in the person of Peter, the plenitude of power/ if 
' the greater causes of the Church, especially those which 
concern the articles of faith, are to be referred to the seat 
of Peter/ if ' to the holy Roman Church, as to the mother 
and head, all the greater causes of the Church may re- 
cur and receive their decision according to her sentence' 
if 'The Roman Church, by the appointment of our Lord, 
is the MOTHER AND MISTRESS of all the faithful' if all this 
be so, as you insist, how is it that the celebrated Eusebius 
one of the most learned men of his day, writing a book on 
the history of the Church for the first three hundred and 
twenty years of the Christian era, honored by a place in 
your own canon law, placed on the list of saints, and called 
by yourselves the father of ecclesiastical history how is it 
that this Eusebius knew nothing of this vast prerogative 
that he recorded nothing which at all resembles it ; but on 
the contrary, recorded so much which is totally irrecon- 
cilable with the doctrine? 

How is it that Constantine, residing at Rome, and of 
course in the most direct channel of information as to the 
claims of her bishop, and surely not opposed to his just 
rights how is it that Constantine knew nothing of it, but 
acted and wrote as if he had the whole authority to direct, 



164 CANON OF THE [CHAPTER 15. 

and as if the bishops, assembled in council at his command, 
had the perfect right to determine? 

How is it that all the bishops of Africa and Gaul, to 
whom the epistle of Constantino refers, knew nothing of 
this papal supremacy, and that of the two epistles which I 
have cited, that which Constantino addressed to Chrestus, 
bishop of Syracuse, looks more like the acknowledgment of 
a primacy, than the epistle addressed to the bishop of Rome ? 

And, lastly, how is it, that of this very Council of Aries, 
the eighth Canon refers to the controversy mentioned in 
page 125, without the slightest allusion to the authority of 
the Roman See, or to the official rights of her Pope, against 
which, according to your present doctrine, Cyprian had sin. 
iiecl so grievously ? For this is the language of the Canon 
in question : (135) ' And concerning, the Africans, since 
they use their own rule of rebaptizing, the Council de- 
clared, that if any heretic should come to the Church, they 
should examine him in the Creed, and if they found that 
he had been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, he should only receive the im- 
position of hands. But if being examined in the Creed, he 
should not confess this Trinity, he ought to be baptized.' 
Here, we have the independence of the African Church 
acknowledged distinctly. ' They use their own rule,' saith 
the Council. But had they done wrong by using their own 
rule in opposition to Pope fctephen had he been justifia- 
ble in his high claim to their submission should not we 
have had, in this canon, some reprehension of the African 

(135) Concil. Hardouin. Torn. 1. p, 264- 'Do Afris auteru, quod 
propria sua Icge uluntur ut rcbaptizcnt, placuit ut ad ecclcsiain si ali- 
quis haerelicus venerit, intcrrogcnt eum symbol-urn ; ct si perviderint 
eum in Patre et Filio, et Spiritu Sancto esse baptizatum, manus tan- 
turn ei imponatur. Quod si interrogatus symbolum, non respondent 
Trinitatem bane, merito baptizetur.' 



CHAPTER 15.] COUNCIL OF ARLES. 165 

independence, and some assertion of the Roman authority 
the more especially too, as the canon proceeds to decree, 
jor the future, the same course which Stephen had advo- 
cated ; viz. that if heretics had been baptized in the ortho- 
dox form, it should be held sufficient. 

Brethren, I will not say that no honest mind, with these 
facts before it, can subscribe to the doctrine of your Canon 
law, because I cannot tell to what extent an honest mind 
may be deluded. But as the evidence appears to my un- 
derstanding, I do say, that of all the claims which the 
world has yet witnessed, the claim which appeals to the tes- 
imony of the primitive Church in support of your doctrine 
of supremacy, presumes most strongly upon the ignorance of 
mankind. 



CHAPTER XVI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

Having IIOAV arrived, in the order of chronology, to the 

O * -s v * 

celebrated council of Nice, which is generally considered 
by you as the first general council, it will be expedient to 
examine your sentiments on the subject of councils, with 
which is intimately connected your important claims to in- 
fallibility. I proceed, therefore, to state, from your Doway 
Catechism and your Canon law, all that seems necessary to 
a proper explanation of your present doctrine. 

' The Church is infallible,' saith your Catechism, (p. 24) 
e and is therefore to be believed ; and all men may rest se- 
curely on her judgment. This is proved, ' First, because 
she is the pillar and ground of truth.' ( 1 Tim. iii. 15.) ' Se- 
condly, out of St. Matthew, xvi. 18. where Christ saith> 
'Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of 
hell shall not prevail against her.' Thirdly, out of St. John, 
~s.iv. 26. ' But the Paraclete,' saith he, ' the Holy Ghost, 
shall teach you all things, whatsoever I shall say to you. 
And xvi. 13. But when the Spirit of truth cometh, he shall 
teach you all truth.' 

Again, the said Catechism declares that ' The definitions 
of a council perfectly oecumenical, that is, a general council, 
approved by the Pope, are infallible in matters of faith, be- 
cause, first, such a council is the Church representative, and 



CHAPTER 16,] GENERAL, COUNCILS. 

has the same infallibility that the Church spread over the 
world hath, Secondlv, because the definite ns of such a 

*/ * 

Council are the dictates of the Holy Ghost accordirji; to thai 
of the Apostles, deciding in Council : it Lath seemed Ood 
to the Holy Ghost and to us.' 

From the Exposition of the Caaoa Law already cucted, 
I cite the following. (136) 

' What is required to constitute a General Council ; 

RULE. 

c In order that a Council may be general, so other requi- 
sites are necessary than these. 

1. That all the bishops should be caikd. 

2. That it should be convoked by him ivbo Las ibe rliiht 
to convoke it. 

3. That he should preside in it. either bv Lirnself. cr by 

i. ' ' 

some other. 

A general Council is nothing else than the "whole Church 
comTe: r ated together. 5 

i_j O ^f 

% 2. 

' To whom does the right belong, to convene and preside 
in a General Council ?' 

RULE. 

f Accordin^to the Canons it belongs to the Pope a] one to 

- - tT 1 i 

convoke and preside in a General Council. Because a Coan- 

(136) Exposuio Ji!r35 Caaou. Jo. Pe:. Giber*. Tota. 1. p. 06. 
1. Quid reqiiirafur tit Coccilrara *:t Geceriie r 

E^gula. 

Ut Concilium sit Generale ncn s'ia reocirsrtur, c'asm qus jecEEB' 

i -3 

tur. 

1. Ut ouines Episcopi ad illud vocentnr. 

2. Ut cojivocetur sb eo. cisjus es: i!!;:d convene are. 

3. Ut isle in eo praesis per se.vel per aljma. ConciHam GBra.i 
sit nisi ecclesia universaijs 



Cujus sit Concilium Geuerale convocare, eidezaq'se pras5der? 



168 GENERAL COUNCILS. [CHAPTER 16. 

oil is the Church congregated together. But the Church is 
a body : and iho Pupa is the head of this body. There- 
fore, as in other bodies, it is the head that convokes, and 
presides in the convocation, it follows that it belongs to the 
Pope to convoke and preside in a General Council.' 

' This rule is subject only to the following exceptions : 
viz. 

1. If it be doubtful who is the lawful Pope. 

2. ]f the Pope be notoriously a heretic. 

3. If the Roman See be vacant. 

4. If a preceding Council have fixed the time and 
place for a future one. 

The decrees of the Councils of Constance and Basle ap- 
prove these four exceptions.' 

3. 

' What is the authority of a General Council ? 

RULE. 

* The authority of a General Council is the same as the 
authority of the Church, and even of Holy Scripture.' 

' Because it represents the whole Church, and the same 
Holy Spirit who dictated the Holy Scriptures, also dictates 
its decrees.' 

Regula. 

JuxtaCanones Corpore Juris inclusos solius est Papae Concilium 
Generale convocare, eidemque prseesse. 

Ratio. Concilium, ut dictum, non est nisi Ecclesia congregata : 
Eeclesia autem est corpus; Papa ver6 hujus corporis caput. Ideoque, 
sicut in aliis corporibus, capitis est corpus convocare, et convocato 
praeesse, Papa? est Concilium Generale convocare eidemque prseesse. 
Praecedens Regula non alias patitur exceptiones, quam istas. 

1. Si dubius sit Papa legitimus. 

2. Si notorius sit Haereticus. 

3. Si sedes vacat. 

4. Si Concilium praecedens futuri tempua et locum praefiniat. 
Decreta Concilii Constantiensis et Basileensis haec quatuor probant. 



CHAPTER 16.] GENERAL COUNCILS. 169 

( From hence it follows, 1 st. that a General Council can 
no more err from truth and justice,. than the Church and the 
Holy Scripture : and therefore it cannot define or decree 
any thing contrary to faith, or morals.' 

2. ' That the authority of a General Council must be th* 
greatest, since it is the same with the authority of the Holj 
Spirit, who is God. And this by that double title, by 
which the Holy Spirit governs it : namely, because it is the 
congregation of the spouse of the Holy Spirit, representing 
her entire, and because it is the interpreter of the revela- 
tion made by the Holy Spirit, whether contained in Scrip- 
ture or in tradition.' 

__ __ 

Q,uae Concilii Generalis Autoritas. 

Kegula. 

Eadcm est Concilii generalis, ac Ecclesiae, imo et Scripturae Sane- 
tae autoritus. 

Ratio : Ecclesiam totam repraesentat, ipsiusque definitiones dictat 
idem Spiritus Sanctus, qui Scripturam Sanctsm dictavit. 

Hinc sequitur 1. non magis posse Concilium generate a veritate et 
justitia deviare, quam Ecclesiam, et Scripturam sanctam : ideoque oi- 
hil posse contrarium fidei, vel bonis moribus definire, vel statuere. 

2. Maximamess'e Concilii Generalis autoritatem, cum eadem sit a 
Spiritus Sancti, qui Deus est. Idque duplici titulo, quo illud regit 
Spiritus Sanctus ; nempe prout est sponsae Spiritus Sancli congregati* 
ipsam totam repraesenlans, et prout est factae a Spiritu Sancto revela- 
tionis, et in Scriptura, et Traditione contentae, interpres. 

Dices : si eadem sit Concilii generalis autoritas, ac Spiritus Sancti, 
unde fit, ut praecepta ab eo factanonsunt divina, sed humana; ut pa- 
tot ex eo, quod non obligant cum vitae discrimine? Respondetur: 
Id provenire ex'eo, quod Concilium generale non sit Spiritu Sancti or- 
ganum extra ea, quae sunt revelata, illave, quae fidem, vel bonot 
mores, proxime tangunt : idque, quia Ecclesia, quam repraesentat, 
constituta est tantum visibilis fidei, morumqueregula. 

Dices iterum : Quomodo eadem est generalis Concilii ac Scriptarae 
Sacrae autoritas, cum c. 4. de Elect, dicatur, a Romano Pontifice au- 
toritatem, roburque suum accipere; Scriptura autem Sacra a Deo, non 
ab liomine, suam accipiat autoiitatem. Sed respondetur : Cap. oppoel- 
15 



170 DOCTRINE OF THE CANON LAW [CHAPTER 16. 

' But yon will say : If the authority of a General Coun- 
cil is the same with that of the Holy Spirit, how is it that 
the precepts enjoined by it are not divine, but human, as 
appears from this, that they do not hind at the peril of life ? 
It may be answered : Because a General Council is not the 
organ of the Holy Spirit beyond those things which are re- 
vealed, or those which nearly affect faith and morals : and 
this is because the Church which it represents is only con- 
stituted to be the visible rule of failh and morals. You 
will say again : How should the authority of a General 
Council and that of the Holy Scriptures, be "the same, 
when it is said in the Canon (C. 4. de Elect.) that the 
Council derives its force and authority from the Roman Pon- 
tiff, whereas the Holy Scripture derives its authority, not 
from man but from God. The answer however is : That 
the passage referred to does not concern this matter -j- be- 
cause it speaks of what regards discipline, and the rule 
which compares the authority of a General Council with the 
authority of Holy Scripture, applies to those things which 
concern faith and morals.' 

iv. 

' What is the distinction between Genera,! Councils? 

RULE. 

' The only distinction to be noted between General 

turn ad rem non facere ; quia, de rebus spectantibus Disciplinary lo- 
quitur, ac hie comparatur Generalis Concilii autoritas cum Scripturaa 
autoritate, quoad res, quae fidem moresque contingunt. 

. . * 4< ' 

Q,uae sit inter Concilia generalia distinctio. 

Regula. 

Unica cst inter Concilia Generalia notanda distinotio, quae petitnr 
OK. conatitutionibus circa Disciplinam, quaeque in eo sita est,quod alia 
aliie puriores ediderint. 

Ratio: Duo tant&m in Conciliis Generalibus considerari possunt. ! 
Potestsa definiendi^et statuendi. 2. Dafinitiones etConsUtutiones. 



CHAPTER 16.] CONCERNING COUNCILS. 171 

Councils, is that which regards the constitutions about dis- 
cipline, in which respect, some have decreed purer consti- 
tutions than others.' 

' The reason is as follows : Two things only are to be 
considered in General Councils. 1 . The power of denning 
and decreeing. 2. The definitions and decrees themselves.' 

' As to the first, there can be no distinction among Gener- 
al Councils, because the power of the Church neither in- 
creases nor decreases ; is has always remained and will 
always remain the same ; for the modern Church is not less 
the spouse and the organ of the Holy Spirit, the body, whose 
head is Christ, the pillar and ground of truth, an army set 
in array, against which the gates of hell cannot prevail, 
with other similar expressions, than the primitive Church ; 
the promises made to the Church are not affecied by time.' 

' As to the second, there can be no distinction between 
General Councils, if we refer to those definitions and con- 
stitutions which respect faith and morals : since, with regard 
to these, no definitions and decrees can be purer than the 
rest. It remains, therefore, that General Councils cannot 
be distinguished, unless by reason of those Constitutions 

Q,uod Primum, nulla potest csse inter ea distinctio : quianec crevit 
nee decrevit Ecclesiae potestas, eadem semper mansit, ut et inanebit : 
moderna etenira Ecclesia non minus est sponsa et organum Spiritua 
Sancti, corpus, cujas caput est Christus, columna et fiimamentum 
Veritatis, castrortim acies ordinata, adversus quam portae iiiferi 
praevalere nequeunt, aliaque similia, quam primitiva : promissionea 
Ecclesiae factae non sunt tempori obnoxiae. 

Quoad secundum, nulla etiam potest esse inter Concilia generalia 
distinctio, si sermo sit de Definitionibus, quae fidem moresve respici- 
nnt : cum circa ilia, Definitiones et Constitutiones nequeant csse alias 
aliis puriores. Restat ergo ul Concilia Generalia non distinguantur, 

nisi ratione Constitutionum, circa Disciphnam circa quam prio- 

rum Conciliorum Constitutiones casterorum Constitutionibus videntar 
puriores. 



172 DOCTKINE OP THE CANON LA.W [CHAPTER 16. 

which concern discipline with regard to which, the Con- 
stitutions of the earlier Councils appear purer than the 
Constitutions of the others.' 

'But you will say, that General Councils are distinguished 
from each other, as respects their authority and their dig- 
nity, and you will produce as proof for this, the Canon law, 
(c. 28. Dist. L.) in which it is said : Whenever the de- 
crees of Councils are discordant, the authority of the stron- 
ger and more ancient, is to be preferred.' 

It may be answered, however, 1 . that this Canon speaks 
of particular Councils, for it would reconcile the Council of 
Ancyra, which was Provincial, with another particular 
Council : 2. Although it did speak of general Councils, it 
may be construed with regard to matters of discipline, in 
which the more ancient Councils are preferable to the others; 
because devotion was fervent in the first ages, but grew cold 
in succeeding times, and o'i this account the earlier Councils 
are held in greater honor, according to the saying: The fa- 
thers established reverence for antiquity.' 

^ v ' 
' In what respects a general Council differs from a partic- 

ular one.' 

Dices : Concilia Generalia, quoad autoritatem, et dignitatem, dis- 
ttngui inter se, afferesque ad hoc C. 28. Dist. L. in quo hsec leguntur : 
Quoties Conciliorum discors est sententia, illius magis tenenda est 
inijus antiquior et potior est autoritas. 

Respondetur: 1. Ilium canonem loqui de Conciliis non. Gen- 
eralibus : conciliat enim Concilium Jlncijranum, quod est Pro- 
rinciale, cum alio Concilio particular!; 2. Etsi loqueretur de Con. 
oiliis Generalibus, restringi posset ad res Discipline, in quibus anti- 
quiora Concilia sunt aliis prseferenda : quia, quae prioribus saeculisfer- 
yebat devotio, succedentibus temporibus tepuit, et proptereci major! in 
lionore habentur: juxta illud : antiquitati Patres sanxerunt reveren- 
tiam. . 

v - 
In quibus Concilium Generate, a Particular! prascipu^ difFerat. 



CfiAPTER 16.] CONCERNING COUNCILS. 178 

BULK. 

' The principal differences between a general and a partic- 
ular Council, are the following :' 

*1, The Pope alone can convoke a general Council, and 
preside in it, but the right of convoking the others (sc. par- 
ticular Councils) and of presiding in them, belongs to other 
bishops.' 

1 2. General Councils are not subject to error nor to sin ; 
but particular Councils are subject to both.' 

' 3. General Councils bind the whole Church ; but par- 
ticular Councils only bind the part represented.' 

f 5. The decisions of general Councils upon matters of 
law are infallible, but contrariwise of the others.' 

These extracts may suffice to shew your present doctrine 
on the points of the authority of the Pope and of a general 
Council, together with the claim of infallibility connected 
therewith. And now, brethren, I shall undertake to prove, 
by the acknowledged records of the first General Council, 
taken from your own writers, that every important item 
of your theory is a change from your primitive system. 

For 1, Your Canon law requires that a general Council 
be called by him who has c the right to call it,' the Pope 
alone. But theCouncil of Nice was convoked by theEmperor. 

ReguJa. 
Prsecipua inter Concilium Generale et Particulare discrimina noa 

alia sunt, quam qnae sequuntur. 

1. Solus Papa potest Concilium Generale convocare, in eoque proa- 
sidere; jus vero alia convocandiiniisque praesidendi adalios pertinet. 

2. Generalia Concilia non sunt errori, nee peccato obnoxia; Partic- 
nlaria vero, utrique. 

3. Generalia obligant totam Ecclesiam ; Particularia ver6, ex se ip- 
sis, non ligant, nisi illius partenu 

5. Judicium Conciliorum Generalium circa jus, eat irreformabile : 
seeua de aliorum judicio. 
15* 



174 THE COUNCIL OF NICE. [CHAPTER 16. 

2. Your Canon requires that the Pope should preside in 
the Council, either by himself or by some other. 

But in the Council of Nice he did not preside, either by 
himself or by any other. 

3. Your Canon declares that the authority of a general 
Council is the same with that of Holy Scripture and of the 
Holy Spirit ; applying to its decrees the words of the apos- 
tles : ' It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.' 

But the Council of Nice adopted no such style of expres- 
sion : neither did it decree any thing concerning faith, except 
as an inference from Holy Scripture. 

Nor did it claim infallibility ; nor did the fathers of that 
age ascribe infallibility to it. 

Nor are its decrees observed by you at this day. 

4. Your Canon attempts to distinguish between the au- 
thority of Councils with respect to faith and morals, and their 
authority with respect to discipline. But the Council of 
Nice used the same phraseology for both, neither is there 
any ground for the distinction, in Scripture or in reason. 
Hence the fathers of that age do not defend the Nicene Creed, 
by the presumed infallibility of the Council, but by Scripture ; 
so that the word of God was with them the decisive test, 
and not the theory of infallibility. The true origin, therefore, 
of this your favorite distinction seems to have been, that the 
decrees on faith, being esteemed sound interpretations of the 
Scriptures, grew into authority as such ; but the decrees on 
discipline, not being founded on Scripture, but only resting 
on the recommendation of the Council, were observed or 
not observed, as the Church thought proper. Patience and 
perseverance, brethren, are necessary auxiliaries in the ar- 
gument before us. May He who is the Fountain of Light 
bestow them on the writer and the reader ; and along with 
them, grant us that sincere and candid spirit, which is essen- 
tt$lto every lover of truth. 



CHAPTER XVII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The two first subjects presented by the plan of the 
preceding chapter, respect the person who called and pre- 
sided over the Council of Nice. 

In consistency with the requisitions of yourCanon law, you 
assert that (137) ' Constantine, the Emperor, in order that 
he might succour the Church in her difficulties, by the au- 
thority of Sylvester, the Chief Pontiff, and according to 
the opinion of the other bishops, summoned bishops from 
every part of the world to Nicea, a city of Bithynia.' 

And again, yoa state the presidency over the Council in 
these terms; (137) 'Among the assembled bishops, the 
chief, as leader, of the whole host, were Hosius, bishop of 
Cordova, Vitns and Vincentius, who were sent by the blessed 
Silvester that they might preside over the Council as le- 
gates of the Apostolic See, and Alexander bishop of Alex- 
andria.' 

(137) Constantinus imperator ut laboranti subveniret ecclesiae, / 
Silvestri summi pontificis auctoritate, aliorumque sacerdotum senten- 
tia, ex universis orbis terrarum partibus episcopos in Nicaeam Bithy- 
niae urbem, ad lacum Ascanium ab Antigonoconditam,honorincentis- 
iimis litteris accersivit.' Mansi Concil. Tom. 2. p. 637. 

(138) < Inter hosprimas obtinebant, utlotius agminis ductores, Osiua 
episcopusCordubensiSjVilus et Vincentius, quia beato Silvestro missi, 
ut apostolicae sedis legati synodo prseorant, et Alexander AlexandrV- 

ib. 



176 TESTIMONY op [CHAPTER 17, 

These statements are the work, as you are aware, breth- 
ren, of no coternporary writer. The records which you 
have handed down to us give not the slightest warrant 
for them, but rather, as 1 shall now proceed to shew, cor> 
tradict them altogether. 

And first, as to the authority by which the Council was 
summoned, I presume you will agree that there can be no 
better witness than the emperor himself, whose address at 
the opening of the Council makes a part of its history. Let 
us cite it entire from your own version. 
(139) ' The Oration of the Em-peror Constantine to the 
Nicene Council, onPeace.' 

'Inasmuch as I have so greatly longed, beloved friends, to 
avail myself of this your license, 1 acknowledge that I 
ought to render thanks to God, the King and Governor of 
all, that he has bestowed upon me this peculiar favor, the 
beholding you at length convened together in one, and about 
to manifest (as I trust) an unanimous agreement. Do not 
therefore, suffer any storm of hatred, hostile to our prosper- 
ity, to drive this good away : and, since the warfare carri- 
ed on by tyrants against God, has been already subdued 
through his divine power, let not the lost fiend cast down 
the sacred discipline and religion of Christ, to be torn by 

(139) ' Constantini Imper. oratio ad Concilium Nicaenum de pace. 

Quoniam rnihi admodum in optatis fait, amici carissimi, isto vestro 
concessu aliquando frui : jam eo potius, regi et moderator! omnium 
Deo ideo gratias me agere debere fateor, quod mini prater alia omnia 
largitus est, ut istud quod omnibus bonis antecellit, nempe vos in unuru 
convocatos, unamque omnes et cousentientem habituros voluntatem 
oculis tandem aspiciam. Nolite igitur pati ut ulla invidiaj tempestas, 
nostris rebus prosperis inimica, istud bonum labefactet . neque cum 
tyrannorum dimicatio contraDeum suscepta, jam Dei virtute profligata 
sit, ut denuo perditus daemon divioam Christi disciplinam et religio- 
nem, malevolorum obtrectationibus lacerandam objiciaf, quandoqai- 
deia intestina seditio in ccclesia Dei conflata multo plus molestiaruna 



CHAPTER 17.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 177 

the malevolent opposition of the wicked. For intestine se- 
dition excited in the Church, seernsto me to include within 
itself far more of trouble and acrimony, than any secular 
warfare, and these are far more prolific ot grief than any 
external calamity. Forasmuch therefore, as, through the 
help and decree of the all good and powerful God, I have 
gained the victory over my enemies, I should think nothing 
more left to me, than that I should manifest my gratitude to 
God, and that together with those, on whom by the help of 
God I have bestowed liberty, I should behold rind sympa- 
thise in the common joy. As soon, therefore, as the tidings 
of your dissension reached my ears, I did not neglect the 
unwelcome rumour ; but chiefly desirous th.at through my 
labour and care a remedy might be found, I. summoned yoi4 
all without delay. And now, although, truly, I rejoice ex- 
ceedingly in beholding your assembly, yet, nevertheless, I 
think it becomes me chiejiy so to order matters by the ea> 
pression of my sentiments, that I may see you all bound to- 
gether by the conjunction of your minds, and that one 
common and peaceful agreement may grow and flourish 

et acerbitatis, quam quodvis bellum pugnave, videtnr mihi in se com- 
plecti : atque hsee lorige plus, quam externa, doloris afferre videntur. 
Cum igitur Dei optimi maximi nutu et auxilio adjutus, victoriarn ab 
hostibus reportassem, nihilque amplius milii reliquum putarem, quam 
ut turn Deo gratias agerem, turn una cum his qui, Deo up em fererile, 
per me essent in libertatem vindicati, communcm laetitiam anirno 
perspicerem; ut primum dissensio vestra ad aures meas praeter om- 
nem spem pervenit, rumorem ilium de ea allatum non plane neglexi j 
fied optans in primis, ut huio rei mea opera et sedulitate remedium 
inveniretur, omnes vos absque mora accersivi. Ac tametsi laetor equi- 
dem vehementer, cum jam vestrum consessum intueor: tune tamen 
arbitror me res rnaxime ex animi sententia gesturum, ubi omnes vo.s 
animorum conjunctione colligates, et unam eamque communem inter 
onanes, et tranquillam concordiam (quam quidem vos, cum sitis De.O 
consecrati, aliis etiam a Deo impetrare cojnsentanetun est) vigere flor&- 
intellexero. Itaque ne ulla sit, quaeso, in vobis mora, O caris- 



178 'TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER IT. 

amongst you/ which, indeed, it is right for you, since you 
ore consecrated to God, and also for others, to make the sub- 
ject of earnest prayer to the deity. Therefore, I pray you 
that there be no delay on your part, beloved servants, and 
good .ministers of God and of the common Lord and Sav- 
iour of us all, neither burden yourselves, I say, thenceforth, 
by bringing forward the causes of the dissension which has 
been raging amongst you ; but first of all things give your 
labor, in order that every chain by which controversy has 
been upheld, may be dissolved by the laws of peace. For 
thus you will perform a work acceptable to God the Su- 
preme Governor, and bestow upon me, your fellow servant, 
the greatest favor.' 

How, brethren, I beseech you, does this accord with 
your assertion, that Constantino summoned the Council, by 
the authority of Silvester, the bishop of Rome ? The en> 
peror expressly takes to himself the whole matter, both in 
its design and in its execution. ' I did not neglect the ru- 
mour of your dissension/ saith he, ' but being chiefly desi- 
rous that THROUGH MY LABOR AND CARE A REMEDY MIGHT 
BE DISCOVERED, I SUMMONED YOU ALL WITHOUT DELAY. 1 

Where is Silvester, the pope at that time, mentioned in 
this address of Constantine ? NOWHERE ! Yet you imagine 
that the pope was the principal, and the emperor only his 
agent. Yea, you imagine that the right to summon a gen- 
eral Council belongs to the pope alone, and that this is a 
right descending to him from St. Peter, having its origin in 

aimi, ac ministri, bonique i'amuli Dei, et communis omnium nostrum 
Domini et Salvatoris; ne gravcmini, inquam, rlcinccps causas dissen* 
eionis inter vos grassantia jam in medium affcrre : primoque omnium 
operam detis, utomnia vincula, quibus constricta teneturcontroversia, 
pacis legibus oninino dissolvantur. Sic enim estis et Deo omnium 
gubernatorem gratam factuvi, et mihi vestro conserve maximum 
prasstaturi beneiioium.' Mansi Concil. Tom. 2. p. 6G2. 



CHAPTER 17.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 

the grant of Christ himself; whereas neither did the apostle 
Peter ever call a general Council, nor did any hishop of 
Rome contemplate such a measure, until long after the 
period of the Council of Nice. The Apostolic Council of 
which we have the history in the fifteenth chapter of the 
Acts, does not appear to have heen convened by the autho- 
rity of any one Apostle : we are only told { that the Apostles 
and ancients (elders) came together to consider of this mat- 
ter/ The sentence of the Council was adopted on the 
suggestion of James, the bishop of Jerusalem,' ' Men and 
brethren,' saith he, (v. 13.) 'hear me,' and inverse 19, he 
concludes by saying, ' Wherefore, 1 judge,' &c. ' And it 
pleased the apostles and ancients with the whole Church/ 
(v. 22) to decree accordingly, and the letter sent to the 
gentiles was written in the name of all the apostles, without 
distinction or difference. As to the case narrated in the 
twenty-first chapter, which some of your writers also call a 
council, it is still less to your purpose, for none of the apos- 
tles are mentioned but James. ' Paul went in with us to 
James, and all the ancients were assembled.' (v. 18) From 
that time until the conversion of Constantine, there is not 
the slightest trace of an attempt to summon a general Coun- 
cil. Particular Councils were holden on many occasions, 
and some of them, as that holden at Antioch on account 
of Paul of Samosata, were of great extent and importance. 
But with this last, I have already shewn, from Eusebius, 
that the pope had no concern. The Council of Aries, to 
which great respect is due, was summoned by Constantine, 
and you do not claim any jurisdiction for the pope on thai 
occasion : so that the first instance of what you rightly call a 
General Council, occurred more than three centuries after the 
commencement of the Christian era, and that council is ex- 
pressly stated by the emperor himself to have been a 



180 COUNCIL OF NICE. [CHAPTER 17. 

remedy devised by his own care for the Church ; and we 
find him accordingly exhorting the bishops in person, without 
even mentioning the pope, or in any way alluding to him. 
Can any candid mind ask for more conclusive evidence to 
disprove your present doctrine, and to demonstrate the pro* 
position, that the primitive Church of Rome held no such 
sentiments about her own supremacy, as her successor ad- 
vanced at a subsequent day ? 

An answer to this address of Constantine, however, was 
delivered, as a proper token of respect on the part of the 
Council of Nice, and this by Eustathius, the bishop of An- 
tioch. And you might expect that this would supply the 
omissions and gently insinuate the mistake of the emperor, 
in passing over, so strangely, the paramount authority of the 
bishop of Rome. But you will find in it, brethren, nothing 
of the kind, as I shall shew by giving it entire, in the follow- 
ing extract : 

(140) ' We render thanks to God, most excellent emperor, 
who has committed to you the kingdom of the world, who by 
you has abolished the error of idolatry, and established tran- 
quillity in the minds of the faithful. The stench of demons 
has ceased : that false religion, the worshipping a multitude 
of gods, is dissolved : the shadows of infidelity are driven 
away, the whole world is enlightened by the rays of divine 
knowledge. The Father is glorified, the Son is adored to- 
gether with him, the Holy Spirit is announced, the consub- 

(140) Deo agimus gratias, O optime imperator, qui terrarum tibi 
regnum dirigit, qui errorem shnulacrorum per te abolevit, et infidelium 
animis tranquillitatem collocayit. Cessavitnidordccmonum: multiplicis 
deorurn cultus soluta est falsa religio; expellunturtenebrsB impietatis, 
luce divinze cognitionis orbis terrarum illustrator. Pater glorificatur, 
Filius sirnul adoratur, Spirilus sanctus annunciatnr, trinitas consub- 
etantialis, una divinitas in tribus personis et hypostasibus prfedicatur. 
Per eum, O imperator, tibi munitur tuae pietatis polentia. Earn nobii 



CHAPTER 17.] NOT CONVOKED BY THE POPE. 181 

stantial Trinity, One Deity in three persons and hypostases 
is preached. Through him, O emperor, the power of your 
piety is fortified. Preserve it for our sake, whole and invio- 
late. Let no heretic, invading the Church, take away 
aught from the Trinity, degrading thereby what remains. 
Arius, who derives his name from madness, is the cause of 
our speech and of our assembly : who being allured, I know 
not ho\Y 3 to the presbyterate of the Church of Alexandria, 
concealed from us that he was an alien from the doctrine 
of the blessed apostles and prophets. For he does not fear 
to deprive the only begotten Son and Word of the Father, 
of the same equal substance with the Father, and this wor- 
shipper of the creature contends that the creature should be 
numbered with the Creator. But you will persuade him, 
O emperor, that his opinion should be changed, that he 
may no longer oppose the apostolic doctrine ; or if he should 
persist in the impiety of the vain opinion, of which he is 
already convicted, you will take him utterly away from the 
fellowship of Christ, and from ours, lest by the impure flat- 
tery of his words he should poison the souls of the simple.' 
Now I confess that these documents carry with them, to 
ray mind, the clearest evidence against the primitive antiqui- 
ty of your present doctrines. For manifest it seems to me, 

serva integram et inviolatam. JVujlus hseretirus suhiens Ecclesiam tfl8 
trinitate unum aljquid auftjrat, reliquum quod restat affectum ignominia. 
Arius nobis, qui a furore accepit denominationem, orationis causa est 
et conventus : qui nescio quomodo allectus in presbyteratum Ecclesise 
Alexandrinae nos latuit, cum esset alienus a doctrina beatorum apos- 
tolorum et propljetarum. Unigenitum .enim filium et verbum patris 
non veretur privare eadem et aequali cum patre substantia, et creato- 
rem cum creatura creaturae cultor contendit connumerare. Eum 
iiutem persuaseris, imperator, mutata seritentia, non repugnare doc - 
trinae apostolicae ; aut si vanae opinionis, cujus est convictus, persti - 
terit inimpietate, eum de Christi etnostro ccetu funditus sustuleria, ne 

suis turbidis verborum blanditiis venetur animas simpliciorum.ib.p.663 
16 



182 ADMITTED BY [CHAPTER 17. 

that if the Church of Rome, in the days of Constantino, 
had claimed a supremacy, and if the Catholic Church 
had then understood and allowed this claim as you suppose, 
the emperor could never have made the address which 1 
have cited, nor could the Council of Nice, by their organ 
Eustathius, have tacitly allowed its truth. Only imagine, 
brethren, I beseech you, a modem sovereign belonging to 
your communion, acting and speaking like Constantino, 
summoning a Council of the whole Church, and telling this 
Council, when assembled, that he, IN HIS CARE, had devi- 
sed this remedy for the troubles of the Church, and finish- 
ing his oration without once adverting to the pope in any 
way whatever. Imagine an answer to such a speech by 
one of your bishops in the name of all the rest, in which 
this imperial assumption is allowed, and thanks given to 
God for it, while not a syllable is found to recognize the be- 
ing or the authority of the Vicar of Christ, the bishop of 
bishops. What would you say of such an address andsuch 
an answer ? Could they, by any stretch of fancy, be at- 
tributed to a modern assembly such as the Council of Trent? 
And can they be honestly reconciled with the idea, that 
pope Silvester, and the emperor Constantine, and the fa- 
thers of the Nicene Council, had any conception of those 
claims of the papacy, which you now require us to ac- 
knowledge at the peril of our souls ! 

No further proof seems necessary for my first assertion, 
that the Council of Nice was not convoked by the pope ; but 
nevertheless it may be as well to add the express admission 
of your own canonist Gibert, who extends the remark to 
many other of the early Councils. 
(141)' As to the convocation of general Councils/ saith this 

"(141) ' Circa Convocationem Conciliorum Generaliurn, Orientalia 
multum ab Occidentalibus discrepant. Scilicet in eo, quod priora sin- 



CHAPTER 17.] THE CANONIST GIBERT. 183 

writer, ( the Eastern and the Western differ greatly. In this 
respect, namely, that the former were convoked by the 
emperors, but the latter by the popes, except indeed, the 
Council of Pisa, which was called by the Cardinals. The 
proof is easily adduced. Thus the emperor Constantine in 
his first address to the Nicene Council, expressly declares, 
that he had convoked it. So the first Council of Constan- 
tinople in their epistle to Theodosius, in which they give 
him thanks, and render an account of what they had done, 
declare that they had been summoned together at his com- 
mand. The same thing is asserted in the title to the Ca- 
nons of this Council.' * 

' In the Council of Ephesus, manifold is the proof that 
it was convened by the emperors Theodosius and Valenti- 
nian. It is expressly declared in the exordium of the 
Council, that it was held by the decree of the most religious 
and Christian emperors. The same is repeated in the be- 
ginning of all its sessions.' 

i The care, which the Council of Ephesus manifests, in 
proving that it was convoked by the emperors Theodosius 

gula, ab Imperatoribus convocata fuerint, posteriora vero a Pontifici- 
bus, e^ccepto Pisano, a cardinalibus convocata. Facile probatuv utrum- 
que factum. Et quidem Imperator Constantinus in prima sua ad 
Synodum Nicaenam oratione, expvesse dicit, se illam convocavisse. 
Primum Concilium Constantinopolitanum in sua ad Theodosium 
Epistola, qua ipsi gratias agit, rationemque gestornm a se redclit, de- 
clarat, se ipsius jussu congregatum fuisse. Idem dicitur in Inscrip. 
tione Canonum ejus. 

'In Concilio Ephesino multiplex occurrit probatio, illud ab Impp. 
Theodosio et Valeruiniano coactum fuisse. Illud in Exordio Concilii 
expresse dicitur, ex Decveto Religiosissimorum, et Christianissimorum 
Imperatorutn. Idem repetitur in principiouniuscujusque actionis.' 

'Curam, quara Concilium Ephesinum crebro indicat, se ab Impera- 
toribusTheodosio etValentiniano convoeatum fuisse, imitata estSynodus 
Calcedonensis; namque, in principio singularum actionum, quae sunt 
*v. .numero, juesionis Impp. Valentiniani et Marciani, a quibus con- 



184 MANY GENERAL COUNCILS . [CHAPTER 17 

and Valentinian, was imitated by the Council of Chalcedon ; 
for in the beginning of all its acts 3 it makes express men- 
tion of the command of the emperors Valentinian and Mar- 
cian, by whom it was convoked. It does the same in the 
title of the epistles which it wrote to those emperors, or to 
the empress Pulcheria.' 

' St. Leo asks Theodosius, that he would grant a general 
Council to Italy. And many rescripts of the emperors fol- 
loWj which teach that the calling and the translation of 
General Councils belonged to their office. What we have 
observed of the convocation of the four first General Councils, 
is confirmed by the letter of the emperor Justinian, to the bish- 
ops assembled at Constantinople by his command, for in order 
that he might defend his convocation of this Council by, the 
example of his predecessors, he relates on what account 
they had convoked the preceding Councils.'. 

Here, then, brethren, the first part of my argument is 
surely established, beyond the possibility of fair objection. 
Your Canon law lays down as the primary requisite of a 
General Council, that it be summoned by him who alone 
1 has the right to call it,' viz. the pope. 

But I have proved that the first General Council was not 
summoned by the pope, but by the emperor, and your 
own Canonist declares the same remark to be applicable 

Vocata fuerat, expressam mentionem facit ; similemque facit in Episto- 
Jarum Inscriptionc, qua ad eosdem Impei'atores vel ad Pulcheriam 
Imperatricern scrips]*,.' 

'S.Leo Thcodosium rogat, ut Italiae Concilium Universale largia- 
tur. Seqminlur plura Imperatorum rescripta, qnae decent, ad eorum 
officium pertinere Conciliorum convocationem, ac translationem. 
Qjiod dc quatuor prioram Conciliorum Generalium convocatione ob- 
aervatura fuit, oonfirmatur per Epistolam Justmiani Imperatoris, ad 
Episcopos Constantinopoli ex ipsius jussu congregates; ut enim con- 
vocationem hujus Concilii a se factain suorum praedecessorum exeni- 
plo tueretur, refert, qua rations Concilia praccedentia ooovocaverint/ 
Kxpos. JUP. Canon. Tom. l.p.77. I 



CHAPTER^ 17.] NOT CONVOKED BY THE P6PE. 185 

to all the four first General Councils, and to many others. 
Hence, your primitive system has been changed in this im- 
portant particular, and your Canon law now ties the defini- 
tion of a General Council to a restriction which the primi- 
tive Church never knew. 

2. The second point in which I am to prove your inno- 
vation upon your own ancient doctrines, is that which con- 
cerns the presidency of a General Council. For your 
Canon law requires, as essential to a General Council, that 
the pope shall not only summon it, but also preside over 
it, either in person or by proxy. But in the Council of 
Nice, he did not preside, either in person or by proxy. And 
this I shall next proceed to shew. 

(142) 'As to the presidency in the Council of Nice,' 
says your own Gibert, ' it is commonly accorded to Hosius, 
the bishop of Cordova, but it is disputed by what title ; 
some saying that he possessed this honor, as being the le- 
gate of the apostolic See ; BUT THERE is NOT A VESTIGE 
OF THIS LEGATION. Others think that this was done on 
account of his singular virtue, knowledge, and experience ; 
together with his old age, which attracted towards him 
great veneration. If confidence may be placed in the sub- 
scriptions of this Council which are read in the Councils, 
&c. it might be concluded that the bishops sat in it accord- 
ing to the, order of their respective provinces.' 

(142) < duoad prsesidentiam in Concilio Nicamo, vulgo haec tribui- 
tur Oslo, Cordubensi episcopo, sed ambigitur quern ob titulum, aliis 
dicentibus, ilium hoc honore potitum fuisse, quatenus legatum sedis 
Apostolicae ; sed nullumest istius legationis vestigium,. Putant alii 
hoc factum fuisse, ob virtutem ejus, scientiam, et experientiam singu- 
lares, necnon grandsEvitatem, qua3 ipsi magnara venerationem concil- 
iabat. Si fides haberi posset subscriptionibus hujus Concilii, qua 
leguntur Concil. Tom. 11. p. 50. -&c. inde concluderetur, Episcopo* 
in eo sedjsse, secundum ordinem suae Provincias.' Expos. Jur. Can. 
Tom. 1. p. 87. 

16* 



186 GENERAL COUNCILS WHERE [CHAPTER lt 

i 

Here is a learned Canonist from among yourselves, bre- 
thren, plainly acknowledging that the assertion by which 
you sustain the claim of the pope to the presidency of the , 
Nicene Council, is without a vestige of proof. Nor is this 
the only instance in which Councils were held in the same 
manner, for I shall cite some other passages from the same 
high authority to shew that the pope .did not preside over 
other General Councils, which yet were never doubted by 
the Church. 

(143) ' The same thing/(viz. that the bishops sat according 
to the order of their provinces)' may be inferred,' saysGibert, 
' from the subscriptions of the first Council of Constantino- 
ple, so far as concerns the session of those who were actually 
present, if they are worthy of credit: namely, thatNecta- 
rius presided, since his subscription is first of all. But this 
head of the presidency brings suspicion upon the subscrip- 
tions ; because it is certain that St. Gregory Nazianzen 
presided, for Nectarius was not elected until after the fa- 
thers had subscribed. The same may be said of the sub- 
scriptions of the Egyptian bishops, who were not present 
at the Council, unless indeed by a subscription ready made. 
Both these facts we learn from the life of Gregory. The 

'Idem inferri licet ex subsoriptionibus Constantinopolitani 1. 
quoad sessionem eorum, qui illi interfuerunt, modo tainen fide dignae 
sintt Item Ncctarium in eo prassedisse, curn primus omnium scriba- 
tur, sed hoc prsesidentiffi caput subscriptiones suspectas facit ; quia 
.cerium est Sanc,lnm Gregorium Nazianzenum praesedisse, cum Necta- 
rius non nisi post subscriptiones patrum, electus fuerit. Idem est de sub- 
acriplionibus Episcoporum Egypti, qui ad Concilium non advenerunt, 
nisi perfecta jam subscriptions. Factum utrumque discimus a Grego- 

rio in ejus vita, Subscriptiones hujus concilii in Bibliotheca Jus- 

telli p. 303 insignem gerunt falskatis nolam - nempe, iis, qui hoc 
concilium subscripsere, annumeranturtres legati S. Leonis, Pontificis, 
ad Concilium Calcedonense LXX annis post celebratum, hempi, ann. 
451. Constantinopolilanumah. 381 habitum fuit.' Ib. p. 87. 



CHAPTER 17.] THE POPE DID NOT PRESIDE. 1ST 

subscriptions of tins Council in the ' Bibliotheca' of Jus* 
tellus cany a notable mark of falsehood, for among those 
who subscribed that Council, there are reckoned three who 
were legates of S. Leo, the pope, at the Council of Chal- 
cedon, celebrated seventy years after, namely, A. D. 451. 
Whereas the Council of Constantinople was held, A. D. 
381.' 

Note this, brethren, I beseech you ; for it carries a double 
evidence against the papal prerogative. The simple fact 
that it furnishes another General Council where , the pope 
did not preside, either in person or by proxy, thereby con- 
firming the view' taken of the Council of Nice, is one proof 
of no small importance. But the melancholy evidence of 
fraud in the forgery of false subscriptions names of the 
bishops of Egypt who were not present and specially 
names of legates of the pope who were probably not born 
at the time, since they were certainly present at another 
Council held seventy years later this evidence goes beyond 
any other, in my mind, to condemn the whole claim. 

Brethren, it is not I, who charge the transmitters of your 
records with forgery. True or false, genuine or corrupted, 
I have promised that I will take them as I find them, and 
will only question their truth j when I have your own war- 
rant for doing so. But here is that warrant furnished by 
one of your most celebrated Canonists; and what, I pray you, 
is the inference to an unsophisticated mind ? Apply the 
principle to any claim under heaven, and tell me whether 
the production of a false document on its behalf is not the 
most powerful evidence against it ? Tell me whether a 
claim known to be true, primitive, universally acknowled- 
ged by those who lived before us, and above all, derived 
from, the authority of heaven, was ever yet defended by hu* 
forgery ? Yea, tell me^. whether the employment of a 



188 GENERAL COUNCILS WHERE [CHAPTER 17, 

x 

forgery in support <of thte prerogative by those who first 
stooped to such a wretched artifice, does not demonstrate 
their perfect conviction that the claim itself was utterly un- 
founded in justice and in truth ? 

. I "do not charge this forgery upon the present race, nor 
upon any except those who committed, or willingly and 
knowingly sustain the fraud. I doubt not that the great 
majority amongst you would spurn such miserable aid, and 
with one voice condemn the cause which relied upon it. 
But it is not the only instance which will meet our eyes be- 
fore our course is ended ; and although it has presented 
itself out of the regular track of my argument, you will not 
wonder that I did not pass it by, even at the cost of a brief 
digression. 

Following, then, the track of evidence in the direct line 
of antiquity, I find our author next stating as follows : 

p.44) ' With regard/ saith he, ' to the other six General 
Councils of the East, it is known certainly from their acts, 
who presided over them, and. what was the order of their 
session. And in the most ancient of them, the Council 
of Ephesus, it is, by the greater part of its seven acts, es- 
tablished, that St. Cyril, the Patriarch of Alexandria) pre- 
sided.' 

(145) ' In all the meetings of the fifth General Council,' 
continues our author, ' called the second Council -of Con- 

(144) ' Quoad reliqua sex Concilia Generalia Orientalia, ex eorum 
actis certo cognoscitur, quis illis prassecferit, quisqne sessionis ordo 
fuerit. Utque ab antiquissirno eorum. Ephesitio, ordiar, in plerisqus 
vii. actionum ejus, cernitur, Sanctum Cyrillum, Patriarcham Alexan- 
drinum pra-sedisse :' Ib. 

(145) 'Insingulis collationibus quinti ConcSKi Generalis, sive Con- 
srtantinop. II. cernitur, Patriarcham Jitijus urbis ipsi praesedisse; nam 
primus omnium Patrum scribitur, in principle! singularum. Idem vide- 
tur in fine 8. BOU ultimse, ubi* Bubficriptiones referuntur, nam subecrip- 



OflAPTEK 17.] THE POPE DID NOT PRESIDE. 189 

stantinople, it is established, that the patriarch of that city 
presided : for he is recorded the first of the fathers in the 
beginning of each. The same appears at the end of the 
eighth or last, where the subscriptions are set down : for the 
subscription of this patriarch is the first of all. But this 
patriarch presided over that Council, because Vigilius, the 
pope, did not chuse to be present, either by himself or by 
legates.' 

o 

Here we have a fact, brethren, which, although evidently 
stated as a mode of accounting for the patriarch; of Con- 
stantinople presiding over the Council, instead of the pope, 
proves a great deal more to a moment's reflection. For, ac- 
cording to your Canon law, it is necessary to the very exist- 
ence of a General Council, that the pope should first 
summon it, and secondly preside in it. But here was a 
Council in which the pope did not chuse to make his ap- 
pearance, either in person or by his legates. It was not 
one of the excepted cases in which the Council of Con- 
stance long afterwards determined that the consent of the 

o 

pope Avas not necessary. But it presented the very case 
in which, according to your present doctrine, the Council 
could not have been held at all. And yet it was held, 
although the pope was not willing to sanction it by his pre- 
sence or by his legates, thus clearly shewing that THE FA- 
THERS OF THAT C'JUKCIL DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR 

DOCTRINE, but held themselves as competent to the cele- 
bration of a General Council without the pope, as with him. 
There is yet another class of facts, noted by our author 
on this point of the presidency of General Councils, which 

tio Patriarchs omnium prima est, Cone. Tom. 5. hie autem Patriarcha 
praefuit huic Concilio, quia Vigilius Pontifex, neque ipse, neque per 
Jegatos, interesse voluit.' p. 88. 



190 THE EMPERORS [CHAPTER 17 V 

he very consistently calls singular. c In the sixth General 
Council,' saith he, J there is something singular about the 
presidency, namely, that in the beginning of eighteen of kg 
sessions, it is said, that the emperor Constantino Pogonatus 
presided: Our most pious emperor 'presiding' (146) 

Nor is this a solitary instance, for he proceeds to mention 
that, ' The singularity above observed in the sixth General 
'Council, concerning the presidency, has also a place occa- 
sionally in the seventh General Council, for there it is said 
in the eighth session, that the empress Irene, with the empe 
ror, her son, presided.' (147) 

And once more : ' The same things appear,' saith he, 'in 
the eighth General Council concerning the presidency, as 
in the sixth and seventh, for in sessions 6. 7. 8. it is said 
that the Emperor Basil presided, * Our most pious emperor 
presiding.' (148) 

Nay, even in the General Councils of the Western Church, 
where your present doctrine might have been expected to 
be always professed if any where, there weie some instan- 
ces totally subversive of the importance which it claims. 
Thus,(149)' It is certain,' says Gibert, ' that the pope was.not 

(146) 'Estaliquid singulars in sixto Concilio General!, circa przesi* 
sidentiam, nimirum, in principio singularum xviii. actionum ejus, dici- 
tur, Imperatorem Constantinum Pogonatum praefuisse ; Pr&sidentt 
piissimo Jmperatore.' Ib. 

(147) ' Singularitas supra observata in Concilio Generali sexto circa 
preesidentiam, locum habet aliquatenus in Concilio Generali vii. ibi 
eniin in actione 8. dicitur, Irenem Imperatricem, cum filio suo Impera- 
toreprafuisse.' ib. 

(148) ' Eadem fere videntur in Octavo Concilio Generali circa prse- 
sidentiam ut in sexto et in septimo, nam in Actionibus 6. 7. 8. dicitur, 
Imperatorem Basilium prffifuisse. Pr&sidente piissimo Imperatore.' 
Ib. p. 89. 

(149) ' Q-uoad reliqua Concilia, certum est, Pontificem nullo modo 
tnterfuisse Concilio Pisano, neque per se, neque perlegatos,- -quoa3 



17.] PRESIDED IN COUNCILS. 191 

present in any manner at the Council of Pisa, either by 
himself or by legates. Nor in the Council of Basil, were 
the legates of the pontiff present, unless at some of the ses- 
sions when he recalled them, &c.' 

Brethren, how much more evidence is necessary to de- 
monstrate the proposition, that your second Canonical esssen- 
tial to the holding of a General Council, was not and could 
not have been supposed essential by the Church of Rome, 
at the primitive day ? I know well how ingeniously your 
writers manage this difficulty, so as to leave unharmed your 
modern doctrine ; but the facts themselves are undeniable, 
and speak a language not to be mistaken. 

That the first General Council, namely, the Council of 
Nice, was called, not by the pope, but by the emperor; and 
that the bishop of Cordova in Spain, presided in it : 

That the greater part of all the other General Councils 
were also called by the emperors, and that their presidents 
were taken sometimes from one See, and sometimes from 
another, and that frequently the sovereigns that called them 
presided : 

That even in the neighborhood of Rome, there have 
been General Councils called and conducted without the 
action of the pope : 

These facts prove, beyond the power of fair argument to 
question,that the fathers who composed these severalCouncils 
did not profess nor believe your doctrine : viz. that the pope 
is the Vicar of Christ, holding the place of God upon the 
earth ; that he is the head of the Catholic Church by divine 
right; that the General Councils of the Church when sum- 
moned and presided over by him, possess the attribute of 
infallibility, but that if he does not summon and preside in 

Concilium Basileense, legates Pontificis non adfuisse nisi quibusdam 
s, cumeosrevocaverit, quotics dissolvit, &c. ib. p. 86. 



192 THE SUBSCRIPTIONS [CHAPTER 17. 

them, they are unlawful. And hence I think it is demon- 
strated, that in the second requisite of the doctrine of Coun- 
cils, the primitive Church of Rome did not hold your 
present system, and therefore, in this too, you have chan- 
ged. ' 

1 add one observation more, in answer to any argument 
drawn from the subscriptions to the Council of Nice which 
are stated differently by different writers. Thus Gelasius 
state? them in the following form : 

'Hosius, the bishop of Cordova, for the Holy Churches 
of God which are at Rome, and in all Italy and Spain, and 
in the rest of the nations dwelling beyond even to the ocean, 
by those who were with him, Vito and Vincent, presbyters 
of Rome/ (150) 

This, surely,, looks very well, and accords admirably with 
the assertion that Hosius presided as the deputy of the 
pope, along with his legates. But a litttle attention shews 
us that Gelasius does not profess to give the words of the 
real subscriptions : for, first, he sets down only thirteen names 
out of three hundred and eighteen ; and secondly, he graces 
these with a rhetorical flourish, as for example, ' Leontius, 
of Cesarea in Cappadocia, the ornament of theChurch of the 
Lord' ' Protogenes,that admirable man,' &c. (151) Every 
one must see, that names set down in this way, have no 
claim for accuracy to be compared with a copy from the 
original subscriptions. 

But the common version of the doings of this Council, 

(150) ' Osius episcopus CordubcE sanctis Dei ecclesiis, quse Roma 
snnt, et in Italia et Hispania tola, et in reliquis ulterius nationibus 
usque ad oceajium commorantibus.per eosquicum ipso erant,Roinanofl 
presbyteros Vitonem et Vincentium.' Gel. Hist. Concil. Nicaen. Mars- 
si. Concil. Tom.. 2. in loco. 

(151) ' Leontius Cesareae Cappadoci-ae, ecclesiae domini ornamen- 
tura,' ' Protogenes ille admirabilis.' &c. ib. 



CHAPTER 17.] OF THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 

which stands first in your own books and possesses your 
highest confidence, has a catalogue, as you know, at the end 
of it, in which the names of all the bishops are professedly 
given, as subscribed by their own hands : and this catalogue 
states the matter very differently, viz. 

(152) 'Hosius,bishop of the city of Cordova of theprovince 
of Spain has said : Thus I believe, as it is above written.' 

'We, Victor and Vincent, presbyters of the city of Rome, 
for the venerable man, our father and bishop, St. Sylvester, 
have subscribed, thus believing, as it is above written.' 

Then follow the names of the other subscribers; and the 
whole document, as it stands, fully sustains the conclusion 
stated by your canonist Gibert, nor, indeed, is it fairly ca- 
pable of any other construction. 

(152) ' Subscripserunt trecenti decem et octo episcopi, qui in eodem 
Concilio convenerunt. 

' Osius episcopus civitatis Cordubensis provinciae Hispanlae dixit : 
Ila credo si cut superius scriptuna est. 

' Victor et Vincentius presbyteri urbis Romae pro venerabili viro 
papa et episcopo nostro sancto Silvestro subscrjpsimus, ita credentes, 
sicut supra scriptum est.' Mansi Concil. Tom. 2. p, 692. 
17 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

In examining the testimony directly borne by the Coun- 
cil of Nice on the subject of the pope's supremacy, and the 
dominion of the Church of Rome, I propose to extract in 
full those Canons of that great Council which bear upon the 
question, subjoining your own latin version, for your greater 
satisfaction. 

CANON 6. 

(153) 'Let the ancient customs be keptAvhich are established 
in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the bishop of Alex- 
andria may have power over all these, forasmuch as this is 
the custom also with the bishop of Rome. In like manner 
also, in Antioch and in the other provinces, let the privileges, 
the dignities, and the authority of the Churches be preser- 

CANON 6. 

(153) ' Antiqui mores serventur, qui suntin Egypto, Libya, et Pen- 
tapoli, ut Alexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habeat potestatero, 
quandoquidem et episcopo Romano hoc est consuelum. Similiter et 
in Antiochia, et in aliis provinciis sua privilegia ac suae dignitateset 
auctoritates ecclesiis serventur. Illud autem est omnino manifestum 
quod si quis absque metropolitan! sententia factus sit episcopus,eum mag- 
na Synodus desinivit non esse episcopum. Q,uod si quidem communi 
omnium electioni, quae et rationi consentanea, et ex regula ecclesias- 
tics facta est, duo vel trespropter suam, quadelectantur, contentionem 
contradioant, vincant plurium suffragia.' Gent. Herveto interprets. 
Mansi. Concil. Tom. 2. p. 669-. 



CHAPTER 18.] THE NICENE CANONS. I 195 

ved. This too, is altogether manifest, that if any be made 
bishop, without the decision of his metropolitan, this great 
Council decrees him not to be a bishop. But if it be by 
the common choice of all, which is agreeable to reason, and 
according to the ecclesiastical rule, and two or three oppose 
him for the sake of the contention in which they delight, let 
the suffrages of the greater part prevail.' 

CANON 7. 

(154) 'Since an ancient tradition and oust onVhas obtained that 
he who is bishop in Jerusalem should be honored, let him 
have the fruits of this honor, the proper dignity of the me- 
tropolis being preserved.' 

JNb\v, here, brethren, is the whole which refers in any 
way to the subject in question, but it is abundantly suffi- 
cient to substantiate the charge of innovation, in many im- 
portant particulars. 

For, in the first place, it is obvious to any reflecting mind, 
that there could have been no motive for passing ithe sixth 
Canon, unless the fathers of the Council had reason to ap- 
prehend some encroachment on the liberties of the Catho- 
lic Church. What this encroachment was, we have already 
learned from Irenseus, Cyprian and Eusebius. The dispo- 
sition to lord it over God's heritage, for which Irenaeus 
rebuked Victor, one pope of Rome, and Cyprian and Fir- 
milian rebuked Stephen, another pope, had given warning, 
long before the Council of Nice, of the quarter in which a 
monopoly of power was likely to accumulate. The im- 
mense advantage which the Church of Rome possessed by 
her location in the empire city of the world, thereby 

CANON 7. 

(154) Quoniam obtinuit consuetude et antiqua traditio, ut qui est in 
Aelia episcopus honoretur; habeat honoris consequentiam j'metrqpoli 
propria dignitatejservata. ib. p. 673. 



196 THE COUNCIL OF NICE. [CHAPTER 18. 

giving the Church of Rome a real primacy of influencej 
was doubtless not only understood by her rulers, but by the 
other portions of the C atholic Church; and its tendency to- 
wards a far stronger and more lofty kind of pre-eminence 
was perhaps sufficiently manifest to excite a natural appre- 
hension in the patriarchs of the other provinces. With this 
clue, it is easy to see why such a Canon should be proposed 
and passed in this famous Council : and thus understood, it 
was a measure of wise and necessary precaution. (155) 

But let us look at its provisions. 'Let the ancient cus- 
toms be kept in Egypt, Lybia and Pentapolis, that the 

(155)1 am sorry to be obliged,here,to notice one of those cases in which 
your writers have thought it expedient to make authority when they 
could find none. This Canon is found in many of your books very 
differently expressed. As for example in the Codex of the Canons 
and Constitutions of the Church of Rome, in the appendix to the works 
of Leo the great, we read the Canon in question under a different 
number, and with these words : ' EcclesiaRomana semper habeat pri- 
matum.' i. e. 'Lt-t the Roman Church always have the primacy,' 
after which follows the ret>t. 

Now the learned editor Quesnel, one of your own most zealous 
men, admits, in the note to this Canon, that the words in question 
are ' doubted by some.' And he states honestly that they are 'neither 
in the Greek text, nor were they found in any other version, nor in 
the subsequent Roman Code of Dionysius, So that it cannot be doubt- 
ed that they either crept from the margin into the text, or were added 
by the clergy or others of the Roman Church, lest the Holy Fathers 
might seem forgetful of the Roman dignity.' The words of the au- 
thor are added for your greater satisfaction. 

' An vero verbahaec : Romana Ecclesia semper primatum Ivabuit vel 
habeat : partem Canonis constituant, an titulum, in dubium a nonnullis 
vocatur. Litem, nifullor, dirimunt Codices MSS. in quibus et suus 
titulus ah his verbisdistinctus canoni tribuitur, et hase canonem ipsum, 
utpars ordiuntur: Ut pars, inquam, sed adjectitia : qua? videlicet nee 
in ipso posteriori Codice Romano Dionysii rcperitur ; ut dubium non 
sit vel earn ex margine irrepsisse in textum, vel a Romans Ecclesiee 
clericis aliisve esse additam, ne Romanes dignitatis obliti esse SS 
Patres viderentur.' Leonis Mag. opp. om. Tom. 2. p. 13. 



CHAPTER 1.8.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 197 

bishop of Alexandria may have power over all these, foras- 
much as this is the custom also with the bishop of Rome.' 
Is there any subordination here of Alexandria to Rome? 
Is there any recognition of Roman prerogative over Alex- 
andria ? Plainly not, but the contrary. As custom had 
given the bishop of Rome power over the Churches of the 
province of Italy, so custom had given to the bishop of Al- 
exandria power over the Churches of Egypt, Libya and 
Pentapolis. The one power is manifestly compared to 
the other power, the one custom to the other custom. * In 
like manner,' continues the Canon, 'let the privileges,. the 
dignities and the authority of the Churches in Antioch and 
the other provinces be preserved.' Why so? What was 

You are probably accustomed, brethren, to read this Ganon with 
this addition: but many, of you are aware, and all of you aught to be 
aware, that it is no part of the actual work of the Nicene Council.. 
The words as I have taken them, and from which I shiv'll support my 
reasoning, are copied verbatim from your own collection of the Coun- 
cHs, and when I deny the authority of the unwarran table addition 
made to the real Canon, I shew you that I am borne out by the ac- 
knowledgment of your own most competent and candid men. 

But this is not the only place in which the Church of Rome has 
made additions to the Nicene Canons. The right of appeal to the Ro- 
man bishop, [p. 15. 1C. Can. 30. 31. and 34.] belongs to'the same class. 
And the whole of this subject calls for the acknowledgment of the 
same Q,uesnel, where in his preface, p. xi. he s'ates that the discipline 
of tl>e Roman Church led her to reject some of the oriental Canons and 
to change others, in order to accommodate them to her own use. 'Prse- 
terea antiqua Romanse Ecclesia3 disciplina ex ista versione [sc.Jsidbri] 
innotescit, dum aliquos Canones Orientates ab ea rcjectos docet, alioe 
mutatos suoque accommodates usui : quod ex Dionysii versione ob-- 
scurum manet, quippe qui Canones ad fidem Grajci textus transtulit, 
non habita ratione recepta? ab Ecclesia Romana disciplinse.' How 
does this acknowledgment agree with the claim of infallibility set up 
for the decrees of this famous Council, upon the one hand; and how 
does it accord with the confidence demanded in the good faith of, 
J'ur traditions on the other.? 
17* 



198 THE COUNCIL OF NICE. [CHAPMrH )&, 

threatening them ? Men do not usually say, ' let a thing be 
preserved,' unless there is danger. Why did not the "Coun- 
cil of Nice manifest the same solicitude for the dignity and 
the authority of the Church in Rome ? Why, in providing 
for all the other provinces, did they not put in some clause 
saving the rights and privileges of the Apostolic See ? Ah! 
brethren, it is easy to understand why this famous Canon 
extended a shield of protection over the rest of the Catho- 
lic Church, and left Rome to take care of herself. There 
was no lack of strength in that quarter, but rather the man- 
ifestation of undue vigor, which then, indeed, only shewed 
the proportions of the infant Hercules, but reached a mar- 
velous maturity in due time. 

There is a second feature in this Canon, however, worthy 
of great attention. The authority of the bishop of Rome 
is attributed, like that of the bishop of Alexandria, to custom, 
Where was the chair of Peter the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven the Vicarship of Christ the authority, not of a 
mere man, but of God upon the earth, according to your 
present Canon law when the fathers of the Council of 
Nice drew up this decree 2 Alas ! brethren, these holy 
men knew nothing of this sublime fabric of divine authority. 
They knew not that they were all built on the foundation of 
that one diocese., and that they owed the reverence of chil- 
dren to the mother and mistress Church of Rome. 

A third point of no small importance meets us in the lat- 
ter part of this Canon, namely, that no one should be made 
bishop without the consent of his proper metropolitan. But 
your Canon law says that 'the translation, the deposition 
or resignation of a bishop, is reserved to the Roman pontiff 
alone, not so much by any canonical constitution as by the 
divine institution.' And again: * As the translation, the 
deposition, and resignation of bishops^ so likewise the con- 



CHAPTER 18.] THE COUNCIIr OF NICE* 199 

firmatfon of those who are elected, after their election, is 
reserved to the Roman pontiff alone, by reason of the spir- 
itual bond.' How is it, brethren, that the Council recog- 
nized nothing of all this ? How is it that they allowed no 
confirmation or consent whatever to supersede the claims 
of the proper -metropolitan, totally ignorant that the bishop 
of Rome was the fountain of aB ecclesiastical authority, 
having derived from the hand of Christ himself,, through the 
person of Peter, THE PLENITUDE OF POWER I 

The same principle meets us under another form, in the 
seventh canon, which the Council of Nice passed in favor 
of the bishop of Jerusalem. c Since an ancient tradition and 
custom has obtained, that he who is bishop in Jerusalem 
should be honored,' saith this canon, ' let him have the 
fruits of this honor, the proper dignity of the metropolis 
being preserved.' Of course, brethren,, you are aware that 
the metropolis of Jerusalem was Cesarea; and frequent 
were the disputes which afterwards arose between the rights 
of the metropolitan and the honor of Jerusalem. But here, 
as in the other canon, we see the Council referring to cus- 
tom and ancient tradition, desirous to prevent encroachment, 
and altogether silent with respect to Rome. 

I proceed to some other canons of this celebrated Com*- 
cil, in order to establish my assertion, that while you claim 
such infallible authority for its decrees, yet your own Church 
does not even professedly observe them. 

Thus the fifth canon is in these wofds : (156) ^Concerning 
those who are separated from the communion, whether they 

5 ~~~ 

(156) De iis qui a comraunio-ne segregati sunt,sive elericorum sive lai- 
eorum sint ordinis, ab episcopis, qui sunt in unaquaque provincia,valeat 
cntentia secundum canonem,qui pronunciat eos,qui ab aliis ejecti sunt, 
ion esse ab aliis admittendos : examinetur autem, numquid vel pusll- 
l&nimhate, vel eontentione, vel aJiqua ejusmodi episcopi acerbitatcj 



fiOO NICENE CANONS [CHAPTER l'&. 

be of the clerical order or of the laity, by the bishops of 
each province, let their sentences stand good, according to 
the canon which declares that those who are ejected by 
some are not to be admitted by others : but it may be ex- 
amined whether they have been expelled from the congre- 
gation, by the pusillanimity, or by the contention, or by any 
severity of the bishop concerned. And in order that this 
examination may be conveniently made, it is- expedient,. that 
there should be a council in each province twice in every 
year : that when all the bishops of the province are together, 
these questions may be settled ; and thus those whom their 
bishop happens to have displeased, may be seen by all to 
have been justly separated from the congregation, until it 
may seem right to the Council of bishops to decree a mil- 
der sentence. And one of these Councils shall be held 
before Lent, in order that all staias may be cleansed from 
the mind, and a pure offering be made unto God,' (so. at 
Easter) ' and the second shall be held in autumn.' 

The twelfth canon is as follows : (157) ' Those who have 
been called by grace,and have manifested their first.ardour,an.d 
have laid aside their girdles, and returned,, afterwards, like 

congregatione pulsi sint. Ut hoc ergo convenientem examinationem 
aecipiiit, recte habcrc visuin est, ut eingulis annis in unaquaque-pro- 
vincia bis in anno synodo fiant : ut cum umnes- provinciEe episcopi in 
eundem -locum communiter conveniant, ejusmodi quaestiones examin- 
entur; et sic quos episcopum oflendisse constiterit, juste esse a con- 
gregalionc separati apudonrmes videaiitur, donee episcoposum congre- 
gation! rideatur, pro iis humaniorem proferre sententiam. Synodi 
autem fiant, una quidem ante quadragosimam,.ut omnibus animi sordi- 
bus sublatis : purum inunus Deo ofTeratur: Secunda autem autumni 
tenjpore. Mansi Concil. Tom. 2, p. C69. 

12, 

(157) Q.ui autem a gratia quidem evocati^et primum suum ardoreni'OS- 
ten derunt,et cingula deposuerunt, postea autem ut-eanes ad suum vomi. 
VuBireversi sunt,''&.c. l bi clecem annigprosternantur eupplices,etiampost 



CHAPTER 18.] NOT OBSERVED. 201 

dogs to their vomit,' &c. f Let these be prostrate suppliants 
for ten years, and afterwards hearers for three years.. But 
in all these cases the ground .and appearance of the peni- 
tence should be examined. For those who with fear, and 
tears, and patience, and good works, exhibit a conversion 
in deed, and not in appearance only, should deservedly have 
communion in the prayers when the above mentioned period 
of hearing is fulfilled i besides which it may be lawful for 
their bishops to establish something more indulgent respect- 
ing them. But as for those who do not Jeel their condition 
so seriously, nor think it of much consequence whether 
their privileges are restored, but that it is enough for their 
conversion to enter the Churches, let them fulfil the whole 
time appointed. 3 

And the 20th canon regulates a point of form in public 
worship, in these words : ' Since there are some who bend 
their knees on the Lord's day and on the days of Pentecost: 
in order that all things may be observed alike in all places, 
the holy Council has decreed that those devotions should 
be performed standing.' (158) " . 

Now here, brethren, permit me to remind you, that the 
authority of a general Council, according to your Canon 

triennii auditionis tempus. In his autem omnibus examinare convenit 
consilium et speeiem poenitentise. Quieuuique enim et metu, et lach- 
rymis, et tolerantisi, et bonis operibus conversionem et opere et habitu 
ostendunt, hi iinpleto auditionis tempore quod prafinitum est, merito 
orationum rommunionem habebunt, cum eo quod liceat etiam episco- 
po humanius aliquod do eis statuere. Q,uicumque autem non adeo 
gravitcr tulerunt, nee multum sua referre existimarunt, satisque esse 
putarunt in ecclesius ingredi ad conversionem, tempus ornnino imple- 
ant.' 

(158) ' Quoniam snnt quidam in die Dominico genuaflectentes, et 
in diebus pentccnstes : ut omnia in uiiiverais locis consonanter obser- 
ventur, plaeuit sancto Concilio, stantes Domino- vota persolvere.' Hard. 
Con. Tom. 1. p. 331. 



202 NIGENE CANONS [CHAPTER 18, 

law, is the same with the authority of the Scripture and 
the Holy Spirit, because it represents the whole Church, 
and the same Holy Spirit who dictated the Scriptures, also 
dictates its decrees. Your Doway Catechism, speaking to 
the same point, declares that the definitions of a general 
Council approved by the pope, are the dictates of the Holy 
Ghost, according to that of the apostles, ' It hath seemed 
good to the Holy Ghost and to us.' 

But here is the first general Council, approved by the 
pope, and by the whole Christian world, passing many im- 
portant canons, which even among yourselves, notwithstand- 
ing their infallible and supreme authority, were soon consid- 
ered a dead letter. 

For I beseech you, how do you regard the rights and 
priyileges of the Churches of Alexandria, Egypt, Antioch, 
and Jerusalem, which the Council of Nice was so careful 
to protect and preserve ? 

How do you regard the canon providing for the yearly 
holding of two provincial synods, in which the judgment of 
each bishop might be rectified by his brethren ? 

How do you reconcile with this your present canon, 
which, instead of preserving the primitive course marked 
out by the Nicene Council, refers all the judgments of the 
bishops to the pope ? 

How do you observe the Nicene canon commanding so 
many years of penitence and good works before great offend- 
ers could be restored to the communion ? 

And how have you obeyed the 20th canon, which cen- 
sures the custom of kneeling on the Lord's day, and at 
Easter; and directs standing as being, at those times, the 
proper posture ? Indeed this last canon is worthy of more 
than a passing remark ; because you know, I presume, .that 
the Church of Rome pursued the very course which the 



CHAPTER 18.] NOT OBSERVED. 203 

canon censured in saying: There are so me who bend their 
knees on the Lord's day,' &c. And you know, also, that 
the Church of Rome disregarded this decree of the Coun- 
cil, and continues her own custom until the present hour. 
Here, then, you perceive two facts, well deserving your at- 
tention. First, you see how little the Council regarded the 
custom of the Church of Rome. And secondly, you see 
how little the Church of Rome regarded the decree of the 
Council. 

It results, then, brethren, that although you call this 
Council infallible, and rank its decrees with the Word of 
God and the dictates of the Holy Ghost, yet, on all the 
canons which I have cited, the practice of your Church 
stands in opposition to her theory. 

I am aware that you will reply by stating your favorite 
distinction between matters of faith and discipline, and you 
may say that you do not hold a General Council to be 
an infallible director, unless in matters of faith alone. But 
it may be worth your while to ask, ou what basis you rest 
this allegation.. 

Certainly not on the Scriptures, for the very instance re- 
ferred to in your Doway Catechism, when the apostles 
passed their decree saying : ' It seamed good to the Holy 
Ghost and to us,' was altogether respecting what you would 
call discipline, and totally irrespective of faith. If the Holy 
Spirit dictated decrees of discipline in this apostolic council, 
and if, as you say, this council is your great authority for 
all subsequent councils, why, I beseech you, do you now 
decide, that matters of discipline are not determined by his 
divine agency, but matters of faith alone ? 

Neither do you ground this distinction on the authority 
of the fathers, for none of the early fathers claim infallibility 
for the decrees of a General Council, except on the foun- 



204 THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN [CHAPTER 18. 

dation of their Scriptural correctness: and whatever obedience 
was rendered by the primitive Church to the decrees of the 
Council in point of faith, was equally expected in point of 
discipline. 

Neither can you support this distinction on the ground of 
reason. For although there is an inherent superiority in 
the propositions which concern faith, over those which con- 
cern discipline., since the subjects of the first are in their own 
nature immutable, while the subjects of the second may be, 
and often have been changed, yet this truth has no relation 
to the question whether the Holy Spirit has dictated them. 
You may indeed say, and say most truly, that the princi- 
ples of the faith are propositions concerning the nature, the 
attributes, and the purposes of God, in reference to man's 
redemption, together with the merciful execution of those 
purposes, as set forth in the mission of Christ and the system 
of his gospel ; that these were the same in substance, from 
the beginning, and, in their own nature, could not admit of 
change. Hence, the pious Abel was an example of the 
same iaith which was professed by St. Paul. While on the 
other hand, the discipline directed for the Church in the pa^ 
triarchal age, differed from the Mosaic economy, and this 
again,differed from the discipline established by the apostles 
for the Christian dispensation, strictly so called ; and there- 
fore we have the same substantial faith, in connexion with 
many forms of discipline. This is all plain and incontrover- 
tible, but it does not warrant your inference from it. For, 
I beseech you, were not all these forms of discipline the 
dictates of the Holy Spirit, at the time they were estab- 
lished, and were they not binding, as such, until the autho- 
rity of the same Spirit sanctioned a change ? Was not the 
discipline of the Mosaic economy given under the solemn 
obligation of ' Thus saith the Lord ?' And was it not bind- 



CHAPTER 18.] FAITH AND DISCIPLINE, 205 



until it was superseded by another discipline, which was 
in its turn put forth under the very same authority. c It 
seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and to us ?' Yea, was 
there ever a period within the whole course of the Scrip- 
ture history, in which the Holy Ghost was ready to dictate 
to his Church in matters of faith, but abandoned it to itself, 
in matters of discipline? Or was there ever a Council 
which claimed to itself any greater measure of inspiration 
in one part of its deliberations, than it claimed in all? 

The truth is, brethren, that just as we see the creative 
power of God ready to manifest itself not only in the for- 
mation of the angels and archangels, but also in the minute 
organization of the smallest insect just as the same divine 
energy which binds the planets in their orbits, condescends 
to notice the fall of the sparrow to the ground, and clothes 
even the lilies of the field, and the grass which to clay is, 
and to-morrow is cast into the oven' even so does the Holy 
Spirit who dictates the principles of faith, dictate likewise 
every thing connected with that faith, in its lowest and ap- 
parently least important particular. There can be no 
Church without faith, therefore faith is essential. But 
neither can a Church exist as a visible society without dis- 
cipline ; for we agree that the ministry and the sacraments 
are essential to the existence of the visible Church on earth,, 
and yet these are matters of discipline, at least in their details, 
and are therefore not embraced in the creed of the Council of 
Nice, nor in any of the earlier symbols. But are not the min- 
istry and the sacraments as truly ordained by Christ and 
the Holy Spirit, as any other branch of the divine system ? 
And does not the great Apostle, when regulating many mi- 
nor points of discipline in the Corinthian Church, expressly 
claim the authority of the Saviour, by declaring, ' If any 
man. among you think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, 

18 



S06 FAITH AND DISCIPLINE. [CHAPTER 18. 

let him acknowledge what I say to be the commandments 
of our Lord Jesus Christ ? Surely, then, your proposition, 
that in decrees touching faith, a general Council is infallibly 
directed by the Holy Spirit, but that in decrees touching 
discipline, it is liable to error, stands utterly unsustained. by 
any Scriptural authority, or by any reason drawn from Scrip- 
ture, or from the analogy of the other works of God : and 
therefore I must needs conclude that it is an hypothesis de- 
vised to meet the difficulty, in which your confessed depar- 
ture from the strictness of the ancient discipline has involved 
your claims to immutability. That it was no part of the 
system of the primitive Church of Rome that there was 
no infallibility claimed for General Councils until long after 
the more important ones were holden, and no difference 
between their decrees except what rested on the authority 
of Scripture, will plainly appear from the testimony of the 
fathers subsequent to the Nicene Council, and to these I 
shall now proceed. 



CHAPTER XIX. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST. 

I have said that the fathers of the age in which the 
Council of Nice was held, did not attribute any infallibility 
to it, nor did they speak of it in such terms as would at all 
comport with your canon law, where it ascribes to General 
Councils 'the same authority as the Scriptures and the Holy 
Spirit. 1 In proof of this assertion, let us turn to the next 
witness in the order of chronology, viz. the celebrated Ath- 
anasius ; who himself assisted at that Council, and was 
afterwards bishop of Alexandria. You know, brethren, that 
his name stands at the highest point of estimation, being, in- 
deed, the most distinguished on the very subject for the 
decision of which the Council of Nice was called. His 
works may be set down to A. D. 327. 

The greater part of this authors' labors were devoted to 
sustaining the Council of Nice against the opposition of the 
Arians, and hence it is manifest, that if your present doc- 
trine of General Councils had then been the doctrine ot the 
Church, his writings would furnish abundant evidence in 
your favor. Instead of which, they display the plainest 
demonstration, as it seems to me, that Athanasius had never 
conceived such an idea. From his decretal epistle on the 
very subject itself, I shall extract several passages to 
shew that he defends the Council by Scripture and tradi- 



208 ATHANASIUS ON THE [CHAPTER 19. 

lion, but never assumes the ground that its decisions were 
equal to Scripture, and dictated by the Holy Spirit. I cite 
for its greater convenience your own Latin version. 

He commences bis epistle by stating (153) that 'the Ari- 
ans being now condemned by all, presume to murmur after 
the manner of the Jews, demanding, truly, why the fathers 
who assembled at Nice, adopted the words essence and con- 
substantial, which words are not to be found in Scripture.' 
He then proceeds to justify the doctrine of the council by 
Scripture at great length, and thus accounts for the adoption 
of the new terms. 

(159) 'The cause of it,' (saith he) 'was the following: 
When the council were occupied in taking away the impi- 

(158) EjHst. Dec.ret. do Synod. NIC. Op. oin. S. Athan. Ed. Col. 
1686. Tom. 1. p. 'MS. ' Ab omnibus condemnati, [so. Ariani] etiam 
nuuc quoque more Judreormn ohmurrmirare ausint, expostulates scil- 
icet, cur putres, qni Niceee eonvcnerant has voces, Essontiam el Consub- 
stanlialitatem, misquam in sacris liieris rcpertas, usurparint : 

(15!*) ibid. p. 267. l Causa autom liujusniodi i'uit. Cum Synoclus in 
hoc asset, ut Arinnorum impia vocabula tollerct, et voces adlribere 
relict, qua3 sine controversia sacra rum literarum essent. nimirum eum 
filiuni esse, et ncqiuiquani c:< non entibus esse. si:d ex Dro ; eumque 
et verhum esse, et sapibntiam, et ncquaquain creaturarn ant facturam, 
sed gcrmen propriuin sui patris : Eusebiani pro inveteratasua etprava 
opinione volebantillud, exDeo esse, commune osse, et ad hominesquo- 
que pertincre, neque quifquam Christum eo nomine a nobis differre, 
eo quod scriptum esset : Unas Dens, ex quo omnid, et rursum : Vttera 
transierunt, eccc^ nova facias-tint oimiia-: omnia vcro ex Deo. Ibi 
patres, animadversa illonim frande et impietatis vafritie, coacti sunt 
clarioribus vei'bis cXponore, quid sit ex Deo esse, et scribevo, Filium 
ex Substantia Dei essc-, ne ex Deo esse, et commune, ct a-qne ad filium 
et creaturas pertinere exist'ii)iaretur ; cap.tera igitiir omnia creaturas 
dixero, excepto Verbo, quod solurn ex I'atre genitum esse crediderunt, 
etccetera quoque ex Deo esse, veram non eadem ralione, qua Filius. 

' Certe ciun Paulus omnia dixisset ex Deo esse, statini subintu- 

lit : fit unus Dominus Jasus Cliristus, per quern omnia : ut omnibus 

ostenderet, Filiuni esse alium a cseteris rebus a Deo creatis.' ' Ideo 

enim Sacrosancta Synodus liquidius dixit, eum ex substantia PatriB 
esae, &c. 



CHAPTER 19.] COUNCIL OF NICE. 209 

ous language of the Arians, and desired to avail themselves 
of those phrases which were allowed to be Scriptural, 
namely, that Christ was the Son,that he did not come from 
nonexistence but from God, that he was the Word, and the 
Wisdom of God, and by no means a creature, or made, but 
the proper offspring of the Father: the Eusebians, exhibit- 
ing their inveterate and wicked opinion, wished it to be un- 
derstood that Christ's being of God was common to man- 
kind, and that in this respect he differed nothing from our- 
selves, inasmuch as it was written: 'One G od , from whom 
are all things,' and again : ( Old things have 'passed away, 
behold all things are made new: and all things are of God.' 
Then the fathers, observing their fraud and impious subtlety, 
AVERE CONSTRAINED to express in clearer words what it 
was to be from God, and to write that the Son was of the 
substance of God, lest it might be taught that the being 
from God was common, and equally belonging to the Son 
and to the creatures: therefore they said that all others were 
creatures, except the Word, who alone they believed was 
generated from the Father, and the rest were also indeed 
from God, but not in like manner as the Son.' 'For cer- 
tainly, when Paul saith that all things are of God, he imme- 
diately adds: And one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all 
things: that he might shew to all that the Son was distinct 
from all other things which were created by the Deity.' 

' Here the Holy Synod said more clearly, that he 

was consubstantial with the Father.' &c. How very dif- 
ferent, brethren, is this style of defence from your doctrine. 
How much more short and simple would Athanasius' argu- 
ment appear if he could have said: All General Councils 
are infallible, because their decrees are dictated by the Holy 
Ghost, and are equal to Scripture. The Council of Nice 
18* 



ATHANASIUS, ON THE [CHAJ>T"fcll 

was a General Council, and therefore the controversy is 
settled by its decision^ 

Again, however, he repeals substantially his former justi- 
fication in these words : (160) 'Assuredly i should not deny 
that the signs and symbols of truth are expressed with more 
perfection in the language of the holy Scriptures than in 
any other : but the malignity and cunning impiety of the 
Eusebians compelled the bishops, as I before said s to use 
clearer words in order to subvert their impiety. Neverthe- 
less it is sufficiently demonstrated and appears plainly, that 
the writings of the council contain the true opinion.' &c. 
It is not necessary, brethren, to remind you* that the Euse- 
bius whose followers are here spoken of ? was Eusebius of 
Nicomedia, and not Eusebius of Cesarea, the historian. 

Again, in. his treatise concerning the Councils of Arimi- 
nurn and Seleucia', Athanasius speaks thus of the Nicene 
fathers : (161) 'They did not write concerning the faith, It 
appears so : but, This is the faith of the Catholic Church ; 
and immediately their confession of faith is added, that they 
might shew that it was not a new 'opinion, but apostolic : 
and that the things which they bad written were not their 
inventions, but apostolic documents.' 

Proceeding to shew bis reverence for Scripture, he cen- 

'(160) Ibid. p. 2rf9. 'Certe id asquum esse nee ego abnuerim, eo quod 
signa indiciaque vetitatis perfectiora ex scripturis sa : nctis, quam aliun- 
dej depromaiilur ;. sed malignitas et versipellis Eusebianorum impietas 
episcopos cbegit, quemadmodum dixi, ut clarioribus verbis uterentur 
ad eor'utn impiet!Uem~subvertendam. Sed tamen satis demonstratum 
est, 6t liquide apparet, scripta Syn'odi rectttni 'sontentiam eontinere,' 
&c 

(161) Ibid, -p. 873'. Defide vero non s6ripserunt, visum est, sed ad 
istum rnodum credit Catholica Ecclesia^et statim confessio ipsa ere- 
dendi adjuncta est, ut ostenderent, earn non novam esse sententiam 
sod apostolicam : et qfcas ipsi "srcripsisaent, 'ntfa esse su'a invents, se^ 
Apnstolorum documenta. 



-CHAPTER 19.] COUNCIL OF NICE. "21:1 

sures the mania which existed for holding councils, and 
gays : (162) 'In vain therefore they (the Arians) um to and 
fro, pretending that they are asking Councils concerning the 
faith, when the divine Scripture is more powerful than all.' 

And in his epistle to the African bishops, he adduces 
another argument derived from tradition, in favour of th& 
word consubstantial employed by the Nicene fathers. (163) 
'We know certain learned and famous bishops among thg 
ancients,' saith h'e, 'and other writers, who used the word 
consubs'tantial, when speaking of the 'deity of the Father 
and the Son.' 

And again, he saith, (164) ' With this understanding,truly, 
the fathers of the Nicene Council wrote that the Son was 
consubstantial with the Father, and they pronounced an 
anathema against those who should say that the Son was 
of any other substance. Nor did they establish those words 
for themselves on that occasion, but they learned them from 
the fathers who were before them, as we said already/ 
Now in these passages Athanasius gives us no intimation 
whatever of the Holy Spirit dictating the decrees of the 
Council, but plainly asserts the contrary; for surely, breth- 
ren, it needs no argument to show, that the language of in- 
spiration, would *iot be defended by a recurrence to Scrip-*- 
ture and tradition. 



(162) Ibid. Frustra igitur circumcursitantes pr<Btexunt, ob fidem ey- 
Qodos sese postulare, cum sit divina scriptura omnibus potentior. 

(163) Ibid. 937. < Novimus quosdam ex priscis eruditos et |>raeclaro 
autistites, aliosque scriptores, cum depatris et filii deitate loquerentur 
Voce consubstantialilatis usos esse. 

(164) Ibid, 939. ' Hoc intellectu videlicet, scripserunt patres Nice 
ni Concilii, filium patri consubstantialem esse, eosque anathemate dam- 
Darunt, qui dicerent, ex alia substantia esse filium. Neque hac in part* 
Bibi ista vocabula finxerunt, sed a patribus, qui ante fuerunt, ea didice- 

quemadmodum diximus. 



212 AtfHANASius. [CHAPTER 19 B 

To shew the contrariety, however, more clearly, it may 
be expedient to place your doctrine and that of Athanasius 
side by side. 

You say that the authority of a General Council, such as 
the Council of Nice, is the same as the authority of Scrip- 
ture. 

But Athanasius says the Scripture is more powerful than 
all 

You say that the Holy Spirit dictated its decrees. 

But Athanasius says that the fathers were compelled by 
the Avian subtlety to adopt words which they learned from 
those that were before them. 

You refer your faith to the decrees of the Council, call- 
ing it infallible. 

But Athanasius refers his faith only to the word of God, 
says not one word of this infallibility, and treats the Coun- 
cil's decision as being correct, solely because it was truly 
warranted by the Scriptures. 

I trust that the testimony of this most unexceptionable 
witness is sufficient to justify the assertion, that your doc- 
trine on the inspiration and infallibility of General Councils 
was not the doctrine of your Church, at his day. His tes- 
timony on the other points of your claims to supremacy, 
shall be presented in our next chapter. 



CHAPTER XX. 



BRETHREN IN ClJRISTj 

I proceed to notice a few other passages in the works of 
the celebrated Athanasius. in which his ideas of the Church 
Catholic will he easily discerned. 

In his Apology, addressed to the Etnperor Constantius, 
Athanasius states his coming to Rome, and having his cause 
laid before the Council there, in order to justify himself from 
the false accusations of his Ari an enemies, in the following 
words. 

(165) 'And these things, truly, the Kifyjiikins com muni 4 
cated to all the bishops, and to the Roman bishop Julius. 
Wherefore the Eusebians sent letters to Julius, and in order 
to frighten us, ordered a Council to be. cullcil, and referred 
the arbitration of the case to Julius himself, if he was wil- 
ling. When, therefore, we had come to Rome, Julius im- 
mediately wrote to the Eusebians, by two of bis presbyters 
Elpidius and Philoxenes : but they, when they heard of out 

(165) St.Athan. lid Impcrat. Constant. Apol. Op. oni. 1. 739. 

' Haee ^Egyptii ad omnes et ad episoopum Romanian Julium scrip* 
sere. Quin et Eusobiani ad .iulium literas miscre, ct ut nos terrerent, 
Synodum jussentnt convocari, et ipsi Julio, si vellct, arlitrium causa 
detulerunt. Cum igitur Romam pervenissemus, Julius continue ad Eu- 
sebianos literas scripsit, missis eo duobus ex suis presbyteris Elpidio 
et I'luloxeno : illi vero, ubi nostram Romae praosentiam audivissent) 
plurimum conturbati sum, quod contra spem eorum me Romam con- 



ATHANASIUS AGAINST [CHAPTER 20. 

presence at Rome, were greatly troubled, because, contrary 
#0 their hopes, I had betaken myself to Rome. Their jour- 
ney therefore being given up, they devised sundry idle and 
vain pretences, because they were greatly alarmed lest the 
same crimes which Valens and Ursacius had confessed ,should 
be laid to their charge also. Then the presbyter Vito 
brought more than fifty bishops into council, where our de- 
fence was allowed, and they confirmed their communion and 
love towards us, and were very indignant against the Euse- 
bians, to whom, as he had received letters from them, they 
ordered Julius to write again. Julius wrote accordingly, 
and sent the letter by Count Gabianus.' 

There are two or three points in this passage to which I 
beg leave to direct your attention. 

Your canon law grants an appellate jurisdiction to the 
bishop of Rome in all ecclesiastical causes, by divine right. 
But the Arians, saith Athanasius, ordered a Council to be 
called, and referred the cause to the arbitrement of Julius, 
if he was willing. He also says, that his going to Rome 
alarmed his adversaries, since they had hoped to terrify him 
from that measure, by their bold and confident course. He 
adds that the Council ordered Julius to write, who wrote 
accordingly. Now all of this is inconsistent with your can- 
on law. For if the bishop of Rome was then acknowl- 
edged to be the appellate Judge, by divine right, of all eccle- 

tulissem. Rejecto igitur itinere, futiles inanesque tergiversando causi- 
ficaiiones commentae sunt, eo quod ingenti metu relinebantur, ne da 
lisdem crimhiibus, quae Valens et Ursacius confessi erant, ipsi quoqua 
convincerentur. Presbyter deinde Vito plurcs episcopos, quarn quin- 
quagenta, in concilium adduxit, u'bi e't nostra defensio recepta fuit, et 
eonfirmarunt in nos communionem et charitatem : magnaque indigna- 
tio exorta est contra Eusebianos, quibus Julium, cum ab eis literas 
acceperat, rescribere jusser'unt. Scripsit igitur Julius, et misit literai 
per Gabianum Comitem 



CHAPTER 20.] THE SUPREMACY. 219 

siastical causes, Athanasius should have been cited before 
him. The Arians could not have offered to make himAr* 
Utrator, ij he was willing, because he was already the 
Judge by virtue of his office. Nor would it have been 
right or fitting to call a Council of more than fifty bishops 
to hear Athanasius, when the right of decision lay with the 
< Vicar of Christ,' alone. Lastly, most incongruous of all 
would it seem, that this Council should order Julius to write, 
when, instead of a letter of paternal remonstrance, it belong- 
ed to him to pronounce a binding and authoritative de- 
cree. 

The letter of Julius, written in consequence, is a letter of 
frank but kindly expostulation throughout. He claims no 
superior rights, pronounces no official judgment, but argues 
with them on the Apostolical canons, on the common cus- 
tom of the Church, and on the principles of the Gospel. 
The Arians had thrust out Athanasius from his diocese, and 
had violently brought Georgius with the aid of a military 
force into his place : the consequence of which had been 
shameful tumults and outrages. Yet in a case so flagrant, 
mark the language of Julius. (166.) e Where is there any ec- 
clesiastical canon or apostolical tradition of this sort ? That 
while the Church was in peace, and the bishops were in 
agreement with Athanasius the bishop of Alexandria, Geoj> 
gius should be sent in, who \vas a stranger and a foreigner^ 
neither baptized at Alexandria nor known to the people, nor 

(166) Ibid. p. 748 9. 'Ubi enim est istiusmodi ecclesiasticus canon, 
autisuusmodi traditio apostolica? Utin pace agenti ecclesia, et episco- 
pis concordibus cum episcopo Alexandria! Athanasio immittere Geow 
gium peregrinum et externum hominem, neque Alexandria? baptizatum 
neque plebi cognitum, neque postulatum a pfesbyteris, eumque Antto- 
chiee creare episcopum, atque inde deducere Alexandriam, non cum 
presbyteris aut diaconis civitatis, non cum episcopis ^Egypti, sed cum 
Haec enim dixere et conquest! sunt, qui hue vsnerunt j. 



216 ATHANAS1US AGAINST [CHAPTER 20. 

asked for by the presbyters, tbat lie should be made a bishop 
at Antioch, and from thence be brought to Alexandria, not 
with the presbyters or the deacons of the city, nor with the 
bishops of Egypt, but with soldiers? For such is the asser- 
tion and complaint of those who have come here. If, tru- 
ly, even after a Council, Athanasius had been found guilty 
of any wrong, it would not have been fitting to create a new 
bishop so illegally, and in a manner so contrary to the ec- 
clesiastical canon, but the bishop of the province should have 
constituted him in the Church itself, and from the sacerdotal 
order, and from the clergy itself, and by no means to have 
violated at this time the canons of the Apostles. Come 
now, if the same conduct had been held towards any of 
yourselves, would you not have loudly exclaimed against it? 
Would you not have demanded that the violated canons 
should be sustained ? Believe us, beloved, we speak truly 
as in the presence of God. This deed is not done piously, 
nor lawfully, nor ecclesiastically.' 

This epistle, however, brethren, is the more interesting 
because it. proves the gradual advancement towards the pri- 
macy, which was yet far from being established. For near 
the close, Julius uses this language. 

(167) ' Therefore inform us more accurately, beloved 

si enim post Synoclum in culpa fuissei deprehensus Athanasius, non 
tamen oportuit creationem novi episcopi ita illegaliter et piaster cano. 
jiem ecclesiasticum fieri, sed in ipsa ecclesia, et ex ipso sacerdotali 
ordine, et ex ipso cloro ilium ab episcopis provincise constitui oportuit, 
et nequaquam nunc Apostolorum Canones violari. Age, si in quem- 
quam vestrum id cominissum esset, nome vociferaturi essetis ? Nonne 
vindjctam, quasi violatis eanonibus, postulaturi fuissetis ? Dilecti cre- 
dits, tanquam Deo prsesente, cum veritate loquimur. Non estistud pie 
factum, non ex jure, non ecclesiastice. 

(167) Ibid. p. 753. ' Gertiores igitur nos, dilectissimi, de ea re facite, 
quo et illis scribamus, et cseteris item episcopis, qui hue debent con- 



CHAPTER 20v] THE SUPREMACY. 217 

brethren, concerning this matter, by which we may write to 
them, and to the other bishops, who, ought to assemble here, 
that before all, those who are guilty may be condemned, 
and there be no further trouble in the Church.' ' For if, 
as you say, they were guilty, judgment should have been 
given according lo the canon, and not in, this manner : you 
should have written to us all, tliat SO) by all, that which is 
just might be decreed.' 'Why therefore in the first place 
did you write nothing to us on the subject of Alexandria ? 
Are you ignorant that the custom is first to write to us, that 
hence, what is just might be established ? On which ac- 
count, if any suspicion arose against a bishop, it ought to be 
referred to our Church. But now, after they have done 
what they thought proper, these men wish to have us ap- 
prove the condemnation of a bishop, at whose doings we 
were not present, and concerning which we were not infor- 
med. Not such were the ordinations of Paul, not thus did 
the fathers teach, but this is truly a different example,' and 
a new institution.' 

Here we see, plainly, a claim set up for the Church of 
Rome to be first informed of what is amiss, that justice may 

venire, ut eoram omnibus, qui culpce obnoxii sunt, condemnentur, et 
ne uUerius peiturbatio in ecclesia fiat.' 

'Nam si ut dicitis, oinnino in culpa fuerunt, oportuitsecundum can- 
onem, etnon isto modo judicium fieri : oportuit scribere omnibus nobis, 
ut ita ab omnibus, quod justum esset, decerneretur.' 

' Cur igitur, in priinis de Alexandrina civitate nihil nobis scribere 
voluistis?. an ignari estis hanc consuetadinem esse, ut primum nobis 
scribatur, ut bine, quod justum est, definiri posset ? Quapropter si ia- 
thic hujusmodi suspicio in episcopum concepta fuerat, id buc ad nos- 
tram ecclesiam referri oportuit. Nunc auteni nos, quos certiores 
ffiinime fecerunt, postquam jam egerint quod libuit, suffragatoi es suae 
damnationis, cui non interfuimus esse volunt- Non ita se habent 
Pauli ordinationes, non ita Patres docuerunt, sed aliud exemplum et 
novum est institutum.' 
19 



218 ATHANAS1US. [CHAPTER 20, 

be done. But observe, first, brethren, that Julius contem- 
templates the action of % Council. ' You should have writ- 
ten to us all,' saith he, 'that so, by all, that which is just 
might be decr&ed* In the second place, this giving infor- 
mation to the Church of Rome is put on the score of cus- 
tom. ' Are you ignorant,' saith Julius, ' that this is the 
custom,' and not one word is to be found that looks like a 
claim by divine right. Thirdly, here is no personal authority, 
for Julius himself as the vicegerent of Christ, the chief ru- 
ler and o-overnor of the whole Church, &,c. according to 

O ' O 

your present system. So that the whole case of Athana- 
sius, to my mind, presents a complete demonstration of our 
proposition, and proves that the Primitive Church of Rome, 
even so far down as the middle of the fourth Century, held 
no such doctrine as her successor holds at the present day. 



CHAPTER XXI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

, We may not in justice dismiss the testimony of 
Athanasius until we see the course by which he was res- 
tored to his diocese, which will shew us, still more plainly, 
the polity of the Church in the fourth Century. 

Pursuing the narrative of this eminent man, we find that 
the council of Rome, and the letter written on their part by 
Julius, produced no result. (168) ' When the Roman Coun- 
cil, continues Athanasius,' ' had written thus by Julius the 
bishop of Rome, the Eusebians again, with wicked audaci- 
ty, laid snares for the troubling of the Churches. And 
when this was made known to the most religious emperors, 
Constantius and Constans, the bishops of the east and west 
were ordered to assemble at Sardis.' 

In obedience to this imperial command, an immense num- 
ber of bishops assembled, from Spain, Italy, Gaul, Africa, 
Egypt, Cyprus, Palestine, Phrygia, Isauria, the names of 
whom Athanasius has for the most part set down, and com- 
putes the whole at three hundred and forty-four. From the 

(168) Ibid. p. 754. 'Hsec cum Romae Synodus per Julium Roman um 
Episcopum scripsisset, imnrobaiterum audacia Eusebiani in Ecclesiis 
perturbandis, insidiisque tendendis usi sunt.' Quod cum rescitum 
eg set ab religiosissimis Imperatoribus, Constantio et Constante, jussi 
Bunt episcopi orientis et occidentis, Sardim convenire,' 



220 ATHANASIUS AGAINST [CHAPTER 21. 

Synodical epistle of this celebrated Council, I extract one 
sentence at the beginning, shewing that it was convened by 
the emperors, and another near the close, refering to Atha- 
nasius. After premising a statement of the troubles which 
had taken place, and the fruitless effort of Julius and his 
brethren in the Council of Rome to appease them, they pro- 
ceed to say : 

( 169) ' On which account, the grace of God co-opera- 
ting, our most religious Princes called us together from di- 
vers provinces and cities, desiring that a holy council should 
convene in the city of Sardis, by which every controversy 
might be cut off.' 

And after setting forth the conduct of the Arians atlength, 
and the violent expulsion of the orthodox bishops, especially 
Athanasius.ihey say : 

(170) ' Therefore we pronounce our beloved brethren 
and fellow ministers, Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepas, and 
the rest who serve God with them and us, innocent and 
pure, Setters being sent, to all the dioceses, that the people 
of each Church may know the sincerity of their bishop.' 

The subscriptions follow, from which we find that 
Hosius of Spain preside ci, and signed first ; and Julius of 
Rome by his presbyters Archidamus and Philoxenus, 
signed after him, (HI) 

(169) Ibid. 760 1. ' Qiiaproptcr, cooperante Dei gratia, religiosis- 
simi principes no? ex diversis. provinces et civitatibus in 111111,01 convo- 
caverunt, cupienles, m sar.ctu synodus in Sardorum civilatem conveni- 
ret, quoomnis cnritroversfa prffidderetur. 

(170) Ibid. 766. ' I-deo nos ciiiectos fratres et cotnministros- nostros 
Athanasiurn, Marccllum, Asclepam et cseteros, qui cum il!i.s Deo no- 
biscum serviunt, innocentes et puros pvonundamus, lite>ins ad siugulas 
paracias missis, ut po.puh cujusque ecclesia? cognoscant sui episcopi 
sinoeritatt m.' 

(171) Ibid. 767. ' Hosius abllispania, Julius RomBe per Archidarauift 
?,t Philoxenum presbyteros sups, Protogen,e Sardi.cq3' ^<c., 



21 .J THE SUPREMACY. 221 

A. few other little matters may be noticed in connexion 
with this witness. 

(172) The Emperor Constantino writes tohim,calling him 
Pope. The same style of address, as you know, brethren, 
was used to all the primitive fathers, who were bish- 
ops. Why it has become restricted to the bishop of Rome 
for so many centuries, instead of being, as it once was, the 
common title of all the metropolitans, is a question which 
your doctrine of Supremacy must answer. 

(173) Again, I remark an epistle addressed to sundry 
bishops by the presbyters and deacons under Athanasius, 
styling him the bishop of 'I he Catholic Church of Alexan- 
dria .' 

Again, I find the terms in which Liberius and Rome are 
spoken of, rather inconsistent with your doctrine. For 
Athanasius, in his epistle to the Hermits-of Egypt, speaking 
of the persecuting spirit of the Arians, uses these words : 

(174) 'Nor truly did they spare Liberius the Roman bish- 
op, for they were led by no reverence, either because that 
was an apostolic See, or because Rome was the metropolis 
of the Roman power; nor did they remember that in their 
letters they had called them apostolic men: but con founding 
all together, they were equally forgetful of all, having no 
solicitude but for impiety alone.' 

(172) 'Ibid. 765. ' Victor Constantinus Maxinuis, Augustus, Papa? 
Atlianasio.' 

(173) Ibid. 790. ' Theogno, Muvi, Macedonio, Theodore, Ursacio 
et Valenti Episcopis e Tyro profectis, presbyter! et diaconi sub.reve- 
fenclissinio Episcopo Atlianasio, Catholics) Ecclesire Alexandria. 

(174) Ibid. S. A than, ad solit. vitam agentes epist. Op. om. 1.832. 
'No Liberio quidem Romano episcopo peporceruflt, nulla reverentia 
ducti, vel quod sedes ilia Apostolica esset, vel qwod lioma Metropolis 
cssetRomanaj ditionis, neque recordati, se eos apostolicos viros in suis 
'iteris appellasse, sed omnia simul miscentes, seque omnium oblivis-- 
c ebantur, neque quicauam illis curse, nisi sola impietas fuit.! 

19* 



ATHANASIUS, AGAINST 

Compare this with the terms Athanasius uses with regard 
to Hosius : (175) 'Although they committed so many and 
so great iniquities, yet they thought they had done nothing, 
so long as that great man Hosius had not experienced their 
malice. For they studied tc* extend their rage towards even 
such as he ; nor did they revere him as the father of the 
bishops,, nor were they moved with shame on account of his 
being a confessor, nor did they regard his having discharged 
the episcopal office for more than sixty years: but despising 
all these considerations, they had their eyes intent only on 
their own heres) , truly regarding neither God nor man. 
Coming accordingly to Constantius, they address him in these 
words: We have done all things,we have driven into banish- 
ment the bishop of the Romans, and before him we had 
made exiles of many other bishops, we have rilled every 
place with terror, nevertheless thy works are all- vain, nor 
do we reckon that we have effected any thing, so long as 1 
Hosius is left. For while he acts among his followers, it 
seems as though all were acting in their Churches. He is 

(175) Ibid. 837. ' Tantis ac talibus sceleribus factis, nihil omnino 
se adh-uc Fecisse arbitrab'antur, quamdiu magnus ille Hosius eorum rna- 
litiam expertus non esset. Nam in eum- talem tantuhique virum,. 
suam rabieinprotendere studuerunt; nequc quod pater essst episcopo- 
rum, reveriti sunt : neque quod confessor erat, pudore moti aunt, neque 
quod sexagesimum annum eteo amplius in episcopatu agebat, respex- 
erunt, sod omnia simul vilipemlentos, ad ; solanrsuam hEeresin oculos 
intenlos habuere, homines revera neque Dcum timentes neque homi- 
nem vcrentes. Adbrti igitnr Const-antinni talibas -verb-is alloquunturj 
orania quidei a nobia facta un-t, p?ofligavimus in exilium Romanorum 
episcopum,et jam ante eum eXtofres fechnus quam plurimos episco- 
po9, omniahica le-i'roribnsimpl'evimua, sed tamen pro nihilo sunt tant& 
tua opera, neqUe quicqunm profecimus,-quamdiu reliquus est Hosius. 
Q,uamdiu enim HVe in suis agit ? omnes in suis ecclesiis ageve videntur. 
Hie princeps est Synodorum, et si quid scribit, ubique auditur : hie for- 
mulam fidei in Nicena syn-edo soacepit, et Arian-os- ubique pro hzeret- 
icis traduxit,' &c. 



CfiAPTER 21.] THE SUPREMACY* 223 

the prince of Councils, whatever he writes is heard of every 
where ; he composed the formulary in the Council of Nice^. 
.and continually traduces the Arians as heretics,' fee. 

From the whole of which, brethren , the following deduc- 
tions seem to my mind irresistible. 

That the charge against Athanasius, which the Council 
of Rome, with Julius the bishop of Rome at their head, 
had not authority sufficient to settle, was settled by the 
Council of Sardis. 

That this Council, like theCouncilof Nice, was convened,, 
not by the bishop of Rome, but by the emperor. 

Thatthebishop of Rome was present by his legates, Archi- 
damus and Philoxenus, but the president of the Council 
was Hosius, the same who presided in the Council of Nice. 
That the term pope was not restricted to the Roman bishop 
in the time of Athanasius; and the Catholic Church of Alex- 
andria was the proper form of speech, not the Roman Cath- 
olic Church of Alexandria, as it would be set down at the 
present day. 

That the regard paid to Rome was partly owing to its being 
an ap'ostolic See,which reason applied to manyChurches. But 
the other reason was of a secular character, since Athanasius 
censures the Arians for not respecting Rome, as the metro- 
polis of the Roman power. 

Lastly, the extraordinary esteem and reverence displayed 
towards the venerable flosius,.the father of bishops-the prince 
of Councils while there is not a word upon the point of Ju- 
lius or Liberius possessing the vicegerency of Christ,the au- 
thority of the true God, the seat of Peter, the office of 
chief ruler and governor, or any intimation which looks 
like your subsequent doctrine, leaves the result of Athana- 
sins' evidence clear and decisive, as i ; t seems to my mind, 
HI demonstration of the change which I have undertaken to- 
prove. 



224 FORGED EPISTLES, ATTRIBUTED [CHAPTER 21 

, Perhaps, however, I ought not to close these extracts 
from Athanasius, without taking notice of the forgeries which 
have been palmed upon the world for some centuries under 
his name. ' Of these, two of the most impudent and hare- 
faced appear to have been intended, not only to supply the 
supposed deficiencies of this eminent father on the subject 
of the supremacy of Rome, but also to support the Roman 
additions to the canons of the Nicene Council. They pur- 
port to be a letter of Athanasius and the Egyptian bishops 
addressed to Marcus the pope, for fresh copies of the can- 
ons of this Council, on the ground that the Arians had burn- 
ed all their copies, with the answer of the pope granting 
the request; and I doubt not that they were made to serve as 
important vouchers for those versions of the Nicene Council 
which differ so widely from the original Greek text. I 
subjoin a few extracts of these letters from the latin. I be- 
lieve they are not extant in any other language. 

(176) ' To the holy and venerable lord Marcus, pope of 
the apostolic dignity, of the holy and apostolic See, and of 
theUniversalChurch, Athanasius and all the bishops of Egypt 
send greeting.' Then presently we have this expression, 
'by the authority of your holy iiee, which is the mother and 
head of all the churches. '(177) 

The reply of the pope is framed according to the same 
model, being, no doubt, the work of the same hand. 

(178) 'To the venerable lords my brethren, Athanasius 

(170) Athan.Op.om. 2. G23. ' Domino saticto et npostolici cul- 
minis venerando Marco sanct.-c HomanaB et upostolicaa sedis, atquc 
universalis Ecclesiae Papae, Athauasius et universi /Egypliorum Epis- 
copi salutern. 

(177) Ib Optamus, ut a vestrae sanctae sedis Ecclesiae autoritate, 
quaeest mater et caput omnium ecclesiavum.' &c 

(178) Ibid. G24. < Dominisvenerabilibnsfratribas Atbanasio, et uni- 
versis ./Egyptiorum Episcopis, Marcus sanctae Romanae apostolicae- 
que sedis, et universalis Ecclesiae Episcopus.' 



CHAPTER 21.] TO ATHANASIUS. 325 

and all the bishops of Egypt, Marcus, bishop ot the holy 
apostolic and Roman See, and of the whole Church,' then 
\ve read of 'the Holy Roman Church which has always re- 
mained without spot, and, by the .Providence of God, and 
through the help of the blessed apostle Peter, will always 
remain the same, '(179)and then vve have the' holy and apos- 
tolic Church, the mother of all theChurches of Christ,which, 
by the grace of God, is proved never to have wandered from 
the track of apostolic tradition.' (ISO) 

You will do me the favour to recollect, brethren, that [ 
have promised to take your own witnesses' statements, ac- 
cording to your own judgment of their authenticity. And 
it gives me pleasure to find the frank sincerity with which 
your eminent scholars unite in condemning these miserable 
forgeries; not always, perhaps,treatingthem with the severi- 
ty they deserve, but shewing a determination to do sub- 
stantial justice in a spirit equally creditable to them, as lovers, 
of Christian antiquity, and friends of truth. 

From your own scholars, therefore, I take my warrant 
for condemning these epistles. For thus your famous Car- 
dinal Bellarmin speaks of them : 

(181) ' Concerning the epistles of Athanasius to pope 
Marcus, and of pope Marcus to Athanasius, it appears, from . 
the mere point of time, that these epistles are supposititious. 7 

And Nannius, the learned translator of Athanasius, pla- 

(179) Ibid. ' Sancta Romanu Ecclesia, quao semper inunaculata 
mansit, et Domino providente, et beato Apostolo Petro openi ferento, 
in future nianchit,' &c. 

(180) Ibid. 525. ' Haec sancta et Apostolica mater omnium EcclesK 
arum Christi Ecclosia, quae per omnipotentis Dei graliam a tramite 
Apostolicae tradiiionis nunquam errasseprobatur/ &c. 

j (181) Elogia S. A tb an. in Praefat. Op. om. ' De Epistolis Athan- 
a sii ad Marcum Papam, et Marci Papae ad Athanasium, coustat ex ra-> 
temporis, eas epistolas esse supposititias.' 



226 FRAUD ACKNOWLEDGED. [CHAPTER 21. 

ces them in the third class, of which he says: (1 82) ( In this 
third class, I have collected all the supposititious books, 
which I do not think to be the work of Atbanasius.' 1 

I shall waste neither your time nor my own, brethren, 
by commenting on this additional fraud upon the fathers. But 
I mention the fact as a matter of justice, not merely to Atha- 
nasius, but also to myself, and to you : to Athanasius, because 
these letters are no part of his testimony : to myself, be- 
cause otherwise you might have supposed my quotations 
partial and unfair: and to you, partly lest you might over- 
look the mark of reprobation which your critics have af- 
fixed to these forgeries, and partly because it gives me real 
satisfaction to acknowledge such instances of candor. It 
only needs an extension of this candor, as it seems to me, 
to bring all our controversies to the point of concord and 
peace. 

(182) Athan.op. om. Ep. Nuncupatoria. 'Intertiain [classem] rel- 
egavi onines supposititios libros, quos Alhanasii non pulo.' 



CHAPTER XXII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The next writer whom the order of time presents to us, 
is the eloquent Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, whose catecheti- 
cal lectures are amongst the most interesting monuments of 
Christian antiquity. He flourished in the same century 
with Athariasius, and his works bear date about A. 345. 
From the latin version of your own learned Touttee, (ex- 
cept in a few places where I do not think him accurate, and 
which I have noted with the original for your greater satis- 
faction,) I proceed to extract the most important portions 
of his testimony in relation to St. Peter and the Catholic 
Church. Of the bishop or Church of Rome he says noth- 
ing: although, as we shall see, his subject would naturally 
have led him to mention them, had he held your doctrine. 

The first passage in which I find him speaking of Peter, is 
in the following language. (183) 'The Lord is merciful, and 
prompt to pardon, but slow to avenge. No one, therefore, 

(183) S. Cyril. Archiepis. Hierosol. Cap. 11. 19. Ed. Paris. A.D. 
1720. p. 31. 'Ben.'gnus est Dominus et ad condonandum promptus, 
tardus autem ad ulciscendum.Nemo igitur suam ipsius salutem desperet. 
Petrus Apostolorum summus et princeps , cor&m vili anciJlula tor Dom- 
inum negavit, sed pceniludine tactus flevit amare,' &c. The original 
Greek does not warrant this translation of the learned Touttee. nirQoS 
<> xoqvipaibraTo? xai TcqiuToaTuTr[? ru>v aTtoarulwr, stirctly rendered, 
Weans no more than : ,-' Peter the leader [Coryphaeus] and foremost of 



228 TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 22. 

need despair of salvation. Peter, the leader and foreman 6jf 
the apostles, denied the Lord thrice before a poor maid-ser-' 
vant, but touched by repentance, he wept bitterly.' &c. 

Again, Cyril styles Peter, the 'foreman ol the aposiles,ari'd 
the leading preacher of the Church.' (184) That is, the 
preacher who took the lead ; inasmuch as he preached the 
first sermon to the Jews, and, as in the case of Cornelius^ 
he also may be said to have preached the first discourse to 
the Gentiles. *' 

Again, Cyril mentions Peter along with Paul in the 
following passages, where, arguing 'against the Jews, he 
contends for the superiority of the Christian over the Mo- 
saic dispensation. (185) 'Be not ashamed of your apostles/ 
saith he, ' for they are not inferior to Moses and the propli-: 
ets, but they are good amongst the good, and better than 
the good. Elias truly was taken into heaven, but Peter 
has the keys of the kingdom of heaven when he hears; 
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in 
heaven. Elias was only taken up into heaven ; but Paul 
taken into heaven and into paradise, (for it was 



the apostles.' In themselves, these words do not import any jurisdic- 
tion or authority over others; whereas a chief and a prince are per- 
sons bearing rule and dominion. The difference is obvious, and is 
altogether necessary to he well noted, in order to understand the fa- 
thers rightly. I might add that there are two copies of this celebra- 
ted discourse of Cyril's extant, of which the second [see page 37. F.] 
has the same passage speaking of Peter, without any expletive what- 
ever. 

(184) Ib. p. 150. [Cat. xi. iii.] ' Petrus apostolorum princeps et 
sapreinus Ecclesiae praeco,' another case of strong amplification, for 
the Greek has it : JJfT(jo? o TIQWTOOTUT?/? T<3v anoaivAwv, r.al r>Jg ixx^- 
aia? xoQvyaiog xiJjwJj, signifying: ' Peter the foremost or foreman of the 
apostles, and the leading -preacher of the Church ;' certainly a very dif- 
ferent pair of titles from the prince of the apostles and the supreme 
preacher of the Church. 

(185) Ib. Catechcsis xiv. 26. p. 218. Nonte tuorum pudeat apos- 
tolorum, non sunt Moyse deteriores, nee prophetis inferiores, sedboni 



(jflAPTER 22.] CYRIL OF JERUlSALEM. 220 

becoming that the disciples of Christ should receive an in- 
crease of favor) where he heard unspeakable words which it 
was not lawful for man to utter. Paul descended again, not 
because he was unworthy to inhabit the third heaven, but in 
order that the excellent gifts he had received, should par- 
take of his mortal lot, and that, after he had descended with 
an accession of honor, and had preached Christ, and had 
endured death for his master's sake, he might also receive 
the crown of martyrdom.' Here, although Cyril mentions 
St. Peter as having received the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven, yet he is contrasting him, not with the other apos 
ties, but with Elias ; and it is evident that on the whole, he 
expresses himself more fully and warmly in favor of the 
privileges of St. Paul. 

Again, I find St. Peter mentioned in the relation of the 
defeat sustained at Rome by the magician Simon. (186) 
'When his erroneous doctrine (Simon's) was diffusing itself 
more widely, that celebrated pair of men, Peter and Paul, 
the presidents of the Church., being arrived there, (i. e. at 
Rome) corrected the fault, and struck Simon with sudden 
death, at the moment that lie was proudly exhibiting him- 

sunt cumbonis, et bonis meliores. Nam Elias revera in cesium ad- 
sumptus est, at Petrus hat>et claves regni ccelorum, cum audient : QUCE- 
tMnque solveris super terram, erunt soluta in c&lis. Elias in cesium 
duntaxat est sublatus; Paulus vero et in ccelum et in paradisum, (De- 
cebat enim Jesu discipulos multiplicatam gratiam accipere) audivit 
ineffdMlta verba qua non licet homini loqui? Descendit autem desur- 
sum Paulus, non quod tertii cceli habitations indignus foret ; sed ut 
perceptis humanam sortem superautibns donis, cunaque honoris acces- 
sione descendens, cum Christum praedicasset, et mortem pro ipso to!- 
firavisset, martyrii quoque coronamadsequeretur.' 

(186) Ib. Cat. vi, 15. p. 96. ' Cum vero error se latius spargeret, 

v itium illud correxit egregium par virorum, Petrus et Paulus Ecclesiaa 

praesules illuc appulsi ; Simonemque, ilium videlicet opinione Deuns, 

8 uperbe se ostentantem subita morte perculerunt. Nam cum pollici- 

20 



230 THE TESTIMONY 

self as if he thought he was a god. For Simon 
raised that he would rise up on high into the air, and be bq'rne 
through the air in a chariot of demons, these servants of 
God fell upon their knees, displaying that concord of which 
Jesus spake ; If two of you shall agree] on any thing that 
they shall ask, it shall be done for them : the weapon of 
this concord in prayer, being launched against the magician/ 
they cast him down to the earth. Nor should this thing 
seem wonderful to you, although, indeed, it be in itself ad- 
mirable, for Peter was he who carried the keys of heaven. 
Nothing wonderful truly: since Paul was he who was taken 
into paradise and the third heaven, and heard mysterious 
words which it was not lawful for man to utter.' 

These passages contain the only statements which I, have 
found in Cyril, capable of being interpreted in favor of you? 
doctrine ; and any intelligent mind can see how little they 
have to do with it. The strongest epithet applied to Peter - 
that of a president of the Church is given to St. Paul in 
connexion with him. He is called a leader of the apostles** 
a foreman -a Coryphaeus but every one knows that these 
terms do not import jurisdiction or dominion, but simply a 

tua essot Simon se.sublimem in ccelos elatuin in, ac daemonum vehi- 
culo sublatus per aera ferretur, genibus provoluti servi Dei, concordi. 
amque illarn demonstrantes, de qua Jesus dixcrat : Si duo ex volis con* 
cordarint, de omni re quamcumquc petierint, fict eis : concordiae telo 
per precationem adversus mugum immisso, praecipitem ad terrain de- 
jecerunt. Neque tibi res ilia mira videatur, tametsi alioqui admiran- 
da : Petrus namque erat, is qui coeli claves circumferebat. Nihil quo- 
que miri : Paulus enim erat, is qui in tertium cesium atque in paradi i 
sum raptus erat, audieratque arcana verba quae non licet homini lo- 
qui.' It is a little strange that your learned translator should give us 
a different version here, from that which the former passages exhibi- 
ted. JIiTQog xai IlavZag TraoayEro/taroi, 61 Tfjg ixxlqa' tag TtQoaTaTtti.- 
Peter and Paul together are properly enough called presidents of the 
church, whereas Peter alone, when Cyril styled him only 7r(6wTO<JrrijS< 
a term of much weaker signification, was called a prince. 



22.] OFCTKU.. 231 

certain precedency among- equals. His having the keys 
of the kingdom, of heaven is compared with Paul's being 
taken, up into heaven ; they are spoken of as being alike 
personal privileges, and there is nothing to warrant the infe- 
rence that one was official, and designed to be transferred to 
successors, any more than the other. And there is not a 
word, in the last passage especially, where the defeat of Si- 
mon at Rome is mentioned, nor in any other part of Cyril's 
books, conveying the slightest allusion to St. Peter's having 
any government over the other apostles, or having establish- 
ed himself as bishop at Rome, or having contemplated the 
erection of one diocese, as a permanent superior over the 
rest of the Church. 

But I proceed to make some other extracts from this 
writer, where it seems obvious to my mind that your doc- 
trine could not have escaped some notice, had Cyril acknow- 
ledged it as a part of his system. 

(187) ' Christ,' saith he, " is the High Priest, having a 
priesthood not to be transferred : who neither began to be a 
priest in time, nor has he another successor to his pontificate.' 
Here there is nothing positively inconsistent with your doc- 
trine, but yet it. appears to me that the subject would natur- 
ally suggest the vicegerency of the pope, who bears the 
person and authority of the Redeemer; and who, though 
not the successor of Christ's pontificate, does nevertheless 
perform the same functions and claim the same powers, ac- 
cording to your system, which the successors ol Christ, if he 
could have them, would properly exercise. 

There is another short passage of Cyril, which has seemed 

(187) lb. Cat. x- xiv. p. 143. 'Christus autem est summus sacer- 
doa, nori . transferendum habens sacerdotium : qui neque in ternpore 
sacerdos esse coepit, neque alterum habet pomificatus sui successo- 
tera.' . 



THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTEli 22 

to me worthy of some attention, on account of its indifeci 
bearing. You know, brethren, that you recommend youi 
doctrine of the Primacy, or rather the Supremacy of Rome, 
because it is such a bond of union, and admirable preventive 
of schism. But we have already had occasion to notice how 
much the primitive Church was troubled with heresy and 
schism, and Cyril adds his testimony to the same melancho- 
ly evidence. For speaking of the coming of Antichrist, he 
enumerates the signs predicted in the Scripture, and acknow- 
ledges himself to he filled with alarm: * The wars among the 
nations/ saith he, ' terrify me ; the schims of the churches 
terrify me,and the mutual hatred among brethren. ( 188) He 
assigns no cause for these schisms, which resembles yom 
argument. He makes no allusion to that departure from the 
supposed See of Peter, which is the great occasion of schism 
according to your theory. He mourns over the evil, as 
you would do, but seems to have no idea of your notion, 
either as respects the cause of schism, or its remedy. 

But I pass on to a beautiful paragraph, which has struck 
me as hardly reeoneileable with your favorite dogma. (189) 

(188) Ib.Cat. xv. 18. p. 233. Terrentine bella nationum, terrent 
ecclesiarum scissiones ; terret mutuum fratrum odium- 1 

(189) Ib.. Cat. xvi. . 22 p. 255. ' Magnum quiddam, et otnnipoteps 
in donis, et admirabile, Spiritus sanctus, Cogita quot nunc hie asside- 
tis, quotanimse adsumus. Unicuique convenienter operatur, et me- 
diua. adstans- uniuscuj usque compositionem videt, vid!ot et cogitatio* 
nem et conscientiam, quidque et loquamur et mente agitemus. Mag- 
num quidem est id quod mo do dixi, sed ad hue tenue Consideres ve 
Urn mente ab eo illustratus, quot sint totius hujusce paroecise Chris- 
tiani ; quotquot totius proyinciffiJPafaestinse. Rursus protende mentem 
ab hac provincia in totum Bomanorum imperium ; et ab hoc adspectusr 
converte in mundum universum; Persarum genera,et Indorum natione 
Gotboset Sauromatas,Gallos, Hispanosque, Mauros et Afros, et^Ethi* 
epas, at reliqaos quorum nee nomina novimug : multi suut enim po 
puli, quorum ne ipsa quidem nomina ad ootitiam. postcajix deyeBre* 



2-2.] tfl" CYRlt. 23ST 

,* The Holy Spirit,' saith Cyril, c is great, omnipotent in gifts, 
and altogether admirable. Think how many of you are 
now seated before me, how many minds are here assembled 
together. The Holy Spirit works on each, and, standing in 
the midst, beholds the composition of each, sees the thought 
and the conscience, the subjects of our speech, and of our 
secret reflection. This that I have said, is great, but yet it 
is a light matter.' I wish you whose minds^he has illumina- 
ted to consider further, how many Christians there are- in. 
this whole diocese, how many in the whole' province of 
Palestine. Again, extend your mind from this province 
through the whole Roman empire, and from this turn to the 
whole world ; the tribes of Persia, the nations of India, the 
Goths and Sarmatians, the Gauls and Spaniards, the 
Moors, and Africans, and Ethiopians, and the rest,, of whom 
we do not even know the name : for there are many na- 
tions of whom the very names have not reached our notice. 
Look at the bishops of each nation, Jhe presbyters, .the dea* 
cons, the monks, the virgins, and the rest of the laity ^.and be- 
hold the great Ruler and superratendant of all^the bestowerof 
gifts, how through the whole world he-gives to one, .modes- 
ty,' to another, perpetual virginity;, to anothe'r,.pity; to another,, 
zeal for the poor';- taianother, the power of resisting evil spir- 
its ; so that even, as- the sun,, by one impulse of its rays, en- 
lightens all things, so the Holy Spirit illumines those who 
possess^ spiritual vision.' 
- Now here,, brethren,. I think that the scope of this fine 

Gonspice cujusque gentis episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, monachos 
virgines, et reliquos laicos : et vide magnum fectorem ac praesidem 
ionorumque largitorem; quomodo in omni mundoilli pudicitiam, isti 
perpetuam virginitatem, huic misericordiam,alii paupertatis studium, 
alter! adversantium spirituum effugandi vim adtribuit,' et quemadmo- 

lux uno radii conjectu omnia collustrat,. sic et Spiritus sanctut. 

pi oculos.habent illurainat.! 
20* 



THE TESTIMONY [cHAtTE& 

passage seems to call for some notice of the papacy, if there' 
were any such thing allowed in the days of Cyril. For 
he is professedly enumerating the operations of the Holy 
Spirit in the Church, and to this end he reckons the bishops, 
the presbyters, the deacons, fee. of every nation. And 
would he omit the bishop of bishops, the ruler, the vicar of 
Christ, the governor who held the authority of the true 
God upon the earth, and whose administration of pastoral 
power over the whole Church needed far more of the gui- 
dance of the Holy Spirit than any of those whom Cyril 
mentions? To my mind it appears as unlikely that Cyril 
could thus enumerate the various ranks in the Church, and 
yet omit the pope, as that an historian should forget the 
king in describing a monarchy. I regard the passage, there- 
fore, as furnishing strong circumstantial evidence against your 
doctrine. 

Again, we find Cyril speaking of the apostles without 
distinction, where he saith, (190) ' Christ imparted the com- 
munication of the Holy Ghost to his apostles, ior it is writ- 
ten: And when he had said this, he breathed on them and 
said : Receive the Holy Ghost : Whose sins ye remit, they 
are remitted to them, and whose sins ye retain they are re- 
tained.' And he adds no intimation of your favourite 
distinction, by which Peter is constituted the head and 
pastor over his brethren. 

On the other point which concerns the authority of Rome 
as the mistress and mother of all the Churches, I find your 
learned translator Touttee himself maintaining the claim of 
Jerusalem > with far greater reason, to be the mother Church. 

(190) Ib. Cat. xvii. 12. p. 270. <Hujus Sancti Spiritus communica* 
tionem Apostolis impertivitjscriptum namque est: Etquum hoc dixis- 
set, insufflavit, et dicit eis ; Accipite Spiritum Sanctum : Quorum^ 
cumque reraiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis \ quorumcuraque retinues 
jitis^retentasunt.' 



CHAPTER 22.] OP CYRIL. 

(191)'No one can deny,* saith he, 'that the authority of the 
Symbol(or creed)of Jerusalem is chief,ifhe will consider the 
following. 1st. That this Church was the mother of all the 
rest: there was the fountain of ecclesiastical tradition, and 
the very cradle of the Christian religion. 2d. There, the 
ancient tradition would be more continually kept in memory^ 
because of the, very presence of the monuments of Christ 
and the apostles.' The claim of Rome to be the mistress 
indeed, is not here impugned ; but her favorite title of 
mother is most manifestly disputed. 

We shall derive much greater satisfaction, however y 
from contemplating the description which Cyril gives us of 
the Catholic Church, in his Catachesis on the very point. 
For the extract to which I shall next ask your attention^ 
brethren, is on that clause of the creed ; ' I believe in the 
Holv Catholic Church.' 

it 

(192) 'TheChurch is calledCatholic,' saith he,(or universal) 
'because it is diffused from the farthest bounds to the utmost 
limits of the earth. Also, because she teaches universally 

(191) Ib. Appendix ad Cateches. v. p. 82. 7. ' Prseoipuam esse 
Symbol! Hierosolymitani author! tatem nullus inficiari potest ,qiii ad 
ista respexerit. 1. Hanc ecclesiam caterarum omnium matrem esse ; 
ibi traditionis ecclesiasticts fontem, et religionis Christianas cunabula. 
2. Ibi antiquam traditionem, prsesentibus Christ! et apostolorum mon 
urnentis jugiter ad memonamrevocatam fuisse.' 

(192) Ib. Cat. xviii. De ecclesia Catholica. 23. 'Catholica enim 
vero (seu universalis) vocatur, eo quod per totum orbem ab extremis 
terras finibus ad extremes usque fines diffusa est. Et quia universe et 
absque defectu docet omnia quse in hominum notitiam venire debent 
dogmata, sive de visibilibus et invisibilibus, sive de ccelestibus etterreB- 
tribus rebus. Turn etiam eo quod omne hominum genus recto cultui 
subjiciat, principes et privates, doctos et imperitos. Ac denique, quia 
generaliter, quidem omne pec'catorum genus quae per animam et corpus 
perpetrantur, curat et sahat, eadem vero omne possidet, quovis nomi- 
ne significetur, virtutis genus, in factis et verbis et spiritualibus cu- 
jusvis speciei donis.' 



236 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 

and without defect, all doctrines which ought to come under 
the notice of men^ whether of visible and invisible, or of 
celestial and terrestrial things. Likewise, because she sub- 
jects to a right worship all ranks of men-, princes and private 
individuals, the learned and the ignorant. And finally, be- 
cause she cures and heals every kind of sin which is com- 
mitted by the mind or by the body, and at the same time 
possesses every kind of virtue, by whatever name it maybe 
known, whether in deeds or in words, or in spiritual gifts of 
every variety.' 

Thus much for the term, CATHOLIC* Next let us hear 
Cyril on the word CHURCH. (193) 'The psalmist truly,' saith 
he, 'had sung before : In the Church praise the Lord froni 
the fountains of Israel. But since, on account of thew 
treachery towards the Saviour,the Jews were cast away from 
lavor, the Saviour built up a second from the gentiles, our 
holy Church of Christians, bf which he said to Peter : And 
on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against her. Of both these, David spake 

(193) Ib. xxv. p. 297. Prius quidem cecinerat Psalmista ; Jn ec- 
clesia benedicite Deum Dominum ezfontibus Israel. Ex quo vero profh 
ter structas adversus Salvatorem insidias, abjecti sunt a gratia Jiulsi; 
secundam ex gentibus sedificavit Servator,sanctam nostram Christian^ 
orum Ecclesiam, dequa dixit Petro: Et super hancpetram adificabo 
meam Ecclesiam, et porta inferi non prcRvalebunt adversus earn. De. 
ambabus illispropbetans aperte dicebat David; de priori quidem quse ab- 
jectafuit ; Odio hdbui ecclesiam malignantium . de secunda vero qua 
eedificata estj in eodem Psalmo.- Domine f dilexi decorem domus. tiia; 
et mos j consequentibus : In ccclesiis benedicam te, JDomine. Rejects 
namquc un ilia qua in Judeea erat, per totum orbem deinceps Christi 
multiplicantur ecclesiae, de quibus dictum estin Psalmis : CantateDo-. 
mino canticumnovum, laus cjus in ecclcsia sanctorum. Q,ueis consen- 
taniga propheta Judseis dixit, non esi miki voluntas in vobis, dicit JPfl; 
minus omnipotens. Statimque subdit : Propterea ab ortu solis usqut 
ad oecasirm, nomcn meum glorijicatum est in gentibus. De eadem santt? 
ta catiiolica Ecclesia scribit ad Timotlieum Paulus : lit scias quowflfa 
oporteat in domo Dei versari f est Ecclesia Dei viventis t colv,mnQ,&; 
stabilimentum vcritatis,' ...cvssy 



OF cram, 

openly : of the first truly which was cut off: 1 hate the 
Church of the wicked : of the second which was to be 
built up. in the same psalm : O Lord, I have loved the ho- 
nor of thy house ; and presently in the following verses: IB 
the Churches I will praise thee, O Lord. For that one 
which was in Judea being rejected, the Churches of Christ 
are thenceforward multiplied through the whole world, of 
which it is said in the Psalms : Sing unto the Lord a new 
song, his praise in the Church of the Saints. To which the 
prophet agreeing saith to the Jews : I have no will towards 
you, said the Almighty. And immediately he adds : From 
the rising of the sun even to the setting of the same, my 
name shall be glorified among the gentiles. Of the same 
holy Catholic Church, Paul writes to Timothy : that you 
may know how to behave in the house of God, which is 
the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the 
truth.' 
(194) 'But since/ continues Cyril, c thename of Church is 

(194) Ib. xxvi. Q,uoniam vero Ecclesiae nomen diversis aceom- 
modatur rebus, ut et de multitudine quae in theatre Ephesiorum erat, 
ecriptum est: Et quum haec dixisset, dimisit ecclesiam, (seu concio- 
nem) proprie autem et vere quis dixerit ecclesiam malignantvum esse 
haereticorum coetus, Marcionistarnm dico, et Manicfiaeorum reliquo- 
rnmque : idcirco nunc cautissime tibi tradidit fides ita tenendum : ET 
IN UNAM SANCTAJI cATHOLicAM ECCLESIAM ; ut eorum abominanda col. 
legia fugiens, adhaereas semper sanctae cathohcae ecclesiae, in qaa 
et renatus es. Et si quando peregrinatus fueris in civitatibus, ne sim- 
pliciter requiras ubi sit Dominicum ; (i. e. Ecclesiae et sacri con- 
ventus aedes) nam et caeterae impiorum sectae atque haereses, suas 
ipsoram speluncas Dominicorum nomine honestare nitnntur; neqne 
ubisit Ecclesia; sed ubi sit Catkolica Ecclesia; hoc enim proprium 
nomen est hujus sanctae, et matris omnium nostrum, quae quidem et 
sponsa est Domini nostri Jesu Christ! unigenili filii Dei, (scriptam est 
enim : Sicut et Christus dilexit Ecclesiam, et semetipsum tradidit 
pro ea, et omnia quae consequuntur :) et figuram prae se fert atque 
Unitationem Superioris Hierusalem guts libera, est, et mater omnium 
nostrum. Quae quum prius sterilis fuerit,nuac est numefosae proli* 
patens* 



38 THE TESTIMONY {CHAPTER; 99r 

accommodated to various things, as of the multitude which 
was in the theatre of Ephesus, it is written : And when he 
had said thus, he dismissed the Church, (or assembly) prop- 
erly and truly it may be said that the Church of the wicked 
is the assembly of heretics, I say, of the Marcionites, and 
the Manicheans, and the rest : therefore now the faith de- 
livers it to you to be most carefully preserved ; AND IN ONE 
HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, in order that you may avoid the 
abominable assemblies of these men, and may adhere ah 
ways to the holy Catholic Church, in which you were re-! 
generated. And if you travel sometimes in the cities, do> 
not simply ask for the Lord's house for the sects of the 
impious and the heretics endeavor to dignify their caverns: 
by the name of the Lord's house, nor yet inquire merely; 
where is the Church; but where is the Catholic Church; 
for this is the proper name of that holy mother of us all, 
which truly is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the only 
begotten Son of God; (for it is written ; like as Christ also; 
loved the Church, and gave himself for it, with all that fol- 
lows) ana! she bears the figure and image of that Jerusalem, 
above, which is free, and is the mother of us all. Who, air; 
though she was barren, is now the parent of a numerous 
seed.' V 

(195) 'The first, then, being repudiated, in the second, 
namely, the Catholic Church, God, as saith St. Paul> placed 

(195) Ib. xxvii. p. 298. Priore namque repudiata, in secumia, 
catholica videlicet Ecclesia, Deus, uti Paulus ait, po suit primum, apos- . 
tolas, secundd prophetas, tertio doctores,postea potestates, turn gratias 
curationum, opitulationes,gubernationes, genera linguarum, et offl- 
nem cujusiibet virtutis speciem : Sapientiam dico et intelligentiam, 
temperantiam et justitiam, misericordiam ethumaiiitatem, insuperabi- 
lemque in persecutionibus patientiara. Q,uae quidem per urnm justitiae 
dextra ac sinistra, per gloria-met ignominiam, primum in perseou- 
tjonibus et angustiissanctos martyres diversis et multiplici flore n 
patientiae coronis redimivit ; nunc vero inpacis temporibus^Dei 



CHAPTER 22.] OP CYRIL. 

first Apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, afterwards 
powers, then the gifts of healing, helps, governments, divers 
kinds of tongues, and every kind of virtue; wisdom and 
understanding, temperance and justice, mercy and humani- 
ty ,and patience not to be overcome by persecutions. Which, 
truly, by the armour of righteousness, on the right hand 
and on the left, by honor and dishonor, at first in persecu- 
tions and sorrows, adorned her holy martyrs with divers 
crowns woven with many a flower of patience; but now, in 
times of peace, receives, by the favor of God, due honor 
from kings, and men conspicuous for their high dignity, and 
from every kind and species of men. For the kings of the 
nations, distributed -in divers places, have limits to their 
power: it is the holy Catholic Church alone which through 
the whole world enjoys an unlimited power. Since God, 
as it is written j has placed peace for her boundary. Of 
which if I were to declare everything, my discourse must 
be continued for many hours. 5 

I have given you this long extract, brethren, from the ad- 
mirable Cyril, in order to shew the striking difference be- 
tween his description of the Catholic Church in the middle 
of the fourth century, and the definition presented by your 
expositors at the present day. For while we behold 
your Doway Catechism, in its exposition of the creed, obli- 
ging every child to say, that the church 'is the congregation 
of all the faithful under Jesus Christ, their invisible head, 
his vicar upon earth, the pope,' while it defines the 



tia.debitos honores recipit aregibus, et viris dignitatum sublimitate 
c ?nspicuis, et omni denique hominum genere ac specie. Qumnque 
leges distributarum diversis locis gentium, suae potestatis limites habe. 
a ?t; solaest sancta Cathojica Ecclesia, quae per ofbem totum indeter- 
flunatagaudet potestate. Posuit enim Deus, ut scriptum est, termi- 
n nm ejuspacem, De qua si omnia dicere vellem, multarum mihi ho- 
farum habenda esset oratio.' 



840 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 22, 

essential parts of the Church to be 'a pope or supreme head, 
bishops, pastors and laity,' while it teaches that from l th& 
pope and general Councils we have our spiritual life and 
motion as we are Christians/ and that the man who has not 
a due subordination and connexion to these must needs be 
deadend not accounted a member of the Church,' -Cyril, ex- 
pounding the same creed, describing the parts of the Church, 
and speaking largely on all that is most important to a true 
understanding of the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, says not 
one word of pope, or Council ; nor does he, in the whole 
of his admirable discourses,afford even an allusion to the ex* 
istence of such a dominion as you claim, over the vast 
extent of Christendom. 

But before I dismiss this witness, let me present to you 
a short extract to shew, that although he took no note of 
pope or Council, he knew how. to value the Scriptures. 
Thus in one place he saith (1 96 ) 'are not the divine Scriptures 
our salvation.' And again: (197) 'Let us therefore,' saith he, 
' declare concerning the Holy Spirit,only those things which 
are written : but if there be any thing unwritten, let us not 
curiously pry into it. The Holy Ghost himself dictated the 
Scriptures ; he also declared concerning himself, whatever 
he chose, or we were able to receive. Let us say therefore 
those things which have been said by him : for whatever 
he has not said we dare not.' 

Alas, brethren I how little did this great luminary of the 

(196) Ib. Cat-xii. 16. p. 170. ' Nonne divinae scripturae sunt sa- 
lus nostra ? 

(197) Ib. Cat. xvi. 2. p. 243-4. ' Dicamus igitur nos de Spiritii 
sancto ea tan turn quae scripta sunt : si quid vero scriptum non fueriti 
ne curiosi scitemur. Ipse spiritus sanctus eloquutus est scripturas: 
ipse de seipso quoque dixit quaecumque voluit, seu quaecumque ca- 
pere potuimus, Dicamus ergo qnae ab ipso dicta sunt : nam quae ill* 
non dixit, nos non audenous.' 



CHAPTER 22.] CYRIL. 241 

primitive Church know of the modern boundaries of faith, 
when he thus confined it to the word of God, recorded in the 
Scriptures, instead of looking for the same dictates of inspi- 
ration in the decrees of Councils, and attributing equal in- 
fallibility to the Catholic Church. Remember, I beseech 
you, that Cyril flourished in the very next generation after 
the Council of Nice, that Macarius the Patriarch of Jerusa- 
lem and eighteen bishops of Palestine had assisted at it,that 
the controversy with the A/ians and Serni-Arians continued 
throughout his own day, and gave him no small disturbance, 
Bo'-lhat, like Athanasius, he had all imaginable reason to 
magnify the authority of this Council, and place its decrees 
on the highest ground. Yet nothing of the kind does he 
any where intimate; but, on the contrary, limits the dictates 
of the Holy Spirit to the Scriptures alone. 

Perhaps I ought not to close this chapter without some 
notice of the frauds which here, as in almost every ancient 
father, have exercised the judgment and drawn forth the 
honest reprobation of your own critics. One of these frauds 
seems to have been either committed or adopted by your 
celebrated doctor Thomas Aquinas, in order to aid the 
power of the pope in the Greek controversy. (198)' Thus/ 
saith Thomas, ' Cyril the patriarch of Jerusalem declares, 
speaking in the person of Christ to Peter : Thou for a 
while, and I forever, with all whom 1 shall set in thy place, 
fully and perfectly, with the sacrament and with authority, 
will Ibe with them, as 1 am with ihee? 'Launoy/ observes 

(198) Ib. p. 388. ' Item Gyrillus Hiei'osolymitanus,' sailh S. Thomas, 
l patriarcha dicit ex persona Christi loquens, [ad Petrum;] ' Tu. cum 
fine, et ego sine fine cum omnibus quqs loco tui ponam : plene et per? 
fecte, sacramento et aulhoritate cum eis ero, sicut sum et tecuni,' 
Launoius epistola ad Paulum Rattijnum Parisiensem Theologum, qua 
toulta similia excutit testimonia, a sancto Thoma in opusculo contra 
rrores Grraecorum objecta, hujus quoquevotftictvprobat. 
21 



ACKNOWLEDGED FKAUD [CHAPTER 22. 

Touttee, candidly, e in the epistle which he wrote to 
Paul Ratuy, where he examines many similar testimo- 
nies adduced by St. Thomas in his work against the errors 
of the Greeks, proves this passage also to be spurious.' And 
in his learned and elaborate Dissertation, where he speaks 
of some other forgeries on the name of Cyril, he uses this 
strong language. (199) ' But that which an ignorant and im- 
prudent rascal has feigned of epistles from Augustin to Cy- 
ril, and Cyril to Augustin concerning the death and miracles 
of Jerome, excels every thing else in impudence ; arid I 
have doubted whether, instead of committing it to the press, 
I ought not rather to have committed it to the flames. The 
opinion prevailed however, lest any thing should be omitted 
in the work which might be desired, that by this one exam- 
ple it should be shewn^ how much could be done by lying. 
Of the same chaff is the fragment cited by S. Thomas 
under the name of Cyril.' 

., Brethren, I cite this passage not only that I may do cre- 
dit to the honest indignation expressed by upright minds 
amongst yourselves, when forced to speak of the shameful 
frauds committed and tolerated so long upon the venerated 
authors of the purer ages, but also for the sake of its bearing 
on what we assume to be genuine. That the writings of 
the fathers are yet sufficiently expurgated, who can assure 
us ? The fact that a writer so profound and so justly cele- 
brated as Thomas Aquinas could either have been himself 
so deceived, or so willing to deceive, is one which you will 

(199) Ib, Dissertalio de Cataches. S. Cyril. Cap. 1. p. xcv. ' Sed om- 
nem fere impudentiam vincit, quod inscilus et imprudens nebulo Au- 
gustini ad Cyrillum, et Cyrilli ad Augustinum epistolas finxit de obitu 
et miraculis S. Hieronymi: queequidern flammis digniora quain typis 
num recuderem dubitavi. Vicit tainen sententia, He in hoc operede- 
siderarentur, ut hoc uno exemplo, quantum mendacio licteerit declara. 
retur. Ejusdeiu furfuris est fragmentum a S. Thoma sub nomine Cf- 
riili citatum.' 



CHAPTER 22.] UPON CYRIL. 243 

not read without mortification and sorrow. And when we 
consider that your whole iabric of ecclesiastical polity and 
peculiar faith is supported by appeals to the remains of anti- 
quity, from which it costs your own brightest scholars so 
much toil to cleanse away the foul rubbish of imposture, 
can you wonder that we ask you to examine them anew ? 
Admiring, as warmly as yourselves, the pure gold of the 
ancient Church, are not our best efforts well spent in sepa- 
rating it from the alloy of unauthorized innovation ? 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The next name on the list of witnesses, is Hilary, the 
bishop of Poictiers, whose works may be set down about 
the year 350. A considerable number of passages occur 
in this writer, which I shall proceed to place before you in 
their own integrity; beginning with those which seem most 
in favor of your doctrine'. 

In his treatise on the Trinity, he introduces, in a fine ad- 
dress to Christ, a sketch of the Sacred history, speaking of 
Moses, and David, Solomon and the prophets, and then 
proceeds to say, (200) ' Matthew, chosen from a publican 
to be an apostle, John, through the kind familiarity of the 
Lord, thought worthy of a revelation of heavenly mysteries, 
Simon, blessed after the acknowledgment of the mystery*, 
(i. e. the mystery of the incarnation) 'fymg 1 at the founda- 
tion of the Church and receiving the Jceys of the celestial 

(200) Hi!. De Trinitat. Lib. VI. Ed. Paris. 1652, p. 110. Electus 
ex publicano Matbceus in apostolum, et ex familiaritate Domini revela- 
tione ccelestiurn mysteriorum dignus Joannes, et post sacrament! con- 
fessione'm beatus SimoTi sedificationi ecclesias subjaceiis, et claves reg- 
ni coelestis accipiens, et reliqui omnes Spiritu Sancto prsudicantes, et 
ex persequutore apostolus vas electionis tuee Paulus, in profundo 
toaris vivens, in coelo tertio homo in paradise ante maftyrium, in mar- 
tyrio perfectae fidei consummata libatio. Ab liis ergo quse teneo edoc i 
tus sum, his immedicabiliter imbutus sum. Et ignosce oifanipoten* 
Deus, quia in his nee emendari possum, et commori 'possum.' 



S3.J HILARY OF tOlCTIKRS. 245 

kingdom, and all the rest preaching by the Holy Spirit, and 
Paul, from a persecutor made an apostle of thine election, 
living in the depth of the sea, a mortal in the third heaven, 
in paradise before martyrdom, the offering of a perfect faith 
being consummated by martyrdom. By these I am in- 
structed in the doctrines which I hold, with these I am un- 
alterably imbued. And forgive me, Almighty God, for adding, 
that in these I am not able to improve, but am able to die.' 

It is perfectly evident that Hilary, in enumerating the pri- 
vileges of the apostles after this manner, makes no allusion 
to the point for which you cite the words I have italicised. 
No man, denies that St. Peter was blessed, that he 
lay at the foundation of the Church, and that he received 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The question is: Did 
he receive any power of jurisdiction or government over the 
other apostles, and was that power transferred to the bish- 
ops of Rome? on 'neither of which points does this, your 
favorite passage, shed a ray of light. Taken by itself, bre- 
thren, in the manner customary with your writers, and aptly 
introduced when the mind of your reader is prepared to 
give it the desired construction, it may, indeed, be made 
to look like evidence on your side. But taken in its real 
connexion, it is manifest that Hilary has here said nothing 
to support your doctrine. 

The next passage, however, amounts to a positive de- 
monstration of his meaning. Hilary is commenting on the 
apparent difficulty presented by the apostles saying, on the 
night in which their Lord was betrayed : ' Now we 
know that thou knowest all 'things. By this we believe that 
thou hast come out from God.' And he addresses them, 
rhetorically in these words: (201)' You,' saith he, <O holy and 

(201) ib. p. 118. E. 'Tanta el tarn Deo propria, vos, 6 sancti t beati 
Y 'ri, ob fidei vestrae meritum claves regni cceloruru sortiti, et ligandi 
21* 



24(> 

blessed men, who had seen so many things only suitable to 
God, performed by our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God> 
and who, on account of the merit of your faith, obtained 
the keys of the kingdom of hf.aven, and the right of bind* 
ing and loosing in heaven and in earth, do you protest that 
you noWjtor the first time, understood the truth that the Sa- 
viour had come forth from God?' In this passage, brethren , 
Hilary admits, in the plainest terms, that the privileges of 
Peter were equally the property of all the apostles ; and of 
course we cannot do justice to his testimony if we put a 
different comment on the other. 

Again, I find our witness declaring, that not Peter, 
but the faith which he confessed^ was the foundation of the 
Church ; just as we have seen the same sentiment in the 
other fathers, and shall, by and by, see it in many more. 
He is addressing himself to the Arians who maintained that 
Christ was a creature. ( 202 ). J Peter,'saith he, 'confessedChrist 
to be the Son of God: but at this day, you,lhe lying priest- 
hood of a new apostolate, cast forth Christ as being a crea- 
ture from nothing. What force do you. give to these glo-. 
rious sayings? Confessing the son of God,, for this he was 
blessed. This is the revelation of the. Father, this is the 
foundation of the Churchy this is the security of eternity, 
from this are the keys of the kingdom of heaven, from this 
his earthly judgments are accounted heavenly.' 

atque solve'ndi in coelo et in terra jus adepti, gesta 'esse pe'r Dominurn 
nostrum Jesum Christum Dei filium vider'atis': el ad M 'qsiod a Deo ex- 
isse se dixit, nunc primuin vos veri -intelligenti-am assequi protes- 
tamini.' 

('202; ib. 521. F. 'Ille,' (i. e. Tetrus) 'confessus est 'Christum filium 
Dei : at iftihi tu liotlie novi 'apostolatus mendax sacerdotium ingeris 
Christum ex nfhilo creaturam. Q,uamvim afFers dictis gloriosis ? fili- 
um Dei confessus?, ob 'hoc beatus est. HBBC revelatio patris est, hoc 
ecclesise fundameri'tu'm est, htec 'sec'uritas feterhitatis est, hinc 
coelorum habet cla've'm,hi"nc terrena ejus.j\idicia'cOelestia sunt.' 



CHAPTER 23.] OF HILARY* 941 

He pursues his argument in the' following animated strain : 
(203) ' Let there be, truly, another faith, if there be any 
other keys of the kingdom of heaven. Let there be ano- 
ther faith, if there is another Church to- come,. against which 
the gates of hell shall not prevail. Let there be another 
faith, if there is to be another apostolate, able to bind and 
loose in heaven, what had been bound and loosed on earth, 
Let there be another faith, if Christ the Son of God, is to 
be preached as being other than lie is. But if this only faith 
which confessed Christ to be the Son of God, merited'the 
glory of all the beatitudes in Peter, it must needs ^be, that 
the faith which only confesses him to be rather a ereature.out 
of nothing, cannot obtain the keys of the kingdom of hea- 
ven; and being constructed neither with apostolic faith nor 
with apostolic virtue, there can be neither Church nor Christ 
connected with-it.' 

There is another passage,, which seems better suited 
to your doctrine, though in truth, it presents no difficul- 
ty. Speaking of the cure of Peter's mother-in-law, and 
expounding it rather mystically^ Hilary observes ; (204) 
'For he first, believed, and is the beginning of the apostolate.' 

(203) lb. 122. D. ' Sit sane fides alia, si aliee claves regni ccclorum 
Bunt. Sit fi ties -alia, si ecclesia alia est ffeturn, adversum qaam portse 
infuri n.on prsevalebunt. Sit fides-alia, si erit alius apostolatus, ligata 
etsoluta per sein, l^rra ligans in ccelo atque solvcns. Sit fides alia, si 
Christus filins Dei alius prffiterquam qui est, pradicabitmv Sin vero 
luec sola 'fides confessa Christum Dei lllium, omnium beatitudinum 
gloriam nteruit ; in Petro : necesse est, ut a quee creaturam potiivs ex 
nihilo confitebitur, claves regni coelorum non adepta, et extra fidem 
W! virtutem aposto-licatn eoustituta, nee ecclesia sit ulla, nee Christus.' 

(204) Ib. Com. in Mat. p. 524. D. ' Nam primus credidit^ et aposto- 
latus est princeps.' It may be^ observed that -the phrase p,rinceps ee- 
cJesiffi, a prince of the Church, occurs to denote a bishop^ in the viii. 
book of Hilary's Treatise on th Trinity, p. 158. D. Speaking 'of St 
Paul's instructions to Titus, he saith : 'Non enrm A postolicus sermo 
'pTobitatishonestatisquepraeceptis hominem tantiina saeculo eonformat 



B48 TESTIMONY OJf [CHAPTER 23 % 

The Word which I have here translated beginning, is Prin, 
ceps, which also signifies a prince, a ruler, and a governor. 
Hence, in your quotations of the passage, your writers give 
it. princeps apostolorum, PRINCE OF THE APOSTLES. But 
.you know,' perfectly well, brethren, that the word princeps 
has the meaning of first, original, primitive, for its prima- 
ry signification, in all our Lexicons. Its secondary meaning 
is chief) principal; and it is only in its third meaning that it 
bears the sense of prince or princess, emperor, chieftain, 
governor, ruler-) &c. Hence, it is not doing justice to Hi- 
lary, nor to the other fathers, to confine this word to that 
single meaning, which the modern languages of Europe have 
derived from it. More especially would this be indefensi- 
ble when Hilary says not princeps apostolorum, the PRINCE 
OF THE APOSTLES, but princeps apostolatus, the beginning 
of the APOSTOLATE,i. e. the apostolic office,which could not 
properly exist until the apostles knew that Christ was the 
Son of God, because no man could be an apostle under the 
Gospel dispensation, until he was enabled to preach the fun- 
damental doctrine of the Gospel. I beg your candid atten- 
tion, brethren, to these remarks, in the firm persuasion, that 
the great bulk of your supposed authority for Peter's juris- 
diction, in the writings of the fathers, rests on this limited 
and unclassical rendering of the .word princeps, which, in 
its first two meanings, expresses what we all allow; and 
which can only be made to serve your purpose by tying it 
down to its third signification, against the whole strain of 
their other testimony. 

I proceed to set before you the rest of Hilary's evidence 

ad vitam, neque rursum per doctrinae scientiam scribam synagogae 
tnstituit ad legem : sed perfectum Ecclesice principem perfectis maxi~ 
marum virtiitum lonis institute, ut et vita ejus ornetur docendo, et dot- 
trina >vivendo.' In all cases of words admitting of more than on 
meaning, the subject matter and the context miust solve the difficulty- 



CHAPTER 23.] HILAR*. 249 

upon the point in question. (205) 'The confession of Peter, 3 
saith he, 'obtained a worthy reward, for that lie saw the Son 
of God in man; Blessed was he who was praised, inas- 
much as his eyes saw and beheld beyond human nature, 
not beholding that which was of flesh and blood, but dis* 
cerning the Son of God fay the revelation of his heavenly 
Father ; and judged worthy, who first acknowledged what 
was of God in Christ. O happy foundation of the Church 
in the declaration of this new name : a rock worthy of that 
building, which should loose the infernal laws, and the gates, 
of hell, and all the bars of death. O happy door-keeper 
of heaven, to whose will the keys of the eternal porch are 
delivered, of which the earthly judgment is a prejudicated 
authority in heaven, that those things which are bound or 
loosed on earth may obtain in heaven a like condition.' 

To make this passage consistent with the rest of Hilary's 
testimony, it would-be necessary to understand it as spoken 
of the faith rather than of the person of Peter. And yet 
it is evident, that even if it were spoken of him personally, 
it would still avail nothing to the support of your doctrine, 
because I have already quoted the declaration of the same 
witness, asserting the same privileges of all the apostles, 

(205) Ib. 572. E. ' Et dignum plane confessio Petri premium con- 
secuta est, quia Dei filium in homine vidissct. Beatus hie est, qui 
ultra humanum oculos inicndisse et vidisse laudatus est: nonid quod 
ex came et sanguine erat contuens, sod Dei filium coelestis patris reve- 
latione conspiciens : dignusque judicatus, qui quod in Christo Dei ea- 
sel, primus agnosceret. O in nuncupatione riovi nominis felix Eccle- 
'lae fundamcnturn : dignaqne aedificatione illius petra, quae infernal 
leges, ettartavi portas, etonmia mortis claustra dissolveret. O beatus 
coeli janitor, cujus-arbitrio claves aeterni aditus trnduntur, cujus ter- 
festre judiciurn praejudicata autoritas sit in coelo : tit quae in terrja 
au t ligata sint aut soluta, statuti ejusdem coiiditionem obtineant et in 
coelo.' 



S50 TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 23. 

Again, we read, in the same work of Hilary: (206) 
< This is to be considered in Peter, that he preceded the 
others in faith. For while the others were still igno- 
rant, he first answered : Thou are the Son of the living God. 
He first expressed his abhorrence of the passion of Christ, 
while he thought it evil. He first answered, that he was 
ready to die for his Lord, and that he would not deny him. 
He first refused to have his feet washed. He drew a sword 
also, against those who took his Lord. But at his' (I sup- 
pose Christs') ' ascent into the ship, the wind and the sea 
were calmed : by the return of their serenity, the eternal 
peace and tranquillity of the Church is indicated. And be- 
cause then he came, (in power) so manifest, they all, justly 
astonished, said ; Truly he is the Son of God.' 

This passage is one of many, which explains what the an- 
cients meant by Peter's primacy. He was first, primus, in 
order of time, to profess his iaith ; therefore he was the 
first, to receive the assurance of the consequent blessing. I 
have set forth the context of these passages at large, for 
the purpose of shewing you, brethren, that Hilary did not 
connect his praise of Peter with any idea of pastoral power 
or government over his fellow apostles ; still less, with any 
notion of an official jurisdiction to be passed down to his 
successors in the Church of Rome. We shall see, y/re- 

(206) Ib. 565. Com in Mat. < Et hoc in Petro considerandmn nst, 
fide cum. cae.teros anteisse. Nam ignorantibus caetaris, primus respon- 
dit : Tu es filius Dei vivi. ' Primus passionom, dum malurn putnt, cte- 
testatus est. Primus et moiiturum se, et non negaturum spopondit. 
Primus lavtiri sibi pedes probibuit. Gladium quoque adversus eos, 
qui Dominum comprebendebant, eduxit. Ascensn aulem ejus in na- 
vim, ventum et mare esse sedatum : post claritatis suae reditum, 
aeterna ecclesiae pax et tranquillitas indicator. Et quia turn manifes-- 
tus adveniet, recte admirantes universi Joquuti gunt: Vcrefilius B 



CHAPTER 23. j OF HILARY. 251 

gently, more proof, that such a doctrine had no place in the 
system of Hilary. 

For listen to him, commenting on the 118th Psalm : (207) 
'What is thy portion, O Peter? Thou hadst renounced all 
things, saying to thy Lord : Behold we have left all and 
have followed thee, what shall we have therefore ? And 
he had answered: Amen I say unto you, that you who 
have followed me in the regeneration, shall sit upon twelve 
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: and others, at 
your example, leaving all things, he had promised that they 
should receive an hundred fold, and afterwards, eternal life.' 

' What then. Peter, is thy portion. Thou hast, though I 
do not dare to say more than an hundred fold, nevertheless 
I say that thy possessions are beyond calculation. Fcr 
thou sayest : What I have, 1 give unto thee, in the name of 
Jesus Christ, arise and walk. O happy possession ! O 
perfect portion of God ! Thou dost not dispense earthly 
treasure, but thou makest amends for the work of nature ; 
and restorest the condemned parts of a deformed birth. 
Thou orderesta man born lame, to walk, and inchest a man 

(207) Ib. p. 890. Enar. in Psalm. 118. ' t^uid est, Petre, istud quod 
pbssides ? Renunciaveras omnibus, Deo tuo dicens: L'cce nos orn- 
nia dereliquimus, et secuti sumus te, quid erit nobis ? Et tibi ille re- 
sponderal: Amen dico vobis, quod vos qui secuti estis me, in regen- 
Matione sedebitis sliper duodecim thronos judicautes duodecim tribus 
Israeli. Etexemplo vestro caeteris relinquentibus cuncta spoponderat, 
quod et centuplum acciperent, et dehinc vitam aeternam possessuri es- 
sent. Quid est igitur istud, Petre, quod habes ? Habes plane, et non 
audeo dicere plus te centuploobtinere, dico tamen te sine multiplica- 
uone calculi possidere. Dicis enim : Q,uod habeo, hoc tibi do, in nom- 
ine Jesu Christi surge et ambula. O felix possessio ! O perfecta Dei 
portio ! Non terrena largiris, sed naturae opus rependis : et vitiosi 
partus damna restauras. Claudum natum ingredi jubes, et multae ae- 
tatis virum incessu rudi incitas. Has opes tribuit, cujus Deus portio 
est. Novit et Paulus divitiae suae glorias, dicens : Mihi autem absit 
gloriari : nisi in cruce Domini mei Jesu Christi,' &c. 



TESTIMONY OP [CHAPTER 23. 

of many years to leap with vigor. He bestows this 
wealth, whose portion is God. And Paul knows the glo- 
ries of his riches, saying ; God forbid that I should glory, 
unless in the cross of Jesus Christ, my Lord.' &c. 

If Hilary, brethren, had professed your notions, would 
he, in thus setting forth the portion of Peter, have passed by 
that peculiar portion in which none of the other apostles 
shared, viz. the plenitude of power, as the ruler of them 
all? 

Again, in his comment on the 51th Psalm, Hilary repeats 
the declaration that (208) 'the apostles,' (not Peter only,) 
'obtained the keys of the heavens.' And in his books on 
the Trinity he calls St. Paul ' The Master of the nations,' 
'The chosen Doctor of the nations,'- And again : 'The elect 
master of the Church,' (209) These titles would far better 
suit your hypothesis, than anything which Hilary says of 
Peter. Indeed the latter would be precisely to the point, 
if the subject were not the wrong apostle. 

One extract more from the writings of Hilary may serve 
to complete his testimony. It is from his epistle to the 
emperor Constantius, complaining of his exile, deploring the 
distracted state of the Church, and referring the emperor to 
Scripture for the truth ol the orthodox doctrine on the 
Trinity. In my opinion, it exhibits clearly the polity of the 
Church, and the regard paid to Councils, in the days of 
Hilary . 

(208) Ib. In Psalm 51. Enar. p. 706. l Apostoli coelorum claves soi- 
titi sunt.' 

(209) Ib. De Trinit. Lib. vi. p. 125. D. Non incerta et infirmailie, 
qui electionis est vas, locutus est : Nee Magister gentium, et Apostolus 
Christi ambiguae doctrinae suae errorem reliquit.' 

Ib. Lib. vii. p. 158. F. 'Non ignoravit doctor hie gentium.et ex consci- 
entia loquentis atque habitantis in se Christ! Ecclesiee electus magister. 



CHAPTER 23.] HILARY. 253 

(210) { I am a bishop,' saith he, addressing the emperor, 
< in the communion of all the Churches and bishops of 
Gaul, although continuing in exile, and as yet distributing 
the communion of the Church though my presbyters. 
But I am banished not through crime, but through faction, 
and by false messengers of the Council deceiving thee, most 
pious emperor.' &c. 

(211) ' Dangerous, as well as miserable is our condition/ 
continues our author, ' now that there are as many creeds 
as wills, as many doctrines as manners, and as many causes 
of blasphemy as vices, whilst our faith ^ is written as we 
choose, or as we choose is interpreted. And although, since 
there is one God, and one Lord, and one baptism, there 
should be one faith, we cut out a part from that only faith ; 

(210) Ad Constantium Augustum Liber. Ib. p. 341. ' Episcopus 
ego sum in omnium Gallicarum Ecclesiarum atque episcoporum com- 
munione, licet in exilio permanens, etEcclesise adhuc per presbyteros 
tneos communionem distribuens. Exulo autem non crimine, sed fne- 
tione, et falsis nunciis synodi apud te Imperatorem pium,' &c. 

(211) Ib. 343. 'Periculosum nobis admodum, atque etiam miserabile 
est, tot nunc fides existere, quot voluntates : et tot nobis doetrinas esse 
quot mores : et tot causas blasphemiarum pullulare, quot vitia sunt : 
dum au*. ita fides scribuntur, ut volumus, aut ita ut volumus, intelli- 
guntur. Et cum secundum unum Deum et unum Dominum, et unum 
baptisma, fides una sit, excidimus ab ea fide qua; sola est : et dum plures 
fiunt, ad id coeperunt esse, ne ullasit. Conscii enim nobis invicem su- 
n\us, post Niceni Conventus Synodum nihil aliud quam fidem scribi. 
Deum in verbis pugna est, dum de novitatibus quffistio est, dum de an>- 
biguis occasio est, dum de autoribus querela est, dum de studiis certa- 
men est, dum in consensu difficultaa est, dum alter alteri anathema 
ossecoepit: prope jam nemo Christi est. Incerto eum doctrinarum 
vento vagamur, et aut dum docemus, perturbamus : aut dum docemur, 
arramus. Jam vero proximi anni fides, quid jam de immutatione in 
sehabet? Primum quse homousion decernit taceri : sequens rursum, 
<!Uffi homousion decernit et pradicat. Tertium deinceps, quse usiam 
s impliciter a patribus prsesumptam, per indulgent] am excusat. Po"stre- 

quartum, quas non excusat t sed condemnat.' 
22 



254 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 23. 

and while we make many creeds, we begin to approach that 
state where there is none. For we are conscious amongst 
ourselves, that since the Council of Nice, nothing has been 
written but creeds. It is a battle about God in words, while 
there is a dispute about novelties, while there is a falling 
into snares through ambiguities, while there is a quarrel about 
authors, and a conflict about studies, while there is difficul- 
ty in consent, while one begins to pronounce anathema 
against another ; already we are near the point when no 
one is of Christ. We wander in an uncertain wind of 
doctrines, and either we trouble others while we instruct, 
or we err while we are instructed. Already it may be asked, 
whether the creed of the last year has any thing immuta- 
ble about it ? First there is a council which decrees that 
the word con substantial should be disused : then another 
which decrees and preaches this same consubstantiality : af- 
terwards a third, which excuses the word substance by way 
ot indulgence, inasmuch as it was taken in simplicity from 
the fathers ; lastly a fourth, which excuses not, but con- 
demns it.' 

I pass on however to the conclusion of Hilary's introduc- 
tory address, where, with honest boldness, he claims the 
attention of the emperor on a different ground from the de- 
crees of Councils. (212) ' Hear/ saith he, ' I ask, those 
things which are written concerning Christ, lest, instead of 

(212) Ib. p. 345. D. 'Audi, rogo, ea quse de Christo suiit scripta, ne 
sub eis ea quse non scripta sunt prsedicentur. Summitte ad ea, quee de 
libris locnturus sum, aures tuas: fidem tuam ad Deutn erigas. Audi, 
quod proficit ad fidem, ad unitatem, ad ajternitatem. Locutur- 
us sum tecum cum honore regni et fidei tuae, omnia ad orientis et 
occidentis paeem profutura; sub publicaconscientia sub synodo dissi- 
dent! sub lite famosa. Praemitto interim pignusfuturi apud te sermo- 
nis mei. Non aliqua ad scandalum, neque quae extra Evangeli" 01 
sunt, defendam,' &c. 



CHAPTER 2tt.] OF HILARY. 255 

these, those things which are not written should be 
preached. Submit your ears to what I shall say to you, 
from the books. You may raise your faith to God. Hear 
what is profitable for faith, for unity, lor eternity. I shall 
set before you, with due respect towards your kingdom and 
your faith, all those things which may benefit the peace 
both of the East and of the West ; under the public con- 
science, under contending councils, under notorious strife. 
I give you beforehand, meanwhile, a pledge of my future 
discourse ; I shall support nothing for the sake of scandal, 
nor any thing which goes beyond the Gospel.' 

To my mind, brethren, the state of things disclosed in 
this extract is at utter variance with your present polity 
For if the bishop of Rome had then been acknowledged 
the supreme judge of all religious causes, according to your 
system, how could Hilary have been banished by faction, 
through the arts of false messengers sent from the Council 
to the emperor ? If the pope were then what you hold him 
to be now, why did not Hilary appeal to him, and cite before 
his tribunal the disturbers of his diocese ? Or at least, why 
does he not tell the emperor something about the true sys- 
tem of Apostolical government, and remind him that he 
ought not to suffer/ a bishop to be banished, until he had the 
sanction of the pope of Rome, the successor of Peter, who 
had ' the authority not of a mere man, but of the true God 
upon the earth,' in the words of your canon law ? Is it 
credible that a banished bishop, seeking the favor of his 
prince, and believing that by divine right the pope of 
Rome was what you hold him to be, could omit all 
allusion to the official prerogatives of this chief ruler of 
Christ's Church on such an occasion, and write as if there 
were no earthly governor or supreme judge over the people 
of Gq,d ? 



256 HILARY. [CHAPTER && 

But this extract shews, further, the miserable distractions 
of the Church, and the total inefficiency of Councils to 
command acquiescence or general consent. How does this 
consist with your doctrine, that a General Council, approved 
by the pope, was an infallible director, being the special 
organ of the Holy Ghost, in the opinion of the fathers ? 
Where does Hilary speak in such a strain of the Council 
of Nice ? Does he not, on the contrary, make light of all 
these councils, speak of them all with the same apparent dis- 
approbation, and instead of telling the emperor that the 
Nicene Synod was infallible, does he not pledge himself to 
confine his argument to the Scriptures alone ? Most mani- 
fest, then, brethren, does it seem to my judgment, that Hilary 
knew nothing of either of these points which are now con- 
sidered by you as fundamental, viz. the supreme authority 
of the pope, and the infallibility of General Councils. So 
that on the whole, I consider this witness as a decided ad- 
versary to the antiquity and apostolical warrant of your 
exclusive claims. His testimony, indeed, like that of many 
others, is not so much positive as circumstantial ; but to 
those who are accustomed to weigh the force of testimony, 
there is none so convincing, because there is none so little 
exposed to fraud or imposition. 



CHAPTER XXI V . 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

To Basil, surnamed the Great, the celebrated bishop of 
Cesarea, we must now recur, for the next link in our chain 
of testimony. His works may be set down to A. D. 370, 
and will furnish several proofs, which, to my mind, seem 
conclusive, that your doctrine of Roman supremacy made 
no part of his system.. 

I shall begin with citing a passage in which he mentions 
Peter incidentally, because I do not find any thing more to 
.your purpose in his writings. Speaking of the general prin- 
ciple, that by the names of men, we do not understand their 
essence or their substance, but only those circumstances or 
qualities by which one individual stands personally distin- 
guished from others, he says : (213) 'Therefore by this 
word,' (sc. Peter,) ' we understand the SOB of Jonah, who 
was of Bethsaida, the brother of Andrew, who, from a fish- 
erman, was called to the ministry 'of the apostolate. Who, 

in the citations from 'Basil, I quote your own latin version. 

(213) Basil op. om. Ed. Benedict. Paris. A. D. 1721. Tom. l.p. 240 . 
'lllico enim per hanc vocem intelligimus lonae filium, qui fuit ex 
Bethsaida, Andreae fratrem,cpti ex piscatore ad apostolatus ministerium 
vocatus est. Qui quoniam fide prrestabat, Ecclesiae sedificationem in 
seipsum recepit : quorum nihil quidquam essentia est, si essentiatam- 
quam substantia intelligatur. Q,ua re nomen characterem quidem Pet 
nobis circumscribit,' &c. 
22* 



258 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 24. 

because he stood before others in faith, received upon him- 
self the building of the Church :. Of which things there is 
nothing concerning the essence of Peter, if, by essence, we 
understand his substance. Wherefore the name of Peter, 
truly, represents his character.' &c. 

We see here,, the oft-repeated fact, that Peter was the 
first foundation stone in the building of the Church, because 
he was the first to acknowledge his Redeemer. But if, by 
this, Basil intended to intimate your doctrine, he would have 
been more likely to have said, that Peter was called from 
being a fisherman to the. government of the apostolate ; in- 
stead of saying, that he was called to its service or ministry. 

My next quotation, however, is more to the purpose. It 
is an extract from the liturgy which bears the name of Ba a 
sil : and embraces that part where prayer is offered for the 
Vishop of Alexandria, styling him, Most holy and blessed 
pontiff, father, pope, and patriarch, and 'calling his office 
the holy pontificate or high priesthood ; while there is not, 
'either here, or elsewhere through the whole of this interest- 
ing liturgy, the slightest reference to the l Vicar of Christ,' 
the ' chief ruler,' the pope of Rome. The passage to 
which I refer is as follows :. 

(214) ' Let us again beseech the omnipotent and merci- 
ful God, the Father of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus 

(214) Ib. Tom. 2. p. 675. < Oratio pro Papa.' 

" <J Rursus etiam rogemus bmnipotentera et mis'ericordem Deum, Pa- 
trem D6mtni,Dei et salvatoristtostri Jesu Christi/per quern obsecramus 
et rogamus te, amator homihum, bone Domine. Memento, Domine, 
anctissimi et beatissimi Pontifici's nostn. Abba N. Papae et Patriar- 
chae magnaB 'tpfeis Alexandriae. Couservane, conserva eum nobis> 
per annos multos et tempora pacifica, perfecte fuftgentem eo qui HH- * 
te commissus est pofttificatu sancto,secundum sancH;ara et beatam tuaro 
voluntatem, recte dispefn^aiftetti verbum veritatis, pascentemque in 
sanctitate et justitia populum tuum: cum omnibus -tfrthodoxis Episco- 



CHAPTER 24.] OF BASIL. 259 

Christ, through whom we pray and implore thee, O lover of 
men, good Lord. Remember, O Lord, our most holy and 
blessed pontiff, father N. pope and patriarch of the great 
city of Alexandria. Preserve him to us, through many 
years and peaceful times, so that he may perfectly fulfil the 
holy high priesthood (or pontificate) which thou hast com- 
mitted to him, according to thy holy and blessed willj rightly 
dispensing the word of truth, and feeding thy people in ho- 
liness and righteousness : together with all orthodox bishops, 
presbyters, and deacons, and with the plenitude of thy holy, 
only, catholic and apostolic Church : benignly granting to 
them and to us, perpetual peace and health.' 

I need not tell you, brethren, that your liturgies, all over 
the world, contain a prayer of the above character for the 
pope of Rome ; but the <proof here furnished is conclusive 
evidence that the primitive Church knew nothing of such a 
custom ; since at so late a day as the close of the fourth 
ceatury, the pope of Ronnie had no distinct place in the de- 
votions of the Church at Alexandria, If your chief pon- 
tiff was then universally regarded as you imagine, how, 1 
beseech you, could it have been, that a liturgy providing so 
honotable a place fjbr the pope of Alexandria, should have 
omitted all mention of that l Vicar of Christ' who was, by di- 
vine appointment } the.9upreme pastor of the whole Church 
the chief ruler wer all ? 

Let me proceed, however., to another passage, where 
Basil laments the distracted state of the Church, and ac- 
counts for it, in terms altogether irreconcileable with your 
doctrine. The extract is long, but it will abundantly repay 
an attentive perusal. 

pis, Presbyteris, Diaconis, cum omni plenitudine sanctae, solius, Ca- 
tholicae et Apostolicae tuae Ecclesiae : pacesn et sanitatem ipsii et 
nobis benigne concedens, diebus omnibus.' 



TfiE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 24, 

(215) 'By the favor and benignity of the most High 
God,' saith our author, c through the grace of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, and from the operation of. the Holy Spirit, I 
was liberated from the false doctrines of the Gentiles,, and 
educated from the first, by Christian parents, from the ancient 
original, and from a boy was taught by them the sacred 
Scriptures, which led me to the knowledge of the truth. 
But when I came to maturity, travelling abroad, and con- 
versant, as may well be believed, in many kinds of business, 
I observed that in all other arts and sciences there was the 
utmost concord amongst those who diligently cultivated 
them ; while, on the contrary, in the only Church of God, 
for which Christ died, and upon which he poured out so 
abundantly the Holy Spirit, I saw-many differing most wide- 
ly, not only among themselves, but also in the interpretation 
of the sacred Scriptures. And, what chiefly alarmed me, 
I found the very bishops of the Church fixed in such a di- 
versity of opinion and sentiment among themselves, so hos- 

(215) Basil. Proemium de judicio Dei. I. forn. 2. p. 213. 

Optimi Dei benignitate ac humanitate, per gratiam Domini nostri 
Jesu-Chrisli, ex Spiritus Sancti o,peratione,. ! a falsa quidem Gentilium 
traditione ac doctrina liberatus, ab antiqua vero origine et ab initio a 
Christianis parentibus educatus, vel apuero dicfici nbipsis litteras sa- 
eras, : quae me ad veritatis cogniiio'nem addtixerunt. Ubi vero ad viri- 
lem aetatem perveni, tune saepius peregrinatus, et in pluribus, ut credi 
par est, negotiis versatus, in caeteris quidem artibus et scientiis maxi- 
mam inter eos qui illarum quasque diligenter excolebant, concordiam 
animadverti : contra vero, in sola Dei !Ecclesia, pro qua Christus mop- 
taos est,-et super quam large Spiritutn Sanctum effudit, multos vidi et 
inter so, et in divinis litteris intellige i ndis valde admodum dissentjre. 
Et quod maxime horrendmn est, reperi ipsos Ecclesise prsefectos ha 
tanta inter se sentential ao opinioriis diversitate eonetitui, sicque Dom- 
ini nostri Jesu Christi mandatis adversari, Deique Ecclcsiam tarn irtt- 
imisencorditer dilacerare, tamque crudeTiter obturbare ejus gregem, ut ( 
esortis Anomoeis, nune, si unquam alias, inipsis quoque impleatur i^ 
lud : $z vobis ipaig exiatrgj&it mri loquentes perversa, ut abducant Ais- 
cipulos post st.' 

I 



24.] OF BASIL. 261 

tile to the precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ, lacerating 
with so little pity the Church of God, and so cruelly troub- 
ling his flock, that now, if ever, the Anomceans *seemed 
to have arisen, in whom that prophecy was fulfilled : And 
also of yourselves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, 
that they might draw away disciples after them. > 

' When I beheld these and other things of the like des- 
cription,' continues Basil, ' and was perplexed to discover 
the cause of so much evil> I lived some time as if in pro- 
found darkness, and in a balance ; now inclining on one side, 
and then upon the other, at one time drawn away by regard 
for the long established customs of men, and again influenced 
by the truth which I. had learned from the Holy Scriptures. 
But after I had remained for a long while in this condition, 
and had looked diligently into the cause of which I have 

2. ' Ha3C atque ejusdem generis alia cum intuerer, praetereaqua 
cum dubitarem quae et unde esset tanti mali causa ; primum quidetn 
quasi in profundis tenebris degebam,et tamquam in statcra constitutes, 
znodo hucmodoiHuc propendebam, quod alins alio aut ad seipsum ma 
traherel,ob diutinam homlnum consuetudinem, aut rursus alio propet- 
leret, ob earn quam in divinis Scripturis agnovissem veritatem. Cum 
nutem in eo statu tliu permansissem, et earn quam dixi causam diligett- 
ter perscrutarer, mihi in mentem venit libri Judicum, qui narrat unun> 
quemque fecisse quod in oculis suis rectum erat atque eliam causam 
ejus rei declarat, his verbis: In dicbus illis non erat rex in Israel. 
Hommigitur cum mihi in mentem venisset, illud quoque de praesenfi 
serum statu exeogitavi : quod forte dictu quidem horrendum est el 
rairabile, aed tamen, si intelligatur, verissimum est. Num videlicet 
inter alumnos Ecclesiae tanta haec discordia ac pugna hodieque exo* 
riatur ob unius magni verique et solius universorum regis ac Dei con- 
temptum, cum quisque deserat Domini nostri Jesu Christi doctrinam, 
et quasdam ratiocinationes ac regulas peculiares suapte auctoritate si- 
bi arroget, malitque adversus Dominum imperare quam a Domino 
regi.' 

*Tho original Greek is very expressive, signifying, as you know, 
brethren, those who were unlike each other; instead of being accord- 
la g to the rule of the Gospel, ' of the same mind. 1 



262 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 24. 

spoken, the book of Judges came into my mind, which re- 
lates how every man did that which was right in his own 
eyes, and likewise declares the cause of this thing in these 
words : In those days there was no Icing in Israel. When 
I recollected this, I thought the same might be applied to 
the present state of things : which is verily fearful and won- 
derful to tell, and yet, if it be rightly understood, is most 
true. For does not the discord and contention which exist 
at this day throughout the Church, arise from their con- 
tempt of that One great, true, and only King and God of 
the Universe, while every one deserts the doctrine of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, and undertakes to establish arguments 
and rules by his own authority, and chooses rather to govern 
against the Lord, than to be ruled by the. Lord.' 

In this extract, brethren, it seems impossible to avoid see- 
ing that there was no consolidated empire over the whole 
Church conceded to any particular bishop, during the days 
of Basil. He deplores the divisions, the distractions, the 
contentions, in which the bishops themselves were engaged. 
But he makes no allusion to the authority of the Vicar of 
Christ, before whose infallible tribunal every dispute and 
controversy should have been hushed into silence and peace. 
He attributes the wretched state of the Church to the same 
cause which the book of Judges assigns for the condition of 
Israel : Every man did that which was right in his own 
eyes, because there was no king, no supreme governor, no 
chief ruler. But he is so far from referring to the supre- 
macy of any earthly vicegerent, that he expressly applies 
his observation to the King of kings ; saying, that men were 
in strife through contempt of God, the only Sovereign, and 
that they preferred ruling against the Lord Jesus Christ, ra 
ther than be governed by him. What can more plainly prove 
the non-existence of your present doctrine at that day ? Is 



CHAPTER 24.] OF BASIL. 263 

it not precisely in times of anarchy and confusion, that the 
lovers of order insist most upon the rights of governors? 
And if the Catholic Church had then acknowledged an uni- 
versal pope, who held the place of the true God upon the 
earth, as your Canon law asserts, and to whom, in the words 
of your Dosvay Commentary, Christ had given the pleni- 
tude ofpoiutr,how should the great Basil, himself an Arch- 
bishop, have complained of the contentions which distract- 
ed the Church, without one word of reference to the only 
appointed and authoritative mode by which they could have 
been appeased ? 

The same topic occurs with melancholy frequency in 
many other parts of the works of our author ; hut it may 
be more satisfactory if I turn to some passages, which apply 
to a different point in the question before us. 

You know that Basil flourished after the division of the 
Roman empire, that the Eastern emperor Valens favour- 
ed Arianism, and that Basil's orthodoxy exposed him to no 
small measure of persecution. The state of the Church 
was of necessity exceedingly troubled, and moved him to 
continual lamentations and regrets. Amongst the means 
which he thought likely to be of service, we find him wri- 
ting to Athanasius, the celebrated bishop of Alexandria, 
whose testimony we have already examined, in order to en- 
gage him to interest the bishops of the Western empire, on 
behalf of their Eastern brethren. From this epistle I shall 
extract some paragraphs worthy of your serious attention. 

(216) <I have of late,' saith Basil, addressing Athanasi- 

(216) Basil. Ep. Athanasio Episcopo Alexandriae. Op. om. Tom. 3. 
P- 159. ' Dudum novi et ipse pro mediocri mea rerum notitia, unam 
esse ecclesiis nostris auxilii viam, si nobiscum conspirent Occidentals 
episcopi. Nam si voluerint, quod adhibuerunt studium in uno aut al- 
, perverse in Occidente sentire deprehensis, illud eliam pro nos- 



264 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 24. 

us, 'bethought me, according to my moderate knowledge of 
things, of one way by which our Churches might be aided, 
if the Western bishops would consent with us. For if they 
were willing to shew for the sake of our diocese, the care 
which they have used towards those who have been detect- 
ed in one heresy or another, in the West ; perhaps it might 
yield some benefit to the common welfare, the emperor 
reverencing the authority of numbers, and the people every 
where being disposed to. follow the majority without hesita- 
tion. But who is more influential in performing such a de- 
sign than thee ? Who is more acute in the discovery of 
what is expedient ? Who more efficient in performing what 
is profitable ? Who more prone to grieve for the afflictions 
of his brethren ? What is more highly venerated than thy 
hoary head, by the whole Western Church ? Leave then 
some memorial of thy mode of life to mortals, O most hon- 
ored father. Adorn thine innumerable labors in the cause of 
piety, by this one deed : send some men from thy Church, 
who are powerful in sound doctrine, to the Western bishops: 
explain to them the calamities with which we are oppress- 
ed : suggest the method of relief: thou mayest become a 

trarum partium parcecia ostendere ; fortasse rebus communibus poiini- 
hil accesserit utilitatis, Imperatore multitudinis auctoritatem reverente 
el populis ubique ipsos sine dubio sequentibus. Q,uis autem ad haeo 
perficienda potentiof est prudentia tua ? Q,uis ad videndum quid 
deceat acutior ? quisad perficienda quae prosunt efficacior? Quis ad 
dolendum ex fratrum afflictions propensior ? Quis perquam reverends 
canitie tua Occident! toti venerabilior ? Relinque aliqubd monumen- 
turn mortalibus, tua vivendi ratione dignum ; patcr in primis venerande. 
Innumeros illos pro pietate exantlatos labores hoc uno facto exorna ; 
mitte aliquos ex sancta tua ecclesia viros in sana doctrina potentes ad 
Occidentales episcopos : expone illis calaraitates quibus premimur: 
suggere modum opis ferendae : fias Samuel ecclcsiis : affligere unfl 
cum populis bello pugnatis : offer pacificas preces : pete gratiam a 
Domino, ut aliquod pacismonumentum ecclesiis immittat.' &c. 



CHAPTER 24.J OP BASIL. 265 

Samuel to the Churches : be afflicted together with those 
vfho are involved in war : offer thy prayers for peace : ask 
favor from the Lord, that he may graciously appoint to us ' 
some memorial of peace*' 

In this passage, brethren, you clearly see how distinct 
\vere the Churches ot the Eastern empire from those of the 
West, in the days of Basil. There is not, here, the least 
allusion to the authority of one common ruler at Rome, but 
a strong appeal to Athanasius, at Alexandria, to excite a 
movement among the bishops of the West in general, which 
might favorably influence the Eastern emperor and the 
people at large. It was to be a voluntary effort throughout. It 
depended, for its execution, on the disposition of Athanasi- 
us, on the disposition of the West, and finally, on the dispo- 
sition of the emperor and the Eastern Christians. But if, 
as you suppose, the whole Church throughout the world 
was placed from the beginning, by divine authority, under 
the government of Peter and of the Roman bishop, what 
had Basil to do with beseeching Athanasius to excite the 
compassion of the western bishops in his behalf? In such 
a case, he would have had a legal right to the protection of 
Rome, and could not have anticipated the want of willing- 
ness on the part of the western bishops to take the same 
care of heresy in the East that they had done in the West 
among themselves. So that we have, here, the plainest 
evidence that there was no such thing as Roman suprema- 
cy over the Catholic Church in the mind of Basil ; that the 
dominion of one Church as the mother and mistress Church 
of the whole Christian world, was perfectly unknown to him ; 
and that the patriarchs of the East and the West could not 
affect each other by any ecclesiastical rule of subordination, 
but only by that influence which sympathy produces 
amongst bodies mutually independent and free. , 
23 



266 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 24. 

There are several other epistles on the same subject, ad- 
dressed to the bishops of Italy and Gaul, and one addressed 
to Damasus, then bishop of Rome ; in all of which there is 
the same evidence of principle and polity, and the same ab- 
sence of ecclesiastical rule and domination. The appeal in 
every instance is made to charity, to Christian love, and to 
Christian influence; and in none of them do I find a sentence 
of warrant for your present doctrine. 

The other passage which I designed to cite from this epis- 
tle, will shew you how Basil was accustomed to speak of 
other Churches. Recommending in the first place, as de- 
manding the earliest attention of Athanasius, the condition 
of the Church at Antioch, he says: (217) 'For what do 
the Churches of the whole world contain, preferable to that 
of Antioch ? Wherefore, if that Church is brought back 
to peace, nothing can hinder, but that the head being streng- 
thened will supply health to the whole body.' Did Basil 
know any thing of Roman supremacy, or believe, that the 
Church of Rome was the mother and mistress of the whole 
Christian world, when he wrote this passage ? And again, 
in another of his epistles, he calls the Church of Nicopolis 
(218) 'the mother Church,' clearly shewing the equality of 
the great dioceses of the Christian world in that day, and 
that the confining these phrases to the Church of Rome, 
and the dominion claimed for her over the Church Univer- 
sal, were no parts of Basil's system. 

But it may be well to cite the opinion of Basil on an in- 

(217) Ib. ' duidautem habeantorbis terrarum eccleaias, quod prse- 
ferendum sit Antiochiee ? quam si contingeret ad eoncordiam redire. 
nihil impediret, quomiuus velut caput corroboratum universe corpori 
sanitatem suppeditet. 

(218) Ib. Ep. Clericis Colcmiensibus. p. 350. ' Cavete litigetis cum 
Yestra matre Ecclesia Nicopolitana :' and in the next epistle, '.AH Co- 
lonicE magistratilus,' he calls that Church 'teneram matrem,' &c, . 



CHAPTER 24.] BASIL. 267 

cidental question of Roman authority. The passage occurs 
in his epistle to Amphilochius concerning the canons ; and 
it will probably aid you in discerning the independence of 
the Churches. It is as follows : 

(219) ' The Encratites, the Saccophori, and the Apotac- 
titse/ saith our author, 'are not subject to the same rule as 
the Novatians, because a canon has been declared concer- 
ning them, although various ; but what concerns the others 
has been past by in silence. Nevertheless we rebaptize 
such according to the one manner. But if rebaptization is 
prohibited with you, as it is among the Romans, yet for the 
sake of a certain order, let our mode prevail.' 1 do not 
see, brethren, how this passage can be brought to accord 
with your favorite doctrine. For, manifestly, if Rome was 
held, by Basil, to be the mother and mistress of all the 
Churches, and if every ecclesiastical question, according to 
your canon law, was then to be decided at the tribunal of 
her bishop, a prohibition of rebaptization amongst the Ro- 
mans could not be made consistent with an allowance of it 
amongst the Greeks. 

Let us next inquire into Basil's mode of speaking of 
General Councils. And this we are able to ascertain with 
reasonable certainty from a passage in which he mentions the 
great Council of Nice, but not in terms which seem at 
all consistent with your doctrine. 

(220) ' We are the heirs of those fathers,' saith he, 'who 

(219) Ib. p. 296. 'Encratitse, et Apolactitse non subjiciuntur 
eidem ration!, cui et Novatiani, quiadeilhs editus Canon, etsi varius; 
IUBB autem ad istos pertinent, silentio stint praetermisse. Nos autem 
Una ratione tales rebaptizamus. Quod si apud vos prohibita est re- 
oaptizatio, sicut et apud Romanes, fficonomise alicujus gratia, nostra 
'amen ratio vim obtineat.' 

(<220) Ib. p. 145. * Siquidem et eorumdem patrum hseredes sumus, 
111 quondam Nicaeae magnum pietatis praeconium promulgarunt : cu 






268 THE -TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 24. 

formerly promulgated at Nice that great proclamation of pie. 
ty ; of which the other parts, truly, are above the reach of 
calumny, but the word consubstantial, being badly under- 
stood by some j there are those who do not yet receive it; 
whom any one may indeed censure justly, and again may 
judge them worthy of pardon. For not to walk in the 
footsteps of the fathers, nor to submit our opinion to their 
stronger voice, is a thing worthy of reprehension, as being 
full of arrogance. While, on the other hand, to hold in 
suspicion a word which has been condemned by others, 
seems in a certain aspect of the subject to be somewhat 
excusable.' 

Does this language correspond, brethren, with your pre- 
sent system, which arrogates the dignity of Holy Scripture 
to the decrees of this and the other General Councils of 
the Church ; on the ground, that those decrees are, equally 
with Scripture, the dictates of the Holy Ghost, and conse- 
quently infallible ? Did Basil think that the Nicene Creed 
was inspired, when he claimed pardon for those who con- 
demned the most important word in the whole formulary 1 
Did he hold it to be the work of the Holy Ghost, when he 
censured those who liked it not, as being f full of arrogance, 
because they walked not in the steps of their fathers?' 
Only imagine, brethren, one of yourselves, writing in favor 
of the Council of Nice in terms so moderate as these, and 
say, whether the appellation of heretic would not be the 
immediate fruit of his presumption ? 

^ ^ t _ I . T _ L .' . _ * 

jus reliquae quidem partes calumniae nulli obnoxiae sunt ; sed voceW 
consubstantialis male a nonnullis acceptara, sunt qui .nondum recepe- 
rint: quos quis et jure \Siy.a'uag\ reprehenderit, ac rursusvenia dignos 
judicarit, Nam Patrqm vestigiis non insistere, nee sua sentenjia vo- 
cem illorum potiorem ducere, res est reprehensione digna, ut plena 
arrogantiae. Rursus autem vituperatam ab aliis vocem, suspectaro 
habere videtur id quodammodo rnediocreni iljis excusationte venial" 
con.ciliare.' 



CHAPTER 24.] OF BASIL. 269 

It is to be remembered, however, in justice to your doc- 
trine, that there is another passage in which Basil approach- 
es your ideas much more closely. It is in his epistle to 
Cyriacus ; where he exhorts that the brethren at Tarsus 
should profess the faith, (221) ' as set forth,' saith he, ' by 
our fathers, who formerly came together at Nice. Neither 
do ye reject any word in' it, but know that those three hun- 
dred and eight fathers who agreed without contention, spake 
not without the operation of the Holy Spirit ; and you may 
add also to this faith that it is not fit to call the Holy Spirit 
a creature, nor to hold communion with those who do so.' 
&c. ' ' 

You would, of course, infer from these words, that Basil 
claimed the infallibility of inspiration for the Council of 
Nice. And yet, in truth, his phraseology imports no such 
thing. For, I beseech you, cannot you say as much for 
every minister of Christ, yea, for every private Christian, 
that he sets forth his faith ' not without the operation of the 
Holy Ghost ;' or, if you please, in still stronger words, that 
he does it c by the operation of the Holy Ghost.' If this be 
doubtful, ask St. Paul what he means by declaring : (1 Cor. 
xii, 3.) 'No man can say, the Lord Jesus, but by the Holy 
Ghost.' Surely then, it is most manifest that the language 
of Basil, fairly interpreted, amounts to nothing more than 
that which we all admit : namely, that the Creed of the 
Nicene Council was an exposition of the true faith, agrea- 

(221) Ib. p. 207. ' Ut fidera a patribus nostris, qui Nicaeae quondam 
convenerunt, editam profiteamini, nullamque in ea vooem rejiciatis, 
sed sciatis trecentos decem et octo patres, qui citra contentionem con- 
venerunt, non sine Spiritus Sancti afflatu,' [Gr. 'EvtQyeia, signifying 
ti&tion, operation, which your translator has turned into a word bear- 
nig the sense of inspiration] ' locutus esse, atque illud etiam huic fidei 
addatis, Spiritum Sanctum creaturam dici non oportere, nee cum iis 
qui dicunt, communicandum,' &c. 
23* 



270 THE TESTIMONY OF BASIL. [CHAPTER 24. 

ble to Scripture ; and that as the operation and influence 
of the Spirit is present with every man who confesses the 
true faith, so we doubt not that his special influence was 
granted abundantly to that venerable assembly of the holy 
men of old. Yet this does not raise their words to the dig- 
nity of Scripture. And if Basil had supposed otherwise, I 
think he would hardly have suggested an addition to the 
creed on the personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit, as 
we see he did in the passage before us, as well as in other 
parts of his works. For if no Christian man was ever yet 
known to propose an addition to the inspired volume, so I 
cannot believe that Basil would have been so presumptuous 
as to propose an amendment to the Nicene Creed, had he 
really imagined it to be the dictate of the Holy Spirit, and 
therefore equal in dignity to the word of God. 

On the whole, therefore, brethren, the testimony of Basil 
admits of no construction that is not, according to my small 
judgment, in direct conflict with your claims. And hence, 
I conceive myself entitled to rank him amongst the witness- 
es which prove your departure from the primitive system. 



CHAPTER XXV 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

Amongst the interesting circumstances in the life of Basil 
the Great, you are aware that his strong attachment to 
Gregory Nazianzen is conspicuous. We apply, therefore, 
to this cotemporary and friend of our last witness, to furnish 
our next testimony on the doctrine of Roman supremacy. 

And fiist, let us hear him on the subject of the apostles. 
(222) ' Dost thou desire,' saith he, after discoursing largely 
on the Aaronic priesthood, ' that I should also set forth an- 
other example of order and discipline, and one, truly excel- 
lent and admirable, and worthy of the highest commemora- 
tion and regard at the present day ? Thou seest that among 
the disciples of Christ, who were all, indeed, great and 
chiefest, and deserving such election, this one is called a rock, 
and receives in faith, the foundations of the Church; anoth- 
er is loved more exceedingly, and reclines upon the breast 

I quote your own latin version, as before, only inserting the Greek 
where emendation may seem necessary. 

(222) Gregor. Nazian. Oral. 28. Ed Paris, A. D. 1609. p. 4534. 

'Vis aliud quoque ordinis et disriplinae exemplum in medium profe- 
ra 'n, idque praeclarum et laudabile, ac praesenti commemoratinne at- 
'iue admonitione in primis dignum ? Vides quemadmouu'm ex Christi 
magnis utique omnibus et excelsis, atque electiorie dignis, 



" lc petravocetur, atque Ecclesias fundamenta in fidem suam recipiat. 






s TttaTsverai, i. e. believes in the foun- 
dations of the Church, which your translator renders : receives in faith 
' lK Joundaticmsofthe Church. I have taken his version , however ; al- 



272 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 25 

of Jesus, and the other disciples endure the preference be- 
stowed upon these with an equal mind. Again, when Christ 
was about to ascend into the mount, that he might shew his 
glory in corporeal form, and manifest his divinity, and un- 
clothe himself of the fleshy covering, who ascended the 
mount with him ? (for all -were not admitted to behold this 
miracle) Peter, John, and James, who were before the oth- 
ers, and were reckoned so. Again, when depressed in mind, 
and withdrawing himself a little before his passion, com- 
mending those who were present to labor in prayer, who 
were taken with him ? The same three. And this was the 
preference and choice of Christ. But how great was the 
modesty and order of the rest ? Peter asks one thing, Phil- 
ip another, Judas another, Thomas another, and any one 
else another ; neither do all ask the same, nor does one ask 
every thing ; but each by turns, and severally. You will 
here say, perhaps, that each asked what he had need of. 
How should it seem so ? Philip desires to say somewhat, 

though the original does not warrant it: because in the result the dif- 
ference is but a trifle.] ' ille impensius ametur, et supra pectus Jesu 
requiescat, ac reliqui discipuli eos sibi praeferri aequo ferant. Jam cum 
in montem ascendendum fuisset, ut Christus corporea forma splende- 
ret, acdivinitatem suam patefaceret, eumque,qui carne tegebatur, nu- 
daret, atque aperiret, quinam simul ascondunt ? [Nee enirn omnes ad 
hujus miraculi spectaculum cidmiltuntur] Petrus, Johannes et Jacobus, 
qui ante alios, et erant, et numerabantur. Rursus cum animi anxio, 
etpauloante passionem secedenti, ac precibus operam danti quosdam 
adesse oporteret, quinam ad earn rem asciti sunt? lidem illi. Atque 
hsec Christi prselatio et electio fuit. Quid ? reliqua moderatio ordi- 
nisque disciplina, quanta ? Aliud Petrus interrogat, aliud Philippus. 
aliud Judas, aliud Thomas, aliud alius quispiam, neque aut idem om- 
nes, aut omnia unus, sed vicissim quisque, ac sigillatim. Dices hie 
fortasse, hoc singulos quaesivisse, quod cuique opus erat. Q,uid? 
Q,uale illud tibi videtur ? Philippns quiddam dicere gestit, nee solus 
audet, veruna Andream. quoque adhibet. Petrus ahquid percunctari 
cupir, et Joannem capitis nutu proponit. Ubi hie morositas f Ubi 
dominandi libido ?' 



CHAPTER 25.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 273 

but he dares not alone, and therefore brings Andrew with 
him. Peter wishes to make an inquiry, and procures John 
to do it, by a motion of the head. Where, in all this, is 
any austerity ? Where, any lust of domination ?' 

There is surely nothing in this interesting passage, breth- 
ren, that can be rendered consistent with the idea of Peter's 
single government over the other apostles. Gregory con- 
siders Peter, John, and James, as the distinguished three ; 
even as St. Paul had said, that the same three 'seemed to 
be pillars.' Of these, he gives no authority to one over the 
others; but praises the general equality which reigned 
throughout the whole. How unlike the style in which an 
advocate of your present system would treat the subject, I 
need hardly say, 

In the second place, however, let me cite our witness on 
the mode in which it was customary to speak of the various 
important Sees of the Church. 

In his nineteenth oration, for example, he says that the 
Church of Nazianzum, of which his father was bishop, and 
himself coadjutor, should be called, (223) ' The new Jeru- 
salem, a second ark rising above the waves, like that of the 
great Noah, the second parent of the world.' And pro- 
ceeding in the same strain, he adds that c this Church sur- 
passes others in celebrity, as much as they surpassed it in 
numbers ; being in this respect like Bethlehem, which, al- 
though it was a little city, was yet the metropolis of the 

(223) Ib. p, 297. 'Ut nova Hierusalem, ac secunda qusedam area 
undis eminens quemadmodum ilia raagni illius Noe, secundique hujus 
mundi parentis, hsec Ecclesia [sc. Nazianzena] vocaretur,' ' Q,uan- 
tumque aliis numero cedebat, tanto eas nominis celebritate vineeret, 
idemque ipsi usu veniret, quod Bethlehem accidisse videmus, quam 
nulla res prohibuit, quominus simul, et parva civitas esset, et totius 
terrae metropolis, utpote Christiorbis oonditoris ac victoris, parentem 
atque nutricem. 



74 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 25. 

whole earth, by reason of its being the parent and the nurse 
of Christ, the Creator and Conqueror of the world.' But 
not only in this instance does the testimony of the fathers 
claim for other Churches the high encomiums which your 
system would fain -monopolize for Rome ; since I find the 
elder Gregory using expressions still stronger in favor of the 
Church of Cesarea. The passage occurs in an epistle, 
written to that Church for the purpose of commending Ba- 
sil to their choice as their bishop ; inasmuch as Gregory was 
prevented by sickness from visiting them in person. (224) 
' Moreover,' saith he, ' while we should regard all the 
Churches with the utmost care and solicitude, as being the 
tiody of Christ, yet should we chiefly thus regard your 
Church, which was not only the mother of almost all the 
Churches from the beginning, but is so now, and is so con- 
sidered ; towards which the whole Christian commonwealth 
turns its eyes, even as the circumference of a circle to its 
centre ; not only on account of the soundness of the faith 
hitherto preached to all, but also on account of the grace of 
unity, granted to her, beyond doubt, by the divine favor.' 
Greatly, brethren, am I mistaken with respect to the mean- 
ing of words, if this passage does not far exceed any thing 
which we have yet met with, in favor of the Church of 
Rome. 

Under this head, I only add two examples of the phrase 
-Catholic Church, applied by Gregory, in his last will and 

(224) Greg. Naz. Epist. Ib. p. 785. D. ' Porro cum omnibus Eccle. 
siis, tanquam Christ! corpori, summa cura ot solicitudine prospicien- 
dum sit, turn maxime vestree, qua? omnium fere Ecclesiarum mater et 
antiquitus,' [Gr. 'HOT' 'a^x^s, from the beginning'] ' fuit, et nunc est, 
atque censelur, et ad quam tota Respublica Christiana oculos conjicit, 
'baud secus ac circulus centre circuniscriptus, non modo propter fidei 
iBtegritatem jam olim omnibus prEedicatam, sed etiam ob concordiffl 
jgratiam, divino baud dubie beneficio ipsi concessam,' 



CHAPTER 25.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 275 

testament, to the Church at Nazianzum, and the Church at 
Constantinople. (225) ' I Gregory, bishop of the Catholic 
Church of Constantinople/ direct 'that my heir shall restore 
all my goods moveable and immoveable, to the holy Cath- 
lic Church of Nazianzum,' fcc. This, in itself, is a very 
small matter ; but I think it worth remarking, because there 
is no one circumstance which tends to give so great an ap- 
pearance of weight to your claims, as the mode in which 
your writers appropriate the term Catholic, to the Church 
of Rome; thereby making the ancient fathers seem to speak 
of your particular Church, when, in truth, they were think- 
ing only of the orthodox Church at large, as opposed to 
heresy. In justice to the primitive writers, it should be well 
understood, therefore, that when the fathers use the phrase 
the holy Catholic Church, they mean the orthodox Church 
throughout the world, without relation to any particular 
place whatever. But when they intend the orthodox 
Church of a special diocese, they say the Catholic Church 
of that diocese, as in the case before us. For inasmuch as 
heresy and schism always began amongst a small number, 
the fact that the general, universal, or Catholic faith stood 
in opposition to them, was always urged in the beginning of 
innovation, as a strong argument on the side of truth ; and 
the Catholicism or universality of Christian doctrine became 
synonimous with its orthodoxy. This, I apprehend to be 
the true reason, why the Nicene Creed continued to be 
called the Catholic faith, even when Arianism triumphed. 
There was a time, you remember, when the saying was 
current: Athanasius against the world: so vast was the 

(225) Appen. op. Greg. Naz. ' Gregorius Episcopus Catholics Con- 
stantinopolis Ecclesise, vivenset prudens,sanoque judicio/ &c. - 



ut ipse meam omnem substantiam, mobilem et immobi- 
, sanctae Catholicae Nazianzi Ecclesiae restituat,' &c. 



276 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 25. 

majority which seemed to favor the heresy of Arius. Yet 
even then, the Catholic fathers used the same phraseology 
as before, meaning, not the faith which was universal at that 
particular period, but the faith which had been universal in 
the beginning. By the very same authority, that portion 
of the Church which accords with the primitive system 
now,! has the best right to be called the Catholic Church, 
even if, numerically, it were the smallest body in Christ- 
endom. 

But let me hasten to the third point which our present 
witness testifies, viz, the torn and divided state of the 
Church, which so clearly demonstrates the freedom exer- 
cised by all its parts to take their own course, without re- 
gard to the common 'mother and mistress,' to the pope of 
Rome, or any other supposed 'Vicar of Christ/ bearing the 
authority, 'not of a mere man, but of the true God upon 
the earth,' as your modern canon law expresses it. (226) 
' The great heritage of God,' saith Gregory, ' acquired by 
the doctrine and precepts and torments of Christ, the holy 
nation, the royal priesthood, is ill at ease, distracted amongst 
six hundred opinions and errors : the vine from Egypt, that 
is, from dark and impious ignorance, transplanted, and grown 
to an immense size and proportion, has covered the whole 
earth, and has risen above the mountains and the cedars.' 
And again, saith he, (227) ' Grievous wolves, intercepting 

(226) Ib. Orat. Vicesima, p. 345. C. ' Cumque magnam illam Dei he- 
reditatem, ipsiusque (so. Christ!) doctrina et legibus atque cruciatibus 
acqxusitam, gentem illam sanctam, regium Sacerdotium,malese habe- 
re atque in scxcentas opiniones ct errores distractum esse; vineaffl- 
que illam, quse ex ^Egypto, hoc est ex impia et caliginosa ignorantia, 
translata et transplantata fuerat,atque ad tarn immensampulchritudineiD 
et magnitudinem pervenerat, ut terrain universal!) operiret, ac sup' 3 
montes et cedros-assurgeret,' &c. 

(227) Ib. Orat. Vieesimatertia, p. 415. 'Gravesque lupi, alii 



CHAPTER 25.J GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 277 

us on every side, tear the Church to pieces. Bishops are 
armed against bishops, people are opposed against people 
with a furious excitement. The emperor himself gives au- 
thority to impiety, and enacts laws against orthodox doctrine.' 
And again, (228) 'Even as the book of the Acts relates of 
the Athenians/ saith he, ( so we spend our time in nothing 
else but to say or hear some new thing. O what Jeremiah 
shall deplore our confusion and darkness, for he alone could 
pour forth lamentations worthy of our calamities.' 

Brethren, if the prerogatives of Rome and her popes 
had then been allowed as you represent them, how could 
the Church and her bishops have become thus distracted 
and divided ? And if Gregory had held your Creed in this 
respect, how could he have deplored such evils without 
insisting upon their only lawful remedy, namely, an imme- 
diate recurrence to the final sentence of the infallible judge, 
whom God himself had endowed with ' the plenitude of 
power ?' 

One passage more, however, from the writings of this 
celebrated father, will shew us, in the last place, what he 
thought on the subject of Councils. It occurs in the form 
of a letter, written to Procopius, as follows: 

(229) ' J have resolved, if I may declare the truth; to 

nos intercipientes, Ecclesiuin discerpunt. Arimmtur saeerdotes ad- 
versus sacerdotes, plebs adversus plebem furibundo impetu fertur. 
hnperator ipse iinpietati authoritatem prabet, atque adversus ortho- 
doxam doctrinam leges instituit,' &c. 

(228) ' Ib. p. 380. ' Q,u6dque Actorum liber de Atheniensibus nar- 
ri it, ad mini aliud vacamus, quam ut novi aliquid i!icamt;s vel audia- 
intis, O quis Hieremias confusionem nostrain caliginemque deplorabit, 
<jui solus lamentationes calumitatibus exaequare novit ! 

(229) Greg. Na2. Ep. Procopio. Op. on\. p. 814. ' Ego, si vera scri- 
oere oportet, hoc animo sura, ut oinnetn Episcoporum conventum 
tu giam 5 quoniam nullius concilii finem Icetum et fausturn vidi, nee 

depulsionem malorum potius, quam accessionem et incrementum 
24 



278 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 25, 

avoid henceforth every convention of bishops ; because I 
have never yet seen a prosperous and happy conclusion of 
any Council ; nor any that might not be said to have increas- 
ed 'existing evils, rather than to have driven them away. 
For the pertinacious contentions and strifes of domination, 
(I pray you, do not consider me severe or uncharitable in 
writing thus) cannot be described in words: and any one 
who should offer his judgment to others, would find himself 
much more readily charged with his offence, than allowed 
to repress the offences of his associates. Wherefore I have 
deemed it best, that I should collect myself, and preserve 
the safety of my soul in solitude and peace. And truly; as 
I think, disease comes to my aid at this time, and so afflicts 
me, that I almost expect every day to breathe my last ; nor 
do I rind any remedy of use to me. On this account, there- 
fore, I trust your magnanimity will excuse my absence; and 
will farther incline you to take pains, that our most pious 
emperor may not suppose me guilty of sloth and negligence, 
but may pardon my weakness :' &c. 

A declaration like this, brethren, coming from such high 
authority, might well be regarded as a serious impediment 
to the triumph of your system, since it strikes at the very 
root of your infallibility. It is no wonder, therefore, that 
your writers should endeavor to evade its force. A speci- 

habuerit. Pertinaees enim coiiteiiliones et doniinaiidi cupiditates 
[ac ne me quasso gravem et molestum existimes, hcec scribentein] ne 
ullis quidem verbis explicari qncant: citiusquc aliqnis improbitatem 
arccssetur, dum aliis judicem se praebcl, quum lit aliorum improbitatem 
comprirnat. Proplerea menietipsum collegi. animreque securitalein in 
sola qninte ac soliludine milii positain judicavi. Nunc verd huic quo- 
que meo judicio patronus morbus aecedit, quippe qui me ita distor- 
qiieat, ut quotidie ftsro extremes spiritus efflem, ncc ulla re meipso uti 
queam. Atque ob hanc causam ignoscat milii tua animi magnitud - 
detque opciam nc picntissinius imperator me inertias atque 'i 
condcmriet, sed infirmitati ignoscat:' 



CHAPTER 25.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 279 

men of their argument is very properly inserted, as an ad- 
monitory prologue to the epistle in question ; and 1 present 
it to you, entire, for your greater satisfaction. 

(230) ' Gregory,' saith your apologist, 'was called to a 
certain Council at Constantinople. Therefore he declares 
that he abhors all Councils of bishops, on account of the 
quarrels and contentions, in which they became mutually 
involved: and at the same time he excuses himself by reason 
of ill health. The authority of this epistle is abused by Cal- 
vin for the purpose of impugning Councils ; but no pious 
mind should be moved thereat. For Gregory is not speak- 
ing of General Councils, but of certain Particular or Pro- 
vincial ones. Otherwise he would contradict himself, since 
in many places he praises the Nicene Council to the skies, 
and he was himself a prime actor in the Council of Con- 
stantinople, which condemned and anathematized the Mac- 
edonians, who opposed the Holy Spirit.' 

What think you, brethren, of this ratiocination ? Grego- 
ry had attended many Councils; some General, some Pro- 
vincial. For a long course of year? he had been a specta- 
tor of their influence upon the Church, with the best pos- 
sible opportunities of observation ; since he was 6rst, bishop 
of Nazianzum, and afterwards, bishop of Constantinople, 

(230) Ib. Argumenium. { Consiantinopolim ad concilium quoddam 
vocabatur Gregorius. Ait igitur se ab omnibus Episcoporum conciliis 
abhorrere, propter rixas et contentiones. quibus iuterse conflictantur : 
simulque valetudinem excusat. Hujus quideiu epistolae authoritate 
ad Conciliorum oppugnalionem Calvinus abuiitur, sp.d neminem pio- 
rummovere debet. Nee euiru de generalibus, sed de particularibus 
quibusdam conciliis loquitur, Alioqtii eniui secum ipse pugnaret, ut- 
pote qui pluribuslocis IS'icaenum concilium laudibus in coelum ferat, et 
m agnaipse pars fuerit Constanlinopoliianae Svnodi,inqua Macedoni- 
an i ? qui Spirnui Saucto bellum indixerant, damnati atque anatlietnate 
sunt.' 



280 TESTIMONY OF GREGORY NAZIANZEN. [CHAPTER 25. 

and was distinguished far more by his learning and his dis- 
interestedness, than by his exalted station. And near the 
close of his life, he gives his true sentiments^ in a private 
letter -to a friend, declaring that he had resolved to avoid 
all conventions of 'bishops , for he had never seen any Coun- 
cil come to a prosperous conclusion, but on the contrary, 
thought they had increased the evils they were meant to 
cure. He accounts for this immediately by adding, that the 
contentions and ambitious rivalry of the bishops could not 
be expressed in words. And we are gravely told, in the face 
of all this, that Gregory did not mean General Councils at 
allfbut only Provincial Synods ! Because he praises the 
Creed of the Council of Nice, which was held before he 
was bom, therefore he is not to be understood according to 
his own plain meaning when he declares, thatoZ/ the Coun- 
cils which he had seen, were productive of more evil than 
good ! True, indeed, it is, that he was a prime actor, with 
others, in General Councils ; not perhaps of choice, but of 
necessity; for these Councils were summoned by the em- 
perors, and the bishops could not absent themselves, unless 
they were excused. And for this very reason it is because 
he had been an active member of General Councils that 
when he speaks thus disparagingly of all the Councils he 
had ever known, without excepting any, we are sure he 
must have included the General Councils amongst the rest. 
The modern distinctions then, which your canon law lays 
down, asserting that General Councils are not liable to sin 
or error, while Provincial Councils are subject to both, were 
surely not known in the days of Gregory. According to his 
experience, both were equally open to the strifes nnd quar- 
rels of the bishops; both were equally liable to witness the 
most shameiul contests for power ; and from all Councils, 
without distinction or difference, he had equally resolved to 
absent himself, that he might possess his. soul in peace. 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST. 

A very celebrated name stands next upon the list of your 
canonical favorites, Ambrose r the bishop of Milan,, who 
boldly closed the doors of the Church against the emperor 
Theodosius himself, in the just administration of ecclesias- 
tical discipline. From the works of this distinguished man, 
I proceed to cite some testimony on the point in question, 
which will shew how far his sentiments differed from your 
doctrine. Like Origen and others,. Ambrose considered 
Peter as representing the Church, not with respect to any 
form of ecclesiastical polity, but as regarded the spiritual 
results of faith in securing the kingdom of heaven. Thus 
he declares, truly, that the Church was built on Peter, that 
he received the keys of the kingdom, &c. but withal asserts, 
that what was said to Peteir was said to all the apostles; that 
the foundation of the Church was not on Peter's person, but 
on the faith which he professed ; that the apostles were 
equal;, nay, that all Christians^ are as Peter,, if they have the 
faith of Peter ; so that while there are many passages in 
his writings, which,, taken alone,,seem to favor your system, 
the whole together is- utterly opposed to it. But let him 
speak for, himself,, brethren,, and judge accordingly. 

In his elaborate discourses on the Psalms, for instance, 
24* 



28.2 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26'. 

we read as follows : (231) 'This is that Peter to whom 
Christ said : Thou art Peter, and upon this rock 1 will 
Iwild my Church. Therefore, where Peter is, there is the 
Church : where the Church is, there is no death ; but life 
eternal. And therefore he adds: The gates of hell shall 
not prevail against it ; and I will giv& unto thee. the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven. That blessed Peter, against 
whom the gates of hell prevailed not, did not close the gates of 
heaven against himself; but on the contrary destroyed the 
entrances of heM, and made manifest the entrances to heaven. 
Being, therefore, placed on earth, he opened heaven, and 
closed hell.' The best commentary on- his meaning here, 
will be obtained by comparing it with the following :. 

(232) 'It is this Peter who answers foF the other apos- 
tles, yea, before the others ; and therefore he is- called a 
foundation, because he professes to keep not only that which 
is proper to himself, but common to all; To him Christ 
declares that his Father had revealed it. For he who speaks' 
the true generation of the Father, receives it not from flesh,, 
but from the Father. FAITH, THEREFORE, is THE FOUN-- 
PATION OF THE CHURCH- i for it was not said of the flesh 
of Peter,, but of his faith, that the gates f death should 

(231) S. Ambros. Op. Ed. Benedict. Tom. 1. p. 87>. E. [inPsal. xl. 
Enar. 36;] ' Ipse eat Petrus cui dixit : Tit es Petrus, et super hanc 
petram tBdificabo Ecdesiain,meam. Ubi ergoPetru&,ibi Ecclesiajibi nulla 
hiors.sed vita sterna- Jit idea addidit: Et portainferi nan prflcvalebutit 
ci : et tibi dabo claves rcgni cmlt/rum. Beatus Petaus, cui non infero- 
i'um porta praevaluit, non caeli portas se clausit; sed e contrario des- 
truxitinferni vestibula, patefecit crelestia. In terris itaque positus COB- 
Iiyu aperuit, inferos clausit.' 

(23$) Ib. Tom. 3.. p. 711 . (De Incarn. Sftcraai. Gap. 4. 33.) { HJ 
cst ergo Petrus qui respondi.t pro ceteris apostoljg, inio pra9 ceteris J 
ot ideo fundamentumdicitur,.quianovit non solinn pr.oprium,sed etiaro 
commune servare. Ruic adstipulatus estChristus, re ve^avit Pater- 
Nam qui yerara generationem loquitur Patrin^ a Patre adsumsit, non 



CHAPTER 26.] OF AMBROSE, 28$ 

not prevail against it : but the confession (of faith) overcame' 
hell. And this confession does not exclude one heresy on- 
ly ; for since the Church, like a good ship, is often assailed 
by many waves, the foundation of the Church ought to 
prevail against all heresies.' 

This, brethren, renders it perfectly manifest that Ambrose 
did not interpret your favorite texts of Scripture so as to 
draw from them any argument for Peter's supremacy. But 
our witness goes much farther in the following passages, to 
which I beg your serious attention. Addressing; himself to 
Christians in general, he saithr (233 ) ' Believe therefore as 
Peter believed, that you also may be blessed, that you may 
deserve to hear " Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto 
thee, but my Father who is in heaven. For WHOEVER over- 
comes the flesh,is A FOUNDATION OF THE: CHURCH: if he can- 
not equal Peter, he can imitate him : for the gifts of God 
are great, who has; not oaty repaired in us what is DUES, but 
lias even vouchsafed to grant us what are his own.' And 
again: (234) 'The rock/ saith Ambrose, c -is Christ: Fbr 

sumsit ex carne.' 34. 'Fides ergo est Ecclesiae fundamentum: mm 
enim de carne Petri, sed' de fide dictam est quia portse mortis ei non 
pravalebunt : se'd confessio vicit infernum. Et baec confessio non 
unam haeresim exclusit; nam cum Ecelesianaultis.tamquambona navis 
fluctibus ssepe tundatur, adversus om&es baereses debet valere Ecclesias 
fundamentum.' 

(233) Ib. Tom. 1. p. 1406. [Exposi-tio Evang, sec-.. Luc. Lib. VI. 
94.] ' Gredeighur sic quemadmoduan Petrus credidit, ut et tu beatus 
sis, ut et tu audire merearis : Quoniam non caro: et sanguis tibi revela- 
nit, sed Pater meus* qui in ccslis est.' 

Ib. 95. ' Q,ui enim camera vicesit, Ecclesia? fundamentnia est : 
si aequare Petrum non potest, imitari potest : magna sunt enim I>ei 
muziera,. <^ui non solum uobis quae nostra fueraati reparavit, verttme. 
tiam qa sunt sua propria concessit.' 

(234) Ib. ., 97. p. 1407, ' Petra est Cfe*ists : Bibebant enim de Spir- 
li sequente petra, petra autem erat Gkrislu* : etuwi, discipulo euo 



284 THJB TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26. 

they drank of that spiritual rock which fottowedthem, and 
that rock was Christ : And he has not denied to his disci- 
ple even the favor of this word, that he may also be a Pe- 
ter, because from the rock he derives the solidity of perse- 
verance, and the firmness of faith. Strive, therefore, that 
thou also mayest be a rock. And look for that rock, not 
without thee, but within. The rock is thine action, the 
rock is thy mind. Upon that rock thy house is built ; that 
it may be struck by no spiritual wickedness. The rock is 
thy faith, faith is the foundation of the Church. If thou 
art a rock, thou shalt be in the Church; because the Church 
is upon the rock. If thou art in the Church, the gates of 
hell shall not prevail against thee. The gates of hell, are 
the gates of death ; but the gates of death can never be the 
gates of the Church.' 

Doubtless, brethren, you recognise in these passages the 
ideas of Origen. And I cannot deny myself the satisfaction 
of adding somewhat more, that you may see the correspon- 
dence to be complete. ( 235) 'But what,' continues our au- 
thor, 'are the gates of death, that is, the gates of hell, unless 
they be the several sins ? If thou art a fornicator, thou hast 

hujus vocabuli gratiam non negavit, ut et ipsesit Petrus, quod de pe- 
tra habeat soliditatem constantiae, fidei firmitatem.' 

Ib. 98. ' Enitere ergo ut et tu petra sis. Itaque non extra te, sed 
intra te petram require. Petra tua actus est, petra tua mens est. 
Supra hanc petram aedificatur domus tua ; ut nullis possit nequitiae 
spiritualis reverberari procellis. Petra tua fides est, fundamentum 
Ecclesiae fides est. Si petra fueris, in Ecclesia eris : quia Ecclesia 
supra petram est. Si in Ecclesia fueris, portae infer! non praevalebunt 
tibi. Portae inferi, portae mortis sunt: portae autem mortis, portae 
Ecclesiae esse non possunt. 

(235) Ib. 99. 'Q,uae autem sunt portae mortis, hoc est, portae inferi, 
nisi singula quaeque peccata? Si fornicatus fueris, portas mortis in- 
gressus es. Si fidem ]aesens,portas inferi penetrasti. Si peccatum mor- 
tale commiseris, portai mortis intrasti : eed potens cat Deus, qui exaltet 



CHAPTER 26.] OF AMBROSE. 285 

entered the gates of death. If thou hast violated thy laith, 
thou hast gone through the gates of hell. If thou hast com- 
mitted any mortal sin, thou hast passed the gates of death: 
but God is mighty, who exalteth thee from the gates of death ; 
that thou mayest announce all his praises in the gates of the 
daughter oi Sion. And the gates of the Church are the gates 
of chastity, the gales of righteousness, into which the just 
enter :' &LC. In all this, it is undeniable that Ambrose sus- 
tains most fully the authority of Origen, upon the points in 
question . 

Another interesting passage occurs elsewhere',- which may 
aid in shewing you the true sentiments of this eminent fa- 
ther. Speaking of David's seeming violation of the cere- 
monial law, on the occasion mentioned by our Redeemer, 
Ambrose saith : (236) ' But how should this observer and 
defender of the law eat, and also give to those who were 
with him, that bread which it was not lawful for any to eat 
except for the priests alone ; unless he designed to shew by 
this figure, that the food of the priests was to be extended 
likewise to the people ? whether because we ought all to 
imitate the sacerdotal life, or because all the sons of the 
Church are priests, for we are anointed to be a holy priest- 
hood, offering ourselves as spiritual sacrifices unto God.' 

But let us next look at a few examples of the mode in 

te de portis mortis; ut amiurities omnes laudes ojus in portis filiaa 
Sion. Portao aute;i Eeclesiae portae castitatis sum, portae justitiae, 
quas Justus intrarn eonsuevil,' &c. 

(236) Ih. f'p. 1364) Lib. V. 33. ' Quomodo anlem illn observator 
legis atque defensor, panes et ipse manducavit, et. dedit iis qui secum 
erant, quos non licebat manducare nisi tantummodo sncerdotibus : 
n isi ut per illam dernonstrai-L-t figuram, sacerdolalem cibum ad usum 
transiturum osse populorum ? feive quod omnes vitnrn sncerdotalem 
debemus imitari : sive quia omnes filii Ecclesiae sacevdotes sunt, un- 
gimurenimin sacerdotiura, offerentes nosmet ipsos Deo hostias spin- 
tales.' 



286 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26; 

which our witness speaks of Peter, in connexion with the 
other apostles ; where, if I mistake not, their equality in .office 
and in privilege will be clearly shewn. 

Thus, arguing against the error of the Novatians, he 
saith : (237) 'To thee, said our Lord, I will give the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven, that thou mayest k>ose and bind. 
Novatian did not hear this, but the Church of God heard it. 
What is said to Peter, is said to the apostles.' 

Again: (238) 'For as Peter, James, and John, and 
Barnabas, seemed to be pillars of the Church, so also who- 
soever shall overcome the world, becomes a pillar of G.qd.' 

Again : (239) 'Therefore,' saith Ambrose, 'three are cho- 
sen who should ascend the mount Peter went up, who 
received the keys of the kingdom, John also, to whom. is 
committed the mother of our Lord : and likewise James, 
who first ascended the episcopal chair.' 

Again : (240) ' Go,' saith he, 'to my brethren, that; is, 
to those eternal gates, which were lifted up when they had 
seen Jesus. One eternal gate is Peter, against whom the 
gates of hell shall not prevail. John, and James are eternal 

(237) Ib. in Psal. 38. linarr. (Tom 1. p. 858) 37. < Tibi, inquit* 
dabo elaves regni cofilorum, ut et solvas et liges. Hoc Novatianus non 

audivit, sed Ecclesia Dei audivit . Quod Petro dicitur, apostolia 

dicitur.' 

(238) Ib. in Psal. 118. Expositio, (p. 1030) 38. < Nam sicut Petrus, 
Jacobus, et Johannes, i't Barnabas colurnnae esse videbantur Eccle- 
eiae; et quicamque vicerit hoc saeculum, fit columna Dei,' &c. 

(239) Ib. Expositio Evang. sec. Luc. Lib. VII. 9 p. 1413. Tres 

igitur eliguntur, qui adscenderent montern . Petrus adscendit, qui 

elaves regni coelorum accepit: Johannes quoque, cui commiUitur Dom- 
ini mater: ^Jacobus etiam, qui primus solium sacerdotale conscendit. 

(240) Ib. Tom. 2. p. 525. De fide, Lib. JV. Cap 2. 25. ' Vafo, 
ergo ad fratr.es meos, hoq est, ad jllas portas aeternales, qua^e cvtni Je- 
sum yiderint, eleva,ntur. .(Eternalis porta est Petrus, cui portae, in- 
feri non praevalebunt. ^Eternales portae Johannes et Jacobus, utpote 



CHAPTER 26.] OF AMBROSE. 287 

Agates, inasmuch as they are the sons of thunder. The 
Churches are eternal gates, where the prophet, desiring to 
announce the praise of Christ, ; saith, that I may announce 
all thy praise in ihe gates of the, daughter ofSion.' 

In bis treatise concerning the Holy Spirit, there are a few 
other passages, which ought perhaps to be presented,' before 
we close this part of our witnesses testimony. They: are .as 
follows : 

(241) ' Nor .is this operation of the Father, the Son^and 
the Holy Ghost found only in ; Peter, but the same unity of 
the divine work is revealed in all the apostles, as the au- 
thority of the heavenly Constitution.' 

(242) ' Therefore we behold unity of government, unity 
of system, unity of bounty.' 

(243) 'This is the heritage of apostolic faith and devo- 
tion, which may be gathered from the consideration of the 
acts of the apostles themselves. Therefore Paul and Bar- 
nabas obeyed the commands of the Holy Spirit. And all 
the apostles obeyed the same.' 

(244) 'Nor was Paul inferior to Peter, although the one 
was the foundation of the Church, and the other a wise 

filii tonhrui. jEternaies pdrtas suht EccltsiiP, ubi laiules Christi an- 
iiuntiare prophota desiderans, dicit : Ut annuntiem omneslaudution.es 
tuas in portisjilice Sion. 

(241) Ib. p. 002. De Spiritu Sancto, Lib. 11. Cap. 13. 148. < Nee 
Boluni una operatio in Petro Patris et Filii et SpiritusSanoti invenitur, 
sed etiam in omnibus apostolis divinae opevaiionis unitas revelatur, et 
quaedam supernae consiilutionisauctoritas.' 

(242) Ib. p. GG3. 153. ' Unitas igitur imperil, unitas constitutionis, 
unitas largitatis. 

(243) Ib. p. GG4. 155. ' Haec est apostolicae fidei et devotionis ho- 
reditas, quam licet et ex ipsornm apostolorum considerare actibus. 
Paruerunt ergo Paulus et Barnabas Sancti Spirittis imperatis. Parue- 
runtet omnes apostoli,' &c. 

(244) Ib. 158. ' Nee Paulus inferior Petro, quamvis ille Ecclesiae 



288 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26. 

architect, knowing how to establish the steps of those who 
believed : nor was Paul, I say, unworthy of the apostolic 
college, since he also may be compared with the first, and 
was second to none. For he who does not acknowledge 
himself inferior, makes himself equal.' 

I trust, brethren,that I have furnished a sufficient number of 
extracts, to satisfy you with regard to the sentiments of this 
celebrated father upon the point before us. And yet there 
is abundant proof remaining unnoticed, of which my limits 
compel me to extract much less than I would otherwise 
rejoice to set before you. Our next quotation, however, I 
regard as peculiarly valuable, because it gives us not only a 
direct proof of the independence which Ambrose exercised 
with regard to the Church of Rome, but some other intima- 
tions deserving our best attention. 

In a discourse upon the sacred ceremony of washing of 
feet, which was used in primitive days by many of the 
Churches, and was greatly esteemed by Ambrose, he saith : 
(245) 'We are not ignorant that the Church of Rome 
has not this custom, the example and form of which 
Church we follow in all things : this custom, nevertheless, 
of washing of feet, she does not retain. Behold, therefore, 
perhaps she has declined on account of the multitude. 
There are some, truly, who endeavor to excuse her by the 

fundarnetitinn, et liic sapiens architectus scions vestigia credential!) 
fundare populorum : Nee Paulus, inquam, indignns apostolorum colle- 
gio, cum primo quoque facile conferendus, et nulli seoundus. Nam 
qui se imparem nescit, facit aequalem.' 

(245) S. Ambrosii De Sacramenlis. Lib. nr. Cap. 1. S.Tom. 2. p- 
362 3. 'Non ignoramus quod Ecclesia Roioana lianc consuetudinem 
non habeat, cujus typum in omnibus sequirnur et for mam : hanc lamen 
consuetudinem non habet, ut pedes lavet. Vide ergo, forte propter 
multitudinevn declinavit. Sunt tamen qui clicant etexcusare conentur 
quia hoc non in mysterio faciendum eet, non in baptismate, non in re- 
generatione : sed quasi hospiti pedes lavandi sint. Aliud est humilitatis 



CHAPTER 26.J OF AMBROSE. 289 

( 

plea, that this custom is not a sacred rite: it is notto be done 
in baptism, not in regeneration, but it is simply to be done 
to our guests, as a mark of hospitality. But it is one thing 
to perform an act in token of humility, and another thing to 
perform it in order to sanctification. Hear, therefore, how 
we prove this to be a sacred rite, in order to sanctification : 
Unless I wash thy feet, (saith Christ) thou hast no part in 
me. I do not speak thus, however, that 1 may censure 
others, but that I may commend my office. 1 desire in all 
things to follow the Church of Rome: but, nevertheless, 
we men have sense also ; and therefore whatever is more 
correctly practised elsewhere, we are more correct in prac- 
tising.' 

(246 ) ( In this respect,' continues Ambrose, c we follow 
the apostle Peter himself, we adhere to the example of his 
devotion. What can the Church of Rome say to this ? 
For truly Peter the apostle, who was bishop of the Church 
of Rome, is our authority for this assertion. Peter himself 
saith : Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my 
head. Behold his faith.' 

Now, here, brethren, we see distinctly the growth of your 
doctrine. The earlier writers do not set down Peter as 
bishop of Rome. You remember the testimony of Irenasus, 
whose catalogue was adopted by Eusebius, the ecclesiasti- 

aliud sanctificatioriis. Denique audi quia mystenum est et sanctifica- 
tio : JYisi lavero tibi pedes, non habebis mecum partem. Hoc ideo dico , 
non quod alios reprehendam, sed mea officia ipse commendem. In 
omnibus cupio sequi Ecclesiam Eomanam : sed tamen et DOS homines 
sensum habemus ; ideo quod alibi rectius servatur, et nos rectius cus- 
todimus,' 

(246) 6. ' Ipsum sequimur apostolum Petrum, ipsius inhaeremus 
devotion!. Ad hoc Ecclesia Romana quid respondet ? Utique ipse 
auctor est nobis hujus adsertionis Petrus apostolus, qui sacerdos fuit 
Ecclesise Romanas. Ipse Petrus ait : Domine non solum pedes, sed 
etiam manus et cdput. Vide fidem.' 
25 



290 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26. 

cal historian. But Cyprian, although a little earlier than 
Eusebius, favors the statement, being one of the latin fath- 
ers, and much more liable to the influence of the Roman 
See. Carthage was in this respect very differently situated 
from Cesarea. For a similar reason, Ambrose was likely 
to have felt the full power of Roman superiority. He was 
the bishop, as you know, of Milan an Italian bishop 
whose locality alone must have secured the highest measure 
of acquiescence in the opinions and claims of the mistress 
city. No wonder, therefore, that he desires in all things to 
follow the example and form of the Church of Rome. No 
wonder that he admits her claim to the episcopate of the 
apostle Peter. And yet, notwithstanding the attachment 
and devotion of Ambrose to the Church of Rome mark 
it, brethren, I beseech you he presumes to differ from her, 
to retain and practise a sacred ceremony which she had cast 
away, to argue against her 'openly in a public discourse, to 
charge her with declining after the multitude, and to prefer 
his own judgment and the custom ol other Churches, on a 
point of sacred order, which he regarded as a means of 
sanctification ; opposing to the opinion of Rome, the Scrip- 
ture, and significantly asking.: ' What can the Church of 
Rome say to this'3' 

Truly, we who aim to be Catholics of the primitive stamp, 
ask no better rule than this example of your own sainted 
Ambrose. Honestly might we say, with him, ' I desire to 
follow the Church of Rome in all things ;' provided we 
might be allowed, with him, to prefer the authority of Scrip- 
ture to the practice of Rome, and to guard our Christian 
liberty by the noble declaration: 'Nevertheless we men 
have sense also ; and, therefore,, whatever is more correct 
than the doctrine of Rome, we are more correct in retain- 
ing.' 



CHAPTER 26.] OF AMBROSE. 291 

There is yet, however, one document more, furnished by 
your authors under the authority of Ambrose, which I have 
examined with considerable interest. It is the record of the 
acts of the Council of Aquileia, held by the order of the 
emperors for the purpose of suppressing the Avian heresy, 
under Ambrose himself, who appears, throughout, as the 
presiding bishop, although his name stands second on the 
list of subscriptions, under that of the bishop of Aquileia. 
This was a Western Council, brethren, held in a city of It- 
aly, before which were summoned several bishops accused 
of heresy. Two only appear to have attended, viz. Palla- 
dius and Secundianus, who were condemned unanimously. 
I cite the following passages from the record to prove that 
even a particular Council was held in Italy itself which the 
pope did not summon, over which he did not preside, and 
for a purpose which your canon law now refers solely to 
his tribunal, BY DIVINE RIGHT. 

(247) At the opening of the Council, ' Ambrose the 
bishop said : Our arbitrement upon this matter is to be con- 
firmed by the imperial warrant, as it may be appointed,' 

Accordingly, ' The imperial warrant is recited in the 
Council.' After which, ' Ambrose the bishop said : Be- 
hold what our Christian emperor has determined. He de- 
sires not to injure the priesthood, and therefore he has con- 
stituted the bishops interpreters.' Not one word occurs in 
the whole, recognizing or alluding to the pope of Rome. 

The Arians being then called upon to answer. Palladium 

(247) Ib. Tom. 2. p. 787. 'Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Disceptatio- 
nes nostraa ex re firman-dee sunt scripto imperial!, ut allegentur.' 

' Scriptum imperiale recitatur in Concilio,' &c. 

' Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Ecce quod Chnstianus constituit im- 
perator, Noluitinjuriam facere sacerdotibus, ipsos interpretes consti- 
episcopos.' 



THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 26, 

refused, saying : (248) ' By your management it is contrived 
that this should not be a full and general Council : our col- 
leagues therefore, being absent, we cannot answer.' 

' Ambrose the bishop said : Who are your colleagues? 

e Palladius replied : The eastern bishops. 

' Ambrose the bishop said : since it has been the usage 
of latter times, that the eastern bishops, being resident in 
the region of the east, should hold Councils there, and the 
western bishops in the west ; we, being settled in the 
western parts, have assembled at the city of Aquileia, ac- 
cording to the command of the emperor. However, the 
prefect of Italy has given orders, that if the eastern bishops 
chose to meet with us, they might do so : but as they know 
the custom that the eastern Councils should be held in the 
east, and the western in the west, therefore they have not 
thought fit to come.' 

The Synodical epistle, addressed by the fathers of this 
Council to the emperors, commences in the following 
strain. 

(249) ' To the most clement, most Christian, and most 

(248) Ib. p. 788 6. Palladius dixit: Vestro studio factum est, ut 
non esset generale et plenum Concilium: absentibus consortibus nos- 
tris, nos respondere non possumus. 

Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Q.ui sunt consortes vestri ? 

Palladius dixit: Orientales episcopi. 

7. Ambrosius episcopus dixi*. : Interim quia superioribus tempori- 
bus Concilium sic factum est, ut orientates in orieritis partibus consti- 
tuti haberent Concilium, occidentales in Occidents; nos in occidentis 
partibus constituti, convenimus ad Aquileiensium civitatem, juxta im- 
peratoris prseceptum. Denique etiam praefectus Italiae htteras dedit, 
ut si vellent orientales convenire, in potestate haberent: sed quia sci- 
erunt consuetudinem hujusmodi, ut in oriente orientalium esset Con- 
cilium, intra occidentem occidentalium, ideo putaverunt non esse 
veniendum. 

(249) Ambros. op. Tom. 2. p. 806. 

1 Imperatoribus clementissimis et christianis, beatisbimisqua princs- 



CHAPTER 26.] OF AMBROSE. 293 

blessed emperors and princes Gratian, Valentinian, and 
Theodosius, the holy Council which is assembled at Aqui- 
leia,' (sendeth greeting :) 

' Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
who has given you the Roman empire ; and blessed be our 
Lord Jesus Christ the only-begotten Son ol God, who pre- 
serves your kingdom in his piety, in whom we give thanks 
to you, most clement princes, because you have proved the 
zeal of your faith, and have labored' to convene a Council 
of bishops, to remove dissensions, and have so far honored 
the bishops in your condescension,, that no one desirous to 
be present should be omitted, and that no one who was un- 
willing should be compelled.' 

Now, brethren, I beseech you to transfer these proceed- 
ings to our day, and mark how utterly repugnant they would 
be to your modern system. 

Would the pope endure the summoning a Council by the 
mandate of any sovereign, to try bishops accused of heresy, 
without reference to his authority ? 

Would an assembly of your bishops think it consistent 
with their obedience, to hold such a Council, for such a 

7 3 

purpose and under such a warrant ? 

And if Ambrose, with all his disposition to acknowledge 
and favor the rights of the Church of Rome, acted and 

pibus Gratiano, Valentiniano et Theodosio. sanctum Concilium quod 
oonvenit Aquileiaa. 

Benedictus Dens pater domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui vobis Roman- 
urn imperium dedit ; et benedictus dominus noster Jesus Christusuni- 
genitus Dei Filius, qui regnum vestrum sua pietate custodit, apud quern 
gratias agimus vobis, clemen.tissimi Principles, quod et fidei vestrse stu- 
dium probavistis, qui ad removendas altercationes congregare studuis- 
t's sacerdotale Concilium, etepiscopis dignatione vestra bonorificenti- 
a <n reservastis ut nemo deesset volens, nemo cogeretur invitus-' 
25* 



#94 TESTIMONY OF AMBROSE. [CHAPTER 26. 

Wrote as is here recorded, could he have known anything 
of die papal prerogative, as laid down in your canon law ? 

Surely, brethren, I cannot err, in leaving these questions 
to be answered by any lover of candor and of truth. 



CHAPTER XXVII. 



'BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

You will doubtless welcome the evidence of- Jerome, whose 
name stands next -in order upon our list, since he is so hon- 
ored by your Canon law, that nothing but favor could be 
expected at his hands' towards the claims of -Roman Supre- 
macy. Nor is it to' be"disputed,that in drawing to the close 
of the fourth century, we find increasing proofs of the ad- 
vancement of those claims towards the - zenith of their 
maturity ; although they were still very far from the point 
which they attained at a-- later day. 

To do justice to this witness, I shall first state his strong- 
est declarations in your favor from his famous letter to pope 
Damasus ; and then present to you his equally celebrated 
epistle to Evagrius. His comments on the passages of Scrip- 

ture which you cite as the foundation of. your claim will next 
demand notice ; and a few passages in which he calls Rome 
the mystic Babylon, and treats the peculiar customs of that 
Church with but small regard, will aid in determining the 
true aspect of his testimony. 

I commence, then, with his letter to pope Damasus, 
which is as follows : viz. (250) ' Jerome to Damasus. 

: Since the East, dashed together by the old madness of the 

- ' - - . -L- _--.._ __ 

'(250) S. Hieron. op. om. Ed. Franc. A. D. 1684. Tom. 2. p. 90. 
e Hieronynma Damaso. Q,uoniam vetusio Oriens inter ee populorum 



296 THE TESTIMONI [CHAPTER 27. 

. ">' 

people, tears piecemeal the seamless-tunic and coat of the 
Lord : and the foxes destroy the vine of Christ, as among 
reservoirs \vorn out, which hold no water ; and it is difficult 
to understand'where the fountain sealed, the garden enclosed, 
may be found ; therefore I have thought it best for me to 
consult the chair of Peter and the faith praised by the apos- 
tle's mouth ; asking at this time food for my soul from the 
same quarter, where formerly I received the garments of 
Christ. For the vast extent of water and of land which 
lies between us, cannot keep me from seeking the pearl of 
price. Wherever the body is, there are the eagles gathered 
together- The prodigal son having. 1 wasted his patrimony, 
the heritage -of the fathers is kept safely amongst you alone. 
There, the ground of the Lord with its prolific soil declares 
its purity by the return of an hundred fold : here, the grain, 
drowned in the furrows, degenerates into tares and straw. 
Now the sun of righteousness rises in the West :. but in the 
East, that Lucifer who had fallen,. has placed his throne 
above the stars. You are the light of the world, you are 

furore collisus, indiscissam Domini tunicam et desuper textam, minu- 
tattin per frustra discerpit : et Christi vineam exterminant vulpes, ut 
inter lacus contritos, qui aquam non habent, difficile, ubi fons signatus, 
et hortus ille conclusus sit, possit intelligi : ideo rnihi calhedram Petri 
et fidem apostolico ore laudatana censui consulendam; indenunc meae 
animae postulans cibum, unde olim Christi vestimentasuscepi. Neque 
vero tanta vastitas element! liquentis, et interjacens longitudo terrarum, 
me a preciosae margaritae potuit inquisitione prohibere. Ubicumque 
fuerit corpus, illuc congregantur aquilae. Profligate a gobble mala 
patrimonio,apud vossolosincorruptapatrum servatur haereditas, Ibi 
cespite terra frecundo dominici seminis puritatem centeno fructu refert: 
hie obruta sutcis frumenta in lolium avenasque degenerant. Nunc in 
occidente sol justitiae oritur : in oriente autem Lucifer ille qui cecide- 
rat, supra sidera posuit thronum suum. Vosestislux mundi, vassal 
terrtR) vos aurea vasa et argentea: hie testacea vasa vel lignea, virgam 
ferream et aeternumoperiunturincendium. Quanquam igitur tui me 
terreat magnitude, invitat tamen humanitas. A sacerdote victimam 



CHAPTEK 27.] OF JEROME. 29t 

the salt of the earth, you are vessels of gold and silver ; here 
the vessels of earth and wood are shut up for the rod of 
iron and eternal fire. Notwithstanding, therefore, your great- 
ness deters, yet your kindness invites me. With earnestness 
I ask a victim of salvation from the priest, the defence 
which the sheep requires from the shepherd. Let envy de- 
part : let the ambition of the Roman chief he banished : I 
speak with the successor of the fisherman and a disciple of 
the cross. I who follow no primate except Christ, am uni- 
ted in communion to your blessedness, that is, to the chair 
of Peter : on that rock I know that the Church is built. 
Whoever eats the lamb out of that house, is profane. If 
any one was not in the ark of Noah, he must perish hi the 
flood. And becausej for my sins, I have dwelt in this wil- 
derness which lies on the boundary between Barbary and 
Syria, and could not always seek the holy (counsel ?) of 
the Lord from your holiness, through so great an interven- 
ing distance : therefore I follow hither your colleagues, the 
confessors of Egypt ; and among the largest vessels, I lie 
hid in a little boat. I know nothing of Vitalis, of Meletius, 
of Paulinus. Whoever does not gather with thee, scatters : 
that is, whoever is not of Christ, is of Antichrist. For 



salutis, a pastorc praesidium ovis flagito. Faccssat invidia: Romani 
culininis recedatambitio: cum successore piscatorisetdiscipulocrucia 
loquor. Ego nullum primum, nisi Christum, sequens, beatudihi tuae, 
id est, cathedrae Petri communione consocior: super illam petram 
aedificatam ecclesium scio. Quit-unique extra lianc domum agnum 
comederit, prophanus est. Si quis in area Noe non fuerit, peribit reg- 
'tiante diluvio. Et quia pro meis facinoribus ad earn solitudinem com- 
migravi, quae Syriam juncto Barbariae fine disterminat, nee possum 
sanctum Domini tot interjacentibus spatiis a sanctimonia tua semper 
expetere : ideo hie oollegas tuos ^Egyptios confessores sequor : et sub 
onerariis navibus, pavva navicula delitesco. Non novi Vhalem, Mele- 
tium respuo, ignore Paulinum, (Juicumque tecumnon colligit, spargit: 
hoc est, qui Christ! non est, Antichrist! est. Nunc igilur, proh dolor ! 



298 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 27. 

notv, O shame !- after the Nicene faith, after the Alex- 
andrine decree, the west also concurring, the new phrase 
of three hypostases is exacted of me, a Roman,, by the 
Campenses, and the chief of the Arians. What apostles, 
1 pray, have disclosed these words? What new Paul, the 
master of the nations, has taught this doctrine ? We may 
ask, what these three hypostases are supposed to mean ? 
They say, three subsisting persons. We answer that we 
believe this. The sense does not content them, they insist 
upon the very words : because there lies hid' I know not 
what poison, in the syllables. We cry aloud, If any one 
does not confess three hypostases, that is, three subsisting 
persons, let him be anathema. And because we do not 
pronounce their very words, we are adjudged heretics. 
But if any one, understanding the word liypostasis in the 
sense of substance or essence, saith that the hypostasis is not 
one, in three persons, he is an alien from Christ : and in this 
confession we are united with you, as though we were bran- 
ded together.' 

Here, brethren, you have the greater part of this celebra- 
ted document, to which your writers so triumphantly refer. 
And I do not hesitate to say, that if maturely considered, 

post Nicaenam fidem, post Alexandri'num juncto pariter Occidente 
decretum, trium hypostaseon ab Arianorum praesule et Campensibus 
novellum a me homine Romano nomen exigitur. Qui quaeso ista 
Apostoliprodidere ? Q,uis novus magister gentium Paulus haec docu- 
it? Interrogemus, quid tres hypostases posse arbitrentur intelligr? 
Tres personas subsistentes aiunt. Respondents, nos ita credere. 
Non sufficit sensus, ipsum nomen efflagitant: quia neseio quid veneni 
in syllabis latet. Clamamus, si quis tres hypostases, aut tria enypos- 
tata, hoc est, tres subsistentes personas non confitetur, anathema sit, 
Et quia vocabula non ediscimus, haeretici judicamur. Si quis autem 
hypostasin usian intelligens, non in tribus personis unam hypostasiu 
dicit, alienus a Chriato est : et eub hac confessions robiscum pariter 
eauterio unionis inurimur.' 



CHAPTER 37.] OF AMBROSE. 299 

it will be found to have no reference whatever to the real 
question at issue. That question is a question of Ecclesi- 
astical polity or government. Your doctrine is, that the 
Church was built on Peter, personally and officially, as be- 
inf the constituted chief and ruler, the vicar of Christ, to 

o J * 

whom was committed the whole Church, apostles and all : 
that his supreme authority was transferred to his successors 
in the Roman See, which thenceforward became, by virtue 
of this transfer, the mother and mistress of all the Church- 
es: and that, by necessary consequence, the being in com- 
.munion with the Church of Rome, as such, is essential to 
the being a member of the Catholic Church. Whereas I. 
shall shew you, distinctly, that Jerome did not hold your 
construction of the Saviour's address to Peter : that on the 
contraiy he held the same which the fathers in general had 
held before him : viz. that the Church was built, not on 
Peter personally, but on the faith which he professed : that 
in consistency with this opinion, the expressions on which 
you rely in the above document, were not intended by Je- 
rome to mean a personal communion with Daraasus, as be- 
ing .the official successor of Peter the pope of Rome but 
a communion with him in that faith of Peter on which the 
Church was built; which faith, the Eastern Church, in the 
days of Jerome, had suffered to be almost overcome by 
Arianism, while the Western Church had continued to hold 
it uncorrupted and pure. 

You will probably think that I have undertaken a rash 
enterprise. Give me your patient attention, brethren, and I 
promise you that it shall have a successful issue. It is only 
necessary lhat we examine Jerome's .declarations in other 
parts of his works, and then we shall be able to do him 
justice in the interpretation of the place in question : for I 
hold it to be a sound rule, that as far as possible, we must 



300 THE TESTIMONY [CHlPTEE 27. 

construe every author, so that he shall not appear to con- 
tradict himself. 

I ask you, then, to turn to the epistle to Evagrius, which 
Calvin and his disciples have praised as loudly as your wri-, 
ters have lauded the other. And here we shall have a bet- 
ter view of Jerome's sentiments, because the very point of 
this epistle was one of ecclesiastical polity, whereas the 
burden of his letter to Damasus was a question of faith alone. 
The deacons of the Church of Rome, as you are aware, 
being limited to the number seven, had become arrogant 
and assuming, preferring themselves before the presbyters. 
Jerome reproves their presumption, and takes occasion to en- 
large on the offices of bishop, priest,anddeacon,with their rela? 
tive powers; especially declaring his opinion as to the compar^ 
ative authority of the Church of Rome. Of course, there- 
fore,, the very topic naturally led to the point under discus- 
sion ; so that the sentiments of Jerome, when the epistle to 
Evagrius is well weighed, can hardly be mistaken. 

The passages important to the argument are as follows, 
viz ; 

(251) < The Church of Rome is not to be thought one 
thing, and that of the whole world another. Gaul and 
Britain and Africa and Persia and the East and Judea and 

Hieron. op. Tom. 2. p. 221. ' Hieronymus Evagrio.' 

(251) ' Nee altera Romans urbis Ecclesia, alteratotius orbis 

existimanda est. Et Gallire et Britannise et Africa et Persis et Oriens 
et India etomnes barbarae nationes unum Christum adorant, unam ob- 
servant regulam veritatis. Si autoritas quseritur, orbis major esturbe. 
TJbicumque fuerit Episcopus, sive Romse sive Eugubii, sive Constant!- 
nopoli sive Rhegii, sive Alexandria, sive Tanis: ejusdem meriti, ejus- 
dem est et sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis hmnilitas, 
vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Cseterum omnes 
apostolorum successores sunt. Sed dicis quomodo Romse ad testimo- 
nium diaconi presbyter ordinatur ? Q,uid mihi prefers vmius urbis con- 
suetudinem?' 



CHAPTER 27.] OF JEROME. 301 

all the barbarian nations, adore also one Christ, and obferve 
the same rule of truth. IF AUTHORITY is> SOUGHT FOR, 
THE WOULD is GREATER THAN ONE CITY. Wherever there 
is a bishop, whether at Rome, or Eugubium, or Constanti- 
nople, or Rhegium, or Alexandria, or Tunis : HE is OF 

THE SAME EXCELLENCY, OF THE SAME EPISCOPATE. The 

power of wealth and the lowliness of poverty does not 
make a bishop either less or greater. But they are all the 
successors of the apostles. But you say, how is it that at 
Rome a presbyter is ordained upon the testimony of a dea- 
con ? Why do you urge to me the custom of a single 
city ?' The conclusion of the epistle is in these words : 
(252) ' And that we may know the apostolic traditions to 
have been drawn from the Old Testament, what Aaron 
and his sons and the Levites were in the temple, the same 
let the bishops, the presbyters, and the deacons, claim to 
themselves in the Church.' 

I shall not detain you by any remarks on this decisive 
passage, until I present to your attention the important tes- 
timony of our witness on the fundamental question ; viz. 
how he considered the Church, as built on Peter. And 
here brethren, you will perhaps be somewhat surprized 
when you examine the proof which this most blessed of the 
fathers (according to your canon law) will afford us. 

(253) ' You say,' says Jerome, ' that the Church is foun- 
ded on Peter, although the same thing is elsewhere done 
upon all the apostles, and all received the keys of the king- 
dom of heaven, so that the strength of the Church is con- 

(252) Ib. ' Et ut sciamus traditiones apostolicas sumptai de veteri 
testamento, quod Aaron et filii ejus atque Levitse in templo fuerunt, 
toe sibi Episcopi et presbyteri et diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia.' 

(253) Hieron. adversuslovinianum. Lib. 1. op. om. Tom. 2 p. 26. H. 
'At dicis, super Petrum fundata est Ecclesia, licet id ipsum in alio 

loco super omnes Apostolos fiat, et cuncti claves regni scelorum mccipi- 
26 



302 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 27. 

*olidated upon them all alike : nevertheless, on this account 
one is elected amongst the twelve, in order that a head be- 
iag constituted, the occasion of schism might be takfin 
away.' In this passage we have the same doctrine that 
Cyprian laid down, though not so strongly. Jerome was a 
presbyter of the Church of Rome, and in that quarter, the 
primacy of Peter and its derivation to the pope of Rome 
might be expected to appear, in their most imposing form. 
Yet even here, your witness asserts a perfect equality 
amongst the apostles, in the fundamental point of the build- 
ing of the Church upon them, and the giving them the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven. 

Again, in his commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, 
we read as follows : 

(254) ' On this rock the Lord founded his Church, from 
this rock the apostle Peter obtained his name.' 'The foun- 
dation which the apostle as an architect laid, is one, 
our Lord Jesus Christ : upon this foundation the Church of 
Christ is built.' 

Again, in his commentary on the very words addressed 
by our Lord to Peter, Jerome declares : (255) | c As the 

ant, et ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitude) sol idetur : tamen propte- 
rea inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut capite constitute, schisraatis tol- 
latur occasio.' 

(254) Ilieron. Com. in. Matthceum. Cap. VII. v. 61. 
'Fundata enim &c.] ' Super hanc petram Dominus fundavit Ecclc- 

siam, ah hao patra Apostolus Petrus sortitus est nomen. 

Qwi aedificavit &c.] ' Fundamentum quod Apostolus architects 

posuit, unus est Dominus noster Jesus Christus: super hoc fundamen- 
tum sdificatur Christi Ecclesia.' 

(255) Ib. Cap. XVI. 

' Et ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram <Edific&uo 
Ecclesiam meam] Sicut ipse lumen Apostolis donavit, ut lumen mun- 
di appellarentur, caeteraque ex Domino sortiti sunt vocabula, ita et 
Simoni qui credebat in petram Christum, Petri largitua est noaaen. 



CHAPTER 27.] OF JEROME. 303 

Lord gave light to the apostles, that they might be called 
the light of the world, so did they obtain other names from 
hioi, thus on Simon who believed in the rock Christ, the name 
of Peter is bestowed. And according to the metaphor of a 
rock, it is rightly said to him : I will build my Church on 
thee.' 

Upon the words which follow : And the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against it, Jerome saith, (256) ' I think 
the gates of hell are the vices and sins of men ; or certainly 
the doctrines of heretics, by which men being allured are 
led to destruction.' 

Upon the words, ' I will give unto thcc the keys of^ the 
kingdom, of heaven,' Jerome's commentary is worthy of 
your particular notice. (257) 'Bishops and presbyters/ saith 
he^ ' not understanding this passage, assume to themselves 
something of the superciliousness of the Pharisees, thinking 
that they can condemn the innocent and absolve the guilty, 
when, before God, it is not the sentence of the priests, but 
the life of the accused that is required. We read in Levi- 

Ac secimdum metaphoram petras, reete dicitur ei : JEdtficabo Ecclesi- 
am meam super te. 

(256) Et portae inferi non praevalelunt a&versus earn] Ego portas 
infer! reor vitia atque peccata, vel certe heereticorum doctrinas, per 
quas illecti homines ducuntur ad tartarum. 

(257) l Et dabo tibi clavssregni c&lonnn, <^c.] Istum locum episcopi 
et presbyter! non intelligentes, aliquid.sibi de Pbarisasorum assumunt 
supercilio, ut vel damnent innocentes, vel solverese noxios arbitren. 
tur, cumapud f)eum non sententia sacerdoturn, sed reorurn vita quaj- 
ratur. Legimus in Levitico de leprosis, ubi jubentur ut ostendant se 
sacerdotibus, et si lepram habuerint, tune a sacerdote immundi fiant, 
non quo sacevdotes lepvosos faciant et immundos, sed quo babeant no- 
titiam leprosi et non leprosi, etpossint discernere qui mundus, quire 
HOmundus sit. Q,uomodo ergo ibi leprosum sacerdos mundum vel in> 
niundum facit, sic et hie alligat, vel solvit episcopus et presbyter, 
non eos qui insontes sunt vel noxii, sed pro officio suo, cum peccato- 

. a^udjerit v,arietates r scit q_ui ligandus sit, quive solvendus.' 



304 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 27. 

ticus,' continues he, e of the lepers, where they are ordered . 
to shew themselves to the priests, and if they had the lep- 
rosy, then the priest should pronounce them unclean ; not 
that the priest could make them leprous and unclean ; hut 
that they might have notice of those who were lepers and 
those who were not, and might be able to discern between 
the clean and the unclean. In the same manner, therefore,, 
as the priest then made the clean and the unclean, so now 
the bishop and the presbyter binds or looses, not those who 
are innocent or guilty, but on account of his office, when 
he hears the varieties of sins, he knows who should be 
bound, or who should be loosed.' I have translated these 
passages as literally as possible. The latter sentence, espe- 
cially, might be better arranged, but the meaning of Jerome 
is sufficiently plain. 

We have not yet, however, closed this important witnesses 
testimony, but shall ask your attention to some farther ex- 
tracts bearing on the point in question. 

In his commentary on St. Paul's epistle to Titus, he saith: 
(258) It beldhgs to the apostolic dignity to lay the founda- 
tion of the Church, which no one should lay except the 
architect. But there is no other foundation besides Jesus 
Christ: where that foundation is laid, inferior workmen may 
carry on the building.' 

And again : arguing strongly that bishop and presbyter 
were at the beginning but different names fpr the same 
office, and that the distinction was introduced for the pur- 
pose of preventing schism, he uses the following language:. 

(253) Hioron. Com. in Epist. ad Titum, Cap. 1. 

' Hujus rei, <5"C.] ApostolicsB dignitatis est Ecclesi<e jacere funda- 
mentutn, quod nsmo ponere, nisi Arclmectus. Fandamentum autenv 
non est aliud prseter Christum Jesnm. Q,ui inferiores artifices. sunt?, 
Li possunt asdes super fundamenta construere. 



CHAPTER 27.J OF JEROME. 305 

(259) ' Peter, who received his name from the firmness 
of his faith, in his epistle, saith : The presbyters who art 
among you, I who am your fellow presbyter, and a witness 
of the sufferings of Christ, and a companion of the glory 
which is to be revealed hereafter, beseech you, feed the flock 
of the Lord among you, not as if by constraint, but wil- 
lingly. Here we shew,' continues Jerome, ' that with the 
ancients presbyters and bishops were the same ; but by de- 
grees, m order mat the plants of dissension might be rooted 
up, the care of government was committed to one. There- 
fore, as the presbyters know themselves by the custom of 
the Church to be subject to him who may be set over them, 
so should the bishops know that they are superior to the 
presbyters more by custom than by the truth of our Lord's 
disposition, and that they ought to govern the Church in 
common ; imitating Moses, who, when he had it in his power 
to preside alone over Israel, chose seventy men with whom 
he might judge the people.'" 

I do not undertake to defend this opinion of Jerome, 
brethren, because I believe that Episcopacy deserves to be 
placed on far higher ground than the mere custom of the 
Church. But the passage is important as exhibiting the 

(259) Ib. ' Et Petrus qui ex fidei firmitate nomen accepit, in Episto. 
la sua loquitur clicens : Preslyteros ergo invobis obsecro compresbyter , 
&t tcstis Christi passionum, qui et ejus gloria qua- in futuro revelunda 
cst socius sum^pascite cum qui invobis gregem, Domini, non quasi cum 
necessitate, sed voluntarie, Haec propterea, ut ostendereinus apud ve- 
teros eosdetn fuisse presbyteros quos et Episcopos, paulatim vero ut 
disscnsionum plantaria evellerentur, ad unurn omnem sollicitudinem 
esse delatam. Si cut ergo presbyteri sciunt se ex Ecclesise consuetu- 
dine ei qui sibi prapositus fuerit esse subjectos, ita Episcopi noverint 
se magis consuetudine quam dispositionis dominica veritate, presbyte- 
ns esse majores, et in commune debere Ecclesiam regere, imitantes 
Moysen, qui cum haberet in potestate solus prseesse popuk) Israel, 
sopluaginta elegit cum qaibus populum judicaret.' 
26* 



306 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTEll *L 

construction which ought to be affixed to other parts of his 
\vorks. And you will perceive at once, that an author who 
thus argued for the original equality of bishops and presby- 
ters, and reduced the whole episcopal power of government 
to the custom of the Church, without divine right, could 
never, in fairness, be suspected of teaching, that the bishop 
of Rome, by the express gift of Christ to Peter, held ' a 
plenitude of power J not only over his own presbyters, but 
over all the bishops, priests, deacons, and laity, through* 
out the whole Christian world. 

A few quotations of another character will shew Jerome's 
regard for Rome in a light but poorly adapted to sustain 
your doctrine. Thus, in his preface to the treatise on the 
Holy Spirit, addressed to his friend Paulinian, he uses the 
following expressions : (260) 'Whenl was a dweller in 
Babylon, a tenant of the scarlet whore, and living after the 
rule of the Roman citizens, I had a desire to prate some- 
what concerning the Holy Spirit ; and the work being be- 
gun, I designed to dedicate it to the pontiff of that city.' 

Strange language this, brethren, from the most blessed of 
the fathers. But it is not the only instance, for I shall shew 
you another more positive and sober declaration of the same 
kind. In his epistle to Marcella, when he argues in favor 
of a solitary life, and especially recommends her to leave 
Rome, and take up her residence at Bethlehem, the birth- 
place of the Saviour ; he saith : (261 ) ' This is a far holier 
place, as I think, than the Tarpeian rock, which the frequent 

(260) S. Hieron. ad Pauliniauum in Lib. Didynii de Spir. Sane, prae- 
fatio, 

Cum in Babylone vorsarer, et purpuratEe meretricis essem colonus, 
et jure duiritum viverem, volui garrire aliquid de Spiritu Sancto,.et 
eojptum opusculum,.ejusdem urbis Pontifiei dedicare. 

(261) S. Hieron. ad Marcellam. Op. om. Tom. 1. p. 82. 

'Et hie [nempe Bethlehem] jmto locus sanctior. &st Tarpeia rupe,. 



27.] OF JEROME, 307 

stroke of the thunderbolt would prove to have displeased 
the Lord. Read the Apocalypse of John, and behold what 
he declares of the scarlet woman, on whose forehead were 
written blasphemies ; of the seven hills, of many waters, 
and of going out from Babylon. Go out from her my peo- 
ple, saith the Lord, that ye be not partakers of her sins, 
and that you receive not of her plagues. Fly ye from the 
midst of Babylon, and save every one of you his own soul. 
She has fallen, she has fallen, the great Babylon, and is 
become a habitation of demons, and a watch-tower of the 
unclean spirit. There, indeed, is a holy Church, there are 
the trophies ot the apostles and martyrs, there is a true con- 
fession of Christ, there is the faith preached by the apostles, 
and there, while heathenism is trodden down, the Christian 
profession is daily erecting itself on high : but ambition, 
power, the vastness of the city, the passion to see and to 
be seen, to salute and to be saluted, to praise and to calum- 
niate, to hear or to speak, with the necessity of seeing such 
a croud of people, however unwillingly, these things are 

quit de ccelo saspius fulminatu ostendit, quod Domino displiceret. Lege 

Apocalypsim Joannis,et quid de muliere purpurata, et st-ripta in ejus 

fronte blasphemia, septem montibus, aquis multis, et Babylonis cante- 

tur exitu, contuere. Exite, inqu.it Dominus, de ilia popuius meus, et 

ne participes sitis delictoru-tn ejiis, ct de, plagis ejus non accipiatis. 

Fugite de media Balylonis, et salvate imusquisque ani'inam siiam* Ce- 

oidit enim, cecidit Babylon -magna, et facta est liabitatio Daimonum, 

et custodia Spiritus immundi. Est quidem ibi sancta Ecclesia, sunt 

tiophoja Apostolorum et martyrum, est Christi vera confessio, est ab 

Apostolo praedicata fides, et gentilitate calcata, in sublime se quotidie 

erigens vocabulum Christianum : sed ipsa ambitio, potentia, magnitu- 

do urbis, videri etvidere. salutari et salutare, laudare et detrahere, vel 

sudire vel proloqui, et tantam frequentiam hominum saltern invitum 

videre, a proposito monachorum et quiete alieua sunt. Aut enim vi- 

demus venientes ad nos, et silentium perdimus, aut non videmus, et 

superbiae avguimur. Interdumque ut visitantibus reddamus vicem,ad 

superbas fores pergiinus, et inter linguas rodentium ministroruni poates 

ingredimur auratos.' 



THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTEB, 27. 

quite foreign to the quiet and design of monks. For either 
we must see those who come to visit us, and thereby lose ths 
benefits of silence ; or we must refuse to see them, and 
thereby be accused of pride. And if we return the visits, 
we present ourselves to scornful doors ; and enter the gilded 
posts amongst the tongues of back-biting menials.' 

I shall not trouble you, brethren, with any disquisition 
upon the question, whether Jerome meant to apply tbeilan- 
guage of the Apocalypse to heathen, or to Christian Rome. 
Certain it is, however, that he wrote those passages nearly 
one hundred years after Christianity had triumphed in the 
imperial city, and at a time when he could with truth assert, 
as we see he did, that ' heathenism ivas trodden down.' 
But if he had believed that the Vicar of Christ, the pas* 
tor and ruler of the whole Christian world, hud his seat at 
Rome, in that Church which was the mother and mistress 
of all the others, is it conceivable that he could have thus ex- 
pressed himself, without one redeeming word of veneration ? 
Or eould you imagine an orthodox, presbyter of your Church, 
distinguished as Jerome was, for piety and learning, deliver- 
ing such sentiments at the present day ? 

Another instance of our author's disregard to the superior 
authority of the Church of Rome, occurs in the following 
passages, addressed to his friend Lucinius. 

(262) ' As to your questions concerning the sabbath,, 
whether it is lawful to fast on it, and concerning the eucha- 

(262) Hieron. ad Lucinium. ib. p. 126. A. ' De sabbato quod quseris, 
utrum jejunandum sit, et de eucharistia, an accipienda quotidic, quod 
Romanae Ecclesias et Hispanic observare perhibentur, scripyit quidem- 
et Hippolytus vir disertissimus, et carptim diversi scriptores e variis 
autoribus edidere.. Sed ego illud te breviter admonendum puto, tra- 
ditiones Ecclesiasticas, [praesertim quse fidei non officiant] ita obeer- 
vandas, ut a maj.<Mribus traditae sunt. Nee aHorum consuetudinem alio- 
rum contrario more subvcrti." 



CHAPTER 27.] OF JEROME. 309 

rist, whether it should be taken every day, as the Churches 
of Rome and of Spain are said to practise, Hippolytus, tru- 
ly, a very learned man, has written, and several others, here 
and there, have also published opinions, from various au- 
thors. But I think it best briefly to admonish you, that the 
ecclesiastical traditions, (especially those which do not med- 
dle with faith ) are to be observed, as the elders have deli- 
vered them. Nor should the custom of some be subverted 
by the contrary mode of others.' . 

(263) * Nor do I say this because I think it proper to 
fast on the dominical days, or because I wish to take away 
the holydnys of the sixty successive days, but let each pro- 
vince be satisfied with its own way, and esteem the precepts 
of the elders as the laws of the apostles themselves.' 

In these passages, the equal rights of all the Churches, and 
the total absence of deference towards Rome, appear plain- 
ly; and fully accord with the general strain of our author's 
testimony. 

Now then, let us turn, if you please, to your favorite, 
the epistle of Jerome to Damasus, and see whether it con- 
flicts with the various quotations which I have set before 
you. It commences with a reference to the distracted state 
of the eastern Church, in consequence of the prevalence of 
Ariamsm, so that it was difficult to know where to find the 
true faith amongst them. From the east therefore, he turns 
to the west, to that Rome in which he had become a pres- 
byter some years before, and whose bishop he was desi- 
rous to propitiate, in order to secure a kind and favorabln 
reception. He introduces a comparison between the Church* 

(263) Ib. ' Nee hoc dico quod dominicis jejunandum putem, et con- 
textas sexaginta diebus ferias auferam, sed unaquseque provincia 
abundet in sensu suo, et praecepta majorurn leges Apostolicas arbi- 
tretur.' 



310 THE TESTIMONY ([CHAPTER 27. 

es in the east and the west, by a recurrence to our Lord's 
parable of the prodigal son. He then alludes strongly to 
the reasons for his former disgust, by saying c Let envy de- 
part : let the ambition of the Roman chief be banished. I 
speak with the successor of the fisherman, and a disciple of 
the cross. I, who follow no primate except Christ, am uni- 
ted in communion to your blessedness, that is, to the chair 
of Peter. On that rocjc I Jcnow that the Church is built ; 
whoever eats the lajnb out of that house is profane. If any 
one was not in the ark of Noah he must perish in the flood' 
^ Wlioever does not gather with thee, scatters : that is, who- 
ever is not of Christ is of antichrist. For now 
shame ! after the Nicene faith, after the Alexandrian 
decree, the west also concurring, the new phrase of three 
hypostases is exacted of me, a Roman, by the chief of the 
Arians.' &c. 

The whole question, here, turns upon the sense of the 
words I have italicised . Whether Jerome meant to say 
that the Church was built on the chair of Peter, or on the 
confession, the faith of Peter, which the Council of Nice 
had acknowledged as the faith of the Catholic or universal 
Church, and which the chair of Peter, (that is, in the style 
of Jerome's days, the Church of Rome) had retained, this 
is the only point at issue. And perhaps I cannot do better, 
with regard to it, than refer you to the Scholium which your 
truly great Erasmus has appended to the very passage. (264) 
' NOT UPON ROME,' was the Church built, ' as I think,' 
saith this celebrated commentator. ' For it might happen 

(264) Hieron. op. Tom. 2. 91. Epist. Hieron, ad Damasum Scholia. 
' Super illam petram] Non super Honiara, ut avbitror. Nam fieri 
potest, ut Roma quoque deg.eneret j sed super earn fidem, quam Petrus 
professus est, et quam hactenus Romana servavit Ecclesia, qua 
alia minus laboravit heeresibus.' 



CHAPTER 27.] OF JEBOME, 311 

that Rome also should degenerate ; but upon that faith 
which Peter professed,and which hitherto the Roman Church 
has preserved, by which alone she has been less troubled 
with heresies.' 

And on the following words of Jerome, ' Out of this 
house, whoever eats the lamb is profane,' the same distin- 
guished critic observes : (265) ' Here truly, Jerome seems 
to think, that all the Churches should be subject to the Ro- 
man See, or at least, not to be separated from that Church, 
which particularly glories in the apostle who held the pri- 
macy among the rest ; and which is therefore orthodox, as 
standing in the first dignity of the orthodox Churches. 
But Jerome alluded,' continues Erasmus, ' to the house in 
which Christ with the twelve apostles ate the paschal lamb. 
And he referred to what we read in the twelfth chapter of 
Exodus respecting the eating of the passover : It shall be 
eaten in one house, nor shall ye carry any portion of its flesh 
out of doors.' 

In accordance, then, brethren, with one of your own most 
eminent scholars, I am justified in saying, that the commun- 
ion to which Jerome alluded throughout this epistle was a 
communion in the orthodox faith, as opposed to the heresy 
of Arms. He had left Rome, in disgust ; and had repaired 
to the Eastern Church, in order to enjoy the peace and re- 
tirement of monastic life. But the Eastern Church becomes 
torn by heresy, his peace is destroyed, his faith is impeach- 

(265) Ib. Extra hanc domum\ ' Hie Hieronymus omnino videtur 
sentire, omnes eccleaias debere subesse Romans eedi, aut certe ab 
hac non alienas, quse peouliariter hoc apostolo gloriatur, qui inter 
apostolos primas tenuit : et sic est orthodoxa, ut sit orthodoxarum 
prima dignitate. Allusit autem ad domum, in qua Christus cum duo- 
decim apostolis comedit agnum paschalem. Etquod legitur Exodi duo. 
decimo de esu phasae : In una domo comedetur, aec efferti d carni- 
b us ejus foras.' 



8J.9 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTEB 27. 

ed, and he desires to return to his former habitation. Ad- 
dressing himself to the Roman bishop, he relates the facts, 
compares the state of the two Churches, and tells Damasus 
that the western Church was now the salt of the earth, the 
light of the world. I am not in communion with these here- 
tical Arians, saith he, our faith is not the same. But I am 
in communion with you, lor you hold the faith of Peter, 
together with his chair. On that faith that rock I know 
that the Church is built, out of which Church whoever eat- 
eth the lamb is profane. For that Church is as the ark, 
which alone preserved the family of Noah from the deluge. 
Whoever does not gather with thee, by a communion in 
this true faith, scatters : for without this faith, he cannot be 
of Christ, and therefore must needs be of Antichrist. 

To shew sfill more clearly, that this is the true exposi- 
tion of Jerome's meaning, let me remind you of the ex- 
pressions with which he so carefully guards his indepen- 
dence. ' Let envy depart, saith he, e Let the ambition of 
the Roman chief be banished. I speak with the successor 
of the fisherman, and a disciple of the cross. I follow no 
primate but Christ.' For what purpose, I beseech you, 
were these words written, if Jerome intended to acknowl- 
edge pope Damasus as the ' Vicar of Christ? holding the 
place, ' not of a mere man, but of the true God upon the 
earth? according to your canon law ? Had such been his 
meaning, would he not have said so ? Since his very ob- 
ject was to ingratiate himself with the pope, and obtain an 
honorable recal from his self-imposed exile, would not every 
motive induce him to employ the strongest language of de- 
votion to the ROMAN CHIEF, which his real sentiments could 
possibly allow? 

But this is not the greatest difficulty which your construc- 
tion of the epistle has to overcome. According to your 



1CHAPTEB 27.] Or JEROME. 313 

hypothesis, the Church of Rome was appointed, by di- 
vine authority, to be the mother and mistress of all the 
Churches the head of the Church throughout the world. 
Of course, then, the Eastern Church, in departing from the 
faith of her mother and mistress, had committed a grievous 
trespass on the established system ot God, of which sys- 
tem, Jerome was an advocate and upholder. But if all this 
were so, why does he not mention it in his epistle ? Why 
does he compare the Eastern and Western Churches to the 
two brothers in the parable of the prodigal son, instead of 
saying that they stood in the mutual relation of parent and 
child 1 ? Why does he accuse the Eastern Church of per- 
sisting in their error, after the Council of Nice had pro- 
nounced their judgment against the Arian heresy, instead 
of charging them with the far deeper sin of treason against 
the divine authority of the Roman See ? 

Above all however, brethren, let me beg you to consider, 
that your construction of this single epistle requires us to 
set Jerome against himself, and to adopt a doubtful com- 
ment upon one passage, in the very face of the remainder of 
his testimony. For have we not heard our witness express- 
ly declaring, in his epistle to Evagrius, that the authority of 
the Church of Rome was not to be followed in preference 
to the rest of the Churches; that all bishops were equal in 
office and in excellency, whether they were of Rome, or 
Engubium, or Constantinople, or Rhegium, or Alexandria, 
or Tanis : that every bishop should consider himself as 
Aaron, and the presbyters as Aaron's sons, and the deacons 
as Levites ? Of course then, there could be no superior 
over any bishop except Christ, since there was no other 
nigh-priest over Aaron the very doctrine, in substance, 
which Cyprian had delivered more than two centuries be- 
fore. 

27 



314 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 27. 

' Again : have we not heard Jerome expounding the Scrip- 
tures in manifest contradiction to your doctrine ; asserting 
directly that what our Lord did for Peter he afterwards did 
for the others ; that the Church was built upon all the 
apostles, and that all received the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven ? Have we not even heard him reducing the very 
power of the keys to so moderate a measure, that if you 
held the same opinion as Jerome, you would hardly think 
it worth a controversy ? 

Again : have we not heard our witness insisting that bish- 
ops and presbyters in the beginning held the same office, and 
strongly arguing that for this reason, bishops, in his days, 
should know themselves to be above presbyters, rather by 
the custom of the Church, than by any divine constitution ? 
And this he states with regard to all bishops. How then 
should he have imagined, that such a pre-eminence had 
been designed, by Christ himself, for the bishop of Rome? 

Again : have we not heard your favorite Jerome apply- 
ing that most offensive of all Scriptural figures the scarlet 
whore, and Babylon to Rome, in his own days ; urging 
his friend Marcella to leave it, in the language of the Apo- 
calypse : ; Go out from her, my people, saith the Lord, 
that ye be not partaker of her sins?' 

And lastly : have we not heard him advise Lucinius, not 
to regard the customs of Rome, on the subject of fasting on 
the Sabbath, and the daily reception of the Eucharist, if it 
differed from the other Churches, saying, Met each province 
be satisfied with its own way ?' 

1 doubt not, brethren, that I may err, as all men are lia- 
ble to do, in my estimate of the force of evidence on the 
minds ot others. But I confess myself perfectly unable to 
conceive, how the testimony of this important witness, ta- 
ken as a whole, can be brought into accordance with your 



CHAPTER 27.] OF JEROME. 315 

system. His vast learning, his zeal for celibacy, his devo- 
tion to monachism, and his letter to pope Damasus, have 
combined to place him in the high rank which he has ob- 
tained upon your calendar. And I am willing to add that 
his candor, his sincerity, and his zeal for what he believed 
to be the truth, are worthy of all praise. For myself I can 
freely say, that I regard his works with peculiar admiration ; 
and am well persuaded, that if the Church of Rome would 
consent to- a thorough adoption of the sentiments of Jerome, 
there would b'e very little material for serious controversy 
remaining. (266) 

(266) Having promised, when I arrived at the testimony of Jerome, to 
place before you his specification of the errors of Origen, I subjoin an 
extract from his Epistle to Pammachius, on that subject : 

' Et primum de libro ns^i aQ^cav, ubi loquitur :' [sc. Origenes] ' Si- 
cut enim incongruum eat dicere, quod possit Filius videre Patrem : ira 
inconveniens est opinari, quod Spiritus Sanctus possit videre Filium. 
Secundum, quod in hoc corpore quasi in carcere sunt animse religatse : 
et antequam homo fieret in paradiso, inter rationabiles creaturas in 
coelestibus commoratse sunt. Unde postea in consolationem suam an.- 
ima loquitur in Psalmis ; Priusquam humiliarer, ego deliqui. Et : 
Revertere anima men in requiem tuam. Et : Educ de carcere animam 
meam; et csetera his similia. Tertium. quod dicat, et diabolum et dj- 
mones acturos pceni'tentiam aliquando, et cum sanctis ultimo tempore 
regriaturos. Q,uartum, quod tunicas pelliceas humana corpora inter- 
pretetur, quibus post offunsam et ejection em de paradiso Adam et Eva 
induti sunt, baud dubium. quin ante in paradiso sine carne, nervis, et 
ossibus fuerint. Quintum, quod carnis resurrectionem membrorumqae 
compagem, et sexum, quo viri dividimur a fceminis, apertissim neget : 
tarn in explanatione primi psalmi, quam in aliis multis tractatibus. 
Sextum, quod sic paradisum allegorizet, ut histories auferat veri- 
tatem, pro arboribua Angelos, pro fluminibus virtutes ccelestes intelli- 
gens, totamque paradisi continentiam tropologica interpretatione sub- 
vertat. Septirnum, quod aquas, qua? super ccelos in Scripturis esse 
Qicuntur, sanctas supernasque virtutes : qua? supra terram et infra 
terram, contrarias et daemoriiacas esse arbitrentur. Octavum, quod 
e xtremum objicit, imaginem et similitudinem Dei, ad quam homo f;on- 



316 THE TESTIMONY OF JEROME. [CHAPTER 27. 

ditus fuerat, dicit ab eo perditam, et in homine post paradiaum non 
fuisse.' Hieron. ad Pammacliium adverdus errores Joan. Hierosolym. 
Op. om. Tom. 2. p. 112. F. 

There are several other parts of the works of Jerome, where he 
enumerates the errors of Origen, but none, as I think, are more satis- 
factory than the preceding. Perfectly plain it is, that there is nothing 
in the list of Jerome's censures which concerns the subject of my 
humble volume ; and therefore, the testimony wiiich I have adduced 
from Origen stands fully accredited, by the very language of yous 
sanon law... See page 12., 



CHAPTER XXVIII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

A brighter name than that of St. Augustin, can hardly 
be found in the annals of the Church since the apostolic 
day ; nor is there one whose authority you are disposed to 
venerate more highly. Let us next turn to his testimony, 
and ascertain how he interpreted those passages of the word 
of God, on which your system is supposed to rest. 

And first, with regard to the apostle Peter being the 
foundation of the Church, it appears that Augustin, in one 
of his earlier works, while yet a presbyter, expressed an 
affirmative sentiment, but afterwards abandoned it, and 
thenceforward maintained the contrary. This we learn from 
bis ' Retractations,' where his account of the matter is as 
fnliows :. 

(267) ' 1 wrote a- book against the epistle of Donatus,' 
saith he, ' while I was a presbyter, in which I said, in acer- 

(267) S. Augustini Op. orn. Editio Bendidiet. Op. om. Tom. 1. p. 
23. Retract. L, r. c. xxi. 1. ' Librnm contra epistolam Donati . . . 
Rodem presbyterii mei temporo scripsi, .... in quo dixi in quodam 
loco de apostolo Petro, quod in illo tamquam in petra fundata sit ec- 
clesia . . . , Sed scio me postea s.-Epissiine sic exposuisse quod a 
IJomino dictum est, Tu cs Pctrus, ct super hanc petrain cedijicalo Eccle- 
siam meam : ut super hunc iritelligcretur qucm confessus est Petrua 
dicens, Tu es Ghristiis filius Dei mm: ac sic Petrus ab hac petra ap- 
pellatus personam EcclesiDB fignraret, quae super hanc petram sedifica- 
27* 



318 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 28.. 

tain place, concerning the apostle Peter, that the Churchi 
was built on him, as on a rock . , . . But I know that very 
frequently afterwards I expounded our Lord's saying :, Thou 
art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, so 
that it might be understood to mean : Upon him whom thou, 
Peter, hast confessed, saying,. Thou art Christ the Son of 
the living God : and so Peter,, being named from this rock, 
would represent the person of the Church, which is built 
upon this rock, and received the keys of the kingdom of 
heaven. For it was not said to him, Thou art a rock : but, 
Thou art Peter, The rock was Christ, whom Simon hav- 
ing confessed, as the Whole Church confesses him, was call- 
ed Peter.' 

A few other extracts will assist in shewing the opinion of 
our witness more clearly. Thus, in his treatise upon Chris- 
tian Doctrine, Augustin has these words, viz. (268) ' He 
gave those keys therefore to his Church, in order that those 
things which she should loose on earth, should be loosed in 
heaven, and that those which she should bind on earth should 
be bound in heaven : that is to say, whoever should not be- 
lieve that sins would be remitted to him in his Church, they 
would not be remitted ; but whoever should believe, and 
being reformed should turn himself away from his trans- 
gressions, being settled in the bosom of his Church, should 

tur, et aqcepit claves regni ceelorum. Non enim dictum est illi, Tu es 
pcua : sed, Tu es Petrus. Petra autem erat Ghristus, quern confessus 
Simon sicut eum tota Ecclesia confitetur, diclus est Petvus.' 

(268) Ib, Tom. 3. p. 8. De Doctrina Christiana, t. 1. c. xvii. 'Has 
igitur claves dcdit Ecclesise SUBS, ut quse solveret in terra., soluta es- 
Hcni. in ccelo, quae ligaret in terra, ligata essent in crelo : scilicet ut 
quisquis in Ecclesia ejus diraittti sibi peccata non crederet, non ei di- 
initterenter; quisquis autera crederet, scque ab his correctus averteret, 
in ejusdein Ecclesia? grernio constitutus, eadem fide atque corrections 
saaaretur. Q.uisquis enim non credit dirnitti eibi posse peccata, fit; 
deun - iov desperando. 



CHAPTER 29/f OF AUGtTSTIN. 319" 

be healed by that faith and reformation. For whoever does 
not believe that his sins may be remitted, becomes worse 
through despair.' 

Here you have a doctrine, brethren, closely resembling 
what we have previously found in Origen and others, giv- 
ing the power of the keys to each individual, as soon as 
he becomes united with the Church of Christ,, so that, be- 
ing once baptized, repentance and faith are sufficient for eve- 
ry subsequent remission of sins, without recurrence to the 
priestly office of absolution. But the importance of the 
subject may demand, though at the cost of some repetition 
a few passages more, from our distinguished author. 

Thus,, in his discourse upon the 21st. chapter of the Gos- 
pel of St. John, he enlarges upon the gift of the keys to 
Peter in the following words,, viz : (269) * And since those 

(269) Ib. Tom. 3. pars secunda, p. 599..C. In Johan. Evang. Cap,2I, 
Tract. 124. 5. ' Et qaia in ipso quoq-ae ambulantes non sunt sine 
peccatis, quse de hujus vitoe infirmitate subrepunt, dedit eleemosyna- 
rum remedia salutaria, quibus eorum adjuvaretur oratio, ubi eos diceie 
docuit, Dknitte nobis debita nostra,- sicut et nos dimittimus debitor!- 
bus nostris.. Hoc agit ecclesia spe beata in hac vita aerumnosa: cujus 
Ecclesiae Petrus apostolus,.propter Apostolatus sui primatum, gerebat 
figurata goneralitate personam. Quod enim ad ipsum proprie pertinet, 
naturft unus homo erat,, gratia unus Christianus, abundantiore gratia 
unus idemque primus Apostolus t sed quando ei dictum est, Tibi dabo 
claves regni ccdorum, et qiiodcumquc ligaveris super terram, erit liga- 
tum etin ccdis,et quodcumque solveris super terram, erit solutum etin 
c(Blis, universam significabat Ecclesiam, quaein hoc saeculo diversis 
teatationibus velut imbribus, fluminibus, tempestatibus quatitur, et non 
cadit, quoniam fundata est super petram, unde Petrus nomen accepit. 
Non enim, a Petro petra, sed Petrus apetra; sicut non Christus a 
Christiano, sed Christianus a Christo vocatur. Ideo quippe ait Domi- 
nus, Super hanc petram aedificabo Scclesiam mearn, quia dixerat 
Petrug : Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi. Super hanc ergo, inquit, pe- 
tram quam confessus e&, aedificabo eeclesiam meam. Petra enim erat 
Christus ; super quod fundameiitum etiam ipse aedificatus est Petrus. 
^undamentum quippe aliud nemo potestponere praeter id quod posi- 



320 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 28 

also who are walking in the Lord are not without sins, 
which steal upon them unawares, through the infirmity of 
this life, he gave them the salutary remedies of mercy, by 
which their prayer might be assisted, where he taught them 
to say : Forgive us our debts, even as we also forgive our 
debtors. This thing, with a blessed hope, the Church per- 
forms in this miserable life : of which Church the apostle 
Peter, by reason of the primacy of his Apostolate, bore the 
person in a figurative universality. For with regard to what 
belonged to himself, by nature he was a man, by grace 
lie was 'a Christian, by more abundant grace he was one 
and the first apostle : but when it was said to him, I will 
give unto thee the Jceys of the kingdom o/ heaven, and 
whatsoever thou slialt bind on earth,, shall be bound also in 
heaven, and whatsoever thoushalt loose on earth, shall be 
loosed in heaven, he signified the Church universal, which in 
this world is shaken by divers temptations, as by rains, 
floods, and tempests, and yet falls not, because it is founded 
upon the rock, from which Peter received his name. For 
the rock was not named from Peter, but Peter from the 
rock : even as Christ is not named from Christian, but Chris- 
tian from Christ. Moreover the Lord saith, Upon this 
rock I will build my Church, because Peter had said, Thou 
art Christ, the Son of the living God. Upon this rock, 
therefore, which thou hast confessed,.! wiirbuild my Church. 
For the rock was Christ; upon which foundation Peter 
himself also was built.. For another foundation can "no 
man lay, besides that which has been laid', Christ Jesus. 
The Church therefore which is built on Christ, received the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven in Peter, that is, the pow- 
er of binding and loosing sins.' 

turn est, quod est, Christus Jesus. Ecclesia ergo quae fundatur in 
Christo, claves ab eo rcgni coelorum accepit in Petro, id est, potesta- 
ligandi solvendique peccata, 



CHAPTER 28.J OF AUGUSTIN. 321 

Again, saith this eminent master in Israel, ( 270 ) ' What 
does this saying mean, Upon this rock I will build my 
Church !? Upon this faith, upon that which was spoken, 
Thou art Christ the Son of the living (rod.' 

And again : Augustin presents the same idea paraphrasti- 
cally, in the following lively manner: (271) c And I say un- 
to thee, Thou art Peter : because 1 am a rock ( petra) thou 
art Peter ; (Petrus) for the rock is not from Peter, but Pe- 
ter from the rock, as Christ is not from Christian, but Chris- 
tain from Christ. And upon this rock Iiwitt build my 
Church : not upon Peter, which thou art ; but upon the 
rock which thou hast confessed : But J will build my 
Church ; I will build THEE, who in this answer bearest the 
figure of 'the Church.' 

It is surely impossible, brethren, after reading these mul- 
tiplied proofs, to avoid understanding the settled and matured 
interpretations which this celebrated teacher attached to 
your favorite text. And yet it is worth remarking, that he 
does not confine his idea of the apostles' representing the 
Church, to the case of Peter. For I find him extending 
the same representative capacity to the person of the apos*- 
tie John, in a beautiful passage, which I cannot deny my- 
self the pleasure of placing before you. 

(270) Ib.GSl. B. ' Q,uid est, super hanc petram.aedificabo Ecclesiarn 
meam ? Super hano fidem, super id quod dictum est, Tu es Christus 
Filius Dei vivi.' 

(271) Ib. Tom. 5. p. 764. E. ' Et ego dico tibi, Tu es Petrus : quia 
ego petra, tu Petrus ; neque enim a Petro petra, sed a petra Petrus : 
quianon a Christiano Chvistus, sed a Christo Chvistianus. Et super 
hanc petram (Edificalo Ecclcsiam meam : non super Petrum, quod tu 
es; sed supra petram, quam confessus es. JEdificalo autem Ecclesi- 
ammeam ; aedificabo te,qui in hac responsione figuram gestas Eccle- 
siae.' 



322 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 28. 

(272) ( Nevertheless/ saith our witness, ' let no one sepa- 
rate these distinguished apostles. In that which Peter signi- 
fied, they were together : and in that which John signified, 
they were to be together .... Nor these alone, but the holy 
universal Church, the Spouse of Christ, does the same, in 
being brought out from these temptations, in being saved for 
this felicity. Which two modes of life Peter and John re- 
presented, severally .... ON BEHALF OF ALL THE SAINTS, 
therefore, who belong inseparably to the body of Christ, in 
order to the proper direction of this most stormy life, Peter, 
the first of the apostles, received the keys of the kingdom 
of heaven for the binding and loosing of sins : AND ON BE- 
HALF OF ALL THE SAME SAINTS, in order to the obtaining 
that most serene bosom of the hidden life, John the Evan- 
gelist reclined on the breast of Christ. As therefore it is 
not Peter alone, but the whole Church, which binds and 
looses sins, neither is it John alone who drinks from the 
fountain of the Lord's breast the sublime truths which he 

(272) Ib. GOO. F. ' Nemo tamen istos insignes Apostolos separet. 
Et in eo quod significabat Petrus, ambo erant : et in eo quod significa- 
bat Johannes, ambo futuri erant .... Nee ipsi soli, sed universahoc 
facit sancta Ecclesia sponsa Christi, ab istis tentationibus eruenda, in 
ilia felicitate servanda. Q,uas duas vitas Petrus et Johannes figurave- 
runt, singuli singulas: .... Omnibus igitur sanctis ad Christi corpus 
inseparabiliter" pertinentibus, propter hujus viiae procellosissimae gu- 
bernaculum, ad Uganda et solvenda peccata claves regni coelorum 
primus Apostolorum Petrus accepit : eisdemque omnibus sanctis prop- 
ter vitaeilhus secretisshnae quietissimum sinum, super pectus Christi 
Johannes Evangelista discubuit. Quondam nee iste solus, sed univer- 
sa Ecclesia ligat solvitque peccata : nee ille in principio Verbum Deuia 
apud Deum, etcetera de Christi divinitate, et de totius divinitatis Trin- 
itate atque imitate sublimia, quae in illo regno facie ad faciem contera- 
planda, nunc autem donee veniat Dominus, in speculo atque in aenig- 
mate contuenda sunt, quae pr-aedicando ructaret, de fonte Dominici 
pectoris solus bibit : sed ipse Dominus ipsum Evangelium pro sua 
jusque capacitate omnibus BUIB bifaendum toto terrarum orbe diffusit. 



CHAPTER 28.] OF AUGUSTIN> 323 

put forth in his preaching ; that in the beginning was the 
Word, God with God, and the rest concerning the divinity 
of Christ, and the Trinity and Unity of the divine nature 
truths to be contemplated face to face in his kingdom, and 
now, until the Lord come, to be beheld in a glass and in 
mystery but the Lord himself diffuses this Gospel to be 
drank by all his saints, each according to his capacity, 
throughout the whole world. ' 

Having thus, I trust, exhibited sufficiently the senti- 
ments of the great Augustin on your principal text from 
St. Matthew, let me next proceed to shew how he under- 
stood your other favorite passage in the Gospel of St. John, 
on which you rest your assertion, that in commanding Pe- 
ter to feed his sheep, our Lord committed to him and his 
successors, in the See of Rome, the pastoral care and gov- 
ernment of the whole Catholic Church under heaven. 

In his discourse upon the day held in honor of the mar- 
tyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, \ve read as follows : viz. 
(273) ' Feed my sheep, I commit my sheep to thee. What 
sheep ? Those which I have bought with my blood. I 
have died for them. Dost thou love me? Die then for 
them. And truly as that servant who was the man of man 
should give a price for the sheep that were lost : Peter gave 

(273) S. Augustin. Sermo in Natali Apostolorum Petri et Puuli. 

Ib. Tom. 5. p. 830. E. Puscc ovesmeas, commendo tibi oves meas. 
Quas oves ? Q,uas emi sanguine meo. Mortuus sum pro eis. Araas 
me ? Morere pro eis. Et quid cm servus ille hominis homo pecuniam 
redderet pro consumptis ovibus : Petrus sanguinem reddidit pro ovi- 
bus conservatis. 5. Eia, Fratres, aliquid pro tempore volo dicere. 
Quod Petro commendatum est, quod Pctro mandatum est, non Petrus 
solus, sed etiam alii Apostoli audierunt, tenuerunt, servaverunt, inaxi- 
Tneque ipse censors sanguinis et diei apostolus Paul us. Audierunt 
ista, et ad nos audienda transmiserunt. Pascimus vos, pascimur vobis- 
cum. Del nobis Deus vires sic amandi vos, ut possiinus etiam mori 
pro vobis, aut effectu, aut affectu.' 



-3.24 THE TESTIMONY [CHAFTEB, 28. 

his blood for the sheep that were saved. But come, breth* 
ren,' continues Augustin, ' I wish to say something for the 
present time. That which was committed to Peter, that 
which he was commanded to do, NOT PETER ONL/X, BUT 

LIKEWISE ALL THE APOSTLES HEARD, HELD, AND KEPT: 

and chiefly that companion of his martyrdom and of his 
natal day, the apostle Paul. They heard these things, and 
transmitted them to us that we might hear them, WE 
FEED THEREFORE, and are fed with you. May God give 
us strength in such wise to love you, that we also may be 
enabled to die for you, either in fact, or in affection.' Here 
you have the same sentiment which Augustin presented to 
us on the subject of the keys. What was said to Peter, 
was said to all, and received by all. Not one word, breth- 
ren, is to be found of your exclusive comment on these por- 
tions of the word of God, in the system of this celebrated 
teacher : but his testimony, both positive and negative, is 
directly hostile to your claims. 

Let me next beg your attention to Augustin's style of ex- 
pression, when he speaks of the Catholic Church, And 
here I shall cite the epistle of the Tertensian Council, to 
which his name is appended ; and which, of course, must 
be received as not only his, but also the declaration of the 
other bishops united with him. Referring to the Donatists, 
this document proceeds as follows : (274) ' They have 
made their confession against the Catholic Church, which 
is diffused throughout the whole world, and have no more 

(274) Concilii Tertensis ad Donat. epistola. Augustin. op. Tom. 2> 
p. 347- ' Confess! sunt enim contra ecclesiam Catholicam, quae toto 
terrarum orbe diffunditur, nihil se habere quod dicerent: quia divinis 
sanctarum scripturai-mii testimoniis oppress! sunt,quibus Ecclesiade- 
signatur incipiens ab Jerusalem crevisse per loca, in quibus Apostoli 
praedicaverunt, et nomina eorundem locorum in suis epistolis et actis 
conscripseruntj et hide diffundi per ceterasgenles.' 



CHAPTER 28.] OF AUGUSTIN. 325 

that they can say : because they are borne clown by the di- 
vine testimonies of the holy Scriptures, in which the Church 
is set forth, as beginning at Jerusalem, and is said to have 
increased through the places in which the apostles preached, 
and the names of those places are written in the Epistles 
and in the Acts, and thence it was diffused through the oth- 
er nations.' 

Again, saith Augustin, elsewhere,- (275) ' The Church 
is the house of< God. But this house is not built in one cor- 
ner of the earth, but through all the earth.' 

And again : (276) ' The body of Christ,' saith he, ' is 
the Church. But who are the supporters of the Church, un- 
less it be the apostles, who are also called pillars.' We have 
in these extracts, which might be multiplied to the size of 
a volume, a true and simple description of the Catholic 
Church, without the slightest allusion to the domination of 
the Roman See, or the headship of the Vicar of Christ, 
which you suppose to be indispensable. 

But the freedom of Augustin's mind from any such tenet, 
will probably appear more plainly, if we advert to some 
other passages, in which he has occcasion to speak of 
Rome. 

Thus he saith, in one place, (277) 'For the Lord prom- 
ised with an oath, to the seed of Abraham, not the Romans, 

(275) Aug. op. Tom. 2. p. 350. ' Ecclesiam eamclem esse clomum 
Dei. Sed liaecdomus non orbis terrae uno angulo aedificatur, sed per 
omnem ten-am. 

(276) Ib. p. 330. D. t Corpus autem Clmsti, ecclesia. Firmamenta 
autem ecclesiae qui, nisi Apostoli, qui etiam colurnnae alibi nuncu- 
pantur.' 

(277) Ib. Tom. 2. 577. B. ' Non enim Romanes, sed omnes gentes 
Dominus semini Abrahae, media quoqne juratione promisit : ex qua 
promissione jam factum est, ut nonnullae gentes, quae non tenentur 
ditione Romana, reciperent Evangelium, et adjungerentur Ecclesiae, 

fructificat et crescit in universo mundo. 
28 



826 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 28. 

but all nations : through which promise it has already hap- 
pened, that some nations who are not under the Roman au- 
thority, have received the Gospel and been joined to the 
Church, which increases and bears fruit in the whole 
world.' 

Again ; we may see how little the other Churches con- 
sidered themselves bound to follow the example of the sup- 
posed ' mother and mistress' of them all, with regard to 
rites and ceremonies. For Augustin, writing to a friend 
who had consulted him on several points of ecclesiastical 
order, saith : (278) ' The question relating to the sabbath 
day is more easily resolved, since the Roman Church fasts 
on that day, and also some other Churches, although but 
few, whether near to her, or at a distance.' And, pursu- 
ing the subject, he relates the rule which Ambrose deliver- 
ed to him at Milan, soon after he was baptized. (279) 
' When I am here,' said Ambrose to his pupil, ' I do not 
fast on the Sabbath day : when I am at Rome, I fast ; and 
to whatever Church you come, continued he, observe its 
customs, if you do not wish either to make, or to suffer 
scandal.' Adopting the maxim, accordingly, of his form- 
er master, Augustin concludes by this general rule. (280) 
' If you are willing to acquiesce in my advice,' saith he, 
* do not oppose your bishop in this thing, but whatever he 
does, do you follow without scruple or disputation.' 

(278) Ib. Tom. 2. p, 59. P. ' Et de die quidem sabbati facilior causa 
es, quia et Romana jejunat Ecclesia, et aliae nonnullae etiamsi pau- 
cae, sive illi proximae sive longinquae.' 

(279) Ib. Tom. 2. p. 6'2. A. ' Quando Me sum, non jejuno sabbato; 
qnando Romae sum jejuno sabbato : et ad quamcumque ecelesiamveD- 
eritis, inquit, ejus morem servate, si pati scandalum non vultis aut 
facere.' 

(2SO) Ib. Q,napropter si consilio meo libenter adquiescis : Episcopo 
tuo in hac re noli resistere, et quod facit ipse sine ullo scrupulo vl 
disceptatione sectare. 



CHAPTER 28.] OF AUGUSTIN. 327 

What prelate, brethren, holding yow present system, 
would speak thus of the opinions and practice of the Church 
of Rome ; or leave it, in this manner, in the power of eve- 
ry bishop, either to follow her ritual or to depart from it, 
precisely as he pleased ? 

One quotation more, however, must close the testimony 
of Augustin ; for the limits assigned to this portion of my 
humble labors have been passed already, and I am compell- 
ed, however reluctantly, to omit much which I had marked 
for insertion. 

And in presenting to you, brethren, this passage, I pre~ 
tend not to forestall your judgment ; but to my mind, it 
seems worthy of your most serious consideration. For 
you well know, that amongst all the arguments urged against 
the Reformation, there is not one more effective in your 
esteem, nor is there one more practically successful, than 
that which you derive from the variety of sects into which 
the dissenters from your Church are divided. And you 
point with triumph to your unity you say that in the age 
which preceded the Reformation, there was but one form 
of the Christian religion throughout the civilized world 
you refer to the injunctions of the Saviour that his follow- 
ers should be one, and you demonstrate the necessity of all 
the peculiar rights of the pope, from the apparent impossi- 
bility of governing the Church in unity and peace, without 
a Vicar of Christ, and a diocese which shall be acknowled- 
ged as the mother and mistress of all the Churches. 

Brethren, we admit that a portion of this argument is 
true. It is true that before the Reformation, there was a 
great deal of ecclesiastical union, where there is now no 
union whatever. Not that your statement is to be allowed 
J n its full extent ; for the numerous and important Church 
of Greece the descendants of the Eastern, as yours is of the 



328 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 28. 

Western branch the Syrian Churches, besides some oth- 
er sects whom you call heretics were known and acknow- 
ledged exceptions to the universality of your dominion, even 
then. But admitting, for the sake of argument, that it was 
so, and leaving unnoticed the bitter animosities and angry 
contentions amongst yourselves, which history has recorded, 
what is there to warrant your inference, that becaus'e you 
were united, therefore your system must be all divine? 
Most willingly we grant that religious truth, when fully un- 
derstood, must produce ecclesiastical union : but it would 
be miserable logic which should undertake to prove, that 
ecclesiastical union can only be produced by religious truth. 
Union, in itself, is neither good nor evil. To give it char- 
acter, it is necessary to combine it with a definite object ; 
and then, it is the object of union, and not the fact of union, 
which decides our judgment of its value. Hence, while 
there is nothing so desirable amongst men as union in truth, 
so, on the other hand, there is nothing so much to be de- 
precated, as union in error., I must needs say, therefore, 
brethren, that this favorite argument of yours, however 
plausible to the unreflecting, seems to me nothing better 
than a weak sophism : for you rely on your union, in order 
to justify your claims, instead of first proving your claims 
in order to justify your union. 

But I pass from the logic of this argument, to a question 
of fact, which changes the whole aspect of the case before 
us. It is this: that so far back as the primitive ages, there 
were divisions, and heresies, and schisms. They appeared 
even under the apostles' government. They multiplied af- 
ter their departure ; and at the close of the fourth century, 
Augustin gives us a list of them amounting to EIGHTY EIGHT, 
although he professes himself by no means sure that his 
list included the whole, I subjoin it in the language of the 



0H&FTER 28.] OF AUGUSTIN. 829 

original ; (281) and to me it seems, of itself, an incon- 
testable proof, that the primitive Church acknowledged no 
such judge as your canon law represents the pope to be ; 
for if it had, every teacher of heresy would have been 
brought before his tribunal ; and the people, taught univer- 
sally to revere the judgment of iihis oracle of God, could 
not have been induced to form a sect around a justly con- 
demned proclaimer of error. Apply, then, brethren, your 
own argument to this period of the Church, and see to what 
conclusion it will lead you. The pope is the centre of uni- 
ty, you say: the rejection of his authority is the great source 
of division. But in the time of Augustin- there was more 
division than there is now : and therefore according to vonr 

t O v 

own reasoning, there was not as general an acknowledgment 
of the pope's authority as there is at present. One vast differ- 
ence however, is to be observed between the early and the 

(281) S. Augustin. op. Tom. 8. p. 3. 1. Simoniani. 2 Menandriani. 3 
Saturniniani, 4 Basilidiani. SNicolaitani. 6 Gnostici. 7 Carpocratiani. 
SCerinthiani. 9 Nazaraei. lOEbionaei, 1.1 Valentiniani. 12-Secundi- 
ani. 13 Ptolemaei. 14 Marcitae. 15 Colorbasii. 1C Heraoleonitae. 17 
Opitae. 18 Caiani. 19 Selhiani. 20 Archonlici. 21 Cerdoniaui. 22 
Marcionitae. 23 Appellitae. 24 Severiani. 25 Tatiani, vel Enoratitae. 
26 Gataphryges. 27 Pepuziani,. alias -Quintillianj. 28 Artotyritae. 20 
Tessarescae-dccatitae. 30 Alogii. 31 Adamiani. 32 Elcesaei, el 
Sampsaei. 33 Theodotiani. 34 Melchisedeciani. 35 Bardesanistae. 3f> 
Noettani. 37Valesii. 38Cathari, sive Novatiani. 39 Angelici. 40 Apos- 
tolici. 41 Sabelliani, sive Patripassiani. 42 Origeniani. 43 Alii Orige- 
niani. 44 Pauliani. 45 Photiniani. 46 Manichaei. 47 Hieracitao, 48 
Meletiani. 49 Ariani, 50 Vadiani, sive Anthropomorphitac. 51 Sen.v. 
iariani. 52 Macedonian!. 53 Aeriani. 54 Aetiani, qui et Eiinomiani. 
55 Apollinaristae. 56 Antidicomaritac. 57 Massaliani, sive Eudritae. 
58 Metangismonitae. 59 Seleuciani^ val Hermiani. 60 Proclianitae. 
61 Patriciani. 62 Ascitae. 63 Passalorynchitae. G4 Aquarii. 55 CoJu- 
thiani. 66 Floriniaui. 67 De mundi statu dissentientes. 68 Niidis pc- 
dibus ambulantes. 69 Donatistae, sive Donatiani. 70 Priscillianistae. 
71 Cum hominibus non.manducantes. 72Rhetoriani. 73 Christi divini- 
tatem passibilem diceivtes. 7^4, Triformeni Deum pu.tantes.. 75 Aquam 
28* 



&3G TESTIMONY OF AUGUSTIN. [CHAPTER SJS, 

later periods of the Church: viz. that now, you who term 
yourselves the true Catholics, always place our rejection of 
Roman Supremacy in the foreground of our errors ; and 
insist on our return to the papal jurisdiction with all your 
powers : whereas, amongst the eighty eight heresies of the 
primitive ages, and amongst all the arguments of the fathers 
against them, NOT ONE SENTENCE CAN BE FOUND UPBRAID- 
ING THEIR ADHERENTS WITH A DEPARTURE FROM THE 

POPE, on THE CHURCH OF ROME. What you may think 
of this difference, brethren, I. know not: but in my judgment 
it seems enough, of itself, to determine the controversy. 

Deo eoaeternam dicentes. 76 Imaginena Dei non esse animam dicen. 
tcs. 77 lunumerabiles mundos opinantes. 78 Animas convert! in dae- 
mones et in queecumque animalia oxistimantes. 79 Libevationera oni- 
ilium apud inferos factam Christ! descensione credentes. 80 Christ! dc 
Patre nativitati initium temporis dantcs. 81 Luciferiani. 82 Jovinian- 
istae. 83 Arabic!. 84Helvidiani. 85 Patermani, give Venustiani. 88 
Tcrtullianistae. 87 Abelpitae. 88 Pelagiani. qui et Ccelestiani. 



CHAPTER XXIX. 



BBETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The evidence of the eloquent Chrysostom, who may be 
set down at A. D. 398, next claims our notice, and would 
justify a far larger space than our limits will allow. A few 
brief extracts must suffice us. 

In his celebrated work on the Episcopal office, we read 
as follows : (282) ' For he,' (namely Christ) c conversing 
with the prince of the apostles, saith, Peter lovesl thou mel 
and Peter answering affirmatively, he adds : If thou lovest 
me, feed my sheep. The master interrogates the scholar, 
whether he is loved by him: not that he might be informed, 
(for how should he seek information, to whom the hearts of 
all men were open) but in order that he might teach us of 

(282) St. Jo. Chrysost. de Saccrdotio Lib. 2. op. om. Latine Tom. 
5. p. 418, 'Hie enim cum apostolorum principe verba facions : Petre 
amasme, inquit,. atque illo id confitente, adjungit: si amas me, pasoe 
oves meas. Interrogat discipulum magister, num ab eo ametur: non 
quo id ipse edoceatur : [qui enim id edoceri studeat is, cui uni mortali- 
um omnium corda pervia sunt] veriim ut nos doceat, quantae sibi cu- 

rae sit gregis hujus praefeetura Propterea enim quum 

respondisset discipulus : Tu scis domine, qaod amem te, testemque 
citasset amoris hujus ipsummet qui amaretur, haud se hie cominuit 
servator Jesus, sed et amoris quoque indicium adjunxit. Neque enim 
turn volebat testatum esse, quantum a Petro amaretur : siquidem id 
omltis nobis argumentis constabat: verum hoc ille turn agebat, ut et 
Petrum et caeteros nos edoceret, quanta benevolentia ac caritate 
erga suam ipse ecclesiam afficerelur : ut hac ratione et nos quoque 



832 THE ^EBTBiDiry [CHAPTER 29,. 

what importance he esteemed the oversight of this flock,' 
( On which account, 5 continues Chrysostom, 'when the 
disciple had answered : Thou knowest Lord, that I love 
thee, and had even cited himself to witness it, the Saviour 
Jesus did not cease, but added another injunction, as an in- 
dex of love. Nor did he desire in this merely to shew how 
much he was loved by Peter, since this appeared by many 
other proofs; but he acted thus, in order to teach Peter and 
all of us, with how much love and benevolence he was af- 
fected towards his Church : so that we also might be infliir 
enced by this motive, to take upon us the care and charge, 

of the same Church, with our whole heart For why 

did he shed his blood ? Certainly that he might purchase 
to himself this flock, of which he then committed the care 
to Peter, and to Peter's successors.' 

Chrysostom here calls Peter the prince of the apostles, 
and the office of the apostolate he frequently elsewhere calls 
by the term of principality; but it is observable that his 
interpretation of the whole passage is altogether different 
from that which your present system demands. For instead 
of considering that our Redeemer designed to commit the 
whole Church, apostles and all, to the pastoral government 
of Peter, he evidently adopts the same view with the otl> 
er fathers, viz. that what was addressed to Peter, was iiv- 
tended for all. You also perceive, that instead of limiting 
the successors of Peter to the diocese of Rome, he pursues 
the enlarged construction, that all bishops are his successors. 
You remember, brethren, the observation made on the lat- 
in word translated prince, in the chapter upon the evidence 

ejusdem ecclesiae studium curamque toto anirno susciperemus . . t 
Q,uanam item de causa idem ille sanguinem effudit suum ? certe ut 
pecudes eas acquireret, quarum curam tum Petro, turn Petrl auccesso- 
ribus comBoitlebat.' 



CHAPTER 29.] OF CHRYSOSTOM. 333 

of Hilary. To which I have only to add, that there is 
nothing in it, as used by Chrysostom, which necessarily im- 
plies authority over the other apostles. 

Again, I find Chrysostom referring to your other proof- 
text in the following manner. (283) 'To those who culti- 
vate the earth,' saith he, ' and are conversant with it, it is 
granted that they may dispense the things of heaven : to 
them is given a power which the Almighty God chose not 
to commit either to angels or archangels : since it was not 
said to these : Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be 
bound in heaven, and whatever ye shall loose on earth shall 
be loosed also in heaven. Terrestrial princes, truly, have 
the power of the chain, but only with respect to the body. 
But this chain of the priests of which 1 speak, concerns 
also the soul, and extends even to the heavens.' .... And 
again: (284) 'Whose sins ye shall retain, saith Christ, they 
are retained. What power can be greater ? The Father 
gave all power to the Son, but I behold this same power 
delivered by God the Son, to them.' (i. e. the priesthood.) 

Here, brethren, you perceive the power of the keys con- 
sidered, not as conferred singly on Peter, and his successors 
in the See of Rome, according to your doctrine ; but as 

(233) Lib. III. p. 429. B. ' Etenim qv.i terram incolunt atque in ea 
vevsantur, iis commissum est ut o;i quse in ccelis sunt, dispensent ; iis 
datura est ut potestatcm habeant, quam Deus optimus neque angelis 
neque avchangelis datam esse vohiit: neque enim ad illos dictum est, 
Quaecumque alligaveris in terra, erunt alligata. at in ccelo-, et qua&- 
cumque solveris in terra, erunt soluta ot in ccolo. Habent quidem et 
teri'ostves principes vinculi potestatem, verftm corporum solum. Id 
autem quod dico sacerdotum vinculum,ipsam etiam animam contingit, 
atque ad ccelos usque pervadit 

(284) . . . . ' Gtuorumcunque. ait, peccata retinueritis, retenta sunt. 
Quaanam, obsecro, potostas hac una major esse queat ? Pater omnifa* 
riamfilio potestatem dedit : cEElerum video ipsam eandera omnifariam 
potestatem a Deo filio illis traditam.' 



834 THE TESTIMONY [CHAPTER 89, 

granted to the apostolic priesthood collectively ; according 
to the enlarged construction so frequently exhibited to us by 
all the other witnesses, and in the previous passage, by 
Chrysostom himself. 

Let me next shew you, that the famous text concerning 
the foundation of the Church, was interpreted by our pres- 
ent witness precisely as it was by those who preceded him. 
For in his cohiment on the 26th Chap, of Matthew, Chrys- 
ostom saith that Christ (285) ' founded and fortified the 
Church upon his confession / (i. e. Peter's) ' so that no 
danger, nor even death itself could overcome it/ 

Again, commenting on the very words of the Saviour, 
(286) ' And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon 
this rock I will build my Church :' Chrysostom saith: 'That 
is, UPON THE FAITH OF HIS CONFESSION/ Nothing can be 
more express and definite. 

In common with almost all the fathers, Chrysostom seems 
to take particular pleasure in the character of St Paul. (287) 
1 There is no one who loved Christ more vehemently than 
Paul/ saith he, c and none who was a greater favorite with 
God: nevertheless, after so many privileges conferred on 
him by the Almighty, he fears and trembles, on account of 

(235) Ib. In. Cap. XXVI. Math. Homil. 83. comment. Tom. 1. p. 
866. ' Nam qui super confessionem ejus Ecclesiam ita fundavit atqufr 
munivit, ut nullum periculum, neque mors ipsa posset earn superare.' 

(286) Ib. Homil. 55. in Cap. XXVI. Math. p. 591, ' Et ego dico tili, 
quia tu cs Petrus, et super hanc petram cedificabo Ecclesiam tncam : id 
est, super jidem confessionis.' The original Greek is rJj niatsi rijs 
ouoZoyiuc : Upon the faith of Ms confession. Which your translator 
has expressed with great carelessness to say the least, in these words: 
fidem atque confessionem. 

(287) Ib. p. 430, D. 'Christum nemo est qui Paulo vehementius 
dilexerit, nemo qui apud Deum gratiosior quam Paulus fuerit: tamen 
post tot privilegia a Deo accepta verotur adhuc ac tretnuit, principatue 
istius subditoruiuque suorum gratia* 



CHAPTER 29.] OP CHE55OJSTOM. 335 

those who were the subjects of iMs principality.' The 
object of this venerable father's argument is to shew the 
awful responsibility of the episcopal office, and therefore he 
recurs to St. Paul, as to him, who was not a whit behind ths 
very chiefest of the apostles, calling his office, a principali- 
ty. Take these few specimens, brethren, as a fair sample 
of the testimony of Chrysostom, and you will have no diffi- 
culty in reckoning him among the rest, as plainly opposed 
to that interpretation of Scripture by which you sustain your 
exclusive claims. 



CHAPTER XXX 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

As your canon law gives a special place to the Messed 
Isidore, (A. D. 412.) I proceed to notice a few passages in 
his epistles, bearing on the points in question, and taken, as 
in other instances, from your Latin version. (288) ' It was 
not, 5 saith this witness, ' because Christ was ignorant of the 
various opinions which men had formed concerning him, 
that he demanded of his disciples, Whom do men say that 1 
ami for lie penetrates the very heart. But 'it was in order 
that he might deliver to all men, by this means, a sure con- 
fession, which Peter, inspired by him, laid down as a basis 
and foundation, zvherewpon the Lord built his Church.' 

You perceive in this passage, brethren, a distinct inter- 
pretation of your favorite text, in direct hostility to your 
present argument. And the other passage, on which you 
depend for the Scriptural proof that our Lord committed the 
whole Church to the care of Peter, is commented on by 
Isidore in the following words, equally inapplicable to your 
doctrine : viz. 

(288) S. Isidori Pelusiotse de interpret, divin. Scrip. Epistol. Lib. ! 
Ep. 235. ' Non eade causa Christus, qui pectus ipsum penetrat, ex 
discipulis suis percontabatur : Quern me dicunt homines esse, quad 
variam hominum de se opinionem ignoraret, sed ut hacratione certain 
omnibus confessionemtraderet, quam ab eo inspiratus Petrus,tamquaffi 
basim ac fundamentum jecit, super quod Dominus Ecclesiam guam 
xetruxit.' 



CHAPTER 30.J OF ISIDORE AND PROSPER. 837 

(289) 'The threefold Interrogation of the Lord addres- 
sed to Peter, concerning love,' saith our witness, ' is not to 
be attributed to the ignorance of the Redeemer, (lest any 
should be deceived) but the good physician, by this triple 
assent, expelled the triple denial.' 

The same explanation occurs amongst the fathers so fre- 
quently, that there is hardly any text on which their com- 
ments appear with greater unanimity. 

From the writings of Prosper of Aquitain, (A. D.434) 
whom your canon styles a most religious man, I shall only 
trouble you with two excellent passages on the Church, 
where nothing is intimated like your system. 

(290) ( The sons of the servants of God/ saith he, ' are 
the sons of the just, the sons of the patriarchs, the proph- 
ets, the apostles and martyrs ; the sons, in fine, of the whole 
Church which is the body of Christ, the mother of all the 
fathers, and of all the sons.' And again, 

(291 ) 'The whole Church with her head, which is Christ, 
as one man,whose proper office is, through all time, to bless 
God, and to encourage herself in his praise, whom she loves 

(289) Ib. Lib. 1. Ep. 103. Triplex Domini ad Petrum de charitate 
iiiterrogatio, a Domini ignorationc proficisci minime existimanda est; 
[ne ita quidam decipiantur] vertim triplicem negationem triplici as- 
sensione bonus medicus depulit.' 

(290) S. Prosperi Aquitan. Expos, in Psal. ci. Ed. Paris. 1711. p. 
378. ' Filii servorum Dei, sunt filii justorum, filii patriarcharum, pro- 
phetarum, Apostolorum et martyrum : filii postremo totius Ecclesise 
quse corpus est Christi,et qua mater est omnium patrum, omniumque 
filiorum. 

(291) Ib. in Psal. on. 'Tota Ecclesia cum suo capite, quod est 
Christus, unus est homo, cujus proprium officium est in omne tempo- 
re benedicere Dominum, seque in laudem ejus, quern ex tota virtute 
sua diligit, cohortari. Interiora autem ejus sunt ratio intelligentiee, 
apes fidei, humilitas timoris, fortitude caritatis : et si quze sunt alia? 
affectiones, quibus mens in admirationem eui auctoris erigitur.' 

29 



838 THE TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 30. 

with her whole strength. But her internal qualities are the 
reason of intelligence, the hope of faith, the humility of 
fear, the patience of love ; and if there be any other affec- 
tions, by which the mind may be lifted up in admiration of 
its Creator.' 

On the subject of Peter's authority over the other apos- 
tles, or the derived supremacy of the Church oi Rome, I 
find nothing in the works of Prosper ; so that his testimo- 
ny yields no support to your system. 

But the name of Vincent of Lerins stands high in your 
esteem, brethren, on account of his admirable book in favor 
of apostolical tradition. Let me next quote from this 
shrewd and powerful writer, a part of his celebrated argu- 
ment, and we shall then occupy a little space in marking 
its application. 

(292) ,5 If I or any other, desire to detect the frauds of 
heretics which are rising up around us,' saith Vincent, ' and 
to avoid their snares, and to continue sound and whole in a 

(292) Vincentii Lirinensis Commonitorium, [Salv. et Vincent. Op. 
ex cura Stephani Baluzii, Ed. Tertia Paris. A. D. 1684.] p. 317. 

{ Sive ego sive quis alius vellet exsurgentium hiureticorum fraudes 
deprehendere laqueosque vitare, et in fide sana snnus atque integer 
pcrmanere, duplici modo munire fidem suam, Domino adjuvante, de- 
beret, primum scilicet, divince legis auctoritate, turn deinde Ecclesiffi 
catholicoe traditione. Hie forsitan requirat aliquis : Cum sit perfectus 
scripturarum canon, sibique ad omnia satis superque snfficiat, quid opui 
est ut ei ecclesiastics intelligentia3 jungatur auctoritas ? Q,uia videl- 
icet scripturam sacram pro ipsa sua altitudine non uno eodemque sen- 
eu universi accipiunt, sed ejusdem eloquia aliter atque aliter alius at- 
que alius interpretatur ; ut pene quot homines sunt, tot illinc senten- 
tiae erui posse videantur. Aliter namque illam Noyatianus, aliter 
Sabellius, aliter Donatus exponit, aliter Arius, Eunomius, Macedoni- 
us ; aliter Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscellianus; aliter Jovinianus, Pe- 
lagius, Ceslestius ; aliter postremo Nestorins. Atque idcirco rnultiiin 
neccsse est, propter tantos tarn varii erroris amfractus, ut prophetic* 
et apostolic interpretationis linea sscundum ecclesiastic! etCatholid 



CHAPTER 30.] VINCENT OF LERINS. 339 

sound faith, lie ought to fortify his faith, by the help of God, 
in a twofold manner ; first, by the authority of the divine 
law, and next, by the tradition of the catholic Church. 
But here, perhaps, some one may say : Since the eahon of 
the Scriptures is perfect, and suffices to itself by teaching, 
on all subjects, enough, and to spare, what need have we 
to join with it the authority of ecclesiastical judgment ? I 
answer : Because all men do not receive the sacred Scrip- 
ture in the same sense, by reason of its sublimity ; but its 
declarations are variously interpreted by this reader and by 
that ; so that there are almost as many different opinions as 
there are men to form them. Thus, Novatian expounded 
the Scriptures in one \va.y, Sabellius in another, Donatus in 
another, Arins, Ennomius, Macedonius, had each his sever- 
al interpretations ; Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, Jovi- 
nian, Pelagius, Celestius, and finally, Nestonus, all con* 
strued the same Scriptures in their several ways. And 
therefore it is altogether necessary, on account of the ma- 
ny and various turnings of error, that the line of prophetic 
and apostolical interpretation should be directed, according 
to the rule of ecclesiastical and catholic construction. A.n& 
in the Catholic Church herself, likewise, care is above- all 
things to be taken, that we hold that which has been be- 

sensus norraam dirigatur. In ipsaitem Catholica Ecclcsia magnopere 
curandtnn est ut id leneamus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab om- 
nibus creditura cst. Hoc est etenim verc proprieque catholicum. 
Quod ipsa vis nominis ratioquo doclarat, quse omnia fere uuiversalhei 
comprehendit. Sed hoc ita demum fiet si sequamur universalitatem, 
antiquitalem,consensionem. Sequemur antcm universitatem hoc mo- 
do, si hanc unam fidemA'eram esse fateamur quam tola per orbem ter- 
ravum confitetur Ecclesia ; antiquitatem vero ita, si ab his sensibua 
nullatenus recedamus quos sanctos niajores ac patres nostros celebras- 
s e manifestum est: consensionem quoque itidem, si in ipsa vetustate 
omnium vel certe pen^ omnium yacerdotum pariter et magislrorum de- 
Snitiones sententiasque sectemur. 



340 THE. TESTIMONY OF [CHAPTER 30. 

lieved everywhere, always, and by all. For this is truly 
and properly Catholic, since the very force and reason oi 
the word declares, that it comprehends all things universal- 
ly. And this we shall attain, if we follow universality, 
antiquity, and consent. And we may follow universality 
in this manner, if we confess that faith only to be true, 
which the Church throughout the whole earth confesses : 
and we shall follow antiquity, if we in nowise recede from 
those interpretations which our holy ancestors and fathers 
manifestly adopted : and in like manner we shall maintain 
consent also, if in this antiquity we embrace the opinions 
and definitions of all, or at least nearly all the bishops and 
teachers.' 

This, brethren, I hold to be sound doctrine, admirably 
expressed. And I beseech you to apply it to the subject 
before us. Your present faith makes the supremacy of the 
pope a part of the creed itself, but we have found no such 
dogma in the system of the primitive fathers. Your pre- 
sent faith explains the Scriptures in direct opposition to the 
interpretations which I have cited from the ancient authori- 
ties : and the opinions and definitions of all the witnesses 
we have examined concerning the Catholic Church, leave 
totally unnoticed your supposed essential government of 
the universal bishop. Hence, by the rule of Vincent, 
your creed should be reduced to its ancient simplicity, and 
your interpretations of Scripture should be brought back to 
the primitive standard. 

But this is not the only point of view in which the pas- 
sage quoted from Vincent should impress the mind of a dis- 
cerning reader. For your canon law expressly ascribes to 
the pope, BY DIVINE RIGHT, the office of final judge in all 
ecclesiastical causes, especially in those which concern faith. 
How is it that Vincent overlooked this divinely constituted 



MTPV -> T^:'^^..^^^^^^ . 



SHAPTER 30.] VINCENT OF LERINS. 341 

tribunal this living oracle of judgment when he laid down 
his famous rule for the faith of the Catholic Church ? Why 
should he send men to the fathers, to search for his three 
ingredients of universality, antiquity, and consent, when a 
course so much more short and easy lay before him ? By 
what singular stupidity should he have omitted to tell the 
Church, that the only thing required to avoid heresy was to 
abide by the decisions of the Vicar of Christ : whom God 
had appointed, like the Urim and Thummim of ancient 
Israel, to resolve every doubt, and settle every contro- 
versy ? 

Brethren, is it possible that you can avoid seeing the in- 
direct but invincible objection here furnished, to your pre- 
sent claims ? Or can it remain a question, with a candid 
and a conscientious mind, that the rule of Vincent, con- 
nected with the testimony of the fathers, would at once 
bring our dispute to a safe and plain conclusion ? . ' IN THE 
CATHOLIC CHURCH HERSELF,' saith he, c care is above all 
things to be taken that WE HOLD THAT WHICH KAS BEEN 

BELIEVED EVERYWHERE, ALWAYS, AND BY ALL. Foil THIS 
IS TRULY AND PROPERLY CATHOLIC.' Judged by this 

standard, your doctrine may be Roman now, but it could 
not have been Roman at the beginning, God grant that 
the time may not be far distant, when that primitive CATHO- 
LIC faith which was once ROMAN, ma)- be Roman again. 
09* 



CHAPTER XXXI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

Having set before you the testimony of those witnesses 
to whom you yourselves appeal, let me ask your attention 
to a brief recital of the catalogue. 

We commenced, as you will recollect, with the Holy Scrip- 
tures. Then we examined the apostolic canons, the apos- 
tolic constitutions, and the epistle of Clement, the bishop of 
Rome, which brought us to the close of the first century. 
Ireneeus and Tertullian gave us the evidence of the second 
century. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Cyprian, Fir- 
inilian and Lactantius, carried us onward to the close of the 
third century. And, multiplying as we advanced, Eusebius 
of Cesarea, the emperor Constantino, the council oi Nice, 
Athanasius, the emperor Constantius, Cyril of Jerusalem) 
Hilary of Poictiers, Basil of Cappadocia, Gregory Nazian- 
zen, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustin and Ch^sostom, brought 
as through the fourth century. Beyond this we progressed 
with Isidore of Pelusium, Prosper of Aquitain, and Vii> 
cent of Lerins, which leaves us about the middle of the fifth 
century : and at this point we have ceased from a task, la- 
borius to the writer, and, I fear, wearisome to the reader; 
but entitled, notwithstanding, to serious consideration from 
those who love the truth, and value the venerable remains of 
Christian antiquity. 



CHAPTER 31. J FRAUDS UPON THE FATHERS. 843 

And here, brethren, permit me to remind you, that I have 
not questioned the fidelity with which the writings of the 
fathers have been handed down to us, except in those in- 
stances where your own authors have compelled me. Ne- 
vertheless, I owe it to truth to state my conviction, that the 
expurgations which your scholars have made of these an- 
cient writings have left them, still, far from immaculate ; al- 
though the labors of your critics are highly creditable to 
their learning and candor. I shall not trouble you with a 
statement of my reasons for this conviction : but shall sus* 
tain its correctness by quoting the opinions of two among 
your most able men. 

The translator of Athanasius saith, (293.) 'As in the most 
fruitful fields many weeds grow up with the best grain, so, to 
every ancient author of the highest note many false and 
spurious books are attributed : but to none more than to 
Athanasius. Moreover these writers, since they are the 
apes of Athanasius, endeavor to present the same arguments 
concerning the Trinity, but with no skill, genius, or erudi- 
tion : indeed they take the most mysterious subjects, and 
with a wonderful unskillfurness,involve them more and more, 
until you would think yourself to be not merely in a laby- 
rinth, from which at least the proper clue might extricate 

(293) In S. Athan. op. Epistola Nuncupatoria. ' U't enim fertilissi- 
mis agris multa zizania unacum optimis frugibusnascuntur,ita optimo 
cuique autori plurimi falsi et nothi libri adscvibuntur : nulli autem 
plures, quam Athanasio. Illi porro, quia simite sunt Athanasii, eadem 
argumenta de Trinitate tractare conantur, sed nullacum mente, inge- 
nio aut eruditione : iidemque res implicatissimas mira infelicitate ma- 
gis ac magis implicant, ut non in labyrintho, ubi saltern filo exitus in- 
veniri poterat, sed in nodo Gordio te hasi-ere putes : adeo illic neo 
caput nee cauda apparet, arbitrerisque te in antique quasi chao voltt- 
ta n, In hos libros adulterines quum incidisset Desiderius. Erasmus, 
e "t nihil melioris venae expectaret, semel deposito onerefessus, nausea- 
lilig Sqvog > nolens amplius glandesgustare. 



344 . INTERPOLATIONS [CHAPTER 31. 

you, but rather in a Gordian knot; or else, there being no 
appearance of either head or tail, you might fancy yourself 
rolling about in the primaeval chaos. When Desiderius 
Erasmus happened upon those adulterated books, and ex- 
pected nothing of a better quality, disgusted and weaned he 
threw down his load at once, exclaiming : Plenty of oak: 
being unwilling' any longer to fare on acorns.' 

To this frank and amusing acknowledgment, I shall only 
add the graver confession of your distinguished Quesnel. 
(294) 'The writings of the holy fathers/ saith he, 'by 
which, as by another channel, the truth is delivered through 
revolving ages, from Christ the Head, even to us, are not 
yet sufficiently purged from the filth of errors and interpo- 
lations, not yet fully restored to their purity ; although more 
than one hundred and fifty years have already elapsed since 
the enterprize was commenced with no small study by men 
of vast learning, in order that the whole of the sacred fathers 
might be, as it were, brought to life again for our bene- 
fit.' 

You perceive, therefore, brethren, that there is abundant 
reason for a portion of skepticism concerning the fidelity 
with which these early records have been transmitted ; since 
they stand impeached of corruption, even by yourselves. 
But I only advert to the fact for the purpose of shewing 
its proper bearing on the proofs I have exhibited ; for it is 
easy to see, thai if I have been able to place before you such 
a body of evidence against your present system, from books 

(294) Ad. S. Leonis Mag. op. praefatio. ' At S'S. Patrum scripta, 
per qua; vehit per alterum alveuru vevitas a Chvisto capite ad nos us- 
que volventibus seculis traducitur, nondum ab erratorum et interpola- 
tiorium fosce satis purgata sunt, nondum suse' puritati plene redciita: 
tametsi jam-a centum quinquaginta et aiaplius annis hocmoliri ccepe- 
rint baud mediooribus vigiliia viri impense docti, ut nobis eancti Pa~ 
tres, toti quasi; renascsrentuf .f 



CHAPTER 31.] OP THE FATHERS. 343 

which your predecessors have thus confessedly interpolated, 
to suit the doctrine of their day, we should doubtless have 
made out a far stronger case, if the testimony of those primi- 
tive writers had remained in its original purity, and if the 
multitude of other authors which the Church of Rome did 
not approve, had been transmitted to us along with them- 



CHAPTER XXXII. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

I conceive it proved by superabundant testimony, that 
the primitiveChurch of Rome professed to hold no authorita^ 
tive supremacy over the other Churches, and that she inter- 
preted the language of Christ to Peter, in precise accordance 
/with the general voice of the fathers, as conveying no offi 
cial grant of supreme power or domination. It was stated, 
however, as you probably recollect, in connexion with our 
remarks upon the testimony of Irenseus, that a secular pri- 
macy of influence must have belonged to her, on account 
of the vast superiority of her location ; and that this was 
the root from which her claims to spiritual supremacy grew, 
into their subsequent magnitude. I doubt not, indeed, that 
the bishops of Rome conceived the idea of establishing 
this supremacy, at a very early day. Neither do I question 
their sincerity in thinking that the peace and prosperity of 
the Church would thereby be greatly promoted. The pol- 
icy of earthly wisdom could find no objection to the theo- 
ry of such a system. According to human judgment, it 
promised a fair and useful result. But these good men for- 
got that religion was not committed to the wisdom of this 
world. They forgot that the Almighty had predicted ruin 
and not success, as the final issue of every attempt to unite 



CHAPTER 32.] SECULAR SUPREMACY. 347 

God and Mammon. They lost sight of the distinguishing glo 
ry of the Gospel which chose the weak things of the world 
to confound the things that were mighty ; tnd in being wise 
above what was written, and in seeking that union from 
policy which could alone be given by the Spirit of holiness 
and truth, they did indeed lay the foundation of a won- 
derful fabric of ecclesiastical power, and it became, in the 
progress of a few centuries, a tower like that of Babel, 
whose summit was designed to reach the heavens : but the 
structure was human, not divine, and therefore it was sub- 
ject to the usual fate of earthly mutation. It would be 
as unkind as it is useless to institute a comparison between 
the literal Babel, and the mystic Babylon. I prefer lea- 
ving that species of argument to other hands, 

it may be asked, however, how the doctrine of papal 
supremacy could have been admitted by the Church, if it 
were not founded upon the authority of the Redeemer? 
To this I would reply, that the rank and influence of the 
Roman See, having given it a great and increasing prepon- 
derance in the Councils of the Church, the Canons of these 
Councils by degrees confirmed its dignity. Thus the right 
of receiving appeals was conferred upon it first by the Coun- 
cil of Sardica, some years subsequent to the Council of 
Nice. The acknowledgement that it was the first of all 
the Churches, was made still later by the Council of Con- 
stantinople. The language of the Council of Carthage 
testified to the growth of Roman influence 3 and that of the 
Council of Chalcedon bore witness to its strength, while 
it sanctioned, in favor of Constantinople,the claims of a rival, 
which the fathers of that Council called f A. NEW ROME.' 
Besides these recognitions of Roman preponderance, the 
emperors, particularly Valentinian in the west, and Marci- 
an in the east, had established the power of appeals bylaw, 



8,48 FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. [CHAPTER 8SL 

md these causes combined, even so early as the time of pope 
Leo, in the middle of the fifth century, gave a considerable 
foothold to your doctrine. It is altogether beside my de. 
sign, however, in this humble work, to assume the office of 
historian, and therefore I refer you to the pages of your own 
celebrated annalist, the' candid, the learned, and the elabo- 
rate Fleury ; who, although of course a champion for his 
Church, yet confesses and deplores the change which led 
her so far from the truth of her primitive system. 

(295) ' The pure days of the Church,' saith this author, 
speaking of the close of the sixth century, ' are passed 
away. Rome, idolatrous, stained with so many crimes, and 
drunk with the blood of so many martyrs, was doomed to 
be punished, and divine vengeance was to be signalised upon 
her, in the face of all the nations.' Proceeding to apply 
the predictions of the Apocalypse to heathen Rome, your 
historian continues : l The execution of the sentence fol- 
lowed in due season. Rome ceased to be the capital jo 
the empire, after Constantine had transferred his seat tt> 
Byzantium : and from the time that the empire was divided, 
the emperors of the West resided at Ravenna, at Milan, and 
everywhere rather than at Rome. Thus she lost, by de> , 

grees, her splendor, her riches, her people Meanwhile 

:ghe was taken and pillaged several times by the barbarian^ 
who ravaged and tore in pieces all the western empire,' ... 

(295) Histoire Ecclesiastique par M. Fleury, Ed. de 1758. Tom. 13i 
Discourssur 1'histoire ecclesiastique, depuis Tan 600. jusqu'& l'a& 
UOO. 

' Les beaux jours de 1'eglise sont pass&s. 

'Rome idolatre, souillee de tant de crimes et eny vree dn eang <& 
tant de martyrs, devoit etre punie, et la vengeance divine devoit ecla 

ter sur elle, a la face de toutes les nations. L'executipn suivi* 

i son terns. Rome cessa d'etre la capitale de 1'empire, depuis quS 
Constantin en eut transferele siege k Bizance: et depuis que I'eJ * 



CHAPTER 32.] FLEUKT'S ADMISSIONS. 349 

' These barbarians, it is true, became converted ; some 
sooner ; some later, .... but in becoming Christians, they 
did not abandon altogether their former character, they con- 
tinued, for the most part, light, fickle, violent, and acted up- 
on more by passion than by reason. They retained also 
their contempt for literature and the arts, and only occu- 
pied themselves with hunting and with war. Hence arose 
ignorance, even among the Romans who were their subjects. 
For the character of the dominant nation always prevails, 
and learning languishes, when honor and interest no long- 
er sustain it.' 

t In the following ages, the most enlightened men, such 
as Bede, Alcuin, Hincrnar, Gerbert, were affected by the 
misfortune of their times ; desiring to attain all the sciences, 
they did not become thoroughly acquainted with any, and 
knew nothing with exactness or method. But what they 
most needed was that critical learning, which would have 
enabled them to distinguish false writings from true. For 
there were, at this period, a multitude of pieces, forged un- 

pire foj; partage, les empereurs d'Occident residerent a Raveime, it 
Milan, et partout ailleurs qu' a Rome. Ainsi elle perdit peu a peu 

son eclat, ses richesses, son peuple. Cependant elle fut prise et 

pillee plusieurs fois par les barbares, qui ravagerent et mirent en pie. 
ces tout 1'empire d'Occident 

Ces barbares, il est vrai, se convertirent; les uns plutot, les autrcs 

plustord; mais les barbares, en devenant Chretiens, ne quit- 

terent pas entierement leurs anciennes nireurs, ils demeurerent laplu- 
part legers, changeans, emportes, agissant plus par passion que par 
raison. ..... Ces peuples continuoient dans leur mepris pour les 

lettres et pour les arts, ne s'occupant que de lachasse et de la guerre. 
De-la vint 1'ignorance, meme chez les Remains leurs sujets. Car 
les moeurs de la nation dominante prevalent toujours, et les 6tudes 
languissent, si 1'honneur et 1'interet ne les soutiennent.' .... 

' Dans les siecles suivans, les hommes les plus eclaires, comme 
Bede, Alcuin, Hincmar, Gerbert, se sentoient du malheur des terns : 
voulant embrasser toutes les sciences, ils n'en approfondissoient au- 
30 



.350 FLEUBY'S ADMISSIONS. [CHAPTER 32, 

der illustrious names ; and this not only by the heretics, but 
by the Catholics, and even with good intentions. Thus 
Virgil of Thaspis avows that he borrowed the name of 
St. Athanasins, in order to attract the attention of the Van- 
dal Arians. In like manner, whenever they had not the 
acts of a martyr to read on the day of his festival, they com- 
posed the most probable or the most marvellous that they 
could : and thereby thought to promote the piety of the 
people. These false legends were chiefly fabricated on the 
occasion of the removal of relics, so frequent in the ninth 
century.' 

' They also framed title deeds, whether to supply the 
place of genuine records which they had lost, or altogether 
fictions : as the famous donation of Constantine' ( granting 
Rome to the pope) 'of which there was no doubt in France 
during the ninth century. But of all these forgeries, the 
most pernicious were the decretals attributed to the popes 
of the four first centuries., which inflicted an incurable wound 

cuue, et ne scavoient rien exactement. Ce qui leur manquoit le plus 
etoit la critique. pour distinguer les pieces fausses des veritables. Car 
iJ y avoit des-lors quantite d'ecrits fabriques sous des noms illustres, 
non seulement par des heretiques, m'ais par des Catholiques, et meme 
a bonne intention : J'ai marque que Virgile de Thaspe avoue lui-meme 
avoir emprunte le nom de Saint Athanase, pour se faire ecouter des 
Vandales Ariens. Ainsi quand on n'avoit pas les actes d'un martyr 
pour lire.au jour de sa fete, on en composait les plus vraisemblables 
ou les plus merveiMeux que 1'on pouvoit : et par la 1'on croyoit entre- 
tenir la piete des peuples. Ces fausses legendes furent principalement 
fabriquees a" 1'occasion des translations de reliques, si fr6quentes dans 
le neuvieme siecle.' 

' On faisoit aussi des titres,soit a Ja place des veritables que l'o 
avoit perdus, soit absolument supposes : comme la fameuse ^donation 
de Constantin, dont on ne doutoit pas en France au neuvieme siecle. 
Mais de toutes ces pidces fausses les plus pernicieuses furent 3es d6cre- 
tales attribuees aux papes des quatre premiers siecles, qui ont fait une 
playe irreparable a- la discipline del'eglise, par lesmaximesnouvelles 



CHAPTER 32.] FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. 351 

on the discipline of the Church, by the new maxims which 
they introduced, for the judgments of bishops, and the au- 
thority of the pope,' 

' Another effect of this ignorance, was to render men 
credulous and superstitious, for want of having sure princi- 
ples of belief, and an exact knowledge of the duties of re- 
ligion.' 

'And a further consequence of the domination of the bar- 
barians, was that the bishops and the clergy became hunters 
and warriors like the laity. The bishops had their vassals 
to serve at their order for the fiefs (or estates) which they 
held; and when the bishop himself was commanded by the 
king, he was obliged to march at the head of his troops. 
Charlemagne rinding this right established, wished to relax 
it at the request of his people ; and he dispensed with the 
personal service of the bishops, provided they sent their 
vassals. But this regulation was badly observed, and we 
find that afterwards, as well as before, bishops armed them- 
selves, and fought, and were taken and killed in war.' 

' But after the bishops found themselves lords, and ad- 

qu'elles ontintroduites touchant les jugemens des eveques etl'autorito 
du pape [p. 7.] 

' Un autre effot cle 1'ignorance, est cle renclre les homines crodules 
et supcrstitieux, faut'e d'avoir des principes certains de cveanee et. une 
connoissance exacte des devoirs de la religion.' 

'Un autre efFet de la domination des barbares, c'est que les evequos 
et les cleros devinrent chasseurs et guerriers comme les liliques.' 

'Les eveques avoient lours vassaux obliges a. servir a. leur ordre 
pour les fiefs qu'ils tenoieut d'eux ; et quand 1'eveque lui-meme etoit 
mande parle roi, il devoit marcher a la tete de ses troupes. Charle- 
magne trouvant ce droit etabli, voulut bien s'en reliicher a la priere de 
son peuple ; et il dispensa les eveques Jde servir en personne, pour, 
vft qu'ils envoyassent leur vassaux. Mais ce regloment fut mal ob- 
serve, et nous voyons apres comme devant,les eveques armes. combat, 
tans, pris et tues a la guerre.' 

' Mais depuis que les eveques se virent seigneurs et admis en parr. 



\ 



352 FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. [CHAPTER 32. 

mitted on the part of the government of states, they sup- 
posed that they possessed, as bishops, what they only pos- 
sessed as lords ; and pretended to judge kings, not only in 
the tribunal of penitence, but in their councils. The sa- 
cred ceremonial introduced since the middle of the eighth 
century, served them for a pretext : the bishop, in placing 
the crown upon the king, seemed to confer the kingdom on 
the part of God/ 

'The popes, believing, with reason, that they had as much 
and even more authority than the bishops, undertook very 
soon to regulate the disputes of sovereigns, not by the way 
of mediation and intercession only, but by authority: which 
was, in effect, to dispose of crowns.' 

The condition of the papal court, under this system, is 
described by your candid historian upon the highest testimo- 
ny, that of the famous Bernard, in the following terms : viz. 

1 St. Bernard represents to us,' saith Fleury, 'the consis- 
tory of the Cardinals, as a parliament, or a sovereign tribu- 
nal, occupied in judging causes from morning till night: and 
the pope who presides there, is so overwhelmed with af- 
fairs, that lie hardly has time to breathe. The court of 



du govcrnemcni des etats, ils crurcnt avoir, corame eveques. ce qu'ils 
n'avoient que comrae seigneurs : ils prctendirent jnger les rois non- 
sculoment dans lo tribunal de la penitence, mais dans les conciles. . . . 
L;< cerernonie du sacre, introduite depuis le milieu du huitieme si6- 
do, servit cncoro de pretexte : les eveques, en imposant la rouronne, 
semWoient donnor le royaume de la part de Dieu.' p. 22. 

Los papes croyant, avec raiso'n, avoir autant et memo plus d'atito- 
rite que les eveques, entreprirent bien-tot de regler les differens entre 
Ics souvtvains : non par voie du mediation et d'intercession seule- 
ment. mais par autorit6 : ce qui en effet etoit disposer des couronnes. 

Ib. Tom. 1C. Discours 14. p. xiv. 

' Saint Bernard nous reprcsente le consistoire des cardinaux comnie 
un parlemeiitou un tribunal souverain, occupe ajuger des proces de- 
puis le matin jusqu' au soir. et le pape qui y presidoit tellement ac 



CHAPTER. 32.] FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. 353 

Rome is full of advocates, of solicitors, of passionate plea- 
ders, insincere.; interested, seeking only to take each other 
by surprise, and each trying to enrich himself at the ex- 
riense of his neighbour.' 

' I know that this crowd of prelates and other strangers 
whom various interests attracted to Rome, brought great 
wealth to the city, and that her people fattened at the cost 
of all others : but I am ashamed to mention such an advan- 
tage when we are treating of religion. For, was the pope 
established at Rome in order to enrich, or in order to sanc- 
tify it?' ' 

< The decretal of Gratian completed the work of con- 
firming and extending the authority of the false decretals, 
which may be found scattered through the whole : ior du- 
ring more than three centuries no other canons were known 
than those of this collection ; none other were followed in 
the schools and at the courts.. Gratian had even gone far- 
ther than these decretals in order to extend the authority of 
the pope, maintaining that the pope was not subject to the 

cable d'affaires, qu' a peine avoit-il un moment pour respirer. La 
cour de Rome pleine d'avocats, de solliciteurs, de plaideurs passion- 
n6s, artificieux, interresses, ne eherchant qu' Ji.se surprendre I'unJ'au- 
tre et s'enrichir aux depens d'autr,ui.' 

' Je sais que cette foule de prelats et d'autres etrangers.que divers 
inter&ts attiroietac-Rome,y apportoit de grandesrichesss r et que son 
peuple s'engraissoit aux depens de tons les autres:- maia- j'ai honte de 
faire mention d'un-tel avantage lors qu'il s'agit de -la religion.- Le 
pape etoit-il'dono etabli Rome pour Penrichir-ou- pour-la- sanctifier?' 
p. XTi. 

' Le decret de Gratien acheva d'affermifc et d'etendru 1'atrtorite des 
feusses-decretales que Ton y trouve semetes partout: car pendant plus 
de trois siecles on ne connoissoifr poim d'autres canons que ceux de 
ce recueil^ on n'en suivoit point d'autres dans IBS ecoles et dans Ie8 
tribunauXi Gratien avoit m&tne-encheri>sur ces decretales pour eten- 
dre 1'autorit^ du pape, soutenant qu'il'n'etoit point soumis aux canons: 
ce qu'il dit de son chef; et sans en apporter aucune preuve d'autorite. 
30* 



854 FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. [CHAPTER 32. 

canons : this he said of himself; and without adducing any 
proof of authority. Thus was formed in the Latin Church 
a confused idea, that the power of the pope was without 
bounds ; and this principle once established, many conse- 
quences were drawn from it, in accordance with the articles 
formally expressed in the false decretals ; and the modern 
theologians have not sufficiently distinguished between these 
opinions, and that which is essential to the Catholic faith, 
concerning the primacy of the pope and the rules of the 
ancient discipline.' 

As the corruption of the original constitution of the 
Church is thus attributed by Fleury to the ignorance which 
followed the irruption of barbarians into the Western em- 
pire, so he accounts for the greater purity of the Greek 
Church by remarking on their comparative love of sound 
learning. ' Among the Greeks,' saith he, ' all persons of 
respectability studied, the laity as well as the clergy ; and 
they instructed themselves in the original books, the Scrip- 
tures, the fathers, the ancient canons. You have seen/ con- 
tinues the historian, c that all their bishops, and even their 
patriarchs, were judged and often deposed in the Councils : 
that they did not ask leave of the pope to assemble ; and 
that there was no appeal to him from their decisions. 

Ainsi se forma dans 1'gglise Latine une idae confuse quo la puissance 
du pape etoit sans boraes ; ce principe une fois pose", on en a tire plu- 
sieurs consequences au-del& des articles exprimes formellement dans 
les fausses decretales, et les nouveaux theologiens n'ont pas assez dis- 
tingue ces opinions d'avec P essentiel.de la foi catholique, touchantla 
primaute du pape et les regies de Pancienne discipline.' 

Ib. xix. < Chez les Girecs tous les konn&tes gens etudioient, lea lal- 
ques comme les clercs; et ils s'instruisoient dans les livres originaux f 
1'ecriture, les peres, les anciens canons, . . . Vous avez vu que tons 
leurs ev&ques et les patriarches m&mes etoient juge's et souvent de- 
poses dans les conciles : qu'on ne demandoit point au pape la permis- 
sion de les assembler, et qu'on n'appelloit point 4 lui de. leurs juge- 



32.] FLEUKY'S ADMISSIONS. 355 

Neither did they address themselves to him on the subject 
of the translation of bishops, nor of the erection of bishop- 
ricks: but followed the canons contained in the ancient code 
of the Greek Church.' 

' But perhaps you will say ; It is not surprising that the 
Greeks did not address themselves to the pope, either for 
appeals, or any other exercise of jurisdiction, since from 
the time of Photius, they did not recognize him as the 
Chief of the Church. But did they address themselves to 
him before that time ? And during the period when they 
were most united with the Roman Church, did they ob- 
serve any part of that which I call the new discipline ? 
They were very far from it, because the Latins themselves 
did not observe it, and because this discipline was then un- 
known throughout the whole Church,' 

You will see, brethren, in these extracts from one of 
your own best historians, a close approximation to the views 
of Christian antiquity which I have endeavoured to present, 
from the writings of the fathers. Something, indeed, Fleiiry 
allowed to Rome, in the shape of a primacy ; and doubtless, 
with thousands of his learned and candid brethren, of whose 
doctrines we shall speak more largely, by and by, he would 
have reconciled, as well as he could, his fidelity to antiquily 
with his fidelity to his vows. But granting all this, I claim 

mens. On no s'adressoit point & lui pour les translations d'ev&ques 
ni les erections d'ev6che& : on suivoit les canons compris dans 1'ancien 

code de 1'eglise Gr6cque 

Ib. xx. 'Vous direz peut-etre : II ne faut pass'etonner que les Grecs 
ne s'adressassent pas au pape, soitpour les appellations, soit pourtont 
le reste, puisque des le terns de Photius, ils ne le reconnoissoit plus 
pour chef de 1'eglise. Mais s'y adresst>ient-ils auparavant? Et dans 
les terns ou ils e'toient le plus unis avec 1'eglise Romaine, observoient- 
ils rien de ce que j'appelle nouvelle discipline ? Ils n'avoient garde 
de le faire, puisque les Latins m&mes ne le faisoient pas : et que cette 
discipline etoit encore inconnue & toute 1'eglise.' .... 



356 FLEURY'S ADMISSIONS. [CHAPTER 3g.. 

his acknowledgment as conclusive upon the point which I 
have undertaken to establish that A CHANGE a vast and 
deplorable change, has passed over your primitive doctrine. 
The extent of this change may still be disputed, but the 
fact cannot be denied. 



CHAPTER XXXIII 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

Resting, for the present, from our examination of anti- 
quity, I proceed, according to our proposed plan, to exam- 
ine the two conflicting theories concerning the limits of 
papal power, which have excited so much serious contro- 
versy amongst yourselves. The result of this examination 
will prove, as it seems to me, that the claims of your can- 
on law have never been relinquished, but continue to rep- 
resent your doctrine fairly to this day. 

An author of your own, whom I presume you would 
allow to be amongst the most unexceptionable, shall furnish 
my text-book on this subject. The late Charles Butler 
Esqr. so well known for his legal erudition, his stores of 
general literature, his admirable tact, and his polished urba- 
nity, has perhaps proved one of your happiest advocates in 
relation to the question before us : and his work entitled, 
' The Book of the Roman Catholic Church,' in a series of 
letters addressed to the distinguished Dr. Southey, having 
been republished at Baltimore in A. D. 1834, is probably 
more easy of access than any other of the later publications 
to which I could refer. 

From his version of the Creed of pope Pius IV. I ex- 
tract five clauses, relating to our subject. This symbol, as 
he correctly states, (p. 8) f was published in 1564, in the 



358 THE CREED OF [CHAPTER 33, 

form of a bull, addressed to all the faithful in Christ. It 
was immediately received throughout the universal Church; 
and, since that time, has ever been considered, in every part 
of the world, as an accurate and explicit summary of the 
Roman Catholic faith. Won- Catholics, on their admission 
into the Catholic Church, publicly repeat and testify their 
assent to it, without restriction or qualification.' 

1. The first clause of this creed, on which some remarks 
may be necessary, is as follows : ' I most firmly admit and 
embrace apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions, and all oth- 
er constitutions and observances of the holy Catholic and 
apostolic Church.' 

2 ' I also admit the sacred Scriptures according to the 
sense which the holy mother Church has^ held, and does 
hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and in- 
pretation of the Holy Scriptures ; nor will I ever take or 
interpret them otherwise, than according to the unanimous 
consent of the fathers.' 

< 3. 'I acknowledge the holy Catholic and apostolical Ro- 
man Church the mother and mistress of all Churches, and 
I promise and swear true obedience to the Roman bishop, 
the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, and 
vicar of Jesus Christ.' 

4. '1 also profess and undoubtedly receive all oth- 
er things delivered^ defined, and declared by the sacred ca- 
nons, and general Councils, and particularly by the holy 
Council of Trent ; and likewise J also condemn, reject, and 
anathematise all things contrary thereto, and all heresies 
whatsoever condemned and anathematized by the Church? 

5. ' This true Catholic faith, out of which none can be 
saved, which I now freely profess, and truly hold, I, N. 
promise, now and ever, most constantly to hold and profess 



CHAPTER 33.] POPE PIUS IT. 359 

whole and entire, with God's assistance, to the end of my 
life, Amen.' 

After setting forth this Creed, the author proceeds to say, 
(p, 11.) ' It is most true, that the Roman Catholics believe 
their doctrines to be unchangeable; and that it is a tenet of 
their creed, that what their faith ever has been, such it was 
from the beginning, such it now is, and such it ever ivill 

'b^ 

Now brethren, inasmuch as this, your,present creed, con- 
tains an oath of ' TRUE OBEDIENCE to the Rp,man bishop, 
the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles and 
Vicar of C hrist,' a definition of the powers of the pope is 
absolutely essential ; since it is plainly impossible to know 
what true obedience means, unless we understand the ex- 
tent to which the pope has a just right to demand it. 

And here I must trouble you with several pages, extrac- 
ted from Mr. Butler's able work, which well deserve your 
close and careful attention. { A chain of Roman-Catholic 
writers,' saith he, (p. 104) 'might be supposed: on the first 
link we might place those who have inmoderately exalted 
the prerogative oi the pope : on the last we might place 
those who have unduly depressed it; and the centre link 
might be considered to represent the canon of the 10th. 
session of the Council of Florence, which defined ihatfull 
power was delegated to the bishop of Rome, in the person 
of Peter, to feed^ regulate, and govern the universal 
Church, as expressed in the general Councils and holy 
Canons. THIS is THE DOCTRINE or THE ROMAN-CATHO- 
LIC CHURCH ON THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE,' continues 
Mr. Butler, ' and beyond it no Roman-Catholic is required 
to believe. Some opinions, represented by the immediate 
links on each side of the central link, are allowed. Those 
on one side, may be supposed to represent Orsi, and the 



TO! < 



860 MODERN DOCTRINE [CHAPTER 33, 

author of the learned treatise entitled, Quis est Petrus ? who 
explain the doctrine expressed in the Council of Florence 
in a manner very favorable to the papal prerogative ; while 
the intermediate links on the other side, represent Bossuet 
La Marca, and other writers, who construe the canon in a 
more limited sense. The former have received the appel- 
lation of Transalpine divines ; the latter are called Cisal* 
pine. I will endeavor to present a short vie\v of their dif- 
ferent systems ; first premising what the Roman Catholic 
Church considers to be of faith upon this important article 
of her creed.' 

1 Universal doctrine of the 
Roman- Catholics respecting the supremacy of the pope.' 

' It is an article ol Roman-Catholic faith, that the pope 
has, by divine right, first, a supremacy of rank ; second, a 
supremacy of jurisdiction in the spiritual concerns of the 
Roman-Catholic Church ; and third, the principal authority 
in defining articles of faith. In consequence of these pre- 
rogatives, the pope holds a rank, splendidly pre-eminent, 
over the highest dignitaries of the Church ; has a right to 
convene Councils, and preside over them by himself, or his 
legates, and to confirm the election of bishops. Every ec- 
clesiastical cause may l>e brought to him as the last resort, 
ty appeal; he may promulgate definitions and formularies 
of faith to the Universal Church ; and when the general 
body or a great majority of her prelates, have assented to 
them, either by formal consent, or tacit assent, all are 
bound to. acquiesce 1 in them. Rome, they say, in such a 
case, has spoken, and the cause is determined. To the 
pope, in the, opinion of all Roman Catholics, belongs also a 
general superintendence of the concerns of the Church ; a 
right when the canons provide no line of action, to direct 



CHAPTER 33.J OF THE PAPAL POWER. 361 

the proceedings ; and, in extraordinary cases, to act in op- 
position to the canons. In those spiritual concerns, in 
which, by strict right, his authority is not definitive, he is 
entitled to the highest respect, and deference. Thus far, 
there is no difference of opinion among Roman-Catholics: 
but here, they divaricate into the Transalpine and Cisalpine 
opinions.' 

' Difference between the 

Transalpine and Cisalpine doctrines, on the temporal and- 
spiritual power of the pope.' 

' The great difference between the Transalpine and Cis- 
alpine divines on the power of the pope, formerly was, that 
the Transalpine divines attributed to the pope a divine 
right to the exercise, indirect at least, of temporal power, 
for effecting a spiritual good ; and, in consequence of it, 
maintained, that the supreme power of every state was so 
far subject to the pope, that when he deemed that the bad 
conduct of the sovereign rendered it essential to the good 
of the Church that he should reign no longer, the pope 
was then authorized, by his divine, commission., to deprive 
him of his sovereignty, and absolve his subjects Jrom their 
obligations of allegiance ; and that even, on ordinary oc- 
casions, he might enforce obedience to his spiritual legisla- 
tion and jurisdiction, by civil penalties. On the other hand, 
the Cisalpine divines affirmed, that the pope had no right, 
either to interfere in temporal concerns, or to enforce obedi- 
ence to his spiritual legislation or jurisdiction, by temporal 
power ; and consequently, had no right to deprive a sove- 
reign of his sovereignty, to absolve his subjects from their 
allegiance, or to enforce his spiritual authority over either, 
civil penalties. THIS DIFFERENCE OF OPINION EXISTS 

31 



362 TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE. [CHAPTER 33. 

NOW NO LONGER, THE TRANSALPINE DIVINES HAVING AT 
LENGTH ADOPTED, ON THIS SUBJECT, THE ClSALPINE 

OPINIONS.' 

Here, brethren, you will be pleased to mark, with espe- 
cial care, the words of your advocate ; because I shall, by 
and by. have occasion to recur to the passage, and ask for 
the EVIDENCE on which the assertion is founded. 

' But though, on this important point/ continues Mr. But- 
ler, ' both parties are at last agreed, THEY STILL DIFFER 



ON OTHERS.' 



' In spiritual concerns, the Transalpine opinions ascribe 
to the pope a superiority and controlling power over the 
whole Church, should she chance to oppose his decrees, and 
consequently, over a general Council, her representative ; 
and the same superiority and controlling power, even in 
the ordinary course of business, over the canons of the uni- 
versal Church. They describe the pope as the fountain 
of all ecclesiastical order, jurisdiction, and dignity. They 
assign to him the power of judging all persons in spiritual 
concerns ; of calling all spiritual causes to his cognizance ; 
of constituting, suspending, and deposing bishops ; of 
conferring all ecclesiastical dignities and benefices, in or 
out of his dominions, by paramount authority ; of exemp- 
ting individuals and communities from the jurisdiction of 
their prelates ; of evoking to himself, or to judges ap- 
pointed by him, any cause actually pending in an ecclesias- 
tical court ; and of receiving immediate appeals from all 
sentences of ecclesiastical courts, though they be inferior 
courts, from which there is a regular appeal to an interme- 
diate superior court. They,] further, ascribe to the pope 
the extraordinary prerogative of PERSONAL INFALLIBILI- 
TY, when he undertakes to issue a solemn decision on any 
point of faith.' 



CHAPTER 33.] CISALPINE DOCTRINE. 363 

' The Cisalpines affirm, that in spirituals the pope is sub- 
ject, in doctrine and discipline, to the Church, and to a gen- 
eral Council, representing her ; that he is subject to the can- 
ons of the Church, and cannot, except in an extreme case, 
dispense with them ; that even in such a case, his dis- 
pensation is subject to the judgment of the Church ; that 
the bishops derive their jurisdiction from God himself imme- 
diately, and not derivatively through the pope ; that he has 
no right to confer bishoprics, or other spiritual benefices of 
any kind, the patronage of which, by common right, pre- 
scription, concordat, or any other general rule of the Church, 
is vested in another. They admit, that an appeal lies to 
the pope from the sentence of the metropolitan ; but assert, 
that no appeal lies to the pope, and that he can evoke no 
cause to himself, during the intermediate process. They 
affirm, that a general council may without, and even against 
the pope's consent, reform the Church. They deny his 
personal infallibility, and hold that he may be deposed by the 
Church, or a general Council, for heresy or schism ; and 
they admit that in an extreme case, where there is a great 
division of opinion, an appeal lies from the pope to a gen- 
eral Council.' 

' Such are the Transalpine, and such the Cisalpine opin- 
ions, respecting the power of the pope,' concludes Mr. 
Butler. 'Both are tolerated by the Roman- Catholic 
Church, BUT NEITHER SPEAKS ITS FAITH : this, as I have 
mentioned, is contained in the canon of the Council of Flo- 
rence which I have cited. All the doctrine of that canon 
on the point in question, and nothing but that doctrine, is 
propounded by the Roman-Catholic Church to be believed 
by the faithful : for this doctrine, but for this doctrine only, 



364 BOTH ERRONEOUS. [CHAPTER 33. 

and the consequences justly deducible from it, are the Ro- 
man-,Catholics answerable/ 

The whole ground, brethren, may now, be considered 
fairly open before us, and I shall commence the proposed 
examination in the ensuing chapter. 



CHAPTER XXXIV. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

The plain statements of your learned and ingenious ad- 
vocate' being exhibited in his own words, the fact is not to 
be disputed that there are four definitions of the papal su- 
premacy recognised amongst you : 

1. The Transalpine doctrine, which,, besides all his oth- 
er prerogatives, ascribes- to the pope,, by divine right, the 
power of dethroning so.vereigns r and absolving subjects from 
their allegiance, and enforcing his authority by civil pen- 
alties. 

2. The Transalpine doctrine, which rejects this-exereise 
of supreme temporal power ;. but still grants to the pope a 
perfect control over Councils, bishops, canons,, and all causes 
of a spiritual nature ; considering him, as the fountain of 
ecclesiastical order, jurisdiction, and dignity, entitled to con- 
fer all ecclesiastical benefices, in- or out of his dominions ; 
authorized to exempt communities and individuals from the 
jurisdiction of their own- prelates, and endowed with in- 
fallibility whenever he undertakes to decide on any point 
of faith. 

3. The Cisalpine doctrine,, which reduces the- pope to a 
measure of dignity inferior to general Councils, and makes 
him subject to the Church ; which places infallibility in the 
decision of the whole Church, speaking by general Councils 

31* 



366 FOUR STATEMENTS [CHAPTER 84. 

approved by the pope ; but which still allows an appeal to 
his judgment as the last resort in all ecclesiastical causes, 
and acknowledges that he may go in opposition to the can- 
ons, in extreme cases. 

4. And fourthly, the doctrine of the Council of Florence, 
which, according to our author, is the only one binding on 
the Roman-Catholic as a matter of faith ; for he tells us, 
that although the Church of Rome tolerates the second and 
third of the above doctrines, yet neither of them represents 
her fairly. Now the language of the Council of Florence, 
as translated by your advocate, is this : that ' FULL POWER 

WAS DELEGATED TO THE BISHOP OF ROME, IN. THE PER- 
SON OF PETER, TO FEED, REGULATE, AND GOVEKN THE 
UNIVERSAL CHURCH, AS EXPRESSED IN THE GENERAL 

COUNCILS AND HOLY CANONS.' But what this phrase, 
full power, means, Mr. Butler will not allow us to learn, 
either from the Transalpine divines, or from their Cisalpine 
opponents ; nor has he been pleased to inform us himself; 
so that if I designed to turn Roman-Catholic to-morrow, 
and were called upon, according to your rule, to promise 
and swear TRUE OBEDIENCE to the bishop of Rome, I 
should despair of finding any standard by which to measure 
the extent of this comprehensive obligation. 

But this is not the whole of my embarrassment ; since I 
am perfectly unable to discover any evidence for Mr. But- 
ler's assertion, that the first and strongest of the Transal- 
pine expositions, which claims the temporal as well as the 
spiritual supremacy for the pope, has been abandoned. 

Was not this the prevailing sentiment in the year 1564, 
when pope Pius IV. set forth the very Creed which is 
now presented as the universally received summary of your 
system ? 

Was it not the doctrine of your Church when a subse- 



CHAPTER 34,] OF THE PAPAL POWERS. 367 

quent pope, Pius V. acted on the principle, by publishing 
his famous bull, deposing queen Elizabeth and absolving her 
subjects from their oath of allegiance ? 

Was it not the doctrine of your Church when that bull 
was renewed by pope Sixtus Quintus ? Mr. Butler, admit- 
ting these unquestionable facts in his 222nd page, does in- 
deed say, ' you cannot express yourself concerning these 
transactions in stronger terms of condemnation, than I have 
used,' Nor do I question, brethren, the sincerity of the 
censures, which he, and thousands of your communion, have 
passed upon them. But after all, do these censures make 
or alter your doctrine ? Or are we to suppose, that the pope 
and the body of Transalpine divines who had so long sup- 
ported the divine right of this prerogative, have now aban- 
doned it ; simply because it has of late years been disap- 
proved by their Cisalpine brethren ? 

It was in the latter end of the seventeenth century, viz. 
in A. D. 1682, when the Clergy of France made the first 
successful assault upon this doctrine in their famous Decla- 
ration, explicitly pronouncing, that ' kings and sovereigns 
are not subjected to any ecclesiastical power, by the order 
oi God, in temporal things ; and their subjects cannot be 
dispensed from the obedience which they owe to them, nor 
absolved from their oath of allegiance. 5 (296) And how, I 
beseech yon, was this declaration received ? Hear the ac- 
count, brethren, given by a distinguished author among 
yourselves. ' No sooner was it published,' saith he, ' than 

(296) Abr&ge do la Defense de la Declaration de "Assembles du 
Clerge de France, de 1682, Introduction, p. iv. ' Les rois et lessouvo- 
rains ne sont soumisa aucunc puissance ecclesiastique, par 1'ordre do 
Dieu, dans les choses temporelles ; leurs suj.ets ne peuvent 6tre dis- 
penses de 1'obcissance (ju'ils leur doiven.l, ni absous du serment de 
fid.elite.' 



368 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [CHAPTER 34. 

a multitude of writers, excited by different motives, hasten- 
ed to combat it. Some, delivering themselves with a blind 
zeal to every thing which the spirit of party could inspire, 
of tricks, of subtil ties, of false applications,, accor/modated 
the writings of the fathers to their own opinions, instead of 
rectifying their opinions by the wisdom and authority of 
those writings. The others, forgetful even ot the laws of 
decency, and borrowing from a scandalous animosity the 
most reproachful qualifications,, spoke only of thunders and 
anathemas against the bishops of France.' (297) And had 
the bishops of France been exposed to the storm with no 
other protection than the strength of their argument, the 
result might have proved that these menaces were not in- 
tended to evaporate in words alone.. 

But you know,, brethren,, that the powerful influence of 
Louis XIV. was immediately displayed in defence of his 
clergy, who, on this occasion, had not so much preceded, 
as followed the judgment of their royal master. The Dec- 
laration bears date the 19th of March, 1682,. and only four 
days afterwards,, viz. on the 23d of the same month, the 
edict of the throne was registered in the Parliament of France. 
By this edict the king forbade all persons, secular and reg- 
ular, subjects or strangers throughout his dominions, to teach 
or write any thing contrary to this famous Declaration, and 
enjoined it strictly upon the archbishops, bishops, doctors 

(297) Ib. 'A peine cette declaration fut-elle'ptibliee,qu'une multitude- 
d'ecvivams excit&s par differensmotifS, s'etnpresserent de la combattre. 
Les unsse livrant avec un zele aveugle k tout ce quo 1* esprit de parti 
peut inspirer de detours, de subtilites, de fausses applications, accom- 
modoient les ecrits des peres a leurs opinions, au lieu de rectifier Ieur3 
opinions sur la sagesse et 1'autorite' de ces ecrits. Les auties, oubli- 
ant jusqaux lois de la decence, et empruntant d'une scandaleuse an- 
imosite les-qualifications les plus injutieuses, ne parloient que de iba*. 
dres et d'anathemes centre les 6v^ques ; de France :' 



CHAPTER 34. j] STILL MAINTAINED. 369 

of divinity, licentiates, &c. to inculcate diligently the doc- 
trine therein contained. (298) Whether, under these cir- 
cumstances, the toleration of the Cisalpine doctrine on 
this particular subject, was considered a point of necessary 
policy, lest the powerful kingdom of France should be for- 
ever lost to the Church of Rome, as England had been, by 
an ill-timed severity, is a question which I leave to the 
judgment of wiser heads than mine. 

Certain it is, however, that the difficulty created by this 
Declaration was not accommodated soon, nor without trou- 
ble. For c we must confess,' saith the same author, ' that 
some clouds arose between the Court of Rome and France, 
upon the subject of the Declaration of the clergy: and that 
pope Innocent XI. refused for some time to send bulls of 
institution to several bishops named for vacant dioceses. 
But all these clouds were dissipated by the letters which 
these bishops wrote to pope Innocent XII, EACH FOR HIM- 
SELF, PROTESTING TO HLS HOLINESS, THAT THE CLERGY 
OF FRANCE HAD NEVER INTENDED TO MAKE A DECREE 
OF FAITH BY THEIR DECLARATION, AND ASSURING HIM 
BESIDES OF THEIR PROFOUND SUBMISSION TO THE RIGHTS 

OF THE HOLY CHAIR. Innocent XII. exacted nothing 
farther, says M. Bossuet, and all the clamors, all the 
machinations, all the menaces of our enemies did not 
hinder this pope, truly holy, from receiving us and all 
the clergy of France, ivith kindness and charity, in his 
paternal bosom.' (299) 

It appears, then, that the supposed abandonment of the 

(298) Ib. At the end. 

(299) Ib. Introduction, p. xxv. 'Ici cependant nous devons conve- 
nir qu'il s'eleva quelques nuages entre la cour de Rome et la France, 
au sujetde la declaration du clerge, et que le pape Innocent xi. refusa 
pendant quelque temps des bulles destitution a plusieurs 6veques 



370 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [CHAPTER 34. 

pope's temporal power rests on nothing stronger than the 
unwilling sufferance of a declaration which was certainly 
disapproved by Innocent XI ; as certainly not approved 
by his successor ; and made the subject of something very 
like an apology, by the French bishops themselves. I con- 
fess I cannot see in this, a sufficient warrant for Mr. Butler's 
assertion that 'the TRANSALPINE DIVINES HAVE AT LENGTH 

ADOPTED ON THIS SUBJECT THE CISALPINE OPINIONS.' 

It is indeed said, that Mr. Pitt suggested to the English 
Roman-Catholics, three questions embracing this topic, to be 
sent to the universities of the Sorbonne, Louvaine, Douay, 
Alcala, and Salamanca ; the answers to which were all re- 
turned in accordance to the Cisalpine doctrine. And it is 
equally unquestionable that the oath taken by the English 
Roman- Catholics, under the provisions of the Act passed 
for their relief, in the year 1791, condemns and abjures the 
doctrine of the pope's temporal power in plain terms. (300) 
But how do these facts affect the question ? Have these 
five universities, and the British Roman-Catholics, without 
the assent of either pope or Council, power to pronounce 
an authoritative construction in a case like this? You know, 
brethren, that such an allegation would be regarded by you 
all as totally preposterous. 

nommes a des sieges vacans, Mais tous ces. images furent dissipes par 
les lettres que ces ev^ques nommes ecrivirent au pape Innocent xii, 
chacun en leur particulier, pour protester a sa saintete que le clerg6 
de France n'avoit jamais eu I'lntention de faire un deerctde foi par 
ga declaration; 1'assurant d'ailleurs de leur profonde sournission aux 
droits du St. Siege. Innocent xii n'en exigca pas davantagc, dit M. 
Bossuet, et toutes les clameurs, toutes les machinations, toutes les 
menaces de nos ennemis n'empecherent pas ce pape, vraiment saint, 
de nous recevoir et tout le Clerge de France, avec douceur et charit6 
dans son scin paternel.' 

(300) See appendix to Mr. Butler's book, p. 287, 8, and 9. 



CHAPTER 34.] STILL MAINTAINED. 371 

Let me, therefore, solicit your serious attention to the true 
state of the question. That it is of the very highest im- 
portance to you all, from the pope, who claims this true, obe- 
dience, down to the lowest and the least who swears that 
he will faithfully render it, can be denied by no man. It en- 
ters into your Creed, the creed of pope Pius IV, which your 
Church allows to be the universally received summary of 
your faith. Out of this faith, saith this creed in its last 
clause, ' NONE CAN BE SAVED ;' and herein it well sustains 
the Doway catechism which declares, 'that he who lias not 
a due subordination and connexion to the pope, and Coun- 
cils, MUST NEEDS BE DEAD, and cannot be accounted a 
member of the Church' in any sense whatever. A princi- 
ple so fundamental, so universal, so essential, in your esteem, 
to the very being of your Church, ought surely to be 
understood and satifactorily defined amongst yourselves. 
Instead of which, your own able advocate, himself a pro- 
found jurist, and better qualified, perhaps, than any man in 
England, to put your doctrine of papal supremacy in the 
most favorable light, gives us four statements of the matter, 
of which three are perfectly irreconcilable ; and the re- 
maining one, the Canon of Florence, which he .pronounces 
to be the only one that truly represents the faith of the 
Church, was generally interpreted, for many successive cen- 
turies, to mean, what your advocate tells us, is now as gen- 
erally abandoned. And yet the doctrines of your Church 
are pronounced unchangeable ; for it is a tenet of your 
creed, in the words of Mr. Butler, that what your faith 
'ever has been, such it now is, and such it ever will be.' Ah, 
brethren ! you will not blame my stupidity if I cannot com- 
prehend the unchangcableness of a Creed, the meaning of 
which its own best friends find it so "hard to discover : since 
they refer us to three different and jarring interpretations of 



5 IS 



372 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [CHAPTER 34. 

the same thing, and then gravely inform us that we cannot 
depend upon any of them. 

But there is one feature of your papal system in which 
you all agree. It is this : that the pope, whatever his other 
powers may be, is the supreme judge of the Church. 
For in the section of Mr. Butler's work where he lays down 
the universal doctrine of the Roman-Catholics respecting 
the supremacy of the pope, he expressly says :* 

' It is an article of Roman-Catholic faith that the pope 
has, by divine right, 1 . a supremacy of rank, 2. a supre- 
macy of jurisdiction in the spiritual concerns of the Roman- 
Catholic Church, and 3. the principal authority in defi- 
ning articles of faith.' ' Every ecclesiastical cause maybe 
brought to him, AS THE LAST RESORT, by appeal ; he may 
promulgate definitions and formularies of faith to the uni- 
versal Church, and when the general body, or a great ma- 
jority of the prelates, have assented to them, either by for- 
mal consent, or tacit assent, ALL ARE BOUND TO ACQUI- 
ESCE, Rome, they say. in such a case, has spoken, and the 
cause is determined.' ' Thus far, saith your advocate, in 
conclusion, there is no difference of opinion among Ro- 
man- Catholics.' 

]No\v, brethren, I beseech you tell me, what is the worth 
of your Cisalpine definition, according to. the above princi- 
ple of faith, admitted by all ? Until the pope, who is the 
only judge in the last resort, has given his -formal decision, 
where is the authority of your latter doctrine ? And there- 
fore I cannot help thinking, that Mr. Butler, who was so 
profoundly versed in legal science, must have smiled within 
himself at the weakness of his argument, when he urged 
the oath established by the British Parliament for the Ro- 
man-Catholics, and the answers of five Universities, and 

*See pEgo SCO. 



CHAPTER 34.] STILL MAINTAINED. 373 

the opinions of the Gallican and English divines, with oth- 
ers, as settling such a question. If Mr. Pitt had doubts 
concerning the powers of the Lord Chancellor of England, 
it would be an amusing device to recommend the declara- 
tion of an assembly of country justices, and the opinions of 
five chamber counsellors, in the very face of the authorita- 
tive decrees and practice of the Court of Chancery itself. 
And if, on such grounds as these, men should be told, that 
the former principles of Equity in England had been aban- 
doned, such an assurance would hardly be thought worthy 
of any other answer than a smile of contempt. But I pray 
you brethren, how much more to the purpose has been the 
course taken on the question before us ? The pope, you 
tell us, by divine right, holds a supremacy of jurisdiction. 
All questions may be determined by him in the last resort, 
by appeal. Rome has then spoken, according to y out- 
phraseology, and the cause is determined. Has this cause 
been so determined, against the Transalpine, or in favor of 
the Cisalpine opinions ? Has there been any appeal to 
Rome upon the question ? Nay, in the selection of his five 
Universities, did not Mr. Pitt set down three who were 
previously known to hold the Cisalpine opinions, the Sor- 
bonne, Louvaine, and Doway, (the only three, with the 
answers of which Mr. Butler's work has favored us) while 
the other two were the universities of Atcala and Sala- 
manca, so that not one of the five was even on Italian ter- 
ritory! So fearful does he seem to have been of the real doc- 
trine of Rome. 

But Rome has spoken, and the cause has been deter- 
mined, over and over again, according to your own unques- 
tioned doctrine. From the days of Gregory VII. up to the 
time of Sixtus V. the claim of temporal as well as spiritual 
supremacy was constantly proposed by the popes as an ar- 

32 



374 ADMISSIONS or THE [CHAPTER 34. 

ticle of faith, acquiesced in both tacitly and professedly by 
the great body of the Church, and therefore, by your own. 
principles, irrevocably bound upon the whole. It is nof: my 
object, brethren, to enter more deeply into historical details 
than the nature of ray subject requires ; but let me cite a 
few sentences from .the book last quoted, in order to shew, 
from the J acts admitted by the Cisalpines themselves, 
how the question must stand, in the event of your submitting 
the canon of Florence to the construction of your only de- 
finitive tribunal. 

' Gregory is the first,' saith our author, ' who endeavored 
to subject all the crowns to the obedience of the popes in 
temporal things.' (301) 

'After the death of Gregory VII,' there were many pro- 
vincial Councils holden, in which what he had done was 
approved : chiefly however, under Victor III, and Urban II; 
afterwards Calixtus II, in a council at Rheims, excommuni- 
cated Henry V, and gave his subjects absolution from their 
oath of allegiance ; so completely had the example of Gre- 
gory VII, established this false doctrine, in the mind of the 
Romans. What took place between Alexander III, and 
Frederic I. between Innocent III. the emperor Otho, and 
John, king of England, is equally the fruit of the enterprize 
of this first author of the papal monarchy.' (302) 

Abrege de la defense dela declaration de 1'assemblee du Clerge ds 
France, p. 10. Innovations de Gregoire VII. 

(301) ' Gregoire est le premier qui ait voulu assuj6ttir toutes lee 
couronnes a 1'obeissance des papes, dans les choses temporelles.' 

(302) Ib. p. 11, ' Apres la mort de Gregoire VII. il se tint plusieure 
candles particuliers, oil Ton approuva ce qu'il avoit fait; et princi- 
palement sous Victor III. et Urbain II. ensuite Calixte II. dans tin 
concile de Reims, excommunia Henry V, et donna a ses sujets 1' abso- 
lution du serment de fidelite ; tant Pexemple de Gregoire VII, avoit 
etabli cette fausse doctrine, dans 1'esprit des Romains. 1 



CHAPTER, 34.] CISALPINE DIVINES. 375 

' The third canon of the Council of Lateran, held under 
Innocent III, commands all feudal lords to banish heretics 
from their lands, to take an oath concerning it, and in case- 
any one should fail to fulfil it for a whole year, it directs 
that the pope be apprised, in order that he may expose the 
property of the offender for a prey, and absolve his vassals 
from their obedience.' (303) I may observe here, brethren, 
that your Cisalpine author labours to distinguish this case 
from the case of sovereigns ; but manifestly, even on his 
own ground, it would be only a question of degrees. The 
principle involved in the case of the sovereign and in that 
of the feudal lord, is precisely the same. If the Council was 
infallible in sanctioning the one, it would be equally infalli- 
ble in sanctioning the other. 

Again, your author acknowledges, that (304) 'The 
Council of Trent, in the xxv. session, deprives princes 
of the possession of cities, in which they permit duels.' 
His argument to evade this fact is amusing. c The Coun- 
cil marks clearly enough,' saith he, J that it only speaks 
of those places which princes hold as fiefs of the Church. 
And this decree was rejected in the Parliament of Paris, in 
1593, as being contrary to the rights of sovereigns, although 

(303) Jb. p. 12. ' Le troisieme canon du IV Concile de Latran, to- 
nu sous Innocent III. ordonne a tous les Seigneurs de chasser les herft- 
tiques de leurs terres, d'en faire le serment, et en cas que quelqu'un y 
manque dans unan, il ordonne que le pape en soit averti, pour exposer 
Jeur biens en proie, et absoudre leurs vassaux de 1'obeissance qui'ils 
leur doivent.' 

(304) Ib. p. 13. ' Le concile deTrente, dans la XXV session, prive 
les princes de la possession des villes, dans lesquelles ils permettent Is 
duel. Mais ce concile marque assez clairement, qn'ilne parle que des 
Heux que les princes tiennent en- fiefs de 1'Eglise. Et on rejeta ce d- 
cret dans les etats tenus a Paris, en 1593, corame contraires aux droits 
des souverains ; quoique ces etats fussent tenus pendant la ligue. Ce 
n etoit d'ailleurs qu'un decretde discipline.' 



376 ADMISSIONS OF THE [CHAPTJSR 84. 

it was during the period of the league. And besides it was 
only a decree of discipline.' 

You perceive clearly, brethren, the weakness of this rea- 
soning, when applied to the main question, viz. whether the 
Church of Rome maintained that princes were subject, in 
temporals as well as spirituals, to the pope's authority. If 
the French parliament thought the Council of Trent refer- 
red only to the fiefs of the Church, why was this decree 
rejected as contrary to the rights of sovereigns ? And even 
if it were limited to the fiefs of the Church, by what right 
could the Council of Trent add a new condition to the ten- 
ure and one so important that a breach of it should work a 
forfeiture unless it were by the general right which had 
been claimed over all princes, for centuries before ? 

But I proceed to another example, which your author 
admits and endeavors to evade, as follows: (305) 'Pope 

(305) Ib. ' Innocent IV. assemble un-concile a Lyon, dans lequel il 
deposa I'empereur Frederic II. ou plutotil oonfirma la deposition de 
ce prince, faite par Gregoire IX, quelques annees auparavant. Nous 
conviendrons d'abord que 1'opinion du pouvoi.r des papes, touchant la 
deposition des princes, etoit alors tellement repandue, qu'il n'y avoit 
que les personnes les pluseclairdes qui soutinssent 1'anci.enne verite. 
Mais nous dirons aussi que la deposition de I'empereur ne futpas un 
decret dti concile. Ce ne fut qu'une sentence pontificale, prononc^e 
en presence du concile, et non par VautoritA du concile. -Nous dirons 
qa'Innocent IV. supposant, sans b6siter, 'qu'il pouvoit d^poser un 
prince qui abusoit de son.autorit6, d^libera seulement si les fautes de 
Fr6d6ric meritoient cette peine, mais qu'il ne rait aullement en d61i- 
b6ration. si, en vertu du pouvoir ponlifical, il pouvoit lier I'empereur 
et d61ier ses sujets, ce qui auroit 6t6 n6cessaire pour faire passer cet 
article, comme une chose decid^e par 1'Eglise. Nous dirons eufinque 
si c'6toit une d6cision d'un concile g6n6rnl, ce seroit une hfer6sie de 
soutenir le contraire. Et cependant jamais on n'a trait6 d'h6r6tiques, 
ni la faculte deth&ologie de Paris, ni les parlemens de France, qui 
out soutenu que la d^pendance des rois toit contraire a l.a parqle d? 
Dieu.' 



. 34.] CISALPINE DIVINES. 377 

Innocent IV.,' saith he, c assembled a Council at Lyons, 
in which he deposed the emperor Frederick 11. or rather he 
confirmed the deposition of this prince, declared by Gregory 
IX. some years before. We shall grant, in the first place, 
that the opinion of the power of the popes, concerning the 
deposition of princes, was then so diffused, that there were 
none but the most enlightened persons who sustained the 
ancient doctrine. But we shall also say, that the deposition 
of the emperor was not a decree of the Council. It was 
only a pontifical sentence, pronounced in the presence of 
the Council, and not by the authority of the Council. We 
shall say that Innocent IV. supposing, without hesitation, 
that he could depose a prince who abused his authority, de- 
liberated only whether Frederick deserved this punish- 
ment ; but that he never took into consideration, whether, 
by force of the papal power, he could bind the emperor and 
loose his subjects ; which would have been necessary, in 
order that this article might be passed for a matter decided 
by the Church. We shall say, in fine, that if this were a 
decision of a general Council, it would be a heresy to main- 
tain the contrary. And yet they have never treated as he- 
retics, either the faculty -of Theology of Paris, or the par- 
liament of France., who have maintained that the depend- 
ence of kings was contrary to the word of God. ' 

Here, brethren, it seems to me, that your Cisalpine logi- 
cian is particularly unfortunate. For first, he relies on the 
weak distinction, that what was done in the Council could 
not be said to be approved by the Council. A much better 
argument is urged by Bossuet when it suited his purpose, 
in another part of the same book, where, even on the sup- 
position that the Council of Constance was not a general 
Council, he yet very properly contends, that if it publish- 
ed an unanimous decree, which ivas in no respect censur- 
32* 



378 CISALPINE AKGUMENT [CHAPTER 34. 

ed by theChurch, no one should presume to assail it. 'For,' 
saith he, (306) e here is precisely the case where the max- 
im ought to be applied : Not to oppose error is to approve 
it : a maxim chiefly true, when questions of faith are con* 
cerned, and above all, when error comes forward under the 
name of a general Council. Silence on such an occasion 
becomes a real approbation, at least on the part of those, 
who, in quality of bishops, and of the pope, the chief of 
the Church, are by their rank obliged to speak.' Apply 
this passage, brethren, to the act of Innocent IV, done in 
the Council of Lyons, and it is surely conclusive upon the 
sense of your Church in reference to the point in question. 

But in the second place, your author grants, that Inno- 
cent, in this instance, confirmed what Gregory IX. had. 
done some years before ; that the opinion was then so dif- 
fused that 'none but the most enlightened sustained the 
ancient doctrine ;' and that the pope supposed, without 
hesitation, that he possessed the power of deposing princes. 
What better proof than this could be required, to exhibit 
the strength of the precedents which had been followed 'so 
long by your supreme ecclesiastical Judges ? The point 
was taken for granted, assumed without hesitation, as a 
principle which needed not to be considered formally by 
the CotinciL because no man was supposed to question its 
truth. 

The concluding remarks of your Cisalpine author,, where 
he asserts, that i if this were the decision of the Council it 

(306) Ib. p. 216. 'Carvoita pr6cisgment le cas oil doit avoir lieu 
eette maxime : c'estapprouverl'erreur que de nepas s'y opposer: max- 
ime principalement vraie, lorsqu'il s'agitdes questions de foi, et sui- 
tout lorsque 1'erreur se produit sous le nom d'un concile cecuraenique. 
Le silence dans une telle circonstance devient une veritable approba- 
tion, au moins de la part de ceuxqui, en qualit6 d'e've'q.ues, et de papa 
ohef de 1'eglise, sont par leur etat obliges de parler..' 



CHAPTER 34.] EXAMINED. 379 

would be heresy to maintain the contrary, and yet the 
French who opposed the doctrine had never been treated 
as heretics/ seems, to my mind, to be weakness itself. That 
immediately upon the Declaration of 1682 they had been 
denounced as heretics, by the Transalpine divines, is as- 
serted by Bossuet in the plainest terms. (307) ' They have 
gone so far,' saith he, l as to proscribe the Declaration, as 
favoring heretics, despoiling the Roman Pontiff of his pri- 
macy, overturning the apostolic chair ; absurd, detestable, 
perilous in faith, distilling the venom of the most frightful 
.schism, under a false covering of piety. But the most fu- 
rious of them all,' continues he, c is the archbishop of Va- 
lentia. He begins by saying that whoever does not admit 
the infallibility of the pope is a heretic,' That they 
had not also been treated as heretics that the popes have 
suffered the Cisalpine doctrine to be broached and defend- 
ed is indeed true ; but it may be accounted for by a sin> 
pie recurrence to the temper of the times. Surely, how- 
ever, brethren, it cannot be necessary for me to remind you, 
that the doctrine of your ecclesiastical law is one thing ; 
and the execution of it is another. 

I ask, therefore, that you will add these examples to the 
instances in English history which Mr. Butler deplores ; 
and I shall put it to your own good sense and candor to say, 
what would the supreme judge of all ecclesiastical ques- 
tions the pope himself be likely to pronounce, if the 
point were submitted to him, instead of the Cisalpine di- 

(307) Ib. 42. 'Us vont jusqu'a leproscrire comme favorisant les 
heretiques, depouillant le pontife Remain de sa primaute, renversani 
le si6ge apostolique ; absurde, detestable, perilieux dans la ioi r distil- 
lant le venin du schisme le plus affreux, au travers d'uno fausse 6coroe 
de piete. Mais le plus furieux de tous, c'est I*archev6que de Valence. 
*1 commence par dire que quiconque n'admct pas FinfaiBibilit da 
Pape est heretique.' 



380 THE AUTHORITA''3PIVE DECISION [CHAPTER 34. 

vines, and the five selected universities ? Granting, if you 
please, that the canon of the Council of Florence is your 
RULE OF FAITH, as Mr. Butler, your able advocate, states 
so expressly; you know, full well, brethren, that laws are al- 
ways best understoodjwhen they have received their construc- 
tion from judicial authority. And although it is admitted,that 
construction, however long established, may be changed, 
yet it is a settled maxim that it ought not to be changed, 
without the strongest and most weighty reasons. But what 
'reasons could be assigned for passing a new construc- 
tion on the canon of Florence ? Would it not be the duty 
of the pope to consider, that before this Council was hoi- 
den, the practice of his predecessors, with the sanction of 
several councils, had fixed the claim of the temporal supre- 
macy ; that the fathers of Florence were, therefore, per- 
fectly familiar with the doctrine ; and that there is nothing 
in the language of the canon intimating the design of dis- 
turbing its exercise ? For if they had intended to restrict 
sthis power, it is plain that they would have intimated it 
by negative words. Since the world began, laws intended 
to restrain existing evils, have been expressed in the lan- 
guage of prohibition. Instead of which, the Canon pro- 
fesses to establish nothing new, but gives the sanction of the 
Council to all that had been done, by saying, that Full 
power was delegated to the bishop of Rome in the person 
oj Peter, to feed, regulate, and govern the universal 
Church.' &c. Would not the pope be further likely to con- 
sider, that alter the passage of this Canon, there was a con- 
tinuance of the same claims and acts ol deposition as before, 
without any other obstacle than that which the resistance of 
the sovereigns themselves occasionally presented : that the 
clergy made no objection, save in France ; and that evea 



CHAPTER 84.] OF THE PAPAL TRIBUNAL. 331) 

there, when Innocent III, issued his bull against King John 
of England, deposing him, and at the same time charged 
Philip Augustus, king of France, to execute this sentence, 
and take possession of the vacant throne, the French King 
admitted, without scruple, the validity of the transfer, and 
prepared to avail himself of the papal prerogative accord- 
ingly ? I believe -history does not record any opposition 
of the Clergy of France on that occasion. With all these 
centuries of precedents^ with the claims of papal consistent 
cy at stake, with the whole edifice of ecclesiastical infalli- 
bility to be sustained or prostrated by his decision, could 
you expect the pope to sanction any other construction^ 
than that which his predecessors had established ? Surely 
not, my brethren. And therefore I am compelled to con*- 
elude, that the oath to render true obedience, to your su- 
preme pontiff, takes high precedence of every human ob- 
ligation, as your system now stands ; and that there is, as 
yet, no sufficient warrant for any other definition of papal 
power, than that which has been inscribed upon the history 
of nations, in characters of blood. 



CHAPTER XXXV. 



BKETHREN IN CHBIST, 

I shall devote a short chapter to the consideration of the 
change which has taken place in the mode of electing the 
pope, and to such particulars of the ceremonies established 
at his installation, as may assist in fixing the construction of 
his powers, according to the best information I can obtain 
of your present system. 

That the bishop of Rome, as well as all other bishops, 
was elected in primitive times, by the clergy of his own 
city and diocese, with the concurring suffrages of the peo 
pie, is a fact so manifest throughout the writings of the fathr 
exs, that it cannot be, and never has been, questioned by 
any. The extract on p. 117 from the letter of Cyprian 
to Cornelius, bishop of Rome, would of itself be conclusive 
on the point, and you are doubtless familiar, besides, with 
the learned treatise oi your own P. Sirmondi, S. I. inserted 
in the 5th Vol. of Hardouin's Councils (p. 1426.) where ths 
subject is treated at large, and formularies are given for the 
holding of these ancient elections. ( 308) 

(308) ' Vetus olim totius ecclesise mos fuit, episcopos cleri et plebis 
cui prsefuturi erant, suffrages creari. Sic enim, ut altius non repetam, 
Cornelium Romas clericorum suffragio episcopum factum, Cyprianus 
epist. 41 et 52, &c. In occidentalibus ecclesiis jus idem suffragii pop- 
ulo in renunciandis episcopia fitiaro post Synodam Nicaenam perseve* 



CHAPTER 35.] MODE OP ELECTING THE POPE. 383 

It appears, however, that after the establishment of Chris- 
tianity in the Roman empire, the sovereigns exercised the 
right of confirming the election of the pope ; from which 
the transition was not difficult to their endeavoring to select 
the persons to be chosen. After much contest and bicker- 
ing upon the subject, which it is beside our design to detail, 
it was left to the cardinals, in the 1 1th century, to elect 
the popes, without any interference on the part of emperor, 
senate, or people; and such has been the course pursued 
from that period to the present day. (309) 

The mode usually followed, and styled election by scru>~ 
tiny, is certainly the most extraordinary known in the his- 
tory of man. The Cardinals, shut up in what is called the 
Conclave -not allowed to hold converse with any one 
whatever their food examined by persons appointed for 
the purpose, lest any secret billet might be enclosed every 
door of access guarded with the utmost vigilance, and all 
this adopted as an established system, for the purpose of se- 
curing a result which is to be attributed to the divine direc- 
tion, presents, brethren, as you will readily allow, a most 
striking contrast to the simplicity and transparency of the 
primitive ages. 

The ceremonies which take place after the election, are 
too numerous for insertion ; and I shall only mention a few 
of those which bear, most directly, upon the official char- 
acter which the pope is supposed to sustain. 

rasse, turn Romanorum Pontificum Siricii, Caelestini, Leonis, decreta, 
quffi cleri plebisque consensu eligendos statuunt; turn Damasi, Am- 
brosii, Augustini, Fulgentii et aliorum, quos eo modo creates constat, 
innumera passim exempla declarant.' 

(309) See, Ceremonies et Coutumes Religienses par B. Picard,Tom. 
1- p. 42. note c. The tone of this writer is so far from what it ought 
to be, that I should not cite him for any fact likely to be called in 
question. 



384 CEREMONIES ON T^HE [CHAfrTEB 35. 

Thus, it appears that he is adored three times ; first, in 
the chapel where the election is held, ' the Dean of the 
Cardinals, and after him, the other Cardinals, adore his ho* 
liness on their knees, kiss his foot, and then his right hand, 5 
&c. Again the 'pope is placed on the altar in the Chapel 
of Sixtus, where the Cardinals come and adore the second 
time,' in the same manner.;] And again, 'the pope is carried 
in his pontifical chair, under a grand canopy of red fringed 
with gold, to the Church of St. Peter, where he is placed 
upon the grand altar, and the Cardinals adore him for the 
third time, and after them, the ambassadors of princes,' 
&c. (310) 

At his coronation, he is seated on his throne, and an an- 
them is sung, the words of which are the prophecy of the 
psalmist, relative to Christ : ' Thou slialt set a crown of 
pure gold upon his head,' fyc> . . . ' The second cardinal 
deacon takes the mitre from him, and the first puts the tiara 
on his head, saying : Receive this tiara ivhich is adorned 
with three crowns, and forget not, in wearing it, that you 
are the father of princes and of kings, the ruler of the, 
world, and on earth, the Vicar of Jesus Christ our Sav* 

(310) Ib. p. 50. ' Le pape est porte dans sa chaire clevant 1'autel 
de la chapelle oil s'est faite 1'election, et c'est lei que le cardinal doien, 
et ensuite les autres cardinaux adorent a genoux sa saintete, lui bai- 

sent le pied, puis la main droite :'&c Le mcme jour deux heu- 

res avant la nuit, le pape revetu de la chappe et convert de sa mitre 
est porfr^sur 1'autel de la Chapel de Sixte, oil les cardinaux avec leurs 
chappes violettes viennent adorer une seeonde fois le nouveau pontife 
qui est assis sur les reliques de la pierre sacree. Cotte adoration se fait 

comme la premiere,' &c 'les cardinaux precedes de la musique 

descendant au milieu del'eglise de St. Pierre. Le pape vient ensuite 
porte dans son siege pontifical sous un grand dais rouge embelli de 
franges d'or. Les estafiers le mettent sur le grand autel de St. Pierre, 
oil les cardinaux 1'adorent pour la troisi6me fpis, et apres eux les am- 
bassadeurs des princes,' &c. 



CHAPTER 35.] INSTALLATION OF THE POPE. 385 

iour.' (311) It may be observed, by the way, that 'pope 
Urban V. is said to have been the first who wore the three 
crowns. Before him, only one crown was placed on the 
head of the Roman pontiff. And the first coronation spo- 
ken of in the history of the popes, is that of Damasus II. in 
1048.' (312) The tiara is described as being a 'conical 
cap, adorned with three crowns blazing with precious stones, 
of inestimable value. The one worn by pope Clement 
VIII. was supposed to be worth five hundred thousand pie- 
ces of gold.' (313) The magnificence of all the other ap- 
pendages of the pontiff may be imagined from this specimen, 
without wearying your attention by details, with which you 
are doubtless far more intimately acquainted than I. 

Now, I will not insult your understandings, brethren, by 
asking, whether you think that these matters and such as 
these, belonged to the early Church of Rome. Neither 
shall I discuss the question whether the primitive mode of 
election could lawfully have been laid aside, without a far 
higher sanction than is pretended : the more especially as 
the plan now followed is directly opposed to a canon of the 

(311) Ib. p. 55. ' Desque le pape s'est assis (sur le throne) le chceur 
chante 1'antienne Corona aurca super caput, &c. avec les reports. , . . 
Le second cardinal diacre ote la mitre au pontife, et le premier lui 
met le triregne sur la tete en lui disant, Accipe Tiaram tribus coronis 
ornatam et seias te esse patrem principum et regum, rectorem orbis, 
in terra vicarium Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi,' &c. 

(312) Ib. 52 note. { Le pape Urbain V. fat le premier qui portales 
trois couronnes. Avant lui on n'en meltoit qu'une sur la tete des 
pontifes. Le premier couronnement dont il est parle' dans 1'histoire 
des papes, c'est celiu de Damase second, en 1048.' 

(313) Ib. 55. note f. ' Ce bonnet conique orn& de trois couronnes 
toutes brillantes de pierreries est d'un prix inestimable. Celui que le 
pape Paul II. consacra, quoique charge de joiaux, ne valoit pas le 

Tmegne de Clement VIII. que Ton estimoit, dit on, cinq cent mille 
pieces d'or.' 

33 



386 CHANGE OF THE PRIMITIVE SYSTEM. [CHAPTEB 35, 

Council of Nice. (314) But it is enough for my undertaking 
to exhibit these changes, in order to shew, how well they 
harmonize with the system of your Canon law, Jiow con- 
sistent they are with the Transalpine construction of the 
Council of Florence, and how unlikely it is, that the wear- 
er of the dazzling tiara, who is exhorted, in the very act of 
his coronation, to remember his prerogative, as father of 
Icings and princes* and ruler of the world, will ever assist 
his Cisalpine adherents to reduce his power within the mod- 
erate circle of Christian antiquity. - 

(314) Hard. Con. Tom. 5. p. 1426. Dissertatio Sirmondi, 
The canon in question directs the ordination of bishops by all the 
bishops of the province, unless incases of necessity, when three were 
allowed to ordain, after the absent bishops had consented by letter. 
But the whole order of antiquity seems to be done away. The pops 
is commonly chosen from among the cardinals who are bishops al- 
ready, although only titular bishops, consecrated by the pope, for 
some far distant country, without the least intention of ever beholding 
their nominal dioceses. And neither in his election, nor in his ordi- 
nation, any more than in his assumed powers, do we find any confer- 
mity to the primitive system. 



CHAPTER XXXVI. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 



Permit me now to express the hope, that after ages of 
error and darkness, so fully acknowledged by your own 
most learned and candid men, the time is not far distant 
when the true light of primitive Christianity shall be restored 
to the Churches ; when the extravagant claims of the pa- 
pal system shall be universally abandoned ; when the defi- 
nition of the Catholic Church shall be restored to its origi- 
nal simplicity; when it shall again be understood that 
Christ himself is amongst his people, and therefore needs 
no vicar ; that he is the Head who has mercifully declared; 
( Lo I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world ,' 
and therefore alone possesses the place of the true God 
upon the earth ; and that his servants who hold the office 
of bishops in the Church, are, in the language of Jerome, 
equal,, whether they be of Rome or of Eugubium; being 
all, alike, successors of the apostles, discharging the same 
ministry, and invested with the same powers. 

You believe in the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH the Church 
of primitive Christianity and so do we. You claim the 
right of membership in that Church, and so do we. You 
profess the faith held by the primitive Church, taught by 
the early fathers, sanctioned by the first four general Coun- 
cils, and so do we. And if the Church of Rome had been 



388 FIRST PRACTICAL ERROR [CHAPTER 36. 

satisfied with that faith if she had abstained from those in- 
novations which your own Cisalpine divines in part deplore, 
~ I doubt whether any other aspect would now be present- 
ed by the Universal Church, than the aspect of unity and 
peace. 

With respect to the modern Church of Rome, we are 
PROTESTANTS, because we have been compelled to protest 
against these innovations. But with respect to the primi- 
tive Church, we profess ourselves CATHOLICS, because we 
symbolize with that Church in all the important points of 
faith and polity. May the period soon arrive, when the 
work begun by your own reformers shall be carried to its 
true extent, and the principles of the same primitive creed 
shall suffice to entitle all Christians to the privileges of the 
same primitive communion ! 

Meanwhile, before I lay aside ray pen, let me beg you to 
consider a few questions of practical importance. 

And in the first place I would ask, why do you insist that 
Christians who hold the same ancient creed, are not equal- 
ly belonging to the Catholic Church, because they are al- 
ienated from each other on minor points of polity or doc- 
trine ? Does a body cease to be united to its head, because 
one member becomes torpid, and another deformed, and a 
third spasmodic? Does a fold cease to be one, because the 
rams of the flock are accustomed to contend,instead of feed- 
ing side by side in peace ? Does a family cease to be one, 
because the nearest relations have quarrelled? Does a 
crew cease to be one, because they refuse to eat together? 
Does a nation cease to be one, because factions and party- 
spirit divide the people? Take your analogy, brethren, from 
what you please, and you will find it equally opposed to 
your exclusive doctrine. The Catholic Church is the body 
of Christ, one in him, even when unable^ by reason of 



CHAPTER 36.] IN THE DOCTRINE OF UNITY. 389 

ecclesiastical disease, to commune in its members. The 
Catholic Church is the flock of the great Shepherd, one 
in him, even when divided amongst each other. It is 
Christ's holy nation and peculiar people, even while, in it- 
self, there may be many sources of contention and strife. 
When ancient Israel fell into dissensions, did they cease to 
be regarded as the people of God ? When Paul and Bar- 
nabas separated, the one from the other, did either of them 
lose his title to salvation? When Victor, the bishop of Rome, 
excommunicated the Churches of Asia in the time of Ire- 
nseus, or when Stephen subsequently excommunicated Cyp- 
rian, did they cease to belong to the Catholic Church ? 
Hence, brethren, the plain unreasonableness of your favorite 
notion,, that union in the faith of Christ does not make us 
Catholics, unless there be also communion with his supposed 
Vicar, and with each other. These divisions these strifes 
these controversies, and the hateful feelings of bigotry so 
apt to characterise them, are all deplorable. I grant it, 
brethren: I write the acknowledgment with a heavy heart. 
But still the Church may be one Catholic Church with re- 
spect to Christ the only Head of the body while it is 
manifold in reference to its members. Our union with each 
other is one of the results, which ough t, indeed, to fol- 
low from our union- with Christ our Head, just as the per- 
fect health of the bodily system ought to be the result of 
the vital action. But God forbid that this divine order should 
be inverted. To make our union with Christ dependent 
upon our union with each other, would be like making our 
life dependent upon the perfect health of the bodily organs. 
Woe be to us y . if every pain and sickness of our mortal frame 
were death ! Woe be to us, if every disease amongst the 
naerabers of the spiritual body were destruction! 
32*- 



390 SECOND ERROR IN THE CREED* [CHAtTES 6 9 

But secondly, why do you aver ..that the creed of the prim- 
itive Church Catholic warrants you in placing the suprema- 
cy of the pope amongst the articles of faith ? It is most 
true that the ancient fathers; times without number, insist 
on the necessity of union in the faith of the Catholic 
Church. But your favorite doctrine, which is the essential 
characteristic of the present Church of 'Rome, whereby 
obedience to the pope is made an article of faith itself NE- 
CESSARY fo SALVATION was unknown to the primitive 
Church. It Came in along with the doctrine of papal su* 
premacy : it grew with its growth, and strengthened with 
its strength, until the headship of Christ and the headship 
of the pope became convertible terms; and the bishop of 
Rome, instead of being, as at first, simply the most influ" 
ential amongst equals, became the father of kings and prin- 
ces, and the ruler of the world : and the very creed ' out 
of which no man could be savedj presented to every hu- 
man being AN OATH OF TRUE OBEDIENCE TO THE POPE, 
as one of the immutable and indispensable principles of the 
Gospel. The lamp of truth has indeed been successfully 
carried through this enormous fabric of error. Your own 
Cisalpine divines have examined its secret chambers, unroll- 
ed its archives, traced the authority for its canons, detected 
its frauds, and honestly and boldly, in the face of Rome 
herself, have proclaimed their conviction, that the primitive 
system had been overwhelmed that innovation had over- 
run the Church '-that for centuries together, ignorance and 
usurpation, superstition and imposture, had combined to 
erect a structure of power, such as the world had never 
beheld, and the Redeemer of the world had never author- 
ized. All this is now confessed, by every enlightened and 
candid mind amongst yourselves. And why, then, do you 
not discard from your creed a clause which you are now so 



CHAPTER 86*] tfHIRfi ERROR IN THE CREEB. 891 

well aware that usurpation placed there ? Why destroy 
the claims which alone could justify the insertion of such an 
article, and yet insist upon the article itself, as essential to 
salvation ? Why not complete the noble work you have , 
begun, and resolutely reform according to the primitive plat- 
form, until nothing remains which cannot be truly defended 
by Scripture, and by the fathers and Councils of the early 
ages ? 

Thirdly, Why do you, in the same creed of pope Pius 
IV. retain the clause by which the professor of your faith 
most firmly admits and embraces apostolical [and ecclesias- 
tical traditions, and all other constitutions and observances 
of the holy Catholic and apostolic Church, when there are 
so many changes, variations, and innovations, brought map- 
on the primitive system? For where is the kiss of charity, 
the communion of the cup, the -allowance of marriage to ths 
clergy, the washing of feet, the standing at prayer on fes* 
tivals, the open response of the people, the reading of the 
Scriptures and the liturgies in the vulgar tongue which the 
whole congregation could understand, the election of bishops, 
the holding provincial councils twice in every year, and the 
severe but wholesome discipline of the primitive system ? 
All these are gone from amongst you. Many of them are 
plainly apostolical traditions, by the testimony of the Scrip- 
tures and the fathers. All of them are ecclesiastical tradi- 
tions, and constitutions or observances of the holy Catholic 
and apostolic Church. Why are men compelled lo protest, 
solemnly before God, in that very creed out of which you 
tell them they cannot be saved, that they firmly admit and 
embrace things, about which not one in a thousand know 
anything, and which those who are informed, know to have 
been long since done away ? Brethren, I beseech you to 
ask your own good understandings and upright hearts, how 



392 FOURTH ERROR IN THE CREED. [CHAPTER 36; 

* 

such a declaration can be justified by the laws of honesty 
and truth. 

I would ask, in the fourth place, Why do you retain 
another clause of the same creed, in which the pro- 
fessor of your faith is bound to say : 1 also admit the Sacred 
Scriptures according to the sense which the holy mother 
Church has held, and does hold, nor will I ever lake or in* 
terpret them otherwise than according to the, unanimous 
consent of the fathers, 1 when it is so manifest that the fa- 
thers do almost unanimously interpret. your favorite texts in 
plain opposition to your present system ? The extracts I 
have submitted to you in my humble performance, are of 
themselves more than sufficient to establish the fact. They 
are taken at large and most punctiliously from your own 
editions, and the evidence they furnish is not to be evaded. 
Is there not here, then, brethren, another palpable case of 
solemn misrepresentation, calling loudly for the hand of re- 
form? 

Fifthly, Why do you profess another clause of the same 
creed, in which the believer in your faith is made to say : 
' I also profess and undoubtedly receive all other things de- 
livered, defined and declared by the sacred canons and gen- 
eral Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent/ 
when you know so well that a volume might be filled with 
those passages from the canons and Councils which retain 
no place in your present system ? And especially, why do 
you continue the clause that follows, in which the believer 
is bound to declare, that he c condemns, rejects, and anathe- 
matizes all things contrary thereto, and all heresies whatso- 
ever condemned and anathematized by the Church,' when 
you ought to be so thoroughly aware, that in making this 
asseveration, he may he truly said to reject his. own : belief, 
and anathematize his own doctrine ? 

Not only, however, would I here protest against the con- 



CHAPTER 36.J FIFTH ERROR IN THE CREED. 393 

tradictions so manifest on the face of this your favorite creed, 
but against the unchristian principle of pronouncing anono- 
thema A SOLEMN CURSE upon all heresies whatsoever. 
True, indeed, it is, that the prirnitiveChurch, at a very early 
day, adopted in her Councils this deplorable custom of cur- 
sing; but at least she confined it to errors in the fundamental 
articles of the faith. The climax, however, of this awful 
habit, appeared in the Council of Trent, who applied it to ev- 
ery article in their whole body of divinity, and were nowhere 
content with cursing the error, but invariably denounced their 
curse upon the man that held it. Strange and melancholy 
fact, that the canons of this Council contain not less than 
one hundred and twenty four distinct anathemas ; a large 
proportion of which are directed against opinions which 
might be holden in perfect consistency with the great doc- 
trines of Christianity! Nay, even in the acclamations with 
which the fathers closed their concluding session, their par- 
tiality for this word appears again ; for I find the last recor- 
ded sentence of the presiding legate was : ' Anathema to 
all heretics,' and the Council returned the unanimous re- 
sponse : ANATHEMA, ANATHEMA ! (315) O brethren, if 
some good angel had presented before them at that moment 
the apostolic precept, ( Bless ; and CURSE NOT,' would they 
not have felt reproved ? 

I confess that to my poor imagination, there is no specta- 
cle more perfectly revolting, none more absolutely opposed 
to my notions of the ministry of reconciliation, than is pre- 
sented by the picture of these two hundred and sixty five 
dignitaries of your Church, recording this multitude of for- 
nial deliberate curses against millions of their fellow crea- 

(315) Hard. Con. Tom. x. p. 193. 
' Card. Anathema cunctis hsereticis. 
'Resp. Anathema, Anathema. 



394 GREAT ABUSE IN THE [CHAPTER 36. 

tures, who worshipped the same Triune God, believed in 
the same divine and incarnate Saviour, received the same 
Gospel, and professed the same primitive creed, with them* 
selves. The malediction of the Almighty is a tremendous 
exercise of his divine prerogative, not to be invoked in any 
other manner than that which his own express word enjoins 
upon us, as a fearful warning to the wicked. To add to the 
list of curses which he has decreed to devise new modes 
or subjects or occasions for the purpose, and, especially, to 
scatter them abroad with such a liberal hand, is an occupa- 
tion not easily reconciled with the religion of love, nor with 
the chanty that hopeth all things. Nor is it one of the 
least striking proofs of the deadly influence of religious big- 
otry, that the Council of Trent alone should have pronoun- 
ced more anathemas than the whole Bible contains ; although 
none but God has the right to dictate a curse, as none but 
he has the power to inflict it. 

So strangely, however, has this assumption of the divine 
judgment become familiarised amongst your doctors, that it 
is even adopted as a part of your modern description of the 
Church. Thus, in the very able tractate ' De Ecclesia,' by 
L. E. Delahogue, with which you are doubtless well ac- 
quainted, he saith, (316) 'The Church of Christ, as appears 
from many passages of the New Testament, is a Church 
TEACHING, Teach all nations ; (Math, xxvin) JUDGING; 
Tdl the Church ; and ANATHEMATIZING : Whoever shall 
not hear you, let him 5e to you as a heathen and a publican.' 
(Matt, xvi.) Alas! brethren, for such a commentary. 
Did our Lord then pronounce curses upon the heathen and 

(316) Tract, de Ecclesia, p. 15. ' Ecclesia Christi, utpatet ex mul* 
tis Novi Testament! locis, est ecclesia DOCENS, Docete omnes gentes, 
Math, xxviii. JUDICANS, Die Ecclesia, et ANATHEMATIZANS : Qui nffn 
audierit, sit tibi sicut ethnicus etpullicanus, Math, xvi.' 



CHAPTER 36.] DOCTRINE OP ANATHEMA. 395 

the publican ? Or did he mean that his followers should pro- 
mulgate the Gospel of peace, by cursing all that opposed 
them ? 

But the time for these ecclesiastical fulminations has pas- 
sed, I trust forever. I have no disposition to doubt, that if 
a similar Council should assemble at the present clay, the 
artillery of the curse would find no place amongst the wea- 
pons of their warfare. Nor am I willing to believe that you 
feel any sympathy with these denunciations. 

True, unhappily, it is, that your creed compels you, with 
all the power of assumed infallibility, to maintain this cruel 
form. True it is, that throughout the British dominions, 
you are bound to curse, as a heretic, the monarch whom 
you obey as a Icing ; and are pledged, in the oath of 1791, 
to support that very protestant succession, upon which your 
faith forces you to invoke an unchangeable malediction. 
True it is, that even in the United States, the same melan- 
choly necessity pursues you. Your rulers throughout the 
length and breadth of the land, are almost all heretics in 
your esteem : and while you pray for them, as rulers, you 
are obliged to curse them with the authority of a Church, 
which calls herself immutable ; and which 'confidently as- 
serts, that her sentence upon earth is ratified in heaven. 
All this, brethren, it must be confessed, is hard to tolerate, 
when it is fairly understood. And yet, I would fain hope, 
that the greater number of your body are right in practice, 
however wrong in theory. I take pleasure in the supposi- 
tion, that just as liberal minded protestants, in general, close 
their eyes to this painful deformity in your creed, and forget 
its very existence ; even so, a large majority amongst your- 
selves repeat the form assigned to you, without any definite 
conception of its meaning ; that even when your tongues 
are uttering these damnatory phrases, a benevolent fraud is 



396 SIXTH ERROR, IN THE [CHAPTER 36. 

unconsciously perpetrated within you; that you pronounce 
a curse with your lips, while your hearts are ready to con- 
vert it into a blessing, 

In the last place., however, I would ask, why do you 
cling to the phantom of infallibility, now that so much has 
been done among yourselves, to clear away the mists and 
darkness of the middle ages ; and to open up the path of 
primitive truth once more ? Why endeavor to maintain, on 
the one hand, that the faith of the Church was always the 
same, while your own Cisalpine divines allow, on the other, 
that for many successive centuries, popes, bishops, Coun- 
cils, kings, nations, all except a few of the most enlightened, 
as Bossuet terms them, were involved in the same gross 
error with respect to the fundamental doctrine of papal su- 
premacy? You say well, that our Saviour promised perpetuity 
to his Church, and that the gates oi hell should not prevail 
against it. But he has nowhere said, that errors in doctrine 
should never be permitted to mingle with his truth. He 
has nowhere promised infallible guidance to a general Coun- 
cil. The logic, specious and plausible as it is, by which 
you demonstrate the necessity of such an infallible directo- 
ry, proves too much for your own admissions. For since 
you allow that the whole Church was so carried away for 
more than four hundred years, by the gross absurdities of 
doctrine and practice, in reference to papal power; I ask you, 
where was her infallibility, and what was it worth, during 
all that time ? Nor is this the most extraordinary part of 
the difficulty ; for at this moment you have three different 
doctrines upon the same subject of papal power, and the 
infallibility of your Church does not enable you to agree 
upon any of them. Here, then, you present to us the 
marvellous spectacle of an infallible Church, not only adopt- 
ing an erroneous doctrine of papal supremacy ever since the 



CHAPTER 36.] DOCTRINE OP INFALLIBILITY. 397 

time of Gregory VII, but incapable of harmoniously inter- 
preting her own system to this day ! Surely, brethren, this 
simple statement of unquestionable facts, is enough to de- 
monstrate the futility of the claim, and it must be high time 
to abandon it. 

And yet there is a sense, in which the doctrine of in- 
fallibility is unquestionably true. I grant it, as I would 
grant the infallibility of St. Peter. The Saviour prayed 
for him, that his faith should not fail. Therefore, that 
faith was certainly infallible. But although the apostle's 
faith was not allowed to FAIL, it was assuredly allowed TO 
FALL, so that he denied his master I He repented he was 
converted and by the experience of that fall, he strength- 
ened his brethren ; and yet we find again, that he was 
blameable in the matter of the Jewish ceremonial law, and 
needed that St. Paul should 'withstand him to the face.' 
Even so, the faith of the Church might be allowed to fall 
into error, and yet it could not be said to fail, so long as it 
has grace to rise again. Nevertheless, as it would be poor 
policy to pursuade a fallen man that he was still standing, 
because it is manifest that if he believed you, he would not 
attempt to rise, so it must be a miserable mode of restoring 
your Church to her primitive truth, to assume, that because 
she was infallible, she never could have erred. With this 
argument to support them, the Transalpine divines are im- 
moveable. That the pope, for centuries, claimed, by di- 
vine right, the exercise of supreme power, and successfully 
practised on the doctrine, is unquestionable. That the 
Church believed the doctrine, is equally certain. That 
it became engrafted on the faith of the Church, and 
was,to all intents and purposes, an article of her creed, 
cannot be denied without mere trifling; for surely that 
which is taught as a necessary inference from" the word of 
34 



398 TRUE MEANING OP INFALLIBILITY. [CHAPTER. 36. 

God, as an essential in the constitution of the Church, as re- 
quisite to the good government of nations, as an undoubted 
prerogative of divine right, to be allowed by all men, from 
the king to the beggar and which is believed as it is taught, 
and humbly submitted to, as it is believed, and all this for 
centuries together surely it is nothing better than trifling 
to say, that this is not a part of the faith. And if the Church 
was all this time infallible, so that it was impossible for her 
to err in faith, then this divine right of temporal and abso- 
lute supremacy must still be your doctrine, and must con- 
tinue to be so, to the end of the world. 

Hence, as it seems to my mind, the enlightened and lib- 
eral men amongst you, brethren, only encumber themselves 
and impede their own laudable efforts, by attempting to 
make REFORM consist with INFALLIBILITY . In the sense which 
you attach to it, infallibility admits of no reform, because it 
is incapable of error. But in its just extent of meaning, in- 
fallibility is that blessed principle of spiritual life, by which 
the Redeemer preserves the great doctrines of his Gospel, 
even in the midst of surrounding errors, until the appointed 
time, when his kingdom shall be established in righteousness, 
and truth shall obtain a glorious and eternal victory. 



CONCLUSION. 



BRETHREN IN CHRIST, 

It was stated in the opening sentence of my third chapter, 
that the change of your primitive system, to which I had 
especially devoted this volume, was in the definition of the 
holy Catholic Church ; including, of course, your doctrine of 
the papacy, and of the Councils. Lest it might be inferred 
from this, that I had no other ground of controversy with 
your claims, I beg leave to say that I have endeavored to 
satisfy my mind in the same manner on all the other points 
involved in the principles of the reformation ; and intend, if 
life and health continue, to present you with a similar ex- 
amination of the fathers on these topics, at some future day. 
It only remains that I conclude my present work, by point- 
ing, with all respect and kindness, to the path, in which, ac- 
cording to my humble judgment, duty and advantage would 
unite to attend you. 

You are doubtless aware, that soon after the famous de- 
claration of the French Clergy, a plan to re-unite the re- 
formed Churches with the Galilean Church of Rome was 
in agitation; that it proceeded with great privacy, and with 
fair prospects of success, and after an interval of some time, 
was again renewed, but was finally abandoned. That there 
was, indeed, reason to hope for a favorable conclusion of 
these efforts will be sufficiently credible, when it is recol- 
lected that such men as Bossuet, Du Pin, and the Cardinal 



400 CONCLUSION. 

de Noailles, upon the one side, and Molanus, Leibnitz, 
and Archbishop Wake upon the other, thought it practic- 
able. - ' 

It does not appear, however, that the minds of men were 
then favorably disposed to such a measure, in Great Britain. 
The maxims of intolerance were strongly established, na- 
tional antipathies ran high, and the obstacles to the proper 
influence of enlightened counsels, were insurmountable. 

Since that day, a great change has taken place in all the 
bearings of this mighty question. Revolutionary France 
cast out the Roman Catholic religion : Napoleon .restored 
it, but its credit and its influence have never regained their 
former level. The wealth and power of Rome are on the 
w ane ; and although the Transalpine doctrines have never 
been formally disavowed, and are, therefore, to this day, 
the doctrines of your Church, yet they cannot, by any possi- 
bility, be enforced, and are more and more regarded as a 
dead letter. On the other hand, the claims of the Roman 
Catholics have risen in Great Britain to an unexpected 
height of estimation, and the weight of numbers and the 
skill of organized system, have been so successfully applied, 
as to threaten the established Church, and assail, in words 
at least, the upper house of parliament. Nor are the trou- 
bled waters yet at rest, but still heave and swell with por- 
tentous agitation. 

In our own country, some wild and reckless spirits, have 
attacked your principles and institutions, with great bitter- 
ness and animosity ; but the reception they have experien- 
ced seems to have borne testimony to the friendly feelings 
of the community at large ; and in the neighbouring pro- 
vince of Lower Canada, especially, a prompt and emphatic 
declaration of esteem on the part of those who belonged to 
other Churches, has indicated a sensitiveness to your right* 



CONCLUSION. 401 

and a regard to your character, alike honorable to you and 
to themselves. 

Observations might be added from the state of religious 5 
parties in Germany and Switzerland, from the increasing 
power of liberal sentiment in Spain, Portugal, and even Italy 
itself, which would further tend to shew, that there has- 
been a wonderful diminution of the spirit of bigotry and in- 
tolerance on all sides, a relaxation of that high tension which 
previously kept every portion of Christendom in a bellige- 
rent attitude towards the rest, and a growing kindliness 
which seems in some measure to have prepared the vast 
host of Christ for a return to the unity of the Catholic Church, 
on the pure, simple, and equal principles of the primitive 
system. 

Brethren, I am no prophet, neither the son of a prophet ; 
and I may be deceived in discerning the signs of the times, 
by my sincere love of unity, by my strong dislike to dissen- 
sions oi all kinds amongst the followers of the cross, and by 
my fervent desire to promote, by any lawful method in my 
power, the solid peace of the spiritual Israel. But whether 
I am deceived or not, I have thought that 1 saw an approx-* 
imation towards unity, if it be nothing more; and I feel not 
a little disposed to the opinion, that a manifestation of pri- 
mitive zeal amongst yourselves, with a judicious employ- 
ment of encouraging effort on the part of those governments 
which have an established religion to maintain, would soon y 
under God, produce a settlement of all serious difficulty. 

In perusing the writings of the fathers, no one can fail to 
be impressed with the solicitude which the Christian empe- 
rors displayed, for the peaceful adjustment of every religious 
controversy. Thus the great majority of the early Coun- 
cils WERE ORDERED BY THE GOVERNMENT. The SOV6- 

took part in them with the liveliest ardor, and em- 

3-1* 



402 CONCLUSION. 

ployed all the influence of their rank and power to 
the Church to unity. 

Was this not laudable ? Surely it was. True, indeed,, 
there was full often, much intolerance, much persecution, 
much error, attendant upon the effort to maintain religious 
conformity. I praise not these. But apart from this alloy y l do 
not see why religious unity should not be as much the cars 
of government as political unity. Conscience should never 
be forced in either case. But without iorcing conscience,, 
or putting any shackles on the reasonable exercise ot hu- 
man liberty, every government which is so constituted as to 
touch the subject of religion at all, may do much to discour- 
age the spirit of dissension, and to cherish the cultivation of 
concord and peace. 

The efforts necessary for such a purpose rest chiefly with 
yourselves ; and permit me to say, brethren, that it con- 
cerns you, above all, to make them. For, disguise it as we 
may, it is not possible, consistently with your avowed doo- 
trine, that your Church can be content with anything short 
of her former dominion, until the changes bi ought in upon 
her original polity are abandoned, and the primitive system 
is restored. As your claims now stand, it is a mistake to 
suppose that you can be satisfied with equal rights and priv- 
ileges. You may think so in a country like the United 
States, so long as nothing better is attainable. You may 
think so in a country like Great Britain, where you have 
been deprived of those equal rights for centuries. Galled 
by the yoke of protestant ascendancy, you may imagine, 
and be very" sincere in proclaiming, that you desire nothing 
more than to stand upoa the common level of jouy breth- 
ren. But remember, I beseech you, that your Church as- 
sumes to herself, BY DIVINE RIGHT, what no other Church 
assumes, the authority of mother and mistress over all 



CONCLUSION. 403 

Churches. Remember that you exact an oath of true obe- 
dience to the bishop of Rome from every soul, at the peril 
of his salvation. Remember that this oath is a part of the 
creed of pope Pius IV. out of which you hold that no one 
can be saved, and that in the same creed, you sanction the 
anathemas of all the Councils, especially the one hundred 
and twenty tour curses of the Council of Trent ; besides 
pronouncing a distinct curse on all heresies whatever. Your 
present system, therefore,oBLiGES you to be dissatisfied with 
any position which falls below these claims, you are BOUND. 
in conscience, to contend for power, until your Church is 
what you think she ought to be, the acknowledged mistress 
of the world. You are bound in conscience, to be discon- 
tented until your rulers conform to your faith ; for it is ab- 
surd to suppose that you are pleased with the duty of curs- 
ing, as heretics, those governors and magistrates- whom you 
are pledged to honor and obey. And hence you stand in 
the perfectly peculiar position, of being compelled, by the 
very terms of your professed belief, to intrigue, to agitate, 
to proselyte, to strive, and to persevere, until you have re- 
gained every inch of your ancient territory. Within that 
mark, all that you recover must be used as an instrument 
for obtaining more. I do not see how you can consistently 
or honestly stop short of it ; for while you maintain that 
the pope has been placed in the throne of universal supre- 
macy, by the voice of God, and while an oath of true obe- 
dience to him stands on the very face of the creed, by which 
you hope to enter the kingdom of heaven, the restoration 
of his rights and the maintenance of his dignity as the Vi- 
car of Christ, must surely constitute, in your esteem, the 
paramount principle of earthly obligation. 

Why not examine, then, over and over again, the grounds 
of a system, which is in such manifest conflict with the evi- 



404 CONCLUSION. 

dence of primitive antiquity, and with the duties which 
devolve on you, in all protestant countries, as citizens and 
men ? 

Why not recommence, under happier auspices, the at- 
tempt of Bossuet and Molanus in France, and a similar at- 
tempt in every other country where the importance of the 
subject can be appreciated ? Why, especially, in England, 
instead of carrying on a system of aggression and defence 
for mere political rights and Church- property, which imbit- 
ters strife,, and sharpens animosity,- why not select the 
wisest, the most learned, and the most moderate men, of all 
parties in religion, and engage every legitimate and honest 
influence of government to bring them to a kindly agree- 
ment ? 

Why not occupy the attention of the congress of sover- 
eigns, which, of late years,, has so often assembled to con- 
sider the political welfare of Europe, with the far more sub- 
lime and important topic of the unity of Christendom? 
Why not, on the free soil of the United States, propose to 
meet the various.denominations, for the sake of friendly and- 
affectionate discussion, instead of casting down the gauntlet 
of proud defiance, and challenging each other to the public 
war of words? Why not, in fine, brethren, since the 
Church of Rome, by your own acknowledgment, has inno- 
vated so largely on the primitive system, why not frankly 
.cast aside the figments of immutability and infallibility, and 
with the Scriptures of truth and the lights of antiquity for 
your guides, retrace your course to the apostolic fountain? 
Why not abjure your anathemas, ' bless and curse not,' and 
bend all your energy and influence to the promotion of an- 
cient Catholic unity, in the spirit of charity and peace? 

But perhaps the bare suggestion of such a practical result; 
may call down upon me the appellations of BREAMER EN- 



CONCLUSION. '405 

THOUSIAST VISIONARY FOOL! Be it so, brethren : I 
shall not quarrel with any man about the epithets of which 
he may think me worthy. A few years will place me beyond 
the reach of human judgment ; and meanwhile, with the 
storms and tempests, the distractions and calamities of the 
Church of God before me, let me dream if you will call 
i t so of a brighter and a purer day. Let me indulge the 
enthousiasm which refuses to despair of the prosperity of 
Israel : let me behold in vision, if I cannot in reality, the 
harmony and concord of the Redeemer's fold ; and when 
the dew of death is gathering on my forehead, let my last 
prayer be for the peace of Zion. 

Yet, brethren, be it enthousiasm, or not it is my deep 
and solemn conviction, that no other course is so likely to 
avert a tremendous conflict, which will shake the Church 
to its centre, convulse the civilized world, and destroy every 
vestige of your influence and power. The elements of 
confusion are now at work : the superstition of igno- 
rance, the bigotry of fanaticism, the scorn of infidelity, 
thinly disguised at best, and often triumphing under the 
broad banner of zeal for the public good, are all preparing 
to avail themselves of the hateful discord of the Church, and 
are ready to sacrifice, to the worst passions of the human 
heart, every pure and holy principle. In the fearful agita- 
tions which threaten Christendom, your dominion must be 
the first to fall, even as the loftiest trees are most sure to be 
uprooted in the fury of the storm. But the result is not to 
he predicted by human sagacity. The violent prostration 
of Christianity in any shape, injures it in all ; and therefore 
every conservative maxim of wisdom combines with every 
motive of kindness, and every argument of duty, to recom- 
mend the timely magnanimity of a voluntary reform, in 
which all who profess the primitive faith, might equally 



406 CONCLUSION. 

unite, and be equally protected. The people 'of God, x the 
rulers of nations, the friends of government and order, the 
lovers of virtue and of peace, should all look to it; for if 
the tempest of anarchy arises, the generation yet unborn 
may weep over the apathy and the procrastination of those, 
who might have averted the calamity, but did not. 

Brethren in Christ, my task is done. I acknowledge the 
manifold-imperfections of its execution. I am aware that 
important questions, whether in Church or State, are apt to 
be very erroneously regarded by men, who, like myself, are 
far removed from courts and capitols, from the glare and 
turmoil of the great world, in the shade of a happy seclu- 
sion. With the operations of governments,with the science of 
politics, with the mighty and controlling spirits of the earth, 
it has pleased a gracious Providence to give me neither op- 
portunity nor desire to intermeddle. But as one devoted 
to Christian unity and Christian concord, regarding you and 
every other portion of the universal Church with none but 
the kindliest feeling, and warmly attached to those princi- 
ples which I believe to have distinguished the pure and prim- 
itive day, I have undertaken, in my obscurity, to approach 
the altar of truth, and lay upon it a sincere, although an 
humble offering. May the God of truth pardon its delects, 
and vouchsafe to it his acceptance and his blessing ! 





1! 





3479