BERKELEY
JN!VERSlTi-OF — *—
CALIFORNIA
Ibt
I
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
IVIicrosoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/churchofromeinheOOhopkrich
^8:Z.^^'**x-.
THE CHURCH OF ROME,
IN HER PRIMITIVE PURITY,
COMPARED WITH THE
CHURCH OF ROME,
AT THE PRESENT DAY :
BEING A CANDID EXAMINATION OF
HER CLAIMS TO UNIVERSAL DOMINION;
ADDRESSED, IN THE SPIRIT OF CHRISTIAN KINDNESS, TO THE
ROMAN HIERARCHY.
BY
JOHN HENRY HOPKINS, D.D.
BISHOP OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH,
IN THE DIOCESE OP VERMONT, U.S.
FIRST LONDON EDITION,
REVISED AND CORRECTED BY THE AUTHOR,
WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE
REV. HENRY MELVILL, B.D.
Cur prefers in medium, quod Petrus et Paulus edere noluerunt? Usque ad hunc
diem sine ista doetrina mundus Christianus fuit. Illam senex tenebo fidem, in qua
puer natus sum. — Hieron. adPam. et Ocean. Op. Om., torn. 2. p. 131.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR J. G. & F. RIVINGTON,
ST. PAUL'S CHURCH YARD,
AND WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL.
1839.
LONDON :
GILBERT & RIVINGTON, PRINTERS,
ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.
P.^^^
€1^
\a
^^"^
TO THE CAUSE
OP
CATHOLIC UNITY,
AS IT EXISTED IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH,
AND AS IT STILL EXISTS
IN THE
HEARTS AND HOPES OF CHRISTIANS,
THIS VOLUME,
AN HUMBLE OFFERING
TO THE GOD OF TRUTH AND PEACE,
IS DEDICATED BY
THE AUTHOR.
a2
034
INTRODUCTION
ENGLISH EDITION.
Barrow's Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy was not
published, as is well known, during the life of the author,
but was delivered by him on his death-bed to archbishop
Tillotson, with a special permission that it might be given
to the world. In a notice to the reader, prefixed by
Tillotson to this celebrated work, we have the following
strong but deserved encomium : " It is not only a just,
but an admirable discourse upon this subject, which many
others have handled before, but he hath exhausted it, inso-
much, that no argument of moment, nay, hardly any con-
sideration properly belonging to it, hath escaped his large
and comprehensive mind. He hath said enough to silence
the controversy for ever, and to deter all wise men, of
both sides, from meddling any farther with it."
It will not be disputed, by any who have well acquainted
themselves with Barrow's Treatise, that it fully merits
the archbishop's panegyric. It is a noble work, exhibit-
ing throughout the massive erudition and the argumenta-
a3
VI INTRODUCTION TO
tive power, which have secured for its author a lasting
and lofty place in English theology. There is no point
of view under which the question can be surveyed which
has not engaged the writer^s attention, and no process,
whether of reasoning or research, to which he has not
had recourse in this masterly performance. The fathers
are ransacked, testimonies are examined, objections anti-
cipated, dishonesties exposed, proofs multiplied, till the
reader is almost wearied beneath accumulated truth. The
style may indeed be thought cumbrous, though, after all,
it is the weight of matter, rather than of words, which
gives to Barrow''s writings so elaborate a character. In
his Treatise, however, of the Pope''s Supremacy, he occa-
sionally relieves the somewhat ponderous sentences by
touches of raillery and sarcasm — as when he describes a
case of schism in China as referred to " the gentleman in
Italy," or speaks of this " pretended successor to the
fisherman" as " really skilled to angle in troubled waters."
Whilst, however, there can be but one opinion as to
the surpassing merits of Barrow*'s Treatise, we see no
reason for assenting to the archbishop''s decision, that
enough has been said " to deter all wise men, of both
sides, from meddling any farther with" the subject. A
work, even so laboured and comprehensive as that of the
accomplished Lucasian professor, is not necessarily adapt-
ed for all times and for all states of the controversy. It
is not enough that a work be admirable — it must be
of a form and texture to attract and detain readers ;
otherwise, though it may be as an armoury, from which
professed combatants take weapons, it will remain, virtu-
THE ENGLISH EDITION. Vll
ally, inaccessible to numbers who may, nevertheless, both
need and wish information. And assuredly it is no dis-
paragement to the book, though it may be to the age, to
assert, that Barrow"'s Treatise has no likelihood, at pre-
sent, of obtaining a wide circulation. The diligent stu-
dent of the controversy with Rome is familiar with its
pages, and appreciates their worth ; but, though the
times are such, that even the unlettered have need to
know something of this controversy, we must throw truth
into more portable shape, if we hope to gain for it any
general attention.
On this principle, the writer of this notice felt the im-
portance of the republication of the following work, so
soon as he had been allowed to give it a perusal. In
forming such an opinion, he was but following many
who were far more competent to judge than himself,
and whose ascertained sentiments determined the right
reverend author to submit his book to the English public.
But it must not be thought that the ponderousness of
Barrow''s work has alone suggested the propriety of pub-
lishing another, which professes, in a measure, to occupy
the same ground. This would imply, that the work of
the Bishop of Vermont is but an abridgment of that of
Dr. Barrow ; and nothing could be farther from a just
definition. It is indeed a less comprehensive and a less
excursive treatise ; but it is the work of an independent
witness, who has followed no leader in seeking truth, and
who would not be content to receive it second-hand. The
title of the book sufficiently explains its object ; and to
A 4
Vlll INTRODUCTION TO
that object the writer has strictly confined himself. There
can be imagined nothing fairer than the course of his
argument. You are present at a sort of judicial inquiry ;
you sit in a court of law, with the Church of Rome upon
trial ; witnesses are successively called, but they are all
such as that Church claims for her advocates ; their testi-
mony is sifted, as by a process of cross-examination ; and
we honestly think, that not one leaves the box without
furnishing ground for a verdict, that the Church of Rome
at the present day, has grievously departed from the
Church of Rome in her primitive purity.
It must be evident at a glance, that, with such an ob-
ject before him, the right reverend author was required
to master a vast collection of ancient writings. But he
has not flinched from the task. With singular industry
he has gathered from the authorities sanctioned by the
Roman canon law, whatever seemed strongest, whether
for or against the pretensions of the Roman Church ; and
with as singular skill he has so arranged his evidence, and
established its bearing, that one hardly knows how its
force can be evaded. At the same time, by an unusual
felicity, his work may be called popular. It is quite
adapted to the general reader, though it may be only fully
appreciated by the laborious divine. The temper, more-
over, which pervades the whole is beautiful : there is not
a harsh or acrimonious expression; controversy never
looked more amiable ; the writer might almost be said to
wound without giving pain ; and for once, at least, we
have a defence of the doctrines of Christianity, without
even the a-ppearance of violence to its spirit.
THE ENGLISH EDITION. lit
It should be added, that the candour displayed in the
following treatise is very observable. The Bishop of Ver-
mont neither omits nor slurs over what would seem to
favour the present claims of Rome, but states it without
reserve, and examines it with as much of fairness as of
acuteness. This gives a special value to the book, in-
asmuch as the general reader may hence satisfy himself
that he is not obtaining a mere partial and one-sided view
of the controversy. In regard, for example, to Jerome —
so great an authority with the Romanists — it is common
enough to quote his epistle to Evagrius, but to take no
notice of that to Pope Damasus. Barrow himself makes
repeated use of the former, but does not allude, except very
remotely, to the latter. And, of course, if the Protestant
quote against the Romanist the epistle to Evagrius, the
Romanist will be likely to quote against the Protestant the
epistle to Damasus. Our author has provided for this by
a candid and careful examination of Jerome's expressions.
We are not, indeed, sure that we might not safely apply to
the epistle to Damasus what Barrow has said, that " we
are not accountable for every hyperbolical flash or flourish
occurring in the Fathers" — a saying which he vindicates
by the authority of Bellarmine himself, who declares of
these holy men, that they sometimes " per excessum
loqui." Still, it is impossible not to admire the satisfac-
tory manner in which the Bishop of Vermont has inter-
preted the exaggerated phrases.
From the reasons thus briefly indicated, it is hoped
and augured that this work will obtain extensive circula-
tion, and help to the settling men*'s minds as to what is
A 5
X INTRODUCTION TO
really the testimony of the Fathers on one of the chief
points in controversy between the Reformed Church and
the Roman. For this testimony is not to be thrown
aside, as some in the present day would rashly recommend.
The Church of England, in freeing herself from the cor-
ruptions of Rome, did not give up her adherence to
Catholic tradition, and so set every man loose to inter-
pret Scripture for himself. The canon of 1571, enjoining
that preachers should teach nothing but what is agreeable
to the doctrine of the Old or New Testament, and what
the Catholic fathers and ancient bishops have gathered out
of that very doctrine — " nisi quod consentaneum sit doc-
trinse Veteris aut Novi Testamenti, quodque ex ilia ipsa
doctrina Catholici patres et veteres episcopi collegerint" —
sufficiently defines the mind of the Church ; sufficiently
shows that she never understood, by the right of private
judgment, the neglect of Catholic consent and the con-
tempt of Christian antiquity. We believe that the follow-
ing often-quoted words of Vincentius Lirinensis accurately
express the sentiments of our Church as to methods by
which heresy should be opposed : " Diximus in superior!-,
bus banc fuisse semper, et esse hodie, Catholicorum con-
suetudinem, ut fidem veram duobus his modis adprobent ;
primum divini canonis authoritate, deinde Ecclesise Catho-
licae traditione." " We have already said that it has
always been, and still is, the custom of Catholics, to prove
their faith in these two ways : first, by the authority of
the divine canon ; then by the tradition of the Catholic
Church." It is this, the adherence to Catholic tradition
as well as to Scripture, which fits the Anglican Church
to enter the lists with Romanism. Dissent will never
THE ENGLISH EDITION. XI
make any head against popery, even if it should weary of
it as a poHtical ally ; for in ecclesiastical contests there
must be an appeal to antiquity, to the practices and prin-
ciples of the primitive Church ; and this is an appeal in
which Romanism with all its abuses, must caiTy it over
Sectarianism with all its reforms.
And if the publication of the following work should be
instrumental in drawing attention to the controversy with
Rome, and to the mode and spirit in which it should be
conducted, it will effect an end of the very first moment.
There is no disguising that the time has arrived at which
the Protestant is called to put on his armour. Popery,
which never breaks silence till armed with more than
words, speaks now without reserve ; and the establishment
in these kingdoms of the Pope's supremacy, of that usur-
pation against which a righteous ancestry rose indignantly
up, is unflinchingly declared to b^ aimed at, and confi-
dently predicted to be near. And shall there be indif-
ference ? The struggle is for what we most love as men,
and value as Christians. It is no party strife, no contest
for political ascendency. It is a struggle between light
and darkness ; a conflict for the rights of conscience, for
the purity of the Gospel, for the privileges of Christianity,
for the hopes of immortality. We could expect nothing
from the re-established ascendency of Popery but the
re-established reign of oppression and terror. We ac-
cuse not the individual Papist of hating the individual
Protestant ; but we accuse Popery, as a system, of being
necessarily intolerant and persecuting. It cannot rid
itself of this : it is grained into its constitution : it would
A 6
Xll INTRODUCTION TO
cease to be Popery in becoming tolerant and forgiving.
There is not attention enough paid to this. Men talk as
if Popery might be reformed, softened, modified ; they
talk of an impossibility. Ever since the council of Trent,
the falsehoods of Popery have been bound up with its
existence, and consecrated by anathemas on all who
disbelieve ; so that, by its own solemn act. Popery
brought itself into such a condition, that it cannot be
reformed except through being destroyed.
Let us not be misunderstood. We do not mean that
there could never be a reformed, a pure Church of Rome ;
though we confess that the acts of the Council of Trent
did so much to close up the avenues to an escape from
corruption, that it is hard to see where reform could
begin except in abolition. Yet even these acts could
not touch the truth of the foundation of the Church, or
the Apostolicity of her orders : and whilst these remain,
it were too much to pronounce a case past recovery.
But we do not use Popery and the Church of Rome as
synonymous or convertible terms — no more than we use
Protestantism and the Church of Rome as opposite or
antagonist terms. The terms ought to be distinguished,
but have been commonly confounded ; and the Romanist,
in consequence, has been taught to believe that we seek
the destruction of his Church, whereas we seek only the
destruction of its abuses, and its restoration to its primi-
tive state. There is much held by the Church of Rome
against which we make no protest ; and as this is not
counter to Protestantism, we do not include it in Popery.
But we take Popery and Protestantism as antagonist
THE ENGLISH EDITION. XIU
terms, understanding by the former whatsoever of error
is denounced by the latter. And we say of Popery thus
defined, that, having been enacted, promulgated, and
established, by the Council of Trent, it can only be got
rid of by a bold slash of the knife — like a foul excrescence,
which it is idle to attempt to reduce and disperse, and
which, whilst suffered to remain, drains out all the
strength of the body, and makes it little better than a
carcase.
And we will not, we dare not, attribute to the spirit of
a benighted age results which we can distinctly trace to
the principles of a benighted system. We will not, we
dare not, think that Popery offered its hecatombs of mar-
tyrs simply because the times were barbarous, and that,
whatever its power, it would never attempt the like in
days of greater knowledge and liberality. It did but act
out its fundamental tenets : those tenets it has never ab-
jured, and, whilst it holds itself infallible, never can. We
would not, then, be deaf to the voice of the champions of
the Reformation. We would not turn our eyes from that
candle which was lighted in England, when bold worthies
died at the stake, and which, whilst it sheds over us a
rich illumination, reminds us of the fires at which it was
kindled. Not unwarned, shall we again place our necks
in that yoke, which " neither we, nor our fathers, were
able to bear," if, through forgetfulness of our principles
and contempt of our privileges, we provoke God to permit
the Papacy to regain its lost power. Not unwarned:
history warns us, experience warns us. In the records of
by-gone days, and in the occurrences of present, we have
XIV INTRODUCTION TO
evidence, which should not only startle the living, but might
almost raise the dead, that, if we would have freedom of
inquiry, liberty of conscience, unadulterated truth ; if we
would worship God, "every man under his vine and
fig-tree, none making him afraid;" we must withstand
Popery, as we would the invader whose ominous flag
might float over our seas, and act on the persuasion,
that it were to surrender the Magna Oharta of the land,
to swerve from the religious system bequeathed us by men
who engrossed it on the scafibld and sealed it at the stake.
But good things may be hoped. The Church sees the
peril, and is preparing herself to meet it. There is a
moral force in the Protestantism of England which has
only to be roused, and, under God, it will prove irresis-
tible. The world shall know that the children of those
who achieved the Reformation, the mightiest deliverance
ever wrought for the human understanding and con-
science, are not to be again thralled and entangled.
To announce the determination, will almost be to effect
the result, that the Papal ascendency shall never be
revived.
It ought to be added, in recommendation of the follow-
ing work, that, soon after it had appeared in America, an
answer was put forth by a Bishop of the Church of Bome
— a man every way qualified, either to maintain a good
cause, or give speciousness to a bad. The book was
characterized throughout by courtesy and ability, but left
the arguments and authorities of the work which it pro-
fessed to answer, just where it found them. There is no
THE ENGLISH EDITION. XV
reason to suppose that it proved satisfactory to the
Roman Cathohcs themselves ; for it could neither be said
to weaken bishop Hopkins^ position, nor to give strength
to the opposite. The Bishop of Vermont, therefore, re-
mains in triumphant possession of the ground ; and we
anticipate for him no other result, if the Roman Catho-
lics of Europe, like those of America, shall attempt to
find shelter for their present system beneath the wing of
the ancient Fathers.
The Bishop of Vermont would appear to have been
one of the first in America to act vigorously on a sense
of the importance of withstanding Popery. And he has
not confined himself to the composing such a work as
the following. He has laboured at the forming an Epis-
copal Institute for his Diocese, certain students in which
are to be specially trained to the Papal controversy — and
there is need of special training ; though we have been
too much in the habit of imagining, that Popery might
be refuted by declaring it absurd. An endeavour to
oppose a barrier to the advancings of Popery in the
United States, should be hailed in England with gratitude
and joy. The barrier is required. America has shut
her eyes to the stealthy progress of Romanism; and
now it is not merely in the humorous sayings of Judge
Haliburton, but in the forebodings of the most thoughtful
ecclesiastics, that we are warned of a danger that Popery
may become dominant in the New World. We have a
great stake in this — Popery cannot triumph on the
other side of the Atlantic, and not, in consequence, be
strengthened on our own.
XVI INTRODUCTION TO THE ENGLISH EDITION.
The writer of this notice will only add, that he feels it
a great honour to be concerned in introducing to the
English Church a work for which he anticipates no com-
mon approval. There are other productions of the right
reverend author for which this may possibly act as pioneer.
Such works come with peculiar grace from the Episcopal
Church in America : they are the offerings of the daugh-
ter to the mother, and prove her not unworthy her
parentage : they are defences of the apostolical doctrine,
which requite us for the conveyed blessing of the aposto-
lical succession.
HENRY MELVILL.
Camherwell,
March 20, 1839.
PREFACE
AMERICAN EDITION.
The author of the ensuing work, in undertaking a formal
discussion of Roman CathoHc claims, has desired to con-
fine himself rigidly to those authorities and to that kind
of argument, which he thought best calculated for the
candid consideration of his Roman brethren, and most
becoming in every man, who seeks to contend for the
principles of Christian truth, without forfeiting the bless-
ings 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 institutes 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
XVm PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION.
was abundant room for a more simple^ and, possibly, more
effective method of exhibiting 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 laboured in vain.
For the plan and special motives of the work, the
author refers to the opening chapters of the book itself.
It was not his 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 Eome. The other points of the contro-
versy, however, 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 Pro-
vidence to favour the undertaking.
Burlington, Vt. Julij \st, 1837.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I.
PAGE.
The author's motives for the work — qualifications — plan. Why ad-
dressed 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
CHAPTER II.
The canon law set forth, recognizing the Scriptures as 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 other works
designed to be quoted for the present doctrine of the Church of
Rome , 11
CHAPTER III.
The present doctrine of the Church of Rome, concerning the defini-
tion of the Holy Catholic Church and the pope's supremacy, set
forth at large in the words of the Doway Catechism and the canon
law 17
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. . . . 22
CHAPTER V.
Testimony of the apostolical canons, inconsistent with the doctrine of
the pope's supremacy 39
XX CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VI.
PAGE.
Testimony of the apostolical constitutions, irreconcilable with the
doctrine of the pope's supremacy 43
CHAPTER VII.
The decretal epistles strongly in favour of the pope's supremacy, but
shown to be a forgery. Candid acknowledgment of the Roman
critics. A document forged in support of any claim becomes evi-
dence against it 49
CHAPTER VIII.
Testimony of Clement of Rome inconsistent with papal supremacy. . 53
CHAPTER IX.
Testimony of Irenaeus set forth at large, and shown to be adverse to
the doctrine of papal supremacy. The narrative of Polycarp,
bishop of Smyrna, and Anicetus, bishop of Rome, totally irrecon-
cilable with the claims of the papacy 58
CHAPTER X.
Probable origin of the doctrine of supremacy. Rome was the mis-
tress-city of the world, and the Church established there must needs
have had a superiority of influence, derived from the secular ad-
vantages of its location. Various reasons concurring to favour 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 for the peace and unity of Christendom {
but it gave no warrant for the change by which it became a spiri-
tual yoke, invested with the attributes of a divine right, and entitled
to exact an universal homage at the peril of salvation 72
CHAPTER XL
Testimony of Tertullian adverse to the papal supremacy 81
CHAPTER XII.
Testimony of Clement of Alexandria, though negative and indirect,
inconsistent with papal supremacy 95
CHAPTER XIII.
Testimony of Origen set forth very fully. Totally irreconcilable with
the papal supremacy. His character impeached of heresy. De-
fended by the learned Huet, and by St. Jerome 101
CHAPTER XIV.
Testimony of C5^rian. Some passages look favourable to the papal
claim ; but when compared with others, it is plain that Rome was
not then invested with any supremacy. The controversy 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 114
CONTENTS. XXI
CHAPTER XV.
PAGE.
Testimony of Lactantius, though negative, is unfavourable to the
Roman doctrine. Testimony of Eusebius at large. His com-
mentary 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 • 130
CHAPTER XVI.
The doctrine of the canon law on general councils set forth at large.
Four chief points in this doctrine which are contradicted by the
testimony of the first general councils, and the fathers. 163
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
canonist Gibert, that not only the Nicene council, but many other
general councils were convened by the emperors. The second
requisite to the holding a general council, according to the canon
Jaw, 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 172
CHAPTER XVIII.
The canons of the council of Nice which bear upon 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 191
CHAPTER XIX.
Testimony of Athanasius irreconcilable with the doctrine of the
infallibility of general councils 204
CHAPTER XX.
Testimony of Athanasius against the doctrine of papal supremacy . . 210
CHAPTER XXI.
Some other matters in the writings of Athanasius. Frauds committed
under his name in favour of papal supremacy 216
CHAPTER XXII.
The testimony of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, opposed to the doctrine
of supremacy, and the present definitioa of the holy catholic
Church, by necessary inference. Fraud on Cyril acknowledged by
Touttee 224
XXll CONTENTS.
CHAPTER XXIII.
PAGE.
The testimony of Hilary of Poictiers irreconcilable with the doctrine
of supremacy, and with the infallibility attributed to general councils 240
CHAPTER XXIV.
The testimony of Basil the Great. The liturgy attributed to him.
His language concerning the council of Nice. The whole together
is decidedly hostile to the doctrines of the canon law upon the
points in question 253
CHAPTER XXV.
The testimony of Gregory Nazianzen. The equality of the apostles.
The mother Church of Nazianzen, and of Nicopolis. The catho-
lic Church. Its distracted condition owing to there being no chief
ruler in Israel. His opinion against councils. The whole strongly
opposed to Roman supremacy and infallibility 267
CHAPTER XXVI.
The testimony of Ambrose, bishop of Milan. Faith is the foundation
of the Church. All believers are foundations of the Church. What
is said to Peter is said to all. The Church of Rome charged with
error. The council of Aquileia. The whole irreconcilable with
the doctrine of the canon law 277
CHAPTER XXVII.
The testimony of Jerome. His epistle to pope Damasus. His epistle
to Evagrius. The Church built on all the apostles. The rock is
Christ. Bishops and presbyters originally equal. Rome is Baby-
lon. The traditions and customs of Rome not more to be obeyed
than those of other provinces. Jerome's enumeration of Origen's
errors. The whole compared together, and shown to be hostile to
Roman supremacy 290
CHAPTER XXVIII.
The testimony of Augustin. His explanation of " Thou art Peter," &c.
directly opposed to the Roman doctrine. Power of the keys ex-
plained in like manner. St. Peter represented the 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 eighty-eight heresies. Augustin, on the whole, irreconcilable
with the Roman doctrine 311
CHAPTER XXIX.
The testimony of Chrysostom. He interprets the proof-texts of the
Doway catechism in a manner which cannot consist with the
Roman claim 324
CHAPTER XXX.
The testimony of Isidore of Pelusium. Peter's confession was the
foundation of the Church. The testimony of Prosper of Aquitain
CONTENTS. XXll
concerning the catholic Church. The testimony of Vincent of
Lirens. His famous standard for trying heresy altogether decisive
against the present doctrine of the Church of Rome 329
CHAPTER XXXI.
Recapitulation of the witnesses. Their writings confessed to he still
interpolated and impure. Yet even as they stand, the evidence is
conclusive 335
CHAPTER XXXII.
The rise of the doctrine of supremacy, from the secular preponde-
rance 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 339
CHAPTER XXXIII.
The creed of pope Pius IV. quoted from Mr. Butler. Admitted to
be the universally received summary of the present system. State-
ment 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 , 349
CHAPTER XXXIV.
These doctrines irreconcilable. No definition agreed on. The
declaration of the French clergy in 1682. Disapprobation 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 pro-
fessed without any authority, and in the face of the declared system
and practice of Rome for centuries. Cisalpine divines admit the
facts. Their argument examined and shown to be inconclusive.
The Transalpine doctrine which accords the right of dethroning
heretical sovereigns, &c. to the pope, is the only authoritative doc-
trine of the present day 356
CHAPTER XXXV.
The change of primitive practice in the mode of electing the pope —
ceremonies of his installation — adoration — placing him on the altar
— triple crown, &c 373
CHAPTER XXXVI.
Points of agreement. Reformed Christians are Catholics in all that
is primitive, but Protestants in all that has been changed. Ques-
tions of practical importance. 1. Why the unity of the holy
catholic Chtffch should be confined to the communion of the Church
of Rome, instead of being, as at first, co-extensive 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, neces-
XXIV CONTENTS.
PAGE,
sary to salvation. 3. Why the same creed obliges the professor to
say that he holds all apostolic traditions and observances of the
holy catholic Church, when so many of these traditions and ob-
servances are done away. 4. Why the same creed exacts the pro-
mise to understand the Scriptures no otherwise than as the fathers
unanimously interpret them, when their interpretations are so
directly opposed to the present system. 6. 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
individual. 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 pro-
fessed doctrines of the Church of Rome have confessedly undergone
such a change, and when, to this day, there are several inconsistent
theories concerning the papacy afloat, without any acknowledged
mode of deciding between them 377
CONCLUDING CHAPTER.
Attempts made in the seventeenth century to unite the reformed
Churches with the Galilean Church of Rome. Circumstances
existing at present more favourable to such an enterprise. The
Church of Rome chiefly concerned to improve the opportunity. A
disposition 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
probably, under God, soon settle every difiiculty. The peril of the
distracted state of Christendom. The responsibility of the present
generation. The author's prayer for peace 389
THE
CHURCH OF ROME
IN HER
PRIMITIVE PURITY,
CHAPTER I.
Brethren in Christ,
An address to an ecclesiastical body so numerous, so
powerful, so august, as the Hi^fSrchy of the Church of
Rome, from an individual of humble name and small
reputation, may well seem, if not to others, at least to
you, in need of an apology. Let me state, therefore, in
all simplicity, the motives which have incited me to the
present undertaking.
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 having neither part nor lot in the heritage of the
faithful.
2 REASONS FOR THE UNDERTAKING. [CHAP.
But besides this official right, I confess, — even at the
hazard of being accused of egotism, — that I have a
feehng of more than usual depth and earnestness upon
the subject of your claims. Although a constant inha-
bitant of the United States for almost forty years, yet I
cannot forget that my first breath was drawn in that ill-
fated island, which has felt the evils of religious discord
so bitterly, and so long. True, the associations of my
childhood have all been broken, and their faded reHcs are
like the dim memory of a dream. But the love of my
native land has never left me ; nor have I ever ceased to
cherish a strong personal interest in all that concerns her
prosperity and peace. May I not be allowed, therefore,
to say that I possess a sort of birthright in the discussion
of the Roman Catholic controversy, which should obtain
for me a patient and indulgent hearing ?
There is a third ground, however, on which I should
defend my work, derived from the fact, that the contro-
versy between our respective Churches deserves to be
considered the most exciting and important religious
topic of the age. In comparison with this, all other con-
troversies sink into insignificance. Your assertion that
the Church of Rome is the mother and mistress of all the
Churches, and 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 pro-
portion of nearly two to one — your vast and well-disci-
plined 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 learning, so skil-
fully displayed in the defence of your system, — the vene-
rable air of antiquity which invests your peculiar doctrines
I.] REASONS FOR THE UNDERTAKING. 3
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 importance on the subject of your claims, which can
hardly be too highly estimated ; and which forms, of
itself, a justification of every attempt to ascertain the
strength of the evidence on which they are sustained.
Nor do I think it the least important part of the case,
that the temper of the times in which we live calls for a
peculiar effort to investigate the merits of this contro-
versy. Your enemies, particularly in this country, are
numerous, determined, and unsparing. The most un-
paralleled assaults of violence have been directed against
you, and a community distinguished for its liberality and
refinement has refused you any adequate redress ^ The
press has teemed with the darkest and most shameless
accusations against your institutions, and no calunmy of
which you are declared to be the object seems too gross
for the public ear. The gaze of unkind suspicion is every
where upon you : the very kennels of history are indus-
triously raked for evidence against you : the bitterest
intolerance thinks itself justified in alarming the com-
munity by terrific statements of your alleged enormities ;
and the veil of your monastic seclusion and your vows of
celibacy are currently represented as the contrivance of
systematic guilt, and the covering of sensual abomination.
It is surely, then, required, by the voice of charity and
truth, that some one should examine the questions at
issue between us, upon their real merits, without the
artificial and fallacious colouring in which a wild and
intolerant zeal has depicted them : and it is equally
required by the precept which commands us to judge as
we would be judged, that your motives and your charac-
^ The allusion is to the burning of the Convent near Boston, A.D. 1834.
B 2
4 aUALIFICATIONS. [cHAP.
ter should be kindly regarded, even when your doctrines
are condemned.
But you will naturally ask, what qualifications I
possess for my undertaking ; on what principle I design
to prosecute it ; and why I choose to address it to the
Hierarchy, the Clergy of your Church, rather than to
the people, or the public at large.
To the first question I frankly answer, that my quali-
fications 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 epistles, and many of those apo-
cryphal 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 judgment on the real
evidence of antiquity. I had read the leading works on
both sides, and saw that both parties appealed 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 labour
of perusing these authorities in their own connexion, was
the only perfect method of arriving at the whole truth —
a labour that few men, perhaps, in our day, are wiUing 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 desire, 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.
I.] ' THE PRINCIPLE ADOPTED. 5
Next to the qualification derived from a patient and
laborious examination of your authorities, permit me to
say, that my personal and local circumstances are calcu-
lated to preserve me from any bias. Whatever influence
the interest of a powerful religious establishment may be
supposed to exert over the minds of my British brethren,
the Church in this country^ has neither honours 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 honour to any creed. Hence, so far as
the qualifications of circumstances and feeling are con-
cerned, I 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 prin-
ciple, 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 DAY. But if the Church of Rome has
varied from herself and this can be demonstrably proved
by her own acknowledged authorities, then, surely, it
will be admitted, that the older pattern must be the
^ America.
B 3
6 WHY ADDRESSED [cHAP.
apostolic pattern^ and that the present Church of Rome
SHOULD RETURN TO HER ORIGINAL SELF, before she
accuses us of innovation. In the evidence which I shall
adduce to estabUsh this change, I shall have recourse to
your own witnesses. The Scriptures in your own version,
the Fathers, the Liturgies, the Councils, 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 trouble of a search, whether I have given a
fair 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.
The public — ^that is, the community in general — take
small interest in religious controversies. Those amongst
them whom my subject would attract are " few and far
between f and therefore I address them not. Rehgious
controversy, I am well aware, has often been made inte-
resting to the public, when it was strongly seasoned with
gross abuse, slanderous mis-statements, personal invec-
tive, amusing or romantic narrative, wit, sarcasm, highly
wrought eloquence, or other attractions which the public
taste admires. But religious argument composed with
sobriety, and put forth in the spirit of truth and peace,
has no right to expect popular favour.
As to your people, I address them not, because, for the
most part, they have neither the liberty nor the inclina-
tion 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 honour-
able exceptions to this remark ; but not enough to justify
I.] TO THE PRIESTHOOD. 7
writers, far more attractive than I pretend to be, in
addressing them. But the laity of the Ohurch of Rome,
especially, are altogether unlikely to read any thing
which their clergy would not sanction. Your rules of
confession, and your strict superintendence 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 occa^
sion, 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 thoroughly 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 undoubting confidence ; not pretending
to judge for themselves in any religious matter, but trust-
ing all their immortal hopes to your presumed infallibility.
Many there are — very many — in the Protestant ranks,
who think you dishonest, profligate, hypocritical dissem-
blers ; 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 proceed on
the presumption that you estimate aright the tremendous
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 stead-
fast hope, that you will look at the authorities and argu-
ments 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
B 4
8 THE RESULT. [CHAP.
death. Yours 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 prerogative beyond their brethren.
You CLAIM THE WHOLE. You identify the Church of
Rome with the Church Catholic 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 original 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 worWs 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 labour, 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
I.] THE RESULT. 9
of the politician, the mechanist, the man of science, the
man of trade, or any of the numerous classes which spend
their intellectual energies on the things of time and sense,
the expected result of their operations must occupy the
first place, since it furnishes the only efficient motive for
their exertions. But the defender of religious truth acts
in obedience to the principle 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 achieve-
ment. 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 intoler-
ance, 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 proceeding, the question of results gives me no con-
cern. I may be vilified, because I condemn the coarse
vituperation with which so many good men, in their mis-
taken zeal, have thought fit to assail you. I may bear
the doom so often experienced by those, who, in times of
high and strong excitement, presume to follow the sober
track of justice and of candour. Or, worse than all, my
humble work may possibly be like an arrow shot into the
air, which strikes no mark, creates no noise, leaves no
track behind it, and is discovered, after a little space,
lying idly on the ground. But what have these fears to
do with the course of duty ? And how precious a conso-
B 5
10 CONCLUSION, [chap. I.
lation is afforded to the servant of Christ, when he is able,
in the language and the faith of the great apostle, to
say, " It is a small thing with me that I be judged 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 before me : and my
design 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 deliberate 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
general plan — are now before you. For the result I ask
no other 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 ; and that I should
make my appeal in every case to the authorities sanc-
tioned by your o^vn Canon law. Let me premise the list
of those on which I rely, as witnesses admitted by your-
selves to be above all exception. " Proofs," in the words
of your favourite Aristotle, " are the only skill ; all the
rest are but appendages \"
From the well-known work of your famous Canonist
Gibert, entitled an Exposition of the Canon law, I quote
the following passages : —
" Holy Scripture is the fountain of the Canon law, with
respect to faith and manners, and also with respect to
the necessity, the utility, and the form of Councils ^."
" Next to the Holy Scripture, the principal fountain of
the Canon law at the present day are General Councils^/'
" The Canon law expressly approves the writings of
* ai yap tt'iotuq tvrexvov eari fiovov rd 5" dWa TrpocBtjicai. Aristot.
Rhet. Lib. 1. Cap. 1. v. 3.
2 " Scrip tura 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.)
' "Post Scripturam Sacram, praecipuus hodiemi juris canonici fons
8unt Concilia Generalia." lb.
B 6
12 LIST OF AUTHORITIES. [CHAP.
several doctors: viz. 1. Those of the blessed Cyprian,
martyr and bishop of Carthage : 2. those of the blessed
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria : 3. those of the blessed
Gregory, bishop of Nazianzen : 4. those of the blessed
Basil, bishop of Cappadocia : 5. those of the blessed John
Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople : 6. those of the
blessed Hilary, bishop of Poictiers : 7. those of the blessed
Augustin, bishop of Hippo : 8. those of the blessed Am-
brose, bishop of Milan : 9. those of the blessed Jerome,
Presbyter : 10. those of Prosper, a most religious man :
11. the epistle of the blessed Leo to Flavian, the bishop
of Constantinople, whose text, even to a tittle, if any laic
or illiterate 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 : 1 6. 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
saint Isidore^.""
Besides these fathers whom your Canon law thus ex-
^ *'Non paucorum Scripta Doctoruin Canon expresse approbat." —
" Non aliorum Scripta expresse probat Canon, quam istorum.
*' 1. Beati Cypriani martyris et Carthaginiensis Episeopi. 2. Beati
Athanasii Alexandrini Episeopi. 3. Beati Gregorii Nazianzeni Episeopi.
4. Beati Basilii Cappadociae Episeopi. 5. Beati Joannis Constantinopo-
litani Episeopi. 6. Hilarii Pietaviensis Episeopi. 7- Beati Augustini
Hipponensis Episeopi. 8. Beati Ambrosii Episeopi. 9. Beati Hieronymi
Presbyteri. 10. Prosperi viri religiosissimi. 11. Epistolam Beati
Leonis ad Flavianura Constantinopolitanum Episcopum destinatam, eujus
textum aut unum iota, si quisquam idiota disputaverit, et non earn in
omnibus venerabiliter aeeeperit, Anathema sit. 12. Rufini et Origenis
quae beatus Hieronymus non repudiat. 13. Orosii viri eruditissimi.
14. Venerabilis viri Sedulii. 15. Vincentii. 16. Eusebii Caesariensis
eum quadam restrictione. 17. Beati Cyrilli opera a quinto Concilio
Generali recepta. 18. Sancti Isidori." lb. Tit. 5. p. 12.
II.] ^ LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 13
pressly names, it pronounces a general approbation of all
the orthodox fathers, and of all that Jerome approves,
although in some respects he may have had cause to blame
them. Indeed the judgment of Jerome is cardinal with
you. He i^ called, in your Canon 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, therefore, 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. He was bishop of Lyons, and his books were pub-
lished about A. D. 170 \
Clement of Alexandria, the master of the famous cate-
chetical school after Pantsenus, whose books Jerome
calls " admirable volumes, full of erudition and eloquence,
taken both from the Holy Scriptures and from secular
literature 2."
TertuUian, the profound and learned presbyter of Car-
thage, who flourished about A.D. 200, and whose works
1 "Irenaeus Pothini Episcopi, qui Lugdunensem in Gallia regebat
ecclesiam presbyter, a martyribus ejusdem loci ob quasdam ecclesiae
quaestiones legatus Romam missus, honorificas super nomine suo ad
Eleutherium Episcopmn perfert literas. Postea jam Pothino prope nona-
genario, ob Christum martyrio coronato, in locum ejus substituitur.
Scripsit quinque ad versus hsereses libros," &c. Sanct. Hieron. Op. om.
Ed. 1684. Tom. 1. p. 180. B.
2 "Clemens Alexandriae Ecclesiae presbyter, Pantaeni auditor, post
ejus mortem Alexandriae ecclesiasticam scholam tenuit, et KaTrjxrfffstav
magister fuit. Feruntur ejus insignia volumina, plenaque eruditionis
et eloquentiae, tam de Scripturis divinis, quam de secularis literaturae
instrument©. E quibus ilia sunt, Srpwjiiarftg, libri octo," &c. lb. 181. B.
14 LIST OF AUTHORITIES. [cHAP.
were the favourite study of St. Cyprian. Jerome records
the fact, that Cyprian never passed a day without reading
this author, and frequently called him " the master.'' He
fell, however, towards the close of his life, into the error
of Montanus, 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 ;
namely, 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 \
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 testhnony, on the points to be discussed*.
* ** Tertullianus presbyter — provineiae Africse, civitatis Carthaginensis,
patre Centurione proeonsulari. Hie acris et veliementis ingenii, — multa
scripsit volumina, quae quia nota sunt pluribus, praetermittimus. Vidi
ego quendam Paulum ConcordiaSj quod oppidum Italiae est, senem, qui se
beati Cypriani jam grandis setatis notarium, cum ipse admodum esset
adolescens, Romae vidisse diceret, referreque sibi solitum, niinquam
Cyprianum absque Tertulliani lectione unam diem praetermisisse, ac sibi
crebro dicere : Da magistrum : TertuUianum videlicet significans. Hie
cum usque ad mediam aetatem presbyter ecclesise permansisset, invidia
postea et contumeliis clericorum Romanae ecclesiae, ad Montani dogma
delapsus, in multis libris novae prophetiae meminit, specialiter autem
adversum ecclesiam texuit volumina De Pudicitia, De Persecutione, De
Jejuniis, De Monogamia, De Ectasi libros sex, et septimum quern adversum
Apollonium composuit. Ferturque vixisse usque ad decrepitam aetatem,
et multa quae non extant opuscula condidisse." lb. p. 183.
2 " Firminianus, quiet Lactantius,Amobiidiscipulus, Nicomediae
Rhetoricam docuit. Habemus ejus Symposium, quod adolescentulus
scripsit, oSotTTopiKov de Aphrica ad Nicomediam, hexametris scriptum
versibus, et alium librum qui inscribitur Grammaticus, et pulcherrimum
de Ira Dei, et Institutionum Divinarum adversum gentes libros septem,"
&c. lb. p. 189.
II.] LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 15
The editions of the Councils which 1 shall use, are your
admirable collections by Hardouin and Mansi; and I
shall quote largely from the celebrated declaration 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 refer.
The first is the elaborate work of your ecclesiastical his-
torian Fleury; the second is the well-known book of
Charles Butler, Esq. one of your most accomplished
advocates, entitled the Book of the Roman Catholic
Church ; and the third is the familiar abridgement com-
monly called the Doway Catechism, composed originally
in 1649 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 American stereo-
type 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 stereotyped 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
writings of the Apostolic Fathers, the Apostolic Canons,
and the Apostolical Constitutions. I shall also comment
occasionally on those unquestionable frauds, such as the
Decretal epistles and others, which will unavoidably pre-
sent themselves in the path which lies before me ; and in
all such cases I shall cite the opinion of your most distin-
guished 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
16 LIST OF AUTHORITIES. [cHAP. II.
at second hand, or presented out of its true connexion.
And if I cannot show from these, your own authorities,
that your Church has changed her original poHty, and
that the primitive Church of Rome would have accorded
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
definition of " The Holy CathoHc 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 diocese 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 Vicar of Christ, and the head of the whole
Christian Church throughout the world\
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 of the apostles were his sheep, and he their head
or pastor."
^ Thus the Doway Catechism, p. 20, declares that " The Church is
the Congregation of all the faithful under Jesus Christ, their invisible
head, and his vicar upon earth, the Pope."
18 RIGHTS OF THE POPE, [cHAP.
" Secondly," according to this catechism, " out of
St. Matthew (xvi. 18) when Christ saith, Thou art
Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church. There-
fore 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 aU 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
consists of " a Pope, or supreme head, bishops, pastors,
and laity ;" 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 cannot be accounted a member
of the Church, since from the Pope and General Coun-
cils^ under Christy we have our spiritual life and motion^ as
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 your Canon law.
" The Pope," says your Canon, " by the Lord's ap-
pointment, is the successor of the blessed Apostle Peter,
and holds the place of the Redeemer himself upon the
earth \"
* " Beat! Petri Apostoli, disponente Domino, Papa est successor, et
ipsius Redemptoris locum in terris tenet." Corp. Jur. Can. Joan. Gib.
torn. ii. p. 6.
III.] ACCORDING TO THE CAXON LAW. 19
" The Roman Church, by the appointment of our Lord,
is the mother and mistress of all the faithful \"
" The Roman Pontiff bears the authority not of a mere
man, but of the true God upon the earth ^"
" The Pope holds the place of God in the earth, that
he may confer ecclesiastical benefices without diminu-
tion ^"
" Christ, the King of kings, and Lord of lords, gave
to the Roman Pontiff, in the person of Peter, the pleni-
tude of power*."
" To the Holy Roman Church, as to the mother and
head, 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 Pontiff^"
" The greater causes of the Church, especially those
which concern the articles of faith, are to be referred to
theseat of Peter ^"
" 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'."
1 " Romana Ecclesia, disponente Domino, cunctorum fidelium Mater
est et Magistra." lb. p. 8.
2 " Romanus Pontifex non puri hominis, sed veri Dei vicem gerit in
terris." lb. p. 9.
3 " Papa locum Dei tenet in terris, ut Ecclesiastica Beneficia sine di-
minutione conferat." lb.
* " Plenitudinem potestatis Christus Rex regum et Dominus dominan-
tium Romano Pontifici in persona Petri concessit." lb. p. 10.
2 " Ad sanctam Romanam Ecclesiam, quasi ad matrem atque api-
cem, omnes majores Ecclesiae causae recurrant, et juxta ejus sententiam
terminum sumant ; nee extra Romanum quidquam ex his debeat decemi
Pontificem." lb. p. 12.
6 " Majores Ecclesise causas, prsesertim articulos fidei contingentes,
ad Petri sedem referendas." lb. p. 12.
' " Trauslatio, depositio, aut cessio Episcopi, non tarn constitutione
20 RIGHTS OF THE POPE, [cHAP.
" As the translation, the deposition, and resignation
of bishops, so Hkewise the confirmation of the electors
after the election, is reserved to the Eoman Pontiff
alone, by reason of the spiritual bond ^^
" Although miracles may have been performed by any
one, yet it is not lawful to venerate him as a saint, with-
out the authority of the Roman Church ^"
" Whenever there is any question concerning the pri-
vileges of the Apostolic chair, they are not to be judged
by others. The Pope alone knows how to determine
doubts concerning the privileges of the chief Apostolic
seatV'
" 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
chief Pontiff alone*."
" It was becoming, since the chief Pontiff represents
the person of Christ, that as during Christ's earthly mi-
nistry the Apostles stood round Him, so the assembly of
the Cardinals, representing the Apostolic college, should
stand before the Pope ; but the rest of the bishops, scat-
tered abroad every where, represent the Apostles sent
forth to preach the Gospel ^""
canonica, quara institutione divina, soli sunt Romano Pontifici reservata."
lb. p. 13.
^ " Sicut Episcoporum translatio, depositio, et cessio, sic et electoruni
post electionem confirmatio, spiritualis ratione conjugii, soli est Romano
Pontifici reservata." lb. p. 13.
2 " Etiamsi per aliquem miracula fierent, non liceret ipsum pro sancto,
absque autoritate Ecclesiee Romanee, venerari." lb.
^ *' Cum super privilegiis sedis Apostolicse causa vertitur ; de ipsis
per alios non judicatur. — Solus Papa cognoscit de dubiis privilegiorum
sedis Apostolicae summse." lb. p. 13.
* " Sunt tantum suromo Pontifici reservata : unara Episcopalem Ec-
clesiam subjicere alteri, et illam praeficere isti : concesso sibi privilegio
Primatiae, atque duos Episcopatus unire, vel unum dividere." Id. p. 13.
^ " Decuit, cum summus Pontifex Christi repraesentet personam, ut
III.] ACCORDING TO THE CANON LAW. 21
These extracts may suffice for the present, to prove
the nature and effect of the prerogatives with which you
invest the Church and the pontiff of Rome. His powers
in reference to Councils, will be reserved for a future
chapter. Let me now proceed to prove that you have
changed your primitive doctrine, by showing 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 examination must be thorough,
if we would hope to be rewarded by the discovery of
truth. When this preliminary labour is accomplished, I
shall examine the two conflicting theories concerning the
limits of papal power, which have excited so much se-
rious controversy amongst yourselves ; and shall show, as
it seems to me, that the claims of your canon law on
that point have never been relinquished, but continue to
represent your doctrine fairly, to this day. A few prac-
tical considerations for your sober reflection, will then
bring us to the conclusion.
quemadmodum Christo conversant! in terris assistebant Apostoli, ita
etiam Cardinalium coetus Apostolicum repraesentans, coram Papa assis-
teret ; reliqui vero Episcopi, ubique diffusi, Apostolos repraesentant ad
prsedicandum per orbem missos." lb. 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, received from our Lord the gracious answer,
" Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona ; because flesh and
blood hath not revealed 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 kingdom 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."
Next, you cite the passage in St. John'*s Gospel (xxi.
16, &c.), where the Saviour saith to Peter, " 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
^ The word lambs, here, ought to be sheep. See your own Montanus,
and the margin of your vulgate. I quote it, however, in the words of
your Doway version, as I am pledged to do.
CHAP. IV.] EXAMINATION OF SCRIPTURE. 23
again : Simon, son of John, lovest thou me ? He saith
to him : Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He
saith to him : Feed my lambs. 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, Lov-
est 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."
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 rocJc^ and upon this rock I will huild my Church.
So that, 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 in-
terpretation to these texts ; from which the inference may
be safely drawn, that the primitive Church of Rome did
not hold your doctrine. But meanwhile, the importance
of the subject demands a critical examination of the first
text especially, in which I shall have no difficulty in show-
ing how very far your commentary has strayed from the
true laws of interpretation.
You tell us, in the note which I have quoted from
your Doway version, what our Lord must have said " in
the vulgar language of the Jews?"" For what purpose is
this, brethren ? Do you mean that the original Gospel,
which is in the Glreek, is not our only sure authority ?
True, indeed, it is asserted by some of the ancients, that
the Gospel according to St. Matthew was first written
in Hebrew, and afterwards translated into Greek ; but
6
24 EXAMINATION OF SCEIPTURE. [cHAP.
you are perfectly aware, that if it had been so, the He-
brew copy was altogether lost ; and therefore the Christ-
ian 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 ham 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
New Testament Scriptures.
But we are happy in the aid which we derive, in this
point of controversy, from your own Latin Vulgate, de-
clared, by your Council of Trent, to be authentic, so
that " 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 : cru a nirpocj icai liri
ravry ry irirp^ 6iK0^0fxy]aio julov tyjv tKjcATjtrtav.
In the Latin Vulgate : Tu es Petrus, et super hanc pe-
tram cedificaho 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 the same time the true idea
of the original, and also the play upon the name, is
1 " Decretum de editione et usu sacrorum librorum. — Sacrosancta
Synodus statuit et declarat ut haec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio, quae
longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in publicis lection-
ibus, disputationibus, praedicationibus, et expositionibus, pro authentica
habeatur ; et ut nemo illam rejicere quo vis prsetextu audeat vel praesu-
mat." Concil. Hard. torn. x. p. 23.
IV.] EXAMINATION OF SCRIPTURE. 25
not possible in any modern language. To make the
Greek and the Latin accord with your commentary, you
know perfectly well, brethren, that an alteration of the
phraseology would be necessary. Thus, in the Greek,
our Lord does not say: eirl tovtc^ rtf UeTpif), but Itti
ravTy ry Trirpa, recurring to the radical word, which is
of a different gender, riirpa is the root, signifying a
rock, which rock was Christ. TleTpalog is the adjective,
signifying rocky or stony. And UeTpoQ, the name given
to Peter, signifies a stone, and sometimes a rock, in a
diminutive sense, being derived from irirpa. Therefore,
as I shall show you in due time, the fathers held that
Peter received his name from the rock, just as the be-
liever is called Christian, from Christ. In like manner,
your Latin Vulgate stands opposed to your Doway com-
mentary, and would require an alteration in its language,
before it could be made to correspond with your doctrine.
Instead of, Tu es Petrus^ 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 rock 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 turn of thought in the original is instruc-
tive and beautiful, but it does not admit of a faithful ren-
dering in many languages ; for Peter became a proper
name, which could only show 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 hist Petrus^ und auf diesen
Felsen will ich hauen meine Gemeine. Here, as in the
English, the turn of the original is altogether lost, for
26 EXAMINATION OF SCRIPTURE. [cHAP.
the structure of the German did not allow of its being
translated.
In the French, on the contrary, the correspondence
of the name is made so perfect, that equal injury, in an-
other respect, is done to the original meaning. Tu es
Pierre, et sur cette pierre je hatirai mon Eglise. Literally,
Thou art Peter, and on this stone I will build 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 ItaHan : Tu sei Pietro,
e sopra questa pietra io edificliero la mia chiesa. And in
the Spanish : Tu eres Pedro, y sohre esta piedra edificare
mi Iglesia.
The fidelity of the Latin Vulgate is well retained in
both these versions; but out of the whole seven lan-
guages, brethren, you see that there is not one which jus-
tifies your Doway commentary. The French approaches
the nearest to it ; but there, as I have shown 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 sup-
port the supremacy of Peter. The apostle was blest
with the privilege of being a stone, yea, a foundation
stone in the edifice 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. iii. 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 advanced, in their solicitude to find authority for
6
IV.] THE NAME, CEPHAS. 27
their favourite doctrine. It is thus stated by VigiHus,
in a letter to Eleutherius :
" 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, because he was the head and the first of all the
apostles ; and what precedes in the head, must necessa-
rily be followed in the members \" And again, in one
of the supposititious decretal epistles, attributed to pope
Anacletus, " It was granted to Peter that he should go
before the others as Cephas, and chief of the apostolate ;"
and the same idea occurs many times, being justified airb
Trig KSipaXriq, as they tell us^.
Now this assertion is peculiarly unfortunate, for it is
directly opposed to the apostle John, and to the plain
meaning of the language to which the word belongs. For
the expression used by our Lord is this : " Thou art Si-
mon the son of Jona : thou shalt he called Cephas, which is
interpreted Peters In the Greek, this latter name is
ntTjOoc, signifying a stone, as has been explained already ;
in the Latin, Petrus ; in English, Peter. But the name
Cephas is a Hebrew 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 NDO (kepha), the Hebrew word
signifying a stone, derived from ?]>D (kiph) a rock. From
^ Mansi Concil. torn. i. p. 75. " Quoniam licet omnium apostolorum
par electio, Beato Petro taraen concessum est, ut ceteris praemiiieret :
unde et Cephas vocatur, quia caput et primus est omnium apostolorum :
et quod in capite praecessit, in membris sequi necessum est."
* Mansi Concil. torn. i. p. 617-
c2
28 TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [cHAP.
this simple explanation, it is plain that the passage, pro-
perly understood, has no imaginable connexion with the
doctrine which has vainly sought support from it. Doubt-
less, brethren, most of you know this; but still, the
extravagance is found in your books, without any cor-
rective ; 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
apostles were anxious about the point of supremacy ;
but in every instance the Redeemer discouraged them,
and inculcated an humble equality. Thus (Matt. xx. 25.)
when the mother of James and John desired a superior
place for her sons, and the other apostles were moved
with indignation, it is recorded that " Jesus called them
to him, and said. You know that the princes of the Gen-
tiles 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 first among
you, shall be your servant."
Again (Matt, xxiii. 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.), we 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
whosoever shall receive me, receiveth him that sent me.
For he that is the least among you all, he is the greatest."
Again (Luke xxii. 24.), " There was a strife amongst
them, which of them should seem to be greater. And he
IV.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 29
said to them, The kings of the Grentiles 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 table in my kingdom, and may sit upon
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.''"'
Now aU 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 interpret to be the grant of his supremacy. So that
neither Peter nor his brethren could have understood
this promise of Christ as you do ; for if they had, they
surely would not afterwards have disputed which of them
should be the greatest. They must have looked on that
question as perfectly settled in Peter's favour, and would
have regarded him with deference accordingly. Neither
does our Lord's language agree with your doctrine ; for
instead of discouraging the whole inquiry, and inculcating
fraternal equality amongst them, he would, as it seems
to me, on your supposition, have reproved their want of
acquiescence in His declared 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
chapter of St. John's Gospel we read (ver. 22) that after
our Lord's resurrection He came into the room where
the disciples were gathered together, and said to them,
" Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also
c3
30 TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [CHAP.
send you. Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you
shall forgive, 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 allow to be the
power of remitting sin, or authoritatively pronouncing
forgiveness . This grant was indeed first promised to Peter ;
but was it actually conferred on him, until the Saviour
gave the spiritual faculty, by breathing on him, and say-
ing, Receive ye the Holy Ghost ? And in this actual con-
ferring of the power are not the other apostles included,
without distinction or difference l Hence, as the charac-
ter 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, indeed, was the first to
acknowledge Christ, and therefore he was the first to
receive the promise of the apostolic commission. 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 exer-
cise, than there is in the promise of the final 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. Peter as
the first bishop of Rome, there is an objection in the very
terms of the Saviour's charge, recorded in St. Mark's
IV.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. * 81
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'
confining 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 labourers ; and it seems hard to suppose
that any one of them was authorized or intended to fix
himself in a particular city as its bishop for such a length
of time. In accordance with this remark, I shall presently
cite to you, from Irenseus, the oldest list of the bishops
of Rome extant, in which Linus, and not St. Peter, is set
down as the first bishop 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 St. Peter was the chief ruler and governor
of the other apostles. And here we shall find many
difiiculties in the way of your hypothesis, which 1 confess
myself unable to solve.
In that invaluable record called the Acts of the Apos-
tles, Peter appears prominently on several important
occasions, as a speaker, a preacher, and a worker of mira-
cles ; but in no instance does he appear to assert or to
exercise any superior 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 conver-
sion of the Samaritans, through the ministry of Philip,
was made known to the apostles who were in Jerusalem
(Acts viii. 14), " tliey sent to them Peter and John."
Here is an inversion of authority. Instead of Peter
sending the other apostles, they sent him. Again, (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 ; "
c 4
32 * TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE [cHAP.
and Peter explains the whole matter, concluding in the
17th verse by 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 person 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, according to your Doway commentary.
Again (Acts xv.), we read that the apostles and elders
came together to consider of the question, whether the
gentile 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 example 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 of the prophets, as it is written,"
&ic. " Wherefore I judged continues the apostle James
(v. 19), " that they who from among the gentiles are
converted to God are not to be disquieted," &c. " Then
it pleased the apostles and ancients^ with the whole Churchy
to choose men of their own company, and to send them
IV.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 33
to Antloch with Paul and Barnabas : Judas, who was
surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the
brethren, writing by their hand : The apostles and ancients^
brethren^ to the hrethren of the gentiles^ greeting^'''' &;c. Now
in all this transaction, where is the least appearance of
Peter's supremacy? 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 V
What is there that looks like Peter's " holding the place
of the Redeemer himself upon the earth," and " bearing
the authority, 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 labours 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, can it be fairly questioned, that if any supremacy
had been conferred on one apostle above the others, 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 government,
that the fu^st should be last, and the last first, and that
the elder should serve the younger. The call of Peter
was like that of the other apostles, but Paul was converted
by a vision, and called in connexion with a miracle. His
labours, his gifts, his sufferings, his share in the epistolary
portion of the New Testament, his comprehensive, deep,
and truly extraordinary knowledge of divine truth, his
being raised up into heaven, where he heard things not
lawful for man to utter — take the whole together, brethren,
and surely it cannot be disputed that the weight of the
Scriptural evidence is greatly in his favour.
There are two points, however, which seem conclusive
to my mind on this branch of our subject ; one, that St.
c 5
34 TESTIMONY OF ST. PAUL [cHAP.
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 Eome.
On the first of these points, let us hear St. Paul him-
self in 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 1 conferred not with flesh and
hlood^ neither went I to Jerusalem to the apostles who icere
before me ; but I went into Arabia, and again I returned
to Damascus. Then, three years after, I came to Jeru-
salem to see Peter, and stayed with him fifteen days : but
other of the apostles 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 com-
municated the Grospel which I preach among the gentiles,
but apart to them who seemed to be something, lest per-
haps 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 hy subjection^ no^
not for an hour^ that the truth of the Gospel might con-
tinue with you." (Gal. ii. 1 — 5.)
" But of them who seemed to be something," continues
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 apos-
tleship of the circumcision, wrought in me also among
IV.] AGAINST Peter's supremacy. 35
the gentiles). And when they had known the grace that
was given to me, James and Cephas and John^ who seemed
to he pillars^ gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of
fellowship : that we shovM go to the gentiles^ and they to
the circumcision.'''' " But when Cephas was come to
Antioch, / withstood him to the face^ hecause he was hlame-
able. For before that some came from James, he did eat
with the gentiles ; but when they were come, he with-
drew and separated himself, fearing those of the circumci-
sion. And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented;
so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimu-
lation. 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, Hvest after the manner
of the gentiles, and not of the Jews, how dost thou com-
pel the gentiles to follow the way of the Jews V
Now, I ask you, brethren, to ponder these extracts
from the writings of St. Paul, and see how totally incom-
patible they are with your doctrine of St. Peter's supre-
macy. Here is this great teacher, whom the fathers so
continually call the " elect vessel," exercising his apos-
tleship for three years without conferring at all with the
other apostles ; then visiting Peter, of whom he speaks
without any note of distinction : then fourteen years after,
visiting Jerusalem again, mentioning those who seemed to
be something, with an express denial that they added any
thing to him, and as express 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 incon-
sistency, 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
c 6
36 PAUL, THE FOUNDER [cHAP.
you, say, whether it is possible to conceive that St. Paul
knew, all this time, that he was writing about the ruler and
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
Do way catechism and your canon law, have only to be
compared in sober sincerity with the epistle to the Gala-
tians, to convince any candid mind, as it seems to me, of
their total inconsistency. 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 decisive.
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, say-
ing : After I have been there I must also see Rome.'"*
Again, (Ch. xxiii. 11.) the Lord standing by him said:
" Be constant ; for as thou hast testified of me in Jeru-
salem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome." Then
in the 28th chapter, his arrival in that city is related,
with many interesting particulars, and the book ends
with stating that " 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 teaching the
things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all con-
fidence, without prohibition." With what success his
labours 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.
IV.] OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 37
Paul was in an especial manner the apostle of the gen-
tiles — as James, Peter, and John had given to him the
right hand of fellowship, (Gal. ii.) 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 " in the Spirit,'^ that is, by divine sug-
gestion, to go there, — as he was encouraged in his pur-
pose by a vision, and safely conducted on his way, and
preached successfully two years, while not one word
appears of Peter's labours in that quarter, — I have cer-
tainly 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 circum-
stances should be handed down to the Church in the
inspired history of the Acts of the Apostles, thought it
good to record this important fact, to be a standing me-
morial to the end of time. That after all this, brethren,
St. Paul should be made to act a secondary part to St.
Peter in founding 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 investigation, when employed upon
the subject of your exclusive claims.
To conclude this branch of the evidence, it may be
necessary to remind you, that in the two epistles of St.
Peter there is not one word intimating the supreme rule
and government supposed to be conferred on him. In
St. PauPs epistles, we have several strong allusions to the
apostolic rod, and the delivering persons to Satan as a
consequence of his ecclesiastical judgment. And St.
John refers very plainly to his authority where he speaks
of Diotrephes. But St. Peter neither speaks of his
powers himself, nor does any other apostolic vn-iter speak
of them for him ; so that the whole tenor of Scripture
seems, to my mind, irreconcilably hostile to your doc-
38 PAUL, THE FOUNDER, &C. [cHAP. IV.
trine. 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 doc-
trine an article of faith, necessary to salvation ! Have
you never wondered, brethren, that the Acts of the
Apostles, and the twenty-one epistles of the New Testa-
ment, should contain so much that might have been
omitted, in the rich abundance of their treasures, while
yet the supremacy of Peter, although essential, 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 ^our voluminous works on
the councils of the Church offer to their readers, are the
apostolical canons, the apostolical constitutions, and the
decretal epistles of the early bishops of Rome.
Of the first of these, the apostolical canons, your
authors, 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 recog-
nized by the councils, and are therefore entitled to great
regard \ 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 resembles in the least your present doctrine.
^ Of the apostolical canons, Dionysius Exiguus says : (see Mansi
Concil. torn. i. p. 3.) " In principio canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum,
de Graeco transtulimus, quihus plurimi consensum non prcehuere facilem."
And Isidorus Mercator says, (ib. p. 6.) " Denique propter eorum aucto-
ritatem caeteris conciliis praeposuimus canones, qui dicuntur Apostolorum,
licet a quUmsdam apocn^hi dicanturJ*
40 TESTI]\lfi>:_ ' THE [chap.
To sHeuyJlQyv'GVer, distinctly, my authority for this asser-
tion, it may be as well to quote those canons which
exhibit the genuine ecclesiastical polity of the primi-
tive 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 con-
strained by many : unless it be fit 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 judgment
and most urgent exhortation of many Ushops \''
You remember, brethren, that your canon submits the
translation of bishops to the pope alone. Here it is
submitted to thejudgmentof mf^?^y 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
nation should know him who is first among them, and
esteem 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 belong to his own diocese, and to the
villages which are under his authority. But neither
should the primate do any thing without the opinion of
all. For thus shall concord continue, and God will be
glorified, through our Lord Jesus Christ ^"
^ Mansi Concil. torn, i, p. 31. " Episcopo non liceat sua relicta parochia
ad aliam transilire, etiamsi a pluribus cogatur : nisi sit aliqua causa ration!
consentanea, quae eum cogat hoc facere, utpote ad majus lucrum, cum
possit ipse iis, qui illic habitant, pietatis verbo conferre ; idque non ex
se, sed multorum episcoporum judicio et maxima exhortatione."
2 Ibid. 35. "Episcopos uniuscuj usque gentis nosse oportet eum qui
in eis est primus, et existimare ut caput : et niliil facere, quod sit arduum
aut magni momenti, prseter illius sententiam : ilia autem facere unum-
quemque, quae ad suam parochiam pertinent, et pagos qui ei subsunt. Sed
nee ille absque omnium sententia aliquid agat. Sic enim erit concordia,
et glorificabitur Deus per Dommum Jesum Christum."
v.] APOSTOLIC CANONS. 41
The comment of Binnius himself upon this canon, zeal-
ous as he is for your claims, interprets it rightly of the
metropolitan bishops. " The Council of Nice," saith he,
" and the council of Ephesus follow these apostolic
canons, decreeing that every bishop should acknowledge
his primate and metropolitan.'''' But here is not one word
of your fundamental doctrine of obedience to the supposed
chief ruler, the bishop of Rome \
Once more, the thirty-sixth canon provides, that
" Twice in the year, a council of bishops shall assemble
and examine amongst themselves the decrees of religion,
and settle all the ecclesiastical controversies that may
occur : once in the fourth week of Pentecost, and again
on the twelfth day of October ^."
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 doc-
trine, before 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, the punishment shall be
decreed. But if being summoned, he does not obey, 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 if he then, contumaciously despising them, does
not appear, the council may give sentence on those
1 Ibid. 61. E. "Nicaena Synodus can. 6. et Ephesina illis actis quae
post 1. Can. edita sunt, hos canones Apostolorum sequuntur, statuentes
ut singuli Episcopi suum primuni et metropolitanum agnoscant," &c.
2 Ibid. 35. E. " Bis in anno fiat episcoporum Synodus, et inter se exa-
minent decreta religionis, et incidentes ecclesiasticas controversias com-
ponant ; semel quidem quarta hebdomada Pentecostes, iterum autem
Hyperberetaei duodecimo."
42 TESTIMONY OF THE APOSTOLIC CANONS. [cHAP. V.
points which they see proved, lest he should seem to pro-
fit by flying from judgment \"
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 imagine.
^ Ibid. 43. " Episcopum a viris fide dignis ob aKquid accusatum, ipsum
ab episcopis vocari necesse est : et si se quidem stiterit, et confessus vel
convietus sit, statuatur poena. Si autem vocatus non paruerit, secundo
etiam vocetur, missis ad ipsum episcopis duobus. Si etiam sic non obedi-
ent, vocetur et tertio, duobus ad eum rursus missis episcopis. Si autem
vel sic aspernans et contumax se non stiterit, Synodus ea quae videntur,
ad versus eum pronunciet, ne lucrifacere videatur, dum judicium sub-
terfugit."
CHAPTER VI.
Brethren in Christ,
The next piece of antiquity which comes under the
name of the apostles, is called the ApostoKcal Constitu-
tions, and purports, as you are doubtless well aware, to
be a complete body of ecclesiastical doctrine, govern-
ment, and worship, set forth by all the apostles in coun-
cil, Clement of Rome acting as their notary. This
claim of apostohc authority is universally denied by your
writers ; but nevertheless they warmly applaud the work,
as containing nothing inconsistent with the system of the
four first centuries, as being the chief fountain of eccle-
siastical doctrine and practice in the Greek Church, and
as being very useful, nay, necessary to be known by
every one studious of Christian antiquity. Your scho-
lars 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 \
* Your learned Philip Labbe S. I. (Mansi Concil. torn. i. p. 254;
declares the Apostolic Constitutions to be " Uberrimum ilium universi
fere apud Graecos canonici juris fontem et disciplinse Ecclesiastica: the-
saurum in plerisque locupletissimum irdaav KavoviKrjv rd^iv, ut docet
Epiphanius, complectentem." " Satisque eonstare, nihil quicquam
in iis reperivi, quod Ecclesiastieae quatuor primorum saeculorum disci-
plinae consentaneum non sit," &c. And again, your learned editor says :
44 TESTIMONY OF THE [CHAP.
For myself, I must frankly say, that I have read
nothing of ancient times with more interest than these
constitutions. They are rich in doctrine, in eloquence,
and in forms of devotion ; and curious in point of cere-
monial detail. But I have searched them in vain for any
trace of your doctrine on the primacy of Peter, the vica-
rious 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 throughout 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 de-
sirable.
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.^
Another specimen is furnished in the following pas-
sage: " On account of these things also, we ourselves,
being gathered together in one, Peter, Andrew, James
and John, the sons of Zebedee, Philip, Bartholomew,
Thomas, and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Lebbeus
(Mansi Concil. torn. i. 254.) " Constitutiones quas vocant apostolicas
opus esse spurium, ab iis, quibus adscribuntur, apostolis, turn et ab
ipsa apostolorum aetate penitus alienum, nemo Theologus modo ignorat
vel diffitetur."
Ibid. 256. " Quae si conjeeturae admittantur, intra spatium illud,
quod anno 309 et 325 concluditur, vulgatarum Constitutionum sedes
Agenda est."
" Utcumque res liabeat sese, utile est opus ad multa, et dogmatum
nostrorum vetustati adstruendae apprime necessarium."
1 Mansi Concil. Tom. 1. p. 274. "Constitutiones quae tribuuntur
apostolis."
" Apostoli et presbyteri omnibus qui ex gentibus in Dominum Je-
sum Christum credidistis, gratia vobis, et pax ab Omnipotente Deo,"
&c.
VI.] APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. 45
whose surname is Thaddeus, Simon the Canaanite, and
Matthias, who was elected in our number in the place of
Judas, and James the brother of our Lord, the same who
is the bishop of Jerusalem, also Paul, the doctor of the
Gentiles and the chosen vessel, all, I say, gathered toge-
ther 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 honoured, 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 creatures may be
used in food, with giving of thanks, since they are of God,"
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.
^ Ibid. Lib. vi. Cap. 14. p. 458. "Propter quse et ipsi nunc in unum
congregati, Petrus, Andreas, Jacobus et Joannes filii Zebedsei, Philippus,
Bartholomseus, Thomas et Matthseus, Jacobus Alphsei, et Lebbseus cog-
nomento Thaddseus, Simon Chananseus, et Matthias, qui loco Judse in
numerum nostrum electus est, et Jacobus frater Domini, idemque Hiero-
solymitanus episcopus, item Paulus Doctor Gentium ac vas electionis,
omnes, inquam, in unum congregati scripsimus vobis catholicam hanc
doctrinam ad fulciendum ac confirmandum vos, quibus universalis epis-
copatus creditus est. In qua doctrinaf hsec vobis exponimus. Deum
omnipotentem unum tantum esse, ac prseter hunc neminem alium esse,
oportereque hunc solummodo colere ac venerari per Jesum Christum
Dominum nostrum in Sancto Spiritu: item uti scripturis sacris, lege et
prophetis, honorare parentes, omnem actionem pravam fugere, resurrec-
tionem et judicium credere, remunerationem expectare, omnibus creaturis
in cibo uti cum gratiarum actione, utpote a Deo factis," &c.
46 TESTIMONY OF THE [CHAP.
being present, and James the bishop, and the other elders
and the seven deacons."
"I therefore, Peter, say first, that the bishop is to be
ordained as we have all decreed alike already,"' &c/
"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
heretics," &lc.^
" Concerning the ordination of the presbyters, I, the
beloved of the Lord, (sc. John,) appoint to you bishops :
when thou ordainest a presbyter, O bishop, place thy hand
upon his head, the presbyters and deacons standing by."
&c.'
" But concerning the ordination of deacons, I Philip,
decree that thou, O bishop, shalt ordain the deacon, by
the laying on of thy hands, all the presbyters and deacons
being present," &c. ^
" And concerning the deaconess, I, Bartholomew, ap-
point, that thou, O bishop, shalt lay hands on her, in
1 Ibid. Lib. 8. cap. 4. p. 538. " Nos igitur duodecim apostoli Domini,
qui una sumus, has vobis constitutiones de omni ecclesiastica forma indi-
cimus, prsesente Paulo vase electionis, et co-apostolo nostro, et Jacobo
episcopo ac reliquis presbyteris et septem diaconis. Ego igitur primus
Petrus dico ordinandum esse episcopum, ut omnes pariter antea consti-
tuimus," &e.
2 lb. cap. 12. p. 651. " Dico ego Jacobus frater Joannis Zebedsei, ut
statim edicat diaconus: Ne quis ex catechumenis: ne quis ex audientibus:
ne quis ex infidelibus: ne quis ex haereticis," &c.
2 lb. cap. 16. p. 567- " De ordinatione presbyterorum ego dilectus a
Domino constituo vobis episcopis : Cum presbyterum ordinas, episcope,
impone ipse manum capiti presbyteri, astantibus tibi presbyteris et dia-
conis," &c.
* lb. cap. 17. p. 570. " De ordinatione vero diaconorum ego Philippus
constituo, ut diaconum ordines, episcope, imponendo manus praesentibus
omnibus presbyteris, et diaconis," &c.
VI.] APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS. 47
the presence of the presbyters, the deacons, and the
deaconesses," «fec.^
" I, Simon, the Canaanite, decree the number of
bishops by whom a bishop ought to be ordained, namely,
by two or tlu-ee," &;c.^
" And I, Paul, the least of the apostles, appoint to
you bishops and presbyters, concerning the canons," &c.'
Such passages, brethren, might be greatly multiplied ;
but these specimens, I trust, are sufficient to shew the
simplicity and equality with which the powers of the
apostles are exhibited in this interesting record of anti-
quity. Can these extracts 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 epis-
copal jurisdiction is mentioned : " To you, bishops, it is
said. Whatsoever pe shall hind on earthy shall he hound also
in heaven^ and whatsoever ye shall loose on earthy shall he
loosed also in heaven*'.'''' Here we have the very lan-
guage which the Saviour addressed to Peter, used in the
plural form, and applied to all bishops without distinction
or difference, agreeing admirably with the sentiment of
^ lb. cap. 18. " De diaconissa vero ego Bartholomaeus constituo'ut
manus ei, episcope, imponas praesentibus presbyteris, et diaconis ac dia-
conissis."
2 lb. cap. 27. p. 575. " Ego Simon Cananaeus constituo a quot epis-
copis debeat ordinari episcopus, scilicet a duobus, aut tribus episcopis,"
&c.
3 lb. cap. 32. p. 578. " Et ego Paulus minimus apostolorum, hsec vobis
episcopis et presbyteris de canonibus constituo," &c.
* lb. lib. ii. cap. xi. p. 298. " Vobis episcopis dictum est : Quodcun-
que ligaveritis super terram, erit ligatum et in coelo, et quodcunque sol-
veritis super terram, erit solutura et in coelo."
48 TESTIMONY OF THE, &C. [CHAP. VI.
the final chapter, where Christ is caEed the "High Priest,
the pontiff, the bishop of all \*'''
Surely, then, we cannot differ in the conclusion, that
neither the apostolical canons, nor the apostolical con-
stitutions 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.
1 Id. 594. D. E. " Omnium episcopum, et Pontificem Christum, Je-
sum Dominura nostrum."
CHAPTER VII.
Brethren in Christ,
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
pontifical book of pope Damasus. These writings are of
a very different character from the subjects of my last
chapter. The favourite topic which runs tlirough them
all, is the authority 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 genuine, they would be entitled to great weight
in settling the antiquity, if not the divine right, of this
your fundamental doctrine.
But here, bretlu*en, 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
Hincmar, that they were the fruits of the dishonest zeal
of Riculfus, who was the bishop of Moguntum, A.D.
787, and who, finding that the authority of the pope
needed support in France, devised these false documents
in the hope of sustaining it.
Certain it is, by the plain statement of your own writers,
that they began to be published about A.D. 836, and
that pope Nicolas I. A.D. 865, contended strongly with
the French clergy, in order to have these forgeries re-
50 THE DECRETAL EPISTLES. [cHAP.
ceived. 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 reformation, and has been acknowledged for a
long period amongst all candid men of your own com-
munion. 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 condemnation. The
language of your famous Labbe is particularly 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 ^^
Brethren, what think you of the fact thus candidly
1 Observatio Philip Labbe, S. I. Mansi Concil. torn. i. p. 86. " Mirum
est viris doctissimis Turriano, Binio, et quibusdam aliis in tanta erudi-
tionis ecclesiasticse luce probari potuisse decretales illas epistolas, a quo-
cumque, seu mercatore, seu peccatore fabricatas, et antiquis Romanae
urbis Pontificibus circiter annum Christianae epochse octingentesimum
suppositas: adeo enim perspicacibus viris deformes videntur hoc saltern
tempore, ut nulla arte, nulla cerussa aut purpurisso fucari possint. Eas
omnes, saltern plerasque earum repudiarunt eruditissimi quique tracta-
tores CathoUci, Baronius, Bellarminus, Perronius, Contius, Antonius Au-
gustinus, Lorinus, Sirmondus, Duoaeus, Petavius, Marca, Bosquetus, ut
alios modo, sive antiquiores, sive recentiores, silentio obvolvam."
lb. p. 87. " Antique juri universalis Ecclesise assensu roborato, suc-
cessit Jussum Novum, quod ab anno 836 publicari coepit, et adnitente
Nicolao I. et caeteris Romanis pontificibus paulatim usu invaluit per occi-
dentis provincias." -
lb. p. 89. " Riculfus autem, a quo publicatam fuisse docet Hincmarus,
Ecclesiam Moguntiacam tenuit ab anno 787> usque ad annum 814, et
Sedem ApostoUcam devote coluit ; ut testis est auctor praefationis ad Bene-
dicti Levitae coUectionem. Quod fortasse illi epistolarum interpolandarum
desiderium injecit, ut labantem Romanae Ecclesiae auctoritatem in Galliis
restauraret."
lb. p. 90. " E. Contenderat tamen Nicolaus Uteris ad universos Galliae
Episcopos datis anno 865, ut decreta ilia reciperentur, et magno conatu
Gallicanorum Episcoporum argumenta repulerat."
VII.] ACKNOWLEDGED FRAUD. 51
admitted by your own authors ? That the admission is
honourable 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 equally undeniable ; and I bear my testi-
mony thus far, with unfeigned satisfaction, in favour of
the -personal integrity which your frank dealing has ex-
hibited. 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 itself? Does
not the admission, that the ninth century gave birth to
such an imposture, executed by a bishop and patronized
by successive popes, cast a mist of melancholy suspicion
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 boasted of
infallibility ?
Avoid them as we may, brethren, these questions will
obtrude themselves upon us. Why were these epistles
forged, if the prerogatives of St. Peter and his successors
were in reality admitted to be then what your Canon law
states them to be now ? Why should men, high in office,
and having much to lose by a failure in such an attempt,
artfully 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 I.
— ^the supposed chief rulers and governors, who held the
place of Christ upon the earth, and had committed to
them the plenitude of power — what security have we for
the pure and faithful guardianship of the other books,
d2
52 ACKNOWLEDGED FRAUD. [cHAP. VII.
which came down to us, through the same hands, from
the same remote antiquity ?
But I turn from the prosecution of this theme, my
brethren. It is not necessary to my argument to press
it farther ; and no mind of true Christian feehng 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 repre-
hension. But, perhaps, though the spirit of the bishop
of Moguntum and pope Nicolas I. was not confined to
their day nor to their persons, 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
after the Scriptures, are the writings of the apostolic
fathers, as they are called, from which nothing positive
can be derived on the point in question. As a useful
instance of circumstantial 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, addressed 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 dwells at Rome, to the
Church of God which dwells 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 \^' — An
^ Mansi Concil. torn. i. p. 171. " Ecclesia Dei quae incolit Romam ec-
clesiae Dei quae incolit Corinthum, vocatis sanctificatis in voluntate Dei
1) 3
54 TESTIMONY OF CLEMENT [cHAP.
humble beginning this ! for Clement, instead of affecting
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. Therefore, having received their command from
Him, and being certainly assured by the resuiTcction of
our Lord Jesus Christ, and confirmed in faith by the
word of God, with the abundance and safeguard of the
Holy Ghost, they went forth announcing the approach of
the kingdom of God. Preaching, accordingly, through
regions and cities, they appointed the first fruits of those
whom they approved in the spirit, as bishops and deacons,
over those who believed \" Here was an excellent oppor-
tunity 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 title of episcopacy. Therefore, on this
account, having obtained perfect foreknowledge, they
appointed those of whom we have spoken before, and
per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, gratia et pax ab omnipotente
Deo per Jesum Christum, in vobis singulis et erga vos invicem multipli-
cetur."
^ Ibid. p. 202. " Apostoli nobis evangehzaverunt a Domino Jesu
Christo, Jesus Christus a Deo. Missus est igitur Christus a Deo, et
apostoli a Christo : factumque est utrumque ordinatim ex voluntate Dei.
Itaque acceptis mandatis et certo persuasi per resurrectionem Domini
nostri Jesu Christi, et in fide confirmati per verbum Dei cum Spiritus
Sancti plenitudine et securitate, egressi sunt annuntiantes adventurum
esse regnum Dei. Praedicantes igitur per regiones ac urbes, primitias
earum, spiritu cum probassent, in episcopos et diaeonos eorum qui cre-
dituri erant constituerunt."
VIII.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 55
delivered a rule thenceforward for the future succession,
that when they departed, other approved men should
take their office and ministry. Those, therefore, who
were appointed by them, or after their time, by other
distinguished men, with the consent of the whole Church,
and who fulfilled their ministry to the sheepfold of Christ,
humbly, quietly, and liberally, and through a long period
secured the highest approbation from all men : those we
think unjustly deposed from their office. Nor will it be
accounted a light sin, if those who offer gifts without
strife and with holiness, are removed from their episco-
pate \" In this passage, it seems difficult to imagine
how Clement could avoid some allusion to his own juris-
diction, 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, therefore,
that the Corinthians could legally have done, was to have
preferred a complaint to the see of Peter. And in pre-
suming to act without applying to the vicar of Christ,
the pastor and prince over the whole Church under
heaven, they showed themselves manifest despisers of
^ Ibid. 203. " Apostoli quoque nostri per Dominum nostrum Jesum
Christum cognoverunt futuram esse de nomine episcopatus contentionem.
Earn igitur ob causam, perfectam prsecognitionem adepti, prsedictos con-
stituerunt, ac deinceps futurae successionis banc tradiderunt regulam, ut
cum illi decessissent, ministerium eorum ac munus alii probati viri exci-
perent. Qui igitur ab illis, aut deinceps ab aliis viris eximiis, consenti-
ente ecclesia universa constituti sunt, et ovili Christi humiliter, quiete,
liberaliterque ministrarunt, ac longo tempore prseclarum ab omnibus
reportarunt testimonium: hos censemus officio injuste dejici. Nonenim
leve erit peccatum, si eos, qui citra querelam et sancte offerunt dona, ab
episcopatu removerimus."
D 4
56 TESTIMONY OF CLEMENT [cHAP.
government, and guilty of an open contempt of the high-
est authority. Why does not Clement mention this fea-
ture in their conduct? Why does not the Church of
Rome, writing to her subordinate subjects, assert her
just rights as " the mother and mistress of all the
Churches r' Why does not her bishop recognise, 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 docu-
ment of genuine antiquity, on any other hypothesis than
this : Clement 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 principles 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, pu-
rity, and temperance, to the praise of His name, through
our High Priest and Advocate, Jesus Christ ; through
whom, to Him, be glory, majesty, power, honour, both
now and for ever. Amen \'"
^ Ibid. 214. " Inspector omnium Deus, Spirituum Dominus, et hems
universae camis, qui elegit Dominura Jesum Christum, et per eum nos in
populum peculiarem, det omni animae, quae magnificum et sanctum nomen
ejus invocaverit, timorem, pacem, patientiam, aequanimitatem, conti-
nentiam, puritatem et temperantiam, ut nomini ejus gratia sit, per sum-
mum sacerdotem et patronum nostrum Jesum Christum, per quern illi
VIII.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 57
Your industrious collectors give us several other
epistles bearing the name of Clement, which, on some
accounts, are both curious and interesting ; 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.
gloria, majestas, potentia, honor, et nunc et in omnia saecula saeculorum.
Amen."
D 5
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
establishment of the very Church of Rome, he makes it
the act of both Peter and Paul ; and while he grants to
that Church an important rank, he expresses himself in
such a manner as is totally irreconcilable 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
salvation, except by those, through whom the Gospel
came to us ; which at first they preached orally, but after-
wards, by the will of God, delivered it to us in the Scrip-
tures, to be the pillar and ground of our faith \" Here,
1 " Non enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognovimus, quam
per eos, per quos Evangelium pervenit ad nos ; quod quidem tunc prae-
conaverunt, postea vero per Dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradide-
runt, fundamentum et columnam fidei nostrae futurum." — Iren. Cont.
Haeres. lib. 3. cap. 1.
CHAP. IX.] TESTIMONY OF IREN.EUS. 59
you perceive, Irenseus calls the Scriptures the " pillar and
ground of our faith," and refers this pillar and ground
to the apostles generally, without distinction. A little
farther on, he says that " Matthew, among the Hebrews,
published the Gospel in their own language, Peter and
Paul then preaching at Rome, and laying the foundation
of the Church. After 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 \'''' Here, though speaking on the very
point, there is not a hint of Peter's supremacy, although
it is plain that if Irenaeus had known of such a doctrine,
every motive of truth and interest would have combined
to favour its publication.
But the third chapter of the same book presents a pas-
sage to which you frequently refer, and therefore I shall
insert it at length, that its true meaning may be clearly
seen.
Arguing against the Gnostic heretics of his day, Irenseus
says, " The tradition of the apostles being manifested
through all the world, it remains to be seen throughout the
whole Church by those who wish to behold the truth. And
we are able to enumerate those who were appointed 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
1 '0 [ikv ^ri MarOaloQ iv toXq 'E/3pat'oic Ty Ib'iq, ^laXI/cry avTuiv, Kai
ypa^rjv t^r]VEyKev tvayysXiov, tov Jlsrpov Kal rov HavXov 'Pujfiy evay-
yeXi^ofikvoiv, Kal ^sfisXiovvru>v tijv iKKXr}<yiav' fxsTd dk rrjv tovtojv
e^^oSov, MdpKog 6 fiaOijTtjg Kal epfir]vevTr)g TLirpov, Kal avrbg to. virh
W'tTQov Krjpvffffoixeva lyypd(pbjg rifuv irapadeSbJKe' Kal AovKag Sk 6 oko-
XovOog HavXov, to vtt' Ikuvov KTjpvaaofiivov tvayykXiov tv /3tj3Acy
narkQiTo. lb.
D 6
60 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
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 successions of
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, showing the
tradition which it has from the apostles, and the faith
announced 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, on every side ; in which
the tradition which is from the apostles has always been
preserved by those who are round about it \"
" The blessed apostles therefore founding and regulat-
ing this Church, delivered to Linus the work of the epis-
copate, 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 chosen to
the episcopate, who saw the blessed apostles themselves,
and resided with them, and had as yet their preaching
and their tradition before his eyes : nor he alone, for at
that time many survived who had been taught by the
^ § 1 . " Traditionem itaque apostolorum in toto mundo manifestatam,
in omni Ecclesia adest respicere omnibus qui vera velint videre: ethabe-
mus annumerare eos qui ab apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis,
et successores eorum usque ad nos, qui nihil tale docuerunt, neque cogno-
verunt, quale ab his deliratur." § 2. " Sed quoniam valde longum est
in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare successiones ; maxi-
mae, antiquissimae, et omnibus cognitse, a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis
Petro et Paulo Romae fundatae et constitutae Ecclesiae, eam quam habet
ab Apostolis traditionem, et annuntiatam 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 sententiam, praeterquam oportet coUigunt. Ad banc
enim ecclesiam propter potiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem con-
venire Ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab
his, qui sunt imdique, conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolis traditio."
IX.] IRENJJUS. 61
apostles. Under this Clement, a serious dissension having
arisen among the brethren at Corinth, the Church which
is at B/ome wrote very powerful letters to the Corinthians,
bringing them to peace, and repairing their faith, and
enforcing the tradition which had been recently 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 pre-
pared fire for the devil and his angels. That this father
of our Lord Jesus Christ was announced by the Churches,
those who will can learn from the Scripture itself, and
can understand the apostolical tradition of the Church ;
since this is an epistle more ancient than 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
Alexander, and then Sixtus was constituted, the sixth
after the apostles, 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, Eleu-
therius holds the episcopate. By this ordination and
succession, that tradition which is from the apostles in
the Church, and the preaching of the truth, reach even
to us.''
" And also Polycarp, who was not only taught by the
apostles, and had conversed with many of those who had
seen Christ, but was even constituted bishop in the
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
martyrdom, he departed this life,) he likewise taught
always those things which he had learned from the
62 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
apostles, which he delivered to the Church, and which
alone are true. To these things, all the Churches which
are in Asia bear testimony, and those who, even to the
present day, have succeeded 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, declaring that he
had received from the apostles that one and only system
of truth which he delivered to the Church \"
Here is the passage with its context, showing the argu-
ment of Irenseus 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 Ire-
* § 3. Oefit\iu)(TavTeg ovv Kal oiKodonrjaavreg oi fiaK&pioi ciTroaroXoi
Ttjv lKK\i](Tiav, Aivq) riijv TrJQ iTTKTKOTrrig Xeirovpyiav kvexeipKTav tov-
Tov Tov Aivov TlavXog ev raXg irpbg Tiiiodeov iTTKXToKalg fxefivrjTai' dia-
Sex^rai dk avrbv 'AvsyKKijrog, fiara tovtov de tqitij) roTTii) drrb rStv
dirotTTokbiv rriv tTTKTKOTrrjv KXrjpovrai KXrifiTjg, 6 Kai liopaKihg roiig
fxaKupiovg diroGToXovg, Kai (TVixj3e(3Xr}K<l)g avTolg, Kal tri tvavXov to
KTjpvyfia tS)V aVooroXwr, Kal rriv 7rapddo<nv Tcpb 6(p9aXfiojv fxwj/, ov
[xovog, in yap ttoXXoi vTrsXsiirovTO tots aTTo tojv dTroaroXiov dtdiday-
[isvor sTTi TOVTOV ovv TOV KXrjfisvTog (TTacreojg ovk bXiyrjg rolg Iv Ko-
piv9({i ytvofiivrjg ddeX(poXg, eTrsffTSiXtv rj ev 'P(t)fiy tKKXt](ria iKavojTciTrjv
ypa<priv ToXg Kopiv9ioig, dg eiprjvrjv (TVfijSi^dKovcra avrovg, Kal dvave-
ovcra TTjv tt'kjtiv avToJv, Kal tjv vsuxttI ditb rwv aVooroXwv Trapddoffiv
dX'^ipti
aimuntiantem unum Deum omnipotentem, factorem coeli et terrae, plas-
matorem hominis, qui induxerit cataclysmum, et advocaverit Abraham,
qui eduxerit populum de terra Mgypti, qui colloquutus sit Moysi, qui
legem disposuerit, et prophetas miserit, qui ignem prseparaverit diabolo
et angelis ejus. Hunc Patrem Domini nostri Jesu Christi ab Eeclesiis
amiuntiari, ex ipsa Scriptura, qui velint, discere possunt, et Apostolicam
Ecclesiae traditionem intelligere ; quum sit vetustior epistola his qui nunc
falso decent, et alterum Deum super Demiurgum et factorem horum
omnium, quse sunt commentiuntur.
IX.] IRENiEUS. 63
nseus declares, that "^o the Church of Rome ^ h^ reason of
the more powerful principality^ it must needs he that the
whole Church resort^ that is, those who are faithful on every
side ; in which the tradition which is from the apostles has
always been preserved.'''' And these, you say, prove Ire-
nseus to be a witness, that the pope then possessed su-
preme 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
Irenseus authorize your conclusion ? Does he not, in the
first place, speak of all the apostles indifferently, and ex-
pressly declare that the tradition of the apostles was given
to us " in the Scriptures, to he the pillar and ground of our
faith f'' Does he not make the establishment of the
Church of Rome the joint act of both Peter and Paul,
saying in positive terms that they set Linus over that
Tov ^£ KXrjfitvra tovtov diadex^Tai 'Evapfffrog, Kal tov Ewapeorov
'AXk^avlpoQ' d9' ovnog Iktoq d-Trb twv aTroaroXajv KaQiaraTai ^vtrrog'
fiiTCL dk TOVTOV TfXscr^opog, og Kal kvSo^ojg efiapTvpTjtrev' tireiTa 'Yylvog,
tiTU TUog' jxiQ' ov 'AviicrjTog' diade^afisvov tov 'Aviktjtov "EojTrjpog, vvv
S(t)5eKa.Tq) TOTtif) tov Trig tTTiCKOTriJe dirb tCjv airoaToKiov KaTf-x^f- i^^^ipov
'EXtvOepog, Ty avTy tol^si, Kai Ty avTy didaxy rirt dirb tCjv dTrotsroXtav
ev Ty IkkXti(Xi(ji irapddoffig, Kai Tb Trjg dXijOeiag Krjpvyfia KaTtjvTrjKtv tig
y'lfidg.
§ 4. Kai UoXvKapTrog Sk ov fiovov dirb aTTOffToXojv fiaOrjTSvOtlg, Kai
avvavaaTpa<pdg TroXXolg ToXg rbv Xpiirrov kiopaKoaiv, dXXd Kal dirb
ctTroffroXwv KaTaeTaOelg sig ti)v 'Atriav, Iv Ty Iv ^iivpvy tKKXr}(Ti<f,
kTricTKOTTog, ov Kal rjfieig ecjpciKafisv iv Ty TrpojTy r/XiKig, {tTrnroXv yap
irapsfitive, Kal Trdvv yripaXkog, kvlo^iog Kal tTri^av'scTTaTa fiapTvprjaag
l^rjXde TOV j8iou) tavTa dida^f^g del, d Kal Trapd tCjv diroaToXojv ifiaOev,
& Kai rj eKKXtjffia Trapadidioaiv, ci Kai fiova eCTiv dXtjOrj. MapTvpovai
TOVTOig al KUTCL TTjv 'Affiav kKKXr]<Tiai rrdaai, Kal oi fi'^xpi- vvv diadsdsy-
fikvoi Tbv UoXvKapTTov, ttoXX^ d^ioTnaTOTtpov koI (5e(3ai6Tepov dXT)9tiag
fxapTvpa ovTa, OvaXevTivov Kal MapKiwvog, Kal tCjv Xonrdtv KaKoyvto-
fiovijJV og Kai stti 'Aviktjtov kTiiSrj/xrjffag Ty 'Fdjfiy, TroXXovg drrb tS)V
TrpoeiprjjjLkvMV aipeTiKwv sTreorptTpEV eig Trjv kKKXtjaiav tov Qsov, jxiav
Kal fi6vr)v TavT7]v dXriQi.iav KTjpv^ag dirb twv aTToaToXiov TrapuXricpkvai,
ri)v dirb Trig kKKXr}(Tiag Trapadsdofikvrjv. Iren. cont. Haer. Lib. 3. Cap. 3.
p. 176.
6
64 TESTIMONY OF [
CHAP.
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 location 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 prin-
cipality 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 which was at once the head and the heart of
that most mighty of empires, 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 numerous, the most influen-
tial, and the most important Church in the general esteem
of Christians, by reason of its peculiar location — all this I
freely concede. Irenseus 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-
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, everywhere round about, must
of necessity resort. The distinction here granted, and
IX.] IREN^US. 65
the necessary results of it, were equally suited to the
argument of Irenseus, whether St. Peter had any connec-
tion 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 other character.
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 examine it closely. The words of the
original, as you know, are lost ; and we are obliged to
take for the original a very poor Latin version. Such as
we have it, the passage stands thus : " Adhanc enim eccle-
siam, propter potiorem principalitatem^ necesse est,'''' S^c.,
literally: " To this Church, on account of the more
powerful principality, it must needs be," &c. The trans-
lator does not say: proper potiorem principalitatem ejus,
— on account of its more powerful principality, — but
leaves out all connexion of the kind : which it is strange
he should have done, if he designed to convey the mean-
ing you attribute to him. Hence, I conceive myself
strictly authorized to infer that such was not his inten-
tion : 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 testimony.
A little reflection upon the scope of Irenseus" argument
will perhaps show this point more clearly. He had been
employed in refuting the wild absurdities of the Gnostic
heretics from the authority of Scripture, and now he
desires 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
66 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
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," con-
tinues 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 principality of the
Roman empire. He then counts up the succession 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 preaching of Polycarp,
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 favourable
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 strain the natural
meaning of the words, but the idea conveyed by it would
have no connexion with the argument. The testimony
of the Church of Rome to the principles of the Gospel,
was what Irenseus wanted to adduce against the Gnostics :
and this testimony could have been in no wise affected by
a point of episcopal supremacy. But he adduced this
Church in preference, because it was the greatest, and
the best known, in consequence of the concourse of all
the faithful 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 distin-
guished body.
IX.] TREN^US. 67
I am happy to find your learned Touttee, the trans-
lator of Cyril, concurring in this view, in his Appendix
to the fifth Oatechesis (p. 82), where, speaking of the
Church in Jerusalem, he says, that " the concoiu-se of
all strangers from every part of the world, produced the
same result as Irenseus had remarked of Rome, that
novelties could not there increase against the force of
tradition, since they would be more readily discovered
and corrected \'*''
There is, however, another and a much more conclu-
sive justification of the sense which I have attached to
the word in question, derived from a fact related by
Irenseus, and recorded by Eusebius, the ecclesiastical
historian of the fourth 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 cen-
sured ; and amongst the rest, Irenseus wrote him a letter
of expostulation, of which the following is a part.
^ " But those elders, who, before Soter, governed the
* " Concursum omnium ex toto orbe peregrinorum, simile quidquam
effecisse, quod Irenaeus Romae factum observat, ne ibi facile posset nova-
rum contra traditionem opinionum soboles increscere ; citius enim depre-
hensa et correcta fuisset."
2 Kai ot TTpb 'EcjTripog 7rp£0-/3wrepot oi TTpoffTavTeg Trjg kKK\ri(7iag, ^g
vvv d^r]yf], 'AviKrjrovXsyonfv Kai IITov, 'YyXvov re Kai TeKsffcpopov, Kai
Kvarov, ovre avroi krripijdav, ovre roXg fieT avrovg STrlrpCTrov, Kai
ovdev IXaTTOV avroi fjn^ Tt]povvrEg, eiprjvevov Totg dirb tSjv TrapoiKiCJv,
iv alg Irripeiro^ f.pxofJi£voig Trpog avrovg. Kai tov [xaKapiov TloXvKdp-
TTov eTTidrjixricravrog Ty'Pojfiy etti ' Avikijtov, Kai rrspi dWiov Tiv(x>v [XiKpd
cXovTtg Trpog dWr^Xovg, evOvg tipffvevrrav, irtpi rovrov tov Ke(l)a\aiov
fiT] <pi\epL<JTr}(TavTeQ eavTovg' ovre yap 6 'Av'iKijTog tov TloXvKapTov
TVHffai kdvvaTO firj rrjpeiv, are jxerd 'lojdvvov tov fiaOrirov Kvpiov rjiioiv,
68 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
Church over which you now preside," (i. e. the Church of
Rome) " namely, Anicetus, and Pius, and Hyginus,
with Telesphorus and Sixtus, neither observed this cus-
tom themselves, nor 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." — " And
when the 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 pre-
sently with the kiss of peace, not greatly contending
about this question. For neither could Anicetus ever
persuade Polycarp to cease this thing, because he liad
lived familiarly with John, the disciple of our Lord, and
with the other apostles, and observed their custom con-
tinually. Nor, on the other hand, could Polycarp per-
suade Anicetus to observe it, since Anicetus said that he
retained the custom of those elders who were before him.
When matters were thus situated, they communed to-
gether; and Anicetus yielded to Polycarp, as a token
of respect, the office of consecrating the eucharist in the
Church ; and at length they departed from each other in
peace, as well those who observed this custom, as those
who observed it not, keeping 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
Kal XoiTTfaiv (XTToffToXiov oIq avvSihrpitj/ev, del rerrjpijKoTa' ovre firjv 6
liloKvKapTrog tov 'AviKrjTov tTTSicrs Trjpeiv, Xkyovra rrjv (JvvqOiiav rStv
Trpb avTOv TrpscrfSvTepojv ocpsiXsiv KaTex^iv Kai tovtojv ovtwq ex^i'T'wv,
tKOivoivrioav tavTolg' Kaiev ry sKKkriaiq, Trape^wpj^o'Cj' 6 'AviKijTog rrjv
tv\api(TTiav Ttp IIoXufcdpTry, jcar' svrpoTrrjv dijXovoTi, Kai fier' eiprjvrjg
air' dX\r]X(t)v dirrjXXdyiiaav, Trdcrrig rrjg eKKXijcriag tipr]vr]v ixovTtav Kai
rdv [It} TTjpovvTbJv. Fragmentum Epistolae ad Victorem Papam Ro-
raanum, ex Euseb. lib. v. Histor. cap. 24. Iren. Op. p. 341.
IX.] IRENJ^US. 69
irreconcilable 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 Irenseus 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 obstinately refusing to conform to
the supremacy of Rome l If, according to your doctrine,
Rome was even then acknowledged as the mother and
mistress of all the Churches — if her bishop, as your canon
tells us, held by divine institution the place of Grod 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 independence in a practice
which his supposed superior condemned I
It is in vain that the force of this testimony is impugned,
by considering the subject of the controversy as a trifle.
It was no trifle, but a very serious question of ecclesiasti-
cal 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 commemo-
rated the last sufferings of her great Redeemer, and on the
following Sunday threw off her mourning, and appeared
in her utmost joy to honour his resurrection ; and that
the consequence of the discrepancy between the Eastern
and Western Churches was, that this whole beautiful
order was thrown into confusion. One part of the Church
was sometimes fasting while another part was feasting.
One part was mourning in sympathy with Christ's passion,
70 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
while another part was celebrating 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 com-
fort during the most interesting portion of the whole
ecclesiastical year. Hence it was a matter of consider-
able importance, and produced much warm discussion ;
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 primacy of St.
Peter and his successors, if any such thing had been con-
templated 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 hold-
ing the place of God, as your canon law expresses it.
And he would have approached Anicetus, the bishop of
Rome, not with the independent frankness of an equal in
authority, but in the ready and suppliant temper which
became his inferior station.
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 honour-
able office of consecrating the eucharist. 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 Irenaeus
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
IX.] IREN.EUS. 71
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 system of your canon law has not an irreconcilable
enemy rather than a friend, in the testimony of Irenseus.
CHAPTER X.
Brethren in Christ,
After examining the testimony of this most unimpeach-
able 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 satis-
factory key to the whole mystery, with which the ques-
tion 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 imaginations as being
almost conclusive evidence in its favour : 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
in accordance with your system, without your being sensi-
ble of any violence to the rights of truth. But if you will
take the assertion of your own witness for the foundation
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
^of those reflections, so as to account for the rise of this
X.] ORIGIN OF THE PRIMACY. 73 *
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
capital 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 Lon-
don to England, Rome was to the world ; because France
and England know that there are other powers upon the
earth independent of their respective governments ; but
the subjects of that empire city saw no power upon the
earth independent of Rome, The ambassadors of every
potentate came to do homage before the majesty of a single
throne. Dissensions amongst nations were brought for
settlement 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 protection 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 of 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 splendour 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 con-
tent with the kind and moderate titles of general and
father — the temple of Janus shut, and wars and commo-
tions almost done away by the wise administration of su-
preme justice— the whole of the mighty empire bringing
its treasure and its allegiance to the great centre, which
74 PROBABLE ORIGIN [cHAP.
was its fountain-head of power, and enjoying in return
the rich advantages of protection and government, the
valour and the labour of its legions, its science, and its
literature, which, like the nerves and life-blood of the
natural body, were diffused freely to the remotest ex-
tremities — all this displayed a picture of human unity, on
which, in its theory, the philanthropist and the philoso-
pher 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 prac-
tical supremacy over the whole of that territory. The
professions, the trades, the fashions, the literature, the
amusements of the capital, give a sort of law to the rest
by a perfectly familiar principle of deference, which is
acknowledged 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 cir-
cumstances by transferring them to some familiar object
of our own day, — if I try to illustrate my idea of a se-
cular supremacy by a simple analogy.
Let us suppose, then, that we had sent a number of
missionaries to plant the Gospel in China, who had suc-
ceeded 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
itself. The emperor, the powerful mandarins, the officers
of government, the men of influence, are now likely to be
X.] OF THE PRIMACY. 75
brought under the blessed yoke of the Grospel. Is it not
reasonable that we should attach tenfold more importance
to that Church than to the provincial Churches — that for
its support we should be most anxious — that into its pro-
gress 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 their
prayers and toils ?
If, however, such would be our views, at a distance
from the field of action, how much more would the same
principle of expediency operate on the missionaries them-
selves ? Of what vast importance would they esteem the
progress of truth in the capital of the Chinese empire ?
How surely would they calculate that success there^ was,
in fact, success everywhere ? How thankfully would they
count the numbers of converts from the ranks of the influ-
ential and the great, not because their souls were of more
value, but because the conversion of such as these was
the readiest mode of breaking down the kingdom of dark-
ness, and inducing multitudes to examine, with fa ^ourable
dispositions, the system of truth ; and how manifest it is,
that in such a case the missionaries, settled in the pro-
vincial Churches, would readily grant a primacy of influ-
ence and^ consequence to their brethren in the capital
city, which would make them the chief leaders, advisers,
and, in fine, directors 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 local situation, that it has no con-
nection 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
regulations for a body of missionaries thus circumstanced,
should we not, perhaps, think it proper to advise all due
E 2
76 . PROBABLE ORIGIN [cHAP.
regard to these principles I Should we not say, Be care-
ful about union, and in all your proceedings consult
together; 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 government and the very heart of the empire,
the Church located there is the most important of the
whole, and the brethren placed over it should have the
chief direction in all your councils. Would not such
advice as this be deemed prudent and wise by all men ?
And hence, is it not plain that we could go farther than
Iren^eus has done in support of a primacy, without de-
parting 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.
During 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. 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, and 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
X.] OF THE PRIMACY, 77
best opportunity of appeasing the imperial wrath, or con-
ciHating the 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 was
likely to prove hostile to the Christian cause, the bishop
of Rome was the only man who could hope to have influ-
ence sufficient with the officers of the court to have him
counteracted or recalled ; that wTiters on the Christian
rehgion would first seek patronage and praise from the
same dignitary, and that all who thought themselves
aggrieved throughout the rest of the Church, would natu-
rally endeavour to strengthen their cause by the sentence
of his approbation — all this, brethren, and much more of
the same character, suggests itself to a mind of common
reflection, in tracing the various causes of the secular
primacy obtained by that Church, which was established
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 important fact, that the secular empire of Rome
was one mighty whole— the earth under one head — the
world under a single prince, and that prince called a
father. Dull and stupid must the intellect have been,
that could fail to discover the application of this idea to
the Christian Church; for was it not, in truth, one
kingdom under a single King — one family under a Fa-
ther ? And why not give the benefit of this consolida-
tion to the Hierarchy on earth ? Why not secure to the
whole Church that order and subordination and peace
under a single earthly head, as the Lord'*s Vicegerent,
which heathenism had brought, in the affairs of human
government, to such a marvellous system ? Should the
e3
78 PROBABLE ORIGIN [cHAP.
hosts of Satan be better marshalled than the hosts of
God ? Should one single will be felt and obeyed to the
remotest bounds of that mighty empire, and should not
one single Church, which is the spouse of Christ, be
much rather 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 heresy 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 ages, being accustomed to have this astonishing
empire of the world continually before their eyes, and to
hear it as the common and favourite 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 encou-
rage every advantage they possessed for its perfect con-
summation, as providential instruments placed in their
hands by divine wisdom, for this especial purpose. I can
easily conceive, that under this influence of their habitual
views, they would find, in Scripture, analogies, and even
declarations, which — had not the idea of 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 prin-
ciple 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
X.] OF THE PRIMACY. 79
begin to interpret them in favour of their ecclesiastical
empire, — that all who were connected with Eome, who
had obligations to the Church there, who feared their
censure or loved their praise, or who had any thing to
expect from their influence, would readily adopt the
system ; and that the converts amongst the great and
noble, who had been accustomed to the maxim that
Rome was the mistress of the world, would 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 readily, as easily accounting
for the rise and progress of a secular primacy, without
calling it by any harsh or offensive name. I do not,
therefore, look upon your doctrine as having its origin in
tyranny, in fraud, 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 favourable 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 ex-
plained by the favourable influence of their location, their
habits of dwelling on the theory and practice of universal
empire, and their desire to secure the unity and peace of
the Church ; on the supposition that they were — what I
willingly esteem them to have been — holy and well-mean-
ing men.
The difference between the local primacy and that
which you now assert, will be shown 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,
E 4
80 ORIGIN OF THE PRIMACY. [CHAP. X.
right, in their respective proportions, to the other cities
which, in the order of Providence, have attained a far
larger measure of influence over the affairs of men ; but
the other insists on the fiat of the Almighty, superior to
all earthly mutation, that Rome shall be the mother and
tlie mistress of the Christian v^^orld to the end of time.
And this divine supremacy, you call on "all to believe, at
the peril of their salvation ! How badly your present
doctrine accords with the evidence of antiquity, I have
already shown 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 estabHshment of your exclusive claims.
CHAPTER XL
Brethren in Christ,
Our next witness in order of time, is the famous Ter-
tullian, that extraordinary writer, whom Cyprian— him-
self a burning and shining hght — was accustomed to call
his master.
In this writer's account of the establishment of the
Church, we have the following strong passage :
^ " 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 in the Son, and
in the Holy Ghost. Immediately, therefore, the apostles
(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 esta-
blished Churches ; and thence going out into the world,
* Reliquos undecim digrediens ad Patrem post resurrectionem, jussit
ire et docere nationes, intinguendas in Patrem, et in Filium, et in Spi-
ritura Sanctum. Statim igitur Apostoli (quos haec appellatio missos
interpretatur) assumpto per sortem duodecimo Matthia in locum Judae,
ex auctoritate prophetiae, quae est in psalmo David, consecuti promissam
vim Spiritus Sancti ad vLrtutes et eloquium, primo per Judaeam contestata
fide in Jesum Christum, et Ecclesiis institutis ; dehinc in orbem profecti,
eandem doctrinam ejusdem fidei nationibus promulgaverunt, et proinde
£ 5
82 TESTIMONY OF TERTULLIAN [cHAP.
promulgated the same doctrine of the faith among the
nations, and estabHshed Churches in each city ; from
which the other Churches thenceforward borrowed the
graff of faith and the seeds of doctrine, and daily borrow
as new Chm-ches are formed. And on this account they
are considered apostolic, as being the progeny of the apos-
tolical Church. For every race must needs be esteemed
according to its origin. Therefore, though there are so
many and various Churches, there is but one first from
the apostles, from which are all. Thus all are first and
apostolical, for all being one proves unity : while there is
the communion of peace, and the name of brotherhood,
and the pledge of hospitality, which rights are governed
by no other rule than the one tradition of the same mys-
tery." " If these things are so, it results, that thence-
forward 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 : but every doctrine is
to be prejudged of falsehood which pretends to be wise
against the truth of the Churches, and of the apostles,
Ecclesias apud unamquamque civitatem condiderunt, a quibus traducem
fidei et semina doctrinae, ceterse exinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt, et quo-
tidie mutuantur ut Ecclesige fiant. Ac per hoc et ipsae Apostolic* depu-
tantur, ut soboles Apostolicarum Ecclesiarum. Omne genus ad originem
suam censeatur necesse est. Itaque tot ac tantse Ecclesiae, una est ilia
ab Apostolis prima, ex qua omnes. Sic omnes priraae et Apostolicae dum
una omnes probant unitatem : dum est illis communicatio pacis, et appel-
latio fratemitatis, et contesseratio hospitalitatis, quae jura non alia ratio
regit, quara ejusdem sacramenti una traditio. Si haec ita sunt, constat
proinde omnem doctrinam, quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis, matricibus
et originalibus fidei, conspiret, veritati deputandara ; sine dubio tenentem
quod Ecclesiae ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo accepit :
oranem vero doctrinam de mendacio praejudicandam, quae sapiat contra
veritatem Ecclesiarum, et Apostolorum, et Christi, et Dei." " Solent
dicere, Non omnia Apostolos scisse, eadem agitati dementia qua rursus
XI.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 83
and of Christ, and of 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 things, but they did not deliver all things to
all; in both subjecting Christ to censure, as sending
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 ; to whom, whatever obscure matters
he put forth to others, he explained, saying that to them
it was given 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, having 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 beforehand the traitor Judas, and
whom he asked to be the son of Mary in his place?
What did he desire them not to know, to whom he even
exhibited his glory, with Moses and Elias, and the voice
of his Father from heaven V
convertunt, Omnia quidem Apostolos scisse, sed non omnia omnibus
tradidisse, in utroque Christum reprehensioni subjicientes, qui aut minus
instructos, aut parum simplices Apostolos miserit. Quis igitur integrae
mentis credere potest aliquid eos ignorasse, quos magistros Dominus
dedit, individuos habens in comitatu, in discipulatu, in convietu ; quibus
obscura quaeque seorsum disserebat, illis dicens datum esse cognoscere
arcana, quae populo intelligere non liceret ? Latuit aliquid Petrum sedi-
ficandae Ecclesiae petram dictum, claves regni coelorum consecutum, et
solvendi et alligandi in coelis et in terris potestatem ? Latuit et Joannem
aliquid, dilectissimum Domino, pectori ejus incubantem, cui soli Dominus
Judam traditorem praemonstravit, quem loco suo filium Mariae demand-
avit ? Quid eos ignorasse voluit, quibus etiam gloriam suam exhibuit, et
Moysen et Heliam, et insuper de coelo Patris vocem ?" Tert. de Praescrip.
Haeret. § xx. xxi. xxii. pp. 208, 9.
E 6
84 TESTIMONY OF TERTULLIAN [cHAP.
Now here we find TertuUian, only one century after
the death of the apostle John, giving an account of the
planting of the Church, speaking of its unity, and insisting
strongly on the argument of prescription and tradition
with the heretics, as Irenaeus had done before him ; with-
out the slightest allusion to the Church of Rome, or the
superiority of one apostle over the others, or the primacy
for the successors of St. Peter, which you claim for the
pope at the present day. True it is, indeed, that Ter-
tuUian 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 TertuUian 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 disclaim.
Speaking on the very point of the privileges which our
Lord granted to Peter, and the powers which the Church
derived from him, TertuUian uses the following strong
language.
^ " But now from your own argument I would know,
from whence you usurp this right for the Church ? If
from our Lord's saying to Peter, Upon this rock I will
build my Church, To thee I have given the keys of the
kingdom of heaven, or. Whatsoever thou shalt bind or
loose on earth shall be bound or loosed in heaven ; dost
thou therefore presume this power of loosing and binding
to have descended to thee, that is, to the whole Church
* De tua nunc sententia quaero, unde hoc jus Ecclesiae usurpes ? Si
quia dixerit Petro Dominus, Super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam
meam, Tibi dedi claves regni coelestis, vel, Quaecumque alligaveris vel
solveris in terra, erunt alligata vel soluta in coelis ; idcirco praesumis et
ad te derivasse solvendi et alligandi potestatem, id est ad omnem eccle-
siam Petri propinquam, qualis es evertens atque commutans manifestam
XI.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 85
which is related to Peter ? Who art thou, thus over-
turning and changing the manifest intention of our Lord,
who conferred this on Peter personally. Upon ihee^ he
says, I will build my Church ; and. To tliee I will give
the keys, not to the Church ; and, Whatsoever thou shalt
loose or bind, not whatsoever they shall loose or bind.
So likewise the event teaches. On him the Church was
built, that is, through him, he furnished the key ; behold
what key ; Ye men of Israel, 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 kingdom, by which the offences which
were formerly bound are loosed, and those things which
might not be loosed are bound, according 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; whether the law was to be
kept or not, Peter, the first of all, filled with the Spirit,
and having spoken before of the calling of the nations,
saith. And now why do ye tempt the Lord by placing a
yoke upon the brethren, which neither we nor our fathers
were able to bear. But by the grace of Jesus we believe
Domini intentionem personaliter hoc Petro conferentem, Super te, inquit,
aedificabo ecclesiam meam, et, Dabo tibi claves, non Ecclesiae, et, Quaecum-
que solveris vel alligaveris, non quae solverint vel alligaverint ? Sic enim
et exitus docet. In ipso Ecclesia exstructa est, id est per ipsum, ipse
clavem imbuit ; vide quam ; Viri Israelitae, auribus mandate quae dico ;
Jesum Nazarenum virum a Deo vobis destinatum, et reliqua. Ipse deni-
que primus in Christi baptism© reseravit aditum coelestis regni, quo
solvimtur alligata retro delicta, et alligantur quae non fuerint soluta,
secundum veram salutem ; et Ananiam vinxit vinculo mortis, et debilem
pedibus absolvit vitio valetudinis. Sed et in ilia disceptatione custodiend^
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, neque patres nostri suflPerre value-
runt ? Sed enim per gratiam Jesu credimus nos salutem consecuturos
sicut et illi, Haec sententia et solvit quae omissa sunt legis, et alligavit
86 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
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
him the Lord had commanded 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 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 com-
mand 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 thine, thou carnal man?
For according to the person of Peter, this power will
suit spiritual men, such as an apostle or a prophet. Since
the Church properly and principally is that spirit in whom
is the Trinity of one divinity, the Father, and the Son,
and the Holy Ghost. He gathers that Church, which
the Lord has placed in three. And therefore, from that
time, every such number who unite in this faith, is
quae reservata sunt. Adeo nihil ad delicta fidelium capitalia potestas
solvendi et alligandi Petro emancipata. Cui si praeceperat Dominus
etiam septuagies septies delinquent! in eum fratri indulgere ; utique, nihil
postea alligare, id est, retmere mandasset, nisi forte ea quae in Dominum,
non in fratrem quis admiserit. Praejudicatur enim non dimittenda in
Deum delicta, quum in homine admissa donantur. Quid nunc et ad
Ecclesiam, et quidem tuam, Psychice ? Secundum enim Petri personam
fepiritalibus potestas ista conveniet, aut Apostolo, aut Prophetae. Nam et
Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est Spiritus in quo est trinitas unius
divinitatis Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. I Ham Ecclesiara congre-
gat, quam Dominus in tribus posuit. Atque ita exinde etiam numerus
omnis qui in hanc fidem conspiraverint, Ecclesia ab auctore et consecratore
censetur. Et ideo Ecclesia quidem delicta donabit, sed Ecclesia spiritus per
spiritualem hominem, non Ecclesia numerus episcoporum. Domini enim,
non famuli est jus et arbitrium ; Dei ipsius, non sacerdotis." Tertul. de
Pud. § xxi. xxii. p. 574.
XI.] TERTULLIAN. 87
esteemed a Church by its Author and Oonsecrator. And
thus indeed the Church will forgive offences, but this is
the Church of 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 mteresting passage
is a part of TertuUian's work after he had become a fol-
lower of Montanus. It is so ; but I do not see any
reason for discarding it on this account, when used as a
commentary on his own meaning in another part of his
writings, and on the subject now before us. For not
only had the errors of Montanus no relation to the doc-
trine of St. Peter's pastoral authority oyer the other
apostles, and the derivation of that authority to the par-
ticular Church of Rome ; but I shall presently show that
some of your own critics defend TertuUian from having
had any participation in them, since Montanus himself
was orthodox at first, and became heretical afterwards.
At all events, TertuUian was not called heretic in his own
day ; and as you acknowledge him to have been a man of
the most austere and pious life, eminent for learning and
genius, bold, fervent, and sincere, the especial favourite
of St. Cyprian, and worthy to be held in reverence by
yourselves to the present hour, he is surely an unim-
peachable witness to prove that the spiritual supremacy
of the Church of Eome was not the doctrine of his age
even in the Church of Rome itself.
There are a few other passages from the same author,
which I may, perhaps, do well to add, for your greater
satisfaction.
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 appropriates the name to Christ in
chief. Thus, speaking of the circumcision of the Jews
88 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
with a knife of stone, he explains it to refer to the pre-
cepts of Christ, " for Christ," saith he, " was preached
as the rock, under many modes and figures \"
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 ^. " Christ changes the name from
Simon to Peter," saith he, " because the Creator re-
formed also the names of Abraham, and Sarah, and
Joshua, calling this last Jesus, by adding to them syl-
lables. But why Peter ? If on account of the vigour 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 matters." And here, accord-
ingly, Tertullian leaves the question, without seeming at
all conscious that Peter could be called a rock by reason
of the whole Church, apostles and all, as your Doway
Catechism assures us, being built upon him.
His reference to the Church as consisting of three, in
allusion to the Trinity, he explains more fully in the fol-
lowing passage : " Are not we laymen priests also ? It
is written. He has made us a kingdom and priests to God
and his Father. The authority of the Church has esta-
blished the difference between the clergy and the laity,
1 " Circumcisis nobis petrina acie ; id est, Christi praeceptis, petra
enim Christus multis modis et figuris praedicatus est." Tertul. adv. Jud.
§ ix. p. 194. A.
2 "Mutat et Petro nomen de Simone, quia et Creator Abrahae et
Sarae, et Auseae nomina reformavit, hunc vocando Jesum, illis syllabas
adjiciendo. Sed et cur Petrum ? Si ob vigorem fidei, multae materiae
solidaeque nomen de suo accommodarent. An quia et petra et lapis
Christus ? Siquidem et legimus positum eum in lapidem offendiculi, et in
petram scandali. Omitto cetera." Tertul. Adv. Marcion. lib. iv. § xiii.
p. 425.
XI.] TERTULLIAN. 89
and this honour is sanctified by the council of the clerg}' ;
but wherever there is no council of the ecclesiastical
order, thou offerest, and thou baptizest, and thou art a
priest alone. But where there are three, the Church is,
although they be laymen. For every one lives by his
own faith ^^
The phrase, " keys of the kingdom of heaven," which is
manifestly a figure, is explained in a somewhat different
manner by TertuUian, in different parts of his works.
Thus, in one passage he says, " What key had the doc-
tors of the law, but the interpretation of the law," where
he presents an idea similar to that we have quoted al-
ready ^. But in another place he says : " If thou dost still
think that heaven is closed against thee, 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 \" Here again we have an interest-
ing variety in the idea, but one which is by no means
suited to your doctrine.
There is another passage of this author, often cited, in
which he mentions the principal Churches, advising the
heretics to apply to those which were of apostolic plant-
ing*. "Come then," saith he, "you who wish to exer-
* " Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus 1 Scriptum est, Regnum quoque
nos et sacerdotes Deo et Patri suo fecit. Differentiam inter ordinem et
plebem constituit Ecclesiae auctoritas, et honor per ordinis consessum
sanctificatus, adeo ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est consessus, et offers, et
tinguis, et sacerdos es solus. Sed ubi tres, Ecclesia est, licet laici. Unus-
quisque enim sua fide vivit." Tertul. de Exhort. Castit. § vii. p. 522.
2 " Quam vero clavem habebant legis doctores, nisi interpretationem
legis V Tertul. Adv. Marcion. lib. iv. § 27, p. 444.
3 " Nam etsi adhuc clausum putas coelum, memento claves ejus hie
Dominum Petro, et per eum Ecclesiae reliquisse, quas hie unusquisque
interrogatus atque confessus feret secum." Tertul. Scorp. § x. p. 496. A.
* " Age jam qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis
tuae, percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas, apud quas ipsae adhuc cathedrae Apos-
90 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
cise your curiosity better in the concerns of your salva-
tion, go through the apostoHc 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 Philippi, you have Thes-
salonica. If you cannot go throughout Asia, you have
Ephesus. But if you are convenient to Italy, you have
Rome, whence 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 sufferings of his Lord : where Paul
was crowned (with martyrdom) at the going forth of
John : where the apostle John was afterwards plunged
into boiling oil, and suffering nothing, was banished to an
island. Let us see too, what one might learn, what he
might teach, when he should also have compared his
sjnnbol 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
tolorum suis locis praesident, apud quas ipsae authenticae literae eorum
recitantur, sonantes vocem, et repraesentantes faciem uniuscuj usque.
Proxima est tibi Achaia ? Habes Corinthum. Si non longe es a Mace-
donia, habes Philippos, habes Thessalonienses. Si non potes in Asiam
tendere, habes Ephesum. Si autem Italiae adjaces, Romam, unde nobis
quoque authoritas praesto est. Ista quam felix Ecclesia ; cui totam doc-
trinam Apostoli cum sanguine suo profuderunt : ubi Petrus passioni
dominicae adaequatur : ubi Paulus Joannis exitu coronatur : ubi Aposto-
lus Joannes posteaquani in oleum igneum demersus, nihil passus est, in
insulam relegatur. Videaraus quid didicerit, quid docuerit, cum Africanis
quoque Ecclesiis contesseravit. Unum Deum novit, creatorem universi-
tatis, et Cliristum Jesum ex virgine Maria Filium Dei creatoris, et camis
resurrectionem ; legem et prophetas cum evangelicis et apostolicis Uteris
miscet, et inde potat fidem : earn aqua signat, Sancto Spiritu vestit,
XI.] TERTULLIAN. 91
drinks his faith ; water signs it ; it is clothed with the
Holy Spirit ; the eucharist nourishes it ; martyrdom
exhorts it, and thus, against this institution he receives
no one. This is the institution which not only premo-
nished men that there would be heresies, but from which
heresies have gone away." Here is a beautiful passage,
shewing an admiration of the Church of Rome on the
part of Tertullian, and certainly displaying every disposi-
tion to do justice to her claims ; yet there is not one
word about the chair of Peter, — of the bishop of Rome
holding the place of God and Christ upon the earth,
— of 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. Before I close
his testimony, however, let me present to you, according
to my promise, the opinion of one of yourselves, the
learned and candid Rigault, on the subject of the asper-
sions, which those who relished not his honesty have
endeavoured to cast upon him.
" ^ Those things which are called the heresies of Ter-
tullian," saith this ingenuous critic, " hardly ordered any
thing to be observed, except braver martyrdoms, severer
fasts, more holy chastity, namely one marriage or none
at all, in which things, however he may have sinned, he
seems to have sinned through a more absolute and vehe-
eucharistia pascit, martjTium exhortatur, et ita adversus hanc institu-
tionem neminem recipit. Haec est institutio, non dico jam quae futuras
haereses praenuntiabat, sed de qua haereses prodierunt." Tertul. de Prae-
scrip. Haeret. § xxxvi. p. 215.
^ " Haereses Tertulliani quae dicuntur, ea vix aliud praecipiebant quam
martyria fortiora, jejunia sicciora, castimonium sanctiorem, nuptias sci-
icet 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
92 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
ment love of virtue. This indeed appears a graver accu-
sation, that he acknowledged 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 so commendable for the sanctity of their
manners, venerable for their beneficent faculty of mira-
cles, and strong in the constancy with which they en-
dured martyrdom, that no one could recognize elsewhere,
a more manifest power 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 ap-
plauded by the more austere for his extraordinary zeal ;
and not towards the end, when his orthodoxy became
infected, and he sunk into contempt \
I conclude this chapter, brethren, by reminding you of
TertuUian's maxim, which is a favourite one with your-
selves, that " What is first is true, and what is subse-
quent is adulterated *." May you be enabled to apply it
aright, and then you will have no difficulty in acknow-
ledging that the spiritual dominion which you now claim
over the Christian world, was not a doctrine of the primi-
tive church of Rome, but one which sprung up at a much
later day '.
Baronius observat, aliquamdiu stetit innoxia, discipulos habuit adeo
morum sanctitate commendabiles, beneficia miraculorum potentia I'eve-
rendos, martyriorum constantia fortes, ut nemo praesentiores alibi Numi-
nis vires agnosceret." Rigault in not. Tertul. op. p. 501 .
^ " Unde verosimile fiat, Montani dogma quale extitit, primordio qui-
dem sui Christianis austerioribus probabili, Tertullianum tenuisse, non
quale postea, cum sequacium quorumdam imposturis et fraudibus, acu
Phrygia interpolatum, ab Ecclesiis Catholicis despui coepit." Ibid.
2 ** Id esse verum quodcumque primum, id esse adulterum quodcumque
posterius." Tertul. adv. Prax. § ii. p. 501.
3 I have been somewhat surprised at a remark published by the learned
author of the Difficulties of Romanism, (p. 261 of the American edition,
XI.] TERTULLIAN. 93
in the note,) where he says, that " in the time of TertulHan 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 authoritative title of bishop of
bishops." This concession is gladly used, I perceive, in the book of the
bishop of Strasburgh, published in answer to Mr. Faber ; but I must
beg leave to doubt whether either of those learned writers has understood
TertulUan 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 argu-
ment, and leave it to your candour to say whether he does not apply these
titles rather in sarcasm than in sober allowance. " I hear," says Tertullian,
" that an edict is proposed, and truly a peremptory one. The highest
pontiff, 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 I
There, as I think, on the very gates of lust, under the 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 one shall
enter with the hope of it. But this is read in the Church, and is uttered
in the Church, and yet she 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 uncleanness offered even to her ears.*'
To my mind the character of this whole passage shows that Tertullian
had no idea of doing honour to the bishop of Rome, but the contrary. He
calls him pontifex maximus, which was the title of the heathen high priest,
and never seriously applied to the Christian priesthood until a much later
age. And the other phrase, bishop of bishops, does not appear to have
been either claimed or appropriated in favour of the bishop of Rome for
many centuries after Tertullian's day. But even if these titles had been
applied in the sobriety of historical narration, still they would not sustain
your doctrine ; for every metropolitan bishop who had bishops under
him might as well be called a chief pontiff, and a bishop of bishops, as
the bishop of Rome ; and the supremacy by divine right of any one bishop
over the whole Church, could, therefore, by no fair reasoning, be sup-
ported from such titles merely, since they might be given to others with
the same propriety. That Tertullian could not have designed to concede
any thing in favour of your present doctrine is incontestably plain from
this single consideration ; that the passage occurs in the opening of the
same book from which I have quoted the extract on pages 85 and 86, so
utterly hostile to your whole system. I add the original in full.
** Audio etiam edictum esse propositum, et quidem pei-emptorium, Pon-
tifex scilicet maximus, quod est, Episcopus Episcoporum, edicit : Ego et
moechiae et fomicationis delicta, poenitentia functis dimitto. O edictum,
cui adscribi non poterit, Bonura factum ! Et ubi proponetur liberalitas
94 TESTIMONY OF TERTULLIAN. [cHAP. XI.
ista ? Ibidem, opinor, in ipsis libidinum januis, sub ipsis libidinum titulis.
Illic ejusmodi poenitentia promulganda est, ubi delinquentia ipsa versa-
bitur. Illic legenda est venia, quo cum spe ejus intrabitur. Sed hoc in
Ecclesia legitur, et in Ecclesia pronuntiatur, et virgo est. Absit, absit a
sponsa Christi tale praeconium. Ilia quae vera est, quae pudica, quae
sancta, carebit etiam aurium maculis."
CHAPTER XII.
Brethren in Christ,
About the same time with Tertullian, though as some
think, rather earHer, 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 nega-
tive, and yet, to a candid mind decisive. He mentions
the Church, times without number, speaks of her unity,
particularises the leading heresies, takes notice of the
^' keys," remarks 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 power 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, travelling over the extensive field
which the works of Clement cover, could have avoided a
plain statement of the fact ; or at least, some intelligible
allusions to it.
I add a few passages from this celebrated author, as a
6
96 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
specimen of the whole. " ^ To beheve and to be regene-
rate, is perfection in hfe. 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."
" ^ But demonstration being required, it is necessary
to descend to controversial questions, and to learn from
the Scriptures themselves, demonstratively, in what man-
ner heresies have fallen from truth, and how in the only
truth and in the ancient Church, the most perfect know-
ledge is found.'*'* Here he uses the phrase, ancient Church,
as Irenseus and Tertullian do, to signify the Church as it
was first planted, without distinction of place, or of one
apostle over another.
" ^ The Lord alone,'*'' saith he, " drank the cup for the
purification of those who rejected and betrayed him.
Whom the apostles imitating, as being indeed gifted and
perfect in 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,
^ OvTOJ TO 7ri<TTtv<Tai novov Kai dvaysvvrjOfjvai, Te\ei<o<Tig koriv iv
K<t>y' ov yap TTOTS aaQtvn 6 Qeog. wg yap to BkXrjfia avTov tpyov ioTi,
Kai TOVTo KoafioQ dvofid^iTar ovtojq Kal to (SovXrjfia avTOv dvOpdjTratv
kffTi tTbJTrjpia- Kal tovto iKKXijaia KeK\t]Tai. Oldev ovv ovq KiKXriKtv, ovQ
okaiaatv k6(cXj;k£v 51 ci-iia Kal (rkaiuKev. Clem. Alex. Pgedag. lib. i. cap.
6, p. 93.
* 'Airodst^ecjQ d' otxrrjg, civdyKri (rvyKaTa(3aivtiv tig rag ZrjTriaeig, Kai
di avTOJV Twv ypa<pSJv eKfiavOdveiv aTrodeiKTiKuig, oirojg fikv d7rt(T<pd\ri-
aav ai. aipkatig, oiriog de Kai kv ^6vy Ty dXrjOeiqi, Kai Ty dp^aiq, IkkXi;-
aiq., r/re aiepijSfffrar?? yvStaig. Clem. Alex. Strom, lib. vii. p. 755.
3 Movog Toii'vv b Kvpiog did ttjv tSiv e7ri(3ovXev6vT(i)v avT(^ dvOpta-
TTitiVy Kai Ttjv tS)v diriartov drroKdOapatv, tTTUv to 7roTr)ptov' dp /xt/tot;-
fiivoi oi aTTooToXot, wg dv t<^ ovtl yvuxTTiKoi, Kal TsXeioi, vTT^p rwv
kKKXijcTiwv, ag tTrrj^av, tiraBov. lb. lib. iv. p. 503.
XII.] CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 97
is expressed, not for Peter, but for Paul, calling him in
one place, ^ "the good apostle," in another, Hhe "noble
apostle," and in two other places, ^ the " divine apostle,"
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.
* Alluding to the heretics of his day, he says, " Who
1 6 KaXoQ cLTToaroXog. Strom, lib. 5. p. 562.
2 t6v ytvvdlov cLTToaToKov. Strom, lib. 2. p. 420.
3 6 fiiv ovv SftffTrkffiog diroaTokoq. Strom, lib. 1. p. 316.
Tov Srtiov diroaToXov. Strom, lib. 2. p. 274.
* oi Toivvv Twv dat^tov cnrTofievoi Xoyiov, dXXoig re l^dp^ovTEQ, fitjSk
kv ToTg Xoyoig rolg Oeioig dXXd k^ijfiapTrjfisviog avyxpu^tvoi, ovre avTol
tlaiaaiv tig Tfjv fSaaiXtiav tojv ovpavdv, ovre ovg t^riirdTrfaav,
tojcriv Tvyxdveiv Trjg dXtjOiiag' dXX' ovdk t^v KXelv f%ovrtg avrol Trjg
iicrodov, ipevcrj Sk riva Kai utg <pTi(nv t) avvrjOtia dvTiKXeida, di rig ov rrjv
avXaiav dvairirdaavrtg^ axTTrep J7jU6»f did rrjg tov Kvpiov ■7rapa56<TS(i)Q
dcnfisv' rrapdQvpav dk dvarkfiovTsg, Kal diopv^avTsg XdOpa to Teixiov
Tjjg kKKXr](Jiag' v7rep(3aivovTeg ttjv dXrjOeiav, fivaTayioyoi rriQ Tutv dcrs-
^wv y^vxng KaOiffTavTUi. otl ydp fxtTayeveaTepag Trjg KaOoXiKrjg eKKXr]-
alag Tag dvOpoJTrivag crvvrjXvaeig TreTroirjKamv, ov TroXXatv Set Xoyojv, ri
ydp TOV JLvpiov kutu Tt)v Trapovaiav SidaaKoXia uTrb AvyovaTOV Kai
Ti(3epiov Kai(Tapog dp^afisvi] fxeaovvTbJV t&v Kvyovarov xpovojv TsXeiov'
raf ri di tHjv diroOToXiuv avTOV fxsXP'' 7^ '"'is UavXov XeiTovpyiag, kiri
'Hkpojvog TtXtiovTar Karw Sh, Trepi Tovg 'Adpidvov tov (3a<nXsu)g xpovovg,
oi Tdg aips(rsig sTnvoTjtTav yEyovatri, Kal lihxpi ye rrjg ' AvtojvLvov tov
irpeff^vrkpov SuTeivav r)XiKiag, KaQdinp 6 BaaiXtidi^g, Kav TXavKiav
l'inypd<pr]Tai SiddffKaXov, a>c avxovaiv avTol, tov TIeTpov epfirjvka' a><r-
■ avTotg di Kal OvaXsvTTvov Oeodddi dKr]Kokvai (pkpovaiv, yvwpifiog Sk ovtoq
ykyovev riavXov. MapKiiov yap, Kara r^v avTrjv avTolg t/XiKiav ytvo-
fxevog, 0)g Trpia^vTrjg, vtojTspoig cvveykviTO, fisO' ov Xiixtjv iir' oXiyov,
KT]pv(T(TovTog TOV UsTpov vTTrjKOVffsv. wf o'vTOjg ^;;^d)/ra)j/, avfx(pavkg Ik
Trig TrpoytviOTaTrig Kal dXr]9taTdTr]g SKKXijaiag, Tdg fiSTayeviffTspag Tav-
Tag, Kal Tdg trt tovtojv dTrojifjSrjKviag. t<^ XP^^^ KeKaivoTOfiijcrOai
TrapaxapaxOeiaag aipeatig. £K tu)V ttprjfjisvojv dpa ipdvepov oJfiai ytyc-
vfjaOai, fiiav tlvai Tr/v dXijGfi sKKXrjffiav, rrjv rip orrt dpxaiav, eig rjv oi
Kara irpoOtaiv SiKaioi syKaTaXsyovTai .... Kara re ovv d-TroOTaaiv,
KaTd Tt iTTivoiav, KaTa re dpxvv, KUTd ts. i^ox'HV, novrjv elvai (j)afi£v ti)v
dpxaiav Kai Ka9oXiKT)v tKKXijcriav, eig evoTrjTa iricTTeojg fiidg Trjg KUTa
Tdg oiKeiag diaOrjKag, fxdXXov dk Kara ti^v haOriKrjv Ti)v fiiav dia^opoig
F
98 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
use the divine word not rightly, but perversely, neither
do they enter the kingdom of heaven themselves, nor
suffer those whom they deceive to follow the truth. But
they have not the key of the entrance themselves, but a
certain false key, or as the common saying is, an anti-
key, by which the veil is not unloosed, as it is to us who
enter by the tradition of the Lord ; but the door is cut
off, and the wall of the Church privately dug 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 here-
sies were about the time of the emperor Adrian, and pro-
gressed until the age of the elder Antonine, such as Basil-
ides, although he assumed to himself the mastership of
Grlaucia, 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, 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
'^oig xpovoiQ kvbg tov Gfoi; T(p (3ov\r]fiaTi, 6i ivbg tov Kvpiov avva-
yovffav Toiig ijdr] KaTaTtrayfievovg ovg irpowpiaiv 6 Oebg, diKaiotg eao-
[lEvoig irpb KaTa(5o\fjg KotTfiov kyv(i)Kh)g- aWa Koi rj k^oxV ^VQ tKKXrjaiag,
KaOdrrep rj apxij rrjg ffvardaeojg, Kara rijv ftovdda kariv, irdvra rd dWa
vTTspfSdWovffa, Kai fitjdkv ix^^^"' ofioiov rj Iffov kavry. Clem. Alex.
Strom, lib, 7- pp. 764, 5.
XII.] CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 99
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, according 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 gathered together, by the will of God,
through one Lord, those who are already ordained to life,
whom God predestinated, and knew they would be right-
eous, before the foundation of the world. And the emi-
nency of this Church, as well as the beginning of its con-
struction, is from unity, overcoming all other things, and
having nothing which is its resemblance or its equal."
Now here it is manifest that Clement regards the keys
in the sense which TertuUian recognises, namely, the
interpretation 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
undermining the wall of the Church ; all which figurative
language is ill adapted to the idea, that the Church of
which Clement spake was a society to be discovered by
its ecclesiastical connection with one particular apostle, or
by having its seat at Rome. He goes on to speak of the
catholic Church as being one ; but he refers this unity to
its substance, its knowledge, its beginning, its excellency,
and to the unity of the faith, as handed down from the
apostles. And the mode in which he presents his argu-
ment 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 successors
in the see of Rome. For under these circumstances,
r 2
100 TESTIMONY OF CLEMENT. [cHAP. XII.
would he not have confuted the heretics by the short and
easy argument, derived from the principality of that
Church, instead 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 heretics. Marcion, Basilides, and Valentinus, have
been condemned and cast off by the infallible decision of
the vicar of Christ. This is the test of faith, the standard
of sound doctrine, the bond of unity." But nothing of
the kind, brethren, can be found in the works of Clement.
Is the inference unfair, that he did not use your present
reasoning simply because he did not hold your doctrine ?
Or must we suppose, in the face of all probability, that
he did truly profess your sentiments with regard to the
supremacy of Peter and the maternal 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 minds.
Neither, as I have already intimated, can justice be done
to it by extracts. What I have cited, however, is a fair
specimen 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, notwith-
standing, 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 recognises expressly,
those things only being excepted which Jerome disap-
proves. The judgment of Jerome, I shall extract in full
by and by ; to show that the passages which are import-
ant for our present 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.
* " On account of its obscurity," says Origen, " the
whole Scripture, divinely inspired, is like to many cham-
* " Similem esse universam Scripturam divinitus afflatam propter ob-
scuritatem quae in ea est, multis domiciliis uno aedificio conclusis ; uni-
cuique domieilio appositam clavem non ipsi convenientem, sic que dissi-
patas esse elaves per domicilia non respondentes singulas iis domiciliis
quibus appositae sunt: opus vero longe difficillimum esse, invenire elaves
et eas cellis aptare, quas aperire possunt: itaque etiam Scripturas ab-
strusas quidem illas intelligi, non aliunde sumptis quam ab ipsis invicem
argunientis intelligentiae, quae in se habent dispersam exponendi rationem."
Origen. Com. in Psal. Vide " Origenis in Sacras Scripturas Commentaria,"
Ed. Col. 1684. tom. i. p. 39. For convenience sake, I have cited, in-
stead of the original Greek, your own Latin version.
f3
102 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
bers within one house ; the key appropriate to each cham-
ber not being next to it : and so the keys are scattered
through the chambers, not answering to those chambers
to which they are nearest ; and it is truly a difficult work
to find the proper keys, and adapt them to the locks
which they are fitted to open : thus it is that the more
abstruse Scriptures are to be understood, the argument
of our knowledge being taken no otherwise than from the
Scriptures theniselves, which have dispersed amongst
them the reasons of their exposition."
Let us next turn to Origen''s commentary on Matthew,
where we shall see the clearest testimony to the point
in question. It will require a very long extract to do it
justice ; but no labour should be thought too great for the
searcher after truth.
After having commented for some time on the confes-
sion of Peter, Thou art the Christ, (fee, Origen pro-
ceeds as follows : ^ " Which if we also shall say, as Peter
1 Origen. Comment, in Matt. ib. tom. i. p. 274-5. " Quod si postquam
dixerimus et nos, quemadmodum Petrus: Tu es Christus JUius Dei tin,
non quasi revelatum nobis fuerit a came vel a sanguine, sed luce cordi
nostro aflPulgente a Patre qui in coelis est, Petrus efficimur ; dicatur et
nobis a Verbo: Tu es Petrus, et quae sequuntur. Petra enim est omnis
discipulus Christi, de quo bibebant, qui bibebant spiritali consequente petra:
et super quamlibet ejusmodi petram aedificatur omnis sermoEcclesiasticus,
et vitse juxta ipsum institutae ratio : unicuique enim perfeeto liabenti
congregationem sermonum beatitudinem perficientiura, et operum, et
cogitationum, inest Ecclesia a Deo aedificata. Si vero super unum ilium
solummodo Petrum totam Ecclesiam a Deo aedificari arbitraris, quid de
Johanne, tonitru filio, et unoquoque Apostolorum dixeris ? Alioquin an
audebimus dicere portas Inferi speciatim adversus Petrum non praevali-
turas, praevalituras autem adversus reliquos Apostolos, et perfeetos ?
Nonne vero et in omnibus et in his singulis sit istud quod supra dictum
est: Portce Inferi non prcevcdebunt adversus earn, et illud quoque: Super
hanc petram cedificaho Ecclesiam meam ? An etiam soli Petro dantur a
Domino claves regni coelorum, nee quisquam beatorum alius eas accipiet ?
Quod si et id aliis commune est ; Daho tibi claves regni coelorum, quomodo
et non ea quae praecedunt, communia sunt, et quae subnectuntur tanquam
XIII.] ORIGEN. 103
did, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, not
as if it had 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, and what
follows. For the rock is every disciple of Christ, from
whom they drank who drank of the Spiritual Eock that
followed them, and on every such rock every ecclesias-
tical word is builded, and the system of life instituted
accordingly ; and in every such perfect man having the
combination of words and works and thoughts, perfecting
holiness, the Church built by God is found. But if thou
thinkest that the whole Church is built by God upon
Peter only, what dost thou say of John, the son of
thunder, and every one of the other apostles ? Or shall
we dare to say that the gates of hell were not to prevail
specially against Peter? Were they then to prevail
against the other apostles and the faithful ? Is it not
plain, that to all and each the assurance is made good,
The gates of hell shall not prevail against it ; and this,
in Petrum dicta ? Hie etenim velut in Petrum dicta videntur ea:
QucBCunque ligaveris super terram, erunt ligata in ccelis, et quae sequuntur:
in Evangelic autem Johannis Servator dans Spiritum sanctum Discipulis
per insufflationem, dicit: Accipite Spiritum sanctum, et quae sunt deinceps.
Proinde multi dicent Servatori: Tu es Christus filius Dei mvi, at non
omnes illud dicentes, haudquaquam a carne et sanguine revelantibus hoc
edocti dicent illi, sed ablato ab ipso Patre qui in coelis est imposito cordi
eorum velamine, ut postea revelata facie gloriam Domini speculantes in
Spiritu Dei loquantur, dicentes de illo: Dominus Jesus, et illi: Tu es
Christus filius Dei vim. Et si quis hoc dicit illi, sibi non revelatum e
came et sanguine, sed a Patre qui in coelis est, ea consequetur, quae ut
ait quidem litera Evangelii, Petro huic dicta sunt ; ut docet autem Spi-
ritus illius, cuilibet qui talis evadit, qualis erat ille Petrus. Nomen enim
trahunt a Petra omnes imitatores Christi, spiritalis scilicet petrae conse-
quentis eos salvi fiunt, ut ex ea spiritualem potionem ebibant. Illi autem
nomen trahunt a Petra, quemadmodum Christus ; sed et cum Christi
membra sint, nomine ab illo ducto Christiani appellati sunt ; a Petra
autem, Petri."
F 4
104 TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN [cHAP.
also, Upon this rock I will build' my Church ? Or is it
to Peter alone, that the keys of the kingdom of heaven
are given, and shall* 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 things which precede it, and which are evidently
connected with it, as also said to Peter, be common like-
wise ? For here it seems to be said to Peter, Whatso-
ever 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 Spirit to the disciples, by
breathing on them, says. Receive ye the Holy Ghost,
together with what follows. Therefore 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 revealing 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 who-
soever becomes such an one, he is the same as that
Peter. For all the imitators of Christ derive their name
from the rock — ^that spiritual rock which follows them
who are saved, that 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 Christ-
ians, so from his being the rock (Petra), they are called
rocks (Petri or Peters)."
XIII.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 105
* " Taking occasion from the same principle," conti-
nues Origen, " you may say that Christians are denomi-
nated 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 whosoever shall be such as these names sig-
nify, 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 ambiguous : whether is this be-
cause 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."
^' ^ But although the gates of hell are many and almost
^ lb. p. 276. " Inde vero accepta occasione justos a Christi justitia,
sapientes a Christi sapientia denominatos esse dices ; idemque faeies de
reliquis ejus nomiiiibus, nomina in Sanctos ducens ; et quicunque tales
fuerint, dicetur iis a Servatore illud quod ita se habet: Tu es Petrm, et
quae sequuntur ; ad id usque ; Non prcevalebuwt adverms earn : Quam
autem, Earn ? an enim petram, super quam Christus sedificat Ecclesiam ;
an Ecclesiam ? ambigua quippe locutio est: an quasi unam eandemque
rem, Petram et Ecclesiam? Hoc ego verum esse existimo: nee enim
adversus petram, super quam Christus Ecclesiam sedificat, nee adversus
Ecclesiam portae Inferi praevalebunt"
2 Id. p. 277- B. " At cum multae sint et vix numerandae Inferi portae,
nulla Inferi porta praevalebit adversus Petram, vel Ecclesiam quam
super illam Christus aedificat." "Atque id quidem sciendum est, quem-
admodum urbium portae singulae propria habent nomina ; eodem mode
portis Inferi pro variis peccatorum formis nomina imponi posse: ita ut
una Inferi porta fornicatio appelletur, per quam iter faciunt scortatores ;
altera autem inficiatio, per quam in infemum descendunt, qui Deum
inficiantur. Jam vero et unusquisque illorum qui diversis ab Ecclesia
opinionibus adhaerent, et aliquam falsi nominis scientiam genuerunt,
protam Inferi aedificavit, aliam quidem Marcion, Basilides aliam, et aliam
Valentinus. Hie igitur portse Inferorum dictae sunt. In Psalmis vero
gratias agit Propheta dicens: Qui excdtas me de portis mortis, ut annuntiem
F 5
106 TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN [cHAP.
innumerable, no gate of hell shall prevail against the rock
or the Church which Christ builds upon it."' " And
this is also to be known, that as the several gates of
cities have their appropriate names, in like manner the
names of the several gates of hell may be taken from the
various forms of sin : so that one gate of hell is fornica-
tion, through which the lewd take their way ; another is
the denial 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, Basi-
lides 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 all thy
praises 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 : therefore 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 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
wisdom is the gate of Zion."
omties laudationes tuas in portis fliae Sion. Atque ex hoc loco discimus
fieri nunquam posse, ut qui non exaltatus fuerit de portis mortis, et ad
portas Sion non pervenerit, omnes laudationes Dei annuntiare possit.
Portae autem Sion contrarise portis mortis intelligi possint, adeo ut porta
mortis sit luxuria ; porta autem Sion, castitas, mortis item, injustitia ;
Sion vero, justitia, quam ostendens Propheta ait: Hcec porta Domini, justi
intrabunt in earn ; et rursum, mortis porta sit timiditas ; fortitude vero,
Sion ; imprudentia, mortis, contraria autem illi sapientia, Sion."
XIII.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 107
" ^ 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, I
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
' lb. p. 278. D. "Post haec videmus, quomodo dictum sit Petro, et cuili-
bet qui Petrus est ; Daho tibi claves regni coelorum. Et primum quideni
existimo his verbis ; Portce Inferi non prcevalebunt adversus earn, conveni-
enter id esse subnexum ; Dabo tibi claves regni coelorum : nam qui contra
Inferi portas munitus est, ut adversus eum non prsevalerent, dignus est
qui ab ipso Verbo claves regni coelorum accipiat ; quasi praemium, quod
nihil adversus ilium portae Inferi potuerint, claves accipiens regni coelo-
rum, ut sibi portas reseret clausas iis qui ab Inferi portis victi sunt : et
ingreditur quidera ut castus per portam pudicitiae, clave pudicitiam ape-
riente reseratam ; et per aliam, ut Justus, aperta justitiae porta clave jus-
titiae : et sic de caeteris virtutibus. Opinor enim pro unaquaque virtute
scientiae quaedam sapientiae mysteria virtutis formae congruentia aperiri
ei qui juxta virtutem vixerit ; dante scilicet Servatore iis qui ab Inferi
portis subacti non fuerint totidem claves quot virtutes sunt, totidem nu-
mero portas aperientes, unicuique virtuti juxta mysteriorum revelationem
respondentes. Fortasse autem unaquaeque virtus coeli regnum est, et
tota siraul regnum coelorum est ; adeo ut juxta id jam in regno coelorum
sit qui vivit secundum virtutes ; atque ita ut illud, Poenitentiam a^ite,
appropinq'iiavit enim regnum ccehrum, juxta id non ad tempus, sed ad
actiones et affectiones referatur. Christus enim, qui omnis virtus est,
praesto est, et loquitur, proptereaque regnum Dei intra Discipulos illius
est, non autem hie et hie. Vide autem quanta vi poUeat petra, super
quam a Christo aedificatur 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 portae Inferi adversus eum non praevaleant.
Adversus eum igitur qui injuste judicat, et non juxta Verbum Dei ligat
super terram, neque ex illius sententia solvit super terram, portae Inferi
praevalent : adversus quem autem portae Inferi non praevalent, is juste
judicat. Idcirco claves habet regni coelorum, aperiens iis qui soluti sunt
super terram, ut in coelis soluti sint ac liberi ; et claudens iis qui justo
illius judicio ligati sunt super terram, ut in coelis ligati ac condemnati
sunt."
F 6
108 TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN [cHAP.
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 admits him into the gate
of chastity, and the key of righteousness 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 corresponding to this form
of virtue, opened to him who lives according to that
virtue ; the Saviour giving to those who were not sub-
dued by the gates of hell, as many keys as there are
virtues, opening as many gates and corresponding to each
virtue according to the revelation of its mysteries. Per-
haps 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
kingdom of the heavens; and therefore this passage.
Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand, may
be referred 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 possessed 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 if by God,
judging in him, that according to the very law it might
be said, ' The gates of hell shall not prevail against him.'
Therefore against him who judges unjustly, and does not
bind according to the word of God upon the earth, nor
loose according to his sentence, the gates of hell prevail :
but that man against whom the gates of hell do not pre-
vail, 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
XIII.] ADVERSE TO THE SUPREMACY. 109
and free, and shutting to those who are bound by his just
judgment upon earth, that they may also be bound and
condemned in the heavens."
" ^ 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 Sa-
viour, those things which are bound by them, that is,
condemned, are bound in heaven, and those which are
loosed on earth are loosed in heaven ; it may be said that
they judge 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 may 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 upon 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 Scrip-
1 lb. p. 279. D. " Quoniam autem qui Episcopatus locum vendicant,
dictum hoc usurpant, sicut Petrus, et acceptis a Servatore clavibus regni
coelorum docent 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 ; pronuntian-
dum est recte illos dicere, si factum etiam habuerint propter quod Petro
huic dictum est ; Tu es Petrvs ; ac si tales sunt, ut super illos sedificetur
Ecclesia a Christo, et ad illos jure id referri possit. Portae autem Inferi
praevalere non debent adversus eum qui ligare vult et solvere. Quod si
fuwthus peccatorum suorum oonstringitwr, frustra et ligat et solvit."
" Si quis autem qui Petrus non fuerit, nee ea habuerit quae hie dicta
sunt, sicut Petrus ligaturum se credit super terram, ita ut quae ligata
fuerint, sint ligata et in coelis ; et soluturum se super terram, ita ut quae
soluta fuerint, sint soluta et in coelis, superbus ille est, nesciens Scriptu-
rarum sensum, et superbia elatus in crimen incidit Diabdi." lb. p. 280.
110 TESTIMONY OF ORIGEN. [CHAP.
tures, and being lifted up with pride he falls into the
crime of the devil."
It is surely impossible, brethren, to ask for language
more plain than this, to prove that Origen had no know-
ledge of the doctrine of your supremacy. He takes no-
tice, indeed, of the claim which some were beginning to
put forth on behalf of the bishops in general, that the
power of the keys granted to Peter was a power belong-
ing to the Episcopact/; 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 TertuUian,
that the keys of the kingdom were granted alike to every
spiritual Christian. He considers the Church built by
Christ upon the rock, against which the gates of hell
should not prevail, as being the kingdom of God esta-
bUshed in the soul ; and his entire view of this famous
passage of the divine word, by which you endeavour to
defend your title to universal dominion, is utterly subver-
sive of your claim to the sanction of the primitive day.
I am aware that you are accustomed to evade the tes-
timony of Origen by condemning him as a heretic. And
therefore, I proceed to prove the high character given to
him by your own v^iters, and especially by Jerome, the
greatest oracle amongst the fathers, according to your
own canon law.
The distinguished Huetius^ one of the most learned
writers of your communion, treating on the very point
whether Origen should 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 Demetrius, the bishop of Alex-
XIII.] CHARACTER OF ORIGEN. Ill
andria, with the consent of many others, condemned Ori-
gen, yet his cause was maintained by Palestine, Arabia,
Phenice, and Achaia, and he was continued and died in
the communion of the cathohc Church : that the cla-
mour raised against him was the result 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 ad-
judged 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 Irenseus, Papias, Cyprian,''*' &c. and
lastly, he quotes with approbation the sentiment of Je-
rome concerning Origen, where he says : " This one
thing I declare freely : I would willingly take the preju-
dice against his name, if I could have therewith his
knowledge of the Scriptures ; and I should make very
light of those phantoms, those shades of goblins or ghosts,
the nature of which is said to be, to frighten children and
to gibber in the dark \'"
1 " Qui contrarias autem sectantur partes, talia regerunt, a Demetrio
licet, plurimisque ipsi consentientibus Episcopis segregatus fuerit ab
Ecelesia Origenes, ipsius tamen causam suscepisse et propugnasse Pales-
tinam, Arabiam, Phceniciam, et Achaiam : et juxta testificationem Hie-
ronymi, non ipsius errores, sed adversariorum invidiam has ei turbas
peperisse." " Quis Ecclesise communionem simulate seeretum eum
existimet, qui fidei professionem ad Fabianum Papam dedit, exorientes
haereses acerrime insectatus est, nullam cum hsereticis societatem iniit,
Catholicorum Episcoporum familiaritate ad mortem usque constanter
usus est V "Denique suam famara et nomen satis asseruit Leo III.,
Pontifex Maximus, cum inter Lectiones ex Patrum lucubrationibus de-
cerptas, et Romano insertas Breviario, nonnullas quoque ex Origenianis
libris petitas eidem inseruit."
*'Q,ui ergo omnem hsereseos suspicionem ab Origene abesse volunt,
cum iis qui invidioso Hseretici nomine ipsum infamant, ita conciliari posse
censeo ; si duplici notione sumi Haeretici appellationem dicamus, vel ad
eum significandum qui haeresia aut fabrefecerit aut secutus sit, earn licet
112 CHARACTER OF [cHAP.
In another part of this very learned treatise, your au-
thor, Huetius, states the fact, that after Origen's death
his doctrines were held in universal estimation, so much
so indeed, 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
honour continued until the time of Arius, who, deriving
some support for his opinions, as was supposed, from the
writings of Origen, brought them into disrepute with
many\
But I am not concerned so much with the defence of
Origen's opinions, as with the simple question of his tes-
timony on the antiquity of your claims. And I beg leave
to observe, brethren, that the universal credit which his
name obtained for such a length of time, gives more than
common weight to this testimony. If, as you say, our
Redeemer granted to Peter a power of authority and
government over the other apostles, and this power or
ejurare paratus, simulatque fuisse ab Ecclesia repudiata ; vel ad desig-
nandum eum qui non haereseos duntaxat auctor et assecla ; sed perpetuus
etiam propugnator, et pertinax adversus Ecclesiae auctoritatem assertor
fuerit : priore igitur notione Haeretici nomen a Patribus Adamantio im-
poni, ut hsereseos 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 Ebrai-
cis : Hoc unum dico : tellem cum invidia nominis ejus habere etiam sci-
entiam Scripturarum, fiocci pendens imagines^ umbrasque lamarum, quarum
natura esse dicltur, terrere parvulos, et in angulis garrire teneh'osis." Vide
Origenianorum, Pet. Dan. Huet. lib. 2. cap. 3. pp. 194, 5.
^ " Sane tanta erat his temporibus Origenianae doctrinae celebritas et
existimatio, ut hinc ad facti poenitentiam adductum fuisse credam Metho-
dium, cum vix quemquam ad suas pelliceret partes ; cuncti ferme Ada-
mantio adhaerescerent." Pet. D. Huet. Origenianorum, lib. 2. § 3.
p. 197.
" A Methodii aetate ad Ariana tempora suus Origeni honos videtur
constitisse. Orto autem Ario patrocinium haeresi suae quaerentes Ariani
Adamantii nomen causae suae praetexere studuerunt." lb.
XIII.] ORIGEN. 113
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 as
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 especially was this
impossible in a doctor of such reputation and influence as
Origen. But so far was Origen from maintaining this
doctrine, that he interprets the very passages 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 state-
ment 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 opposi-
tion against Origen \ Why was not the bishop of Rome
active against him, if that bishop then claimed his present
prerogatives ? Why was not Origen then attacked on
this very ground I 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.
1 " Demonstratum est autem turbarum omnium, quae adversus Ori-
genem magno Ecclesiae detrimento concitatae sunt, auctorem et incentorem
fuisse Demetrium Alexandrinum." lb. § 1. p. 196.
2 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 TertuUian, 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, candour requires
that all which appears to favour your system should be
fully set 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 primacy acknowledged by Cyprian, and the primacy
claimed by you.
" There is one God," says Cyprian, " and one Christ,
and one Church, and one chair founded by the voice of
the Lord upon Peter. No other altar can be erected,
no new priesthood can be established, besides that one
altar and that one priesthood. Whoever attempts to
gather elsewhere, scatters \"
^ " Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et cathedra una
super Petrum Domini voce fundata. Aliud altare constitui, aut sacer-
CHAP. XIV.] TESTIMONY OF CYPRIAN. 115
Again, speaking of the election of Cornelius as bishop
of Rome, he uses this language \ " He" (sc. Cornelius)
" was made bishop by many of our colleagues who were
then at Rome, who sent unto us illustrious letters to his
praise and honour, in testimony of his preaching and his
ordination. And Cornelius was therefore made bishop by
the judgment of God and of Christ, by the testimony of
almost all the clergy, by the suffrage of the people who
were present, and by the college of priests and of ancient
and good men ; and no one was appointed before him,
when the place of Fabian, that is, the place of Peter and
the degree of his sacerdotal chair, was vacant, which he
now occupies by the will of God and the consent of us
aU."
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
shghtest agency on the part of either clergy or people, is
striking indeed. But I quote it now, in order to give
you the benefit of that part of it, in which the see of
Rome is called the chair of Peter.
Again, complaining of the schismatical attempt of
dotium novum fieri prseter unum altare, et unum sacerdotium, non potest.
Quisquis alibi coUegerit, spargit." Cyp. ad Pleb. Epist. p. 59.
^ " Et factus est Episcopus a plurimis collegis nostris, qui tunc in urbe
Roma aderant, qui ad nos litteras honorificas, et laudabiles, et testimonio
suae praedieationis illustres de ejus ordinatione miserunt. Factus est
autem Cornelius Episcopus de Dei et Ciiristi judicio, de Clericorum pene
omnium testimonio, de plebis, quae tunc aifuit suffragio, et de sacerdotum,
antiquorum et bonorum virorum collegio ; cum nemo ante se factus esset,
cum Fabiani locus, id est, cum locus Petri et gradus Cathedrae sacerdota-
lis vacaret, quo occupato de Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum con-
sensione firmato," &c. Cyp. Epist. ad Antonian. p. 75.
116 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
' Novatian to become the bishop of Rome, Cyprian says * :
" Afterwards they presume to rest upon a false bishop
appointed by heretics, and to carry letters from schis-
matics 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 *, " 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
viriter, do in reality prove nothing of the kind. The idea
of Cyprian was, that the apostolic or the episcopal office
was one, that the calling of Peter and the giving him his
official authority 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 maintain-
ing 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 pre-
cedency among peers, or any other case, in which a
^ " Post ista adhuc insuper pseudo-episcopo sibi ab haereticis constitute,
navigare audent, et ad Petri cathedram atque ad Ecclesiam principalem,
unde unitas sacerdotalis exorta est, a schismaticis et profanis litteras ferre,
nee cogitare eos esse Romanes (quorum fides, Apostolo praedicante, lau-
data est) ad quos perfidia habere non possit accessum." Cyp. ad Cornel,
de Fortunat. et Felic. p. 95.
2 " Quando et baptisma unum sit, et Spiritus Sanctus unus, et una
Ecclesia a Christo Domino super Petrum origine unitatis et ratione fun-
data," Cyp. Epist. ad Januar. p. 138.
XIV.] CYPRIAN. 117
number being united in the same work with the same
powers, one, for the sake of order, goes before the rest.
That this was the extent of Cyprian^s deference to the
bishop of Rome will be abundantly manifest from the
following extracts.
^ " Our Lord," saith he, " whose precepts we ought to
reverence and observ^e, establishing the honour 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 upon 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 governed by those pre-
sidents, and this is by the divine law," &;c.
Again ^ saith Cyprian, " By Christ, there is one Church
through the whole world divided in many members ; for
the episcopate is one, diffused by the harmonious host
* "Dominus noster, cujus praecepta metuere et observare debemus,
Episcopi honorem, et Ecclesiae suae rationem disponens in Evangelio
loquitur, et dicit Petro : Ego tibi dico, quia tu es Petrus, et super istam
petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portae Inferorum non viacent earn,
et tibi dabo claves regni coelorum, et quae ligaveris super terrain, erunt
ligata et in coelis, et quaecumque solveris super terram, erunt soluta et in
coelis. Inde per temporum et successionum vices, Episcoporum ordina-
tio, et Ecclesiae ratio decurrit, ut Ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur :
et omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem Praepositos gubernetur. Cum hoc
itaque divina lege fundatum sit," &c. Cyprian. Lapsis Epist. p. 42.
* " Cum sit a Christo una Ecclesia per totum mundum in multa mem-
bra divisa, item Episcopatus unus, Episcoporum multorum concordi
numerositate diffusus ; ille post Dei traditionem, post connexam et ubique
conjunctam Catholicae Ecclesiae unitatem," &c. Cyp. ad Antonian.
Epist. p. 81.
118 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
of many bishops, and this, according to the tradition of
God, is the connected and every where conjoined unity of
the cathohc Church," &c.
Again \ " The episcopate," says he, " is one, of which
a part is held by each bishop, with an interest 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 overflowing abundance, never-
theless unity is preserved in the origin."
Again, in a passage which is full of exceUent instruction
to the ministers of Christ, Cyprian states as follows ^ :
" In all things," saith he, " we ought to hold the unity
1 "Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur.
Ecclesia quoque una est, quae in multitudinem latius incremento fecundi-
tatis extenditur : quo modo solis multi radii, sed lumen unum : et rami
arboris multi, sed robur unum tenaci radice fundatum : et cum de fonte
uno rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet dififusa videatur exundantis
copise largitate, unitas tamen servatur in origene." Cyp. de unitat.
Eccles. p. 208.
2 " Per omnia debemus Ecclesiae Catholicae unitatem tenere, nee in
aliquo fidei et veritatis hostibus cedere. Non est autem de consuetudine
praescribendum, sed ratione vincendum. Nam nee Petrus quem primum
Dominus elegit, et super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam suam, cum secum
Paulus de circumcisione postmodum disceptaret, vindicavit sibi aliquid
insolenter, aut arroganter assumpsit ; ut diceret se primatum tenere, et
obtemperari a novellis et posteris sibi potius oportere. Nee despexit
Paulum quod ecclesiae prius persecutor fuisset, sed consilium veritatis
admisit, et rationi legitimae quam Paulus vindicabat, facile consensit ;
documentum scilicet nobis et concordiae et patientiae tribuens, ut non per-
tinaciter nostra amemus, sed quae aliquando a fratribus et collegis nos-
tris utiliter et salubriter suggeruntur, si sint vera et legitima, ipsa potius
nostra ducamus. Cui rei Paulus quoque prospiciens, et concordiae et
paci fideliter consulens in epistola sua posuit, dicens : Prophetae autem
duo aut tres loquantur, et caeteri examinent : si autem alii revelatum
fuerit sedenti, ille prior taceat," &c. Cypriani Epist. ad Quint, p. 140.
XIV.] CYPRIAN. 119
of the catholic Church, nor in any thing of faith and
virtue should we yield to her enemies. We should not
admit the prescription of custom, but should rather be
overcome by reason. For Peter, whom the Lord chose
first, and upon 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 readily 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 occa-
sionally 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 show clearly the equality of right and
authority 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
jurisdiction on the apostle over his brethren, nor on the
bishop of any one diocese over the rest. But the matter
does not rest upon these proofs alone. There are other
passages still more conclusive, which I cannot pass by in
justice to the truth.
Thus, in many of the epistles of Cyprian, speaking of
120 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
Cornelius, then bishop of Rome, he calls him ^ "his col-
league," his " fellow bishop," " his brother," in no one
instance giving him any title of superior respect or reve-
rence, but invariably using the language of the most
absolute equality.
Again, assigning the reason why Rome takes prece-
dence of Carthage, he makes not the slightest allusion to
any difference 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 mag-
nitude, Rome ought to precede Carthage ^."
But nothing tries the strength of comparative autho-
rity, like the occurrence of a dispute or controversy ; and
this test offers itself as the most irrefragable evidence of
the doctrine held on the point of supremacy by our pre-
sent vdtness. It is familiarly known to you, brethren,
that Stephen, the bishop of Rome, next but one after
Cornelius, maintained the validity of baptism when admi-
nistered by heretics and schismatics, and was warmly
opposed on this account by Cyprian and the bishops of
Africa, who held a provincial council on the subject.
And it ought to be as familiarly known, that Cyprian,
and his colleagues of Africa, yielded not one jot to their
brother and colleague of Rome, but defended their posi-
tion 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
1 "Cum Comelio, coepiscopo nostro." — "Comelium coUegam nos-
trum." Cyp. Epist, ad Antonian. p. 73.
" Cognovimus, frater charissime, fidei, ac virtutis vestrae." Cj'p. Epist.
ad Comelium, p. 104.
2 "Plane quondam pro magnitudine sua debeat Carthaginem Roma
praecedere." Cyp. ad Comelium, Epist. 70.
6
XIV.] CYPRIAN. 121
rest, after the holding of the council, furnishes our first
authority.
" ' 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 without the Church, stained with pro-
fane water amongst heretics 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 re-
ceived the baptism of the Church." After this introduc-
tion, Cyprian proceeds to explain and support his doc-
trine, and concludes in the following words, viz.
" ' These things we have addressed to your conscience
1 " Ad Stephanum Papain de Concilio."
** Cyprianus et caeteri Stephano, Salutem.
" Ad quaedam disponenda et consilii communis examinatione limanda,
necesse habuimus, frater charissime, convenientibus in unum pluribus
sacerdotibus cogere et celebrare concilium. In quo multa quidem pro-
lata atque transacta sunt ; sed de eo vel maxime tibi scribendum, et cum
tua gravitate ac sapientia conferendum fuit, quod magis pertineat et ad
sacerdotalem auctoritatem et ad Ecclesise catholicae unitatem pariter ac
dignitatem, de divinae dispositionis ordinatione venientem, eos qui sint
foris extra Ecclesiam tincti, et apud haereticos et schismaticos profanae
aquae labe maculati, quando ad nos atque ad Ecclesiam, quae una est,
venerint, baptizari oportere: eo quod parum sit eis manum imponere ad
accipiendum Spiritum sanctum, nisi accipiant et Ecelesiae baptismum."
Cyp. 0pp. p. 14L
' " Haec ad conscientiam tuam, frater charissime, et pro honore comr
mimi; et pro simplici dilectione pertulimus, credentes etiam tibi pro
G
122 TESTIMONY OF CYPRIAN, [cHAP.
most dear brother, for the common honour and for sin-
cere love, believing that those things which are rehgious
and true, will also be acceptable to you in the truth of
your faith and religion. But we know that certain men
are unwilling to lay aside any opinion which they have
ever imbibed, or to change readily their own purpose ;
but the bond of peace and concord amongst their col-
leagues being preserved, 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 adminis-
tration 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 claiming its descent from the time of the
apostles, he took it upon him, as Victor had done in the
days of Irenseus about the Easter controversy, to refuse
communion with those that dissented from his doctrine.
Had your present system been, at that time, the acknow-
ledged system of the Church, this act of Stephen would
have produced one of these two results : either Cyprian
and his African colleagues must have submitted imme-
diately, or they must have been cut off as obstinate
schismatics. But neither of these results were appre-
religionis tuae et fidei veritate placere, quae et religiosa pariter et vera
sunt. Caeterum scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere,
nee propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo inter collegas pacis et con-
cordise vinculo, quaedam propria, quae apud se semel sint usurpata, reti-
nere, Qua in re nee nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem damns ; cum
liabeat in Ecclesiae administratione voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum
unusquisque praepositus, rationem actus sui Domino redditiu'us. Optamus
te, frater charissime, semper bene valere." lb. p. 142.
XIV.] AND THE BISHOPS OF AFRICA. l^S
hended, nor did either take place. Cyprian did not sub-
mit, but severely censured Stephen for his course, and
denied the truth of the Roman tradition. And yet so
far was he from being condemned for his independence,
that he stands upon your list as a saint, and is termed
the blessed 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 independence of Cyprian and his resistance to
Stephen, cannot be tolerated on the ground that the doc-
trine of Cyprian was right. His independence was right,
although his doctrine was wrong ; and hence, as we shall
see when we come to the history of that council, the very
same men who adopted the doctrine of Stephen on the
point of baptism, confirmed the independence of the
African Church.
But I have other proofs to offer of the general resist-
ance to the bishop of Rome on this occasion. Firmilian,
the bishop of Cappadocia, in a letter to Cyprian, saith \
^ "Qualis vero error sit, et quanta sit csecitas ejus qui remissio-
nem peccatorum dicit apud synagogas haereticorum dari posse, nee
permanet in fundament© unius Ecclesiae quae semel a Christo supra
petram solidata est ; hinc intelligi potest, quod soli Petro Christus dix-
erit : Quaecunque ligaveris super terram, erunt ligata et in coelis, et
quaecunque solveris super terram, erunt soluta et in coelis, et iterum in
Evangelio quando in solos Apostolos insufflavit Christus dicens : Acci-
pite Spiritum sanctum : si cujus remiseritis peecata, remittentur illi ; et
si cujus tenueritis, teneLuntur. Potestas ergo peccatorum remitten-
dorum Apostolis data est, et ecclesiis quas illi a Christo missi constitue-
runt, et episcopis qui eis ordinatione vicaria successerunt. Hostes autem
unius catholicae ecclesiae in qua nos sumus, et adversarii nostri qui
Apostolis successimus, sacerdotia sibi illicita contra nos vindicantes, et
altaria prophana ponentes ; quid aliud sunt quam Chore et Dathan et
Abiron, pari scelere sacrilegi, et easdem quas et illi poenas daturi cum
G 2
124 . TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
" How great is the error, how strange the blindness of
him who says that the remission of sins can be given in
the synagogues of heretics, and continues not upon the
foundation of that one Church, which was once built by
Christ upon the rock; he should understand that to
Peter alone, Christ said. Whatsoever thou shalt bind on
earth, shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven. And
again, in the gospel, when Christ breathed only on his
apostles, saying to them : Receive the Holy Ghost : whose-
soever 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,
established, and to the bishops which succeeded them by
regular ordination. But those enemies of that one ca-
tholic Church in which we are, those adversaries of us
who have succeeded the apostles, defending their unlawful
priesthood against us, and setting up a profane altar, —
what else are they but Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, in
an equal sin of sacrilege, and sure to obtain for all who
unite with them the same punishment ; even as we know
that the companions and favourers of these men perished
with themselves. Therefore I am justly indignant at this
open and manifest folly of Stephen, who, although he so
boasts of the place of his bishoprick, and contends that
he holds the succession of Peter, upon whom the foun-
dations of the Church were placed, nevertheless brings in
his qui sibi consentiunt, secundum quod etiam tunc illorum participes et
fautores pariter cum eis perierunt. Atque ego in hac parte juste in-
dignor ad banc tam apertam et manifestam Stephani stultitiam, quod
qui sic de Episcopatus sui loco gloriatur, et se successionem Petri tenere
contendit, super quera fundamenta ecclesise collocata sunt, multas alias
petras inducat, et ecclesiarum multarum nova sedificia constituat, dum
esse illic baptisma sua auctoritate defendit." Firmilian. ad Cyprian.
Epist. 0pp. Cyp. p. 157.
XIV.] FIRMILIAN. 125
other rocks, and builds the new edifices of many Churches,
while he defends their baptism by his authority."
Again, in another passage of the same epistle, we
find the following : ^ " Those who are of Rome do not
in all things observe what was delivered from the begin-
ning, 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 diversities 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 and unity of the catholic Church. But
Stephen has presumed to disturb this concord and unity,
breaking towards you the peace which his predecessors
always maintained with you in love and mutual honour :
even defaming the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, as
if they delivered his doctrine."
And again, ^ " We," saith Firmilian, "join custom
to truth, and we oppose to the custom of the Romans a
* " Eos autem qui Romse sunt non ea in omnibus observare quae sint
ab origine tradita, et frustra apostolorum auctoritatem praetendere :
scire quis etiam inde potest, quod circa celebrandos dies paschae, et circa
multa alia divinae rei sacramenta, videat esse apud illos aliquas diversi-
tates, nee observari illic omnia aequaliter, quae Hierosolymis observantur.
Secundum quod in caeteris quoque plurimis provinciis, multa pro loco-
rum et nominum diversitate variantur ; nee tamen propter hoc ab
Ecclesiae Catholicae pace atque unitate aliquando discessum est. Quod
nunc Stephanus ausus est facere, rumpens adversus vos pacem, quam
semper antecessores ejus vobiscum amore et honore mutuo custodierunt :
adhuc etiam infamans Petrum et Paulum beatos Apostolos, quasi hoc
ipsi tradiderint." lb. p. 159.
* " Caeterum nos veritati et consuetudinem jungimus, et consuetudini
Romanorum consuetudinem sed veritatis opponimus ; ab initio hoc te-
nentes quod a Christo et ab Apostolo traditum est" lb. p. 164.
G 3
126 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
custom which is of truth, holding from the beginning what
has been dehvered by Christ and the apostle.""
That Cyprian fully agreed in these sentiments of his
colleague Firmilian, is sufficiently evident from what I
have already cited; but I shall confirm it by a few
extracts 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.
^ " Although we have embraced fully all that is to be
said upon the baptism of heretics, in the epistles of which
^ "Quanquam plene ea quae de haereticis "baptizandis dicenda sunt,
complex! sumus in epistolis, quarum ad te exempla transmisimus, frater
charissime, tamen quia desiderasti in notitiam tuam perferri, quae mihi
ad litteras nostras Stephanus frater noster rescripserit, misi tibi re-
scripti ejus exemplum ; quo lecto magis ac magis ejus errorem deno-
tabis, qui haereticorum causam contra Christianos, et contra Ecclesi-
am Dei asserere conatur. Nam inter csetera vel superba, vel ad rem
non pertinentia, vel sibi ipsi contraria, quae imperite atque improvide
scripsit, etiam illud adjunxerit, ut diceret : [si quis ergo a quacunque
liseresi venerit ad nos, nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est, ut ma-
nus illi imponatur in poenitentiam :" &c.] " Unde est ista tradi-
tio ? Utrum ne de dominica et Evangelica auctoritate descendens, an
de Apostolorum mandatis atque epistolis veniens ? Ea enim facienda
esse quae scripta sunt, Deus testatur, et proponit ad Jesum 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 sues mittens, mandat baptizari gentes et doceri,
ut observent omnia quaecunque ille praecepit. Si ergo aut in Evange-
Ho praecipitur, aut in Apostolorum Epistolis, aut Actibus continetur,
ut a quacumque haeresi venientes non baptizentur, sed tantum manus
illis imponantur in poenitentiam, observetur divina hsec et] sancta tradi-
tio." " Ut nemo infamare Apostolos debeat, quasi illi haereticorum
baptismata probaverint ;" " quae ista obstinatio est, quaeve prse-
sumptio, humanam traditionem divinae dispositioni anteponere, nee
aniraadvertere, indignari et irasci Deum, quoties divina praecepta solvit
et praeterit humana traditio ? " Cyp. epist. ad Pomp, contra Epist.
Stephan. p. 152, 3.
XIV.] CYPRIAN. 127
we 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 Grod. For amongst other proud and irre-
levant things, and contradictions which he has unskil-
fully and thoughtlessly WTitten, he has added the follow-
ing : 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 peni-
tence," &c. . . . "But whence is this tradition ? 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 testifies and pro-
poses to Joshua, saying. This book of the law shall not
depart from thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein
day and night, that thou mayest observe to do all things
which are written therein. In like manner, the Lord,*
sending his apostles, commands them to teach and bap-
tize the nations, that they may observe all things which
he had commanded them. If, therefore, it is either
directed in the Grospel, 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 tra-
dition be observed." " But let no one defame the
apostles, as if they approved the baptism of heretics." . . .
" How great is this obstinacy, how bold this presump-
tion, to place this human tradition before the divine sanc-
tion, forgetting that God is always indignant and wrath-
ful, whenever human traditions are exalted above his
precepts ! "
G 4
128 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
Here, then, brethren, we have a practical demonstra-
tion of Cyprian''s views upon this important question, too
plain to be fairly evaded, and rendering it impossible for
an unprejudiced mind to believe that the doctrine of the
catholic Church in his days was at all accordant with
your present claims on the subject of papal supremacy.
For, I beseech 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 Stephen were the vicars of
Christ, holding the place of Grod upon the earth, or that
his opinions were to be 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 bishop holds a
part ? Does he not declare that the Church is built on
the apostles, and on the ^bishops, their successors ; and
place the unity of the Church, not on the agreement of
the bishops with the Roman see, but on their concord and
agreement together ? Does he not address the bishops
of Rome precisely as he addresses the bishops of Africa,
and expressly assert their mutual independence, each
bishop being solely accountable to God ? Does he not
explain what he meant in styling the Church of Rome
"the principal see," by saying, that '•'' on account of its
superior magnitude^ Rome ought to precede Carthage T
Does he not refuse to change the custom of Carthage to
the custom of Rome, and call that custom a human tra-
dition opposed to truth? Does he not deny that any
thing can be properly called an apostolical tradition, unless
it be found in Scripture ? And does he not condemn the
bishop of Rome with the utmost freedom, when he thinks
XIV.] CYPRIAN. 129
him in error, and even impeach him of pride, of ignor-
ance, and of obstinacy?
Now, brethren, I only ask, what provincial bishop of
your Chm-ch would dare to write and act thus at the
present day ? Yet Cyprian was not blamed for his inde-
pendence. Like Victor in the days of Irenaeus, 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 Cyprian closed his life by a glorious martyrdom, and
stands high on your calendar as one of the blessed, and
is enrolled in your canon law ; while Stephen, his anta-
gonist, though the council of Aries sanctioned his doc-
trine, 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 dominion of his see, as
" the mother and mistress of all the Churches,**" have any
real warrant from primitive antiquity ?
G »')
CHAPTER XV,
Brethren in Christ,
The name of Lactantius, who is commonly set down
about A. D. 306, and that of Eusebius, the bishop of Ce-
sarea, who is a few years later, are all that I shall place
before you, previous to the council of Nice. Of these,
Lactantius stands first in order.
The testimony of this author is merely negative ; and
yet it seems worthy of great consideration. For what
writer giving a description of your religion at this day,
and speaking of Peter, and of Rome, would omit all allu-
sion to the primacy ?
If he believed that Peter was the prince of the apostles,
having dominion over the rest, could he speak of him
without giving the honour that was due ? If he believed
that the Church of Rome was the authoritative " mother
and mistress" of all the Churches, and that the bishop
of Rome was the vicar of Christ, holding the place of
Grod upon earth, could he inculcate the system of the
faith, without noticing a point of such vast practical im-
portance? Manifestly not. Therefore I must trouble
you with a short extract from Lactantius, wherein he
states the commencement 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.
CHAP. XV.] TESTIMONY OF LACTANTIUS. 131
After having discussed, at much length, the hfe, the
character, and the death of Christ, and the conduct of
the Jewish nation, Lactantius speaks of his resurrection,
and of his conversing with his disciples forty days, and
continues thus : * " These commands concerning the gos-
pel and the preaching of his name, being given to his
disciples, a cloud suddenly surrounded him, and bore
him to heaven, on the fortieth day after his passion, as
Daniel had predicted, saying : And behold in the clouds
of heaven, the Son of man coming, went even to the
Ancient of days. But his disciples being dispersed
through the provinces, placed the foundations of the
Church every where, doing great things in the name of
their Lord Grod, and miracles almost incredible, because,
in departing, he had endowed them with virtue and power
by which the system of the new annunciation might be
established and confirmed ; 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 that this also 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 their cities to
the ground." &;c.
' " Ordinata vero discipulis suis evangelica, ac nominis sui praedicatione,
circumfudit se repente nubes, eumque in coelum sustulit, quadragesimo
post passionem die, sicut Daniel fore ostenderat, dicens : Et ecce in nu-
bibus coeli ut Filius hominis veniens, usque ad vetustum dierum pervenit.
Discipuli vero per provincias dispersi, fundamenta Ecclesiae ubique
posuerunt ; facientes et ipsi nomine magistri Dei magna, et pene incredi-
bUia miracula ; quia discedens instruxerat eos virtute, ac potestate, qua
posset novae annuntiationis ratio fundari et confirmari : sed et futura
aperuit illis omnia ; quae Petrus et Paulus Romse praedicaverunt ; et ea
praedicatio in memoriam scripta permansit ; in qua cum multa alia mira,
turn etiam hoc futurum esse, dixerunt, ut post breve tempus immitteret
Deus regem, qui expugnaret Judaeos, et eivitates eorum solo adaequaret."
Lactant. de vera Sap. lib. iv. § 21. p. 277-8-
G 6
132 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
Here, you perceive, Lactantius passes briefly over the
very ground w^here the supremacy of Peter and of Rome
should prominently appear, if, in his day, these characters
of your religion had been established in the catholic
Church. But neither here nor elsewhere, does this writer
intimate the slightest consciousness 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 preserva-
tion, and his great work, especially, that which has ob-
tained 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 how 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
according to the Vulgate, but not the Hebrew, ' Benja-
min a youth in ecstasy of mind," ^ (being the 28th verse
of the 68th Psalm, numbered in your version the 67th,)
Eusebius applies it to Paul, in which he agrees with the
fathers generally, as your own note on the passage in the
* 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 Tva p»32 UTif
on, which Jerome translates Ibi Benjamin parmdus continens eos, and
Montanus translates Ibi Benjamin pusUlus dominam eos, both of which
accord well with our version, but not at all with yours, which follows the
Vulgate and the Septuagint. Eusebius cites the Septuagint, and also refers
to the other versions, but his explanation of the passage would only be
strengthened still more by the strict meaning of the Hebrew.
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 133
Doway Bible, correctly states : ^ " 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 the youngest or the least," continues Eu-
sebius, "was Paul the divine apostle, of the tribe of
Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, as he himself
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 last of all,
born out of due time. For this expression, however,
^ avTi Si Tov, kxei, 6 "SvfJLfiaxoQ oirov <pri<Ti Btviafiiv 6 fiiKpoTarog, Kal
6 'AKvXag b^ioiutc, IkA (prjffi Beviafiiv b fSpaxvQ, eiriKpaT&v avr&v. Bev-
laiiiv dk vsojrepog Kal fiiKporaroQ r) (3paxvTaTog, UavXog ijv 6 OeXog
diroffToXogj (pvXrjg u)V Bevia/xtv, 'E/3paioc I? 'Ej3|oata>v, KaQojg avrbg
didd(TKHXsy(ov' Trspcro/ij} oKrarifitpog, Ik ykvovg 'Itrpa^X, <pvXrig Beviafiiv,
'EjSpalog ek "E/3paia>v veutrepog dk flprjTai fj /itfcpdrarof, ») (ipax'bg, sTrd
Kai avrbg tovto SiddaKu Xkyuv 'vcrrepov dk ttolvtiov uKTirep ry lKTp<i)fiart
&<pQij Kcifioi' dvTi bk rov, iv iKaToiau, b fjikv 'AKvXag iTriKpardv avrSiV
6 bk QtoboTitav Traibtvrrig avrdv 17 bk t tKbomg, iraibtvovTa 17 bibdff-
KOVTtt rjpfxrjvevffev ov bti bk rifiXv TrXnovtov Xoytav tig dTrbbtiKiv tov
Kpariiv t(x)V kKKXrjmCiv, Kal Traibevrrjv avrCJv elvai tov iepbv diroffToXov
Beviafxlv bjvofiacrfikvov ov fiovog bk dpa 6 Bsviafilv ^v eKsl briXabilj Iv
ralg sKKXriaiaig rov Qiov, dXXd Kal ol dpxovTeg 'lovba rjysfioveg avTutv,
o'i T6 apxovTsg Tta^ovXutv Kal ol apxovTtg 'Se^OaXeifi' (Tr}[iaivH bk 6
\6yog bid tovtmv rolg XoiiroXg aTrooroXoif, wv ot fikv ijffav Ik <pvXrjg
'lovba, 01 bk U ^vXrjg Za/3ov\wv Kal Nt^OaXct/A* bid Ti^g tovto)v fik^vrj-
rai xwjoctc to ayiov Ilrcv^a bid 'VLaaiov tov Trpo^i^roy Xeyov y^ Tiafiov-
\o)v Kal yi] Nc^OaXet/i, obbv SfaXdaarig Trepav tov 'lopbdvov, FaXiXaia
Tu>v kOvuiv Kal avrbg bk 6 2wr))p Tropayaywv Trapd t-^v StdXaffffav Ttjg
FaXiXaiag, Tovg kavTOv fxaOriTdg evOevbt dvtKaXelTO' <Ta<pilJg ovv iiriKpa-
riiv Twv lKKXT](yia)V, vpioTOV fikv TlavXov tov ^paxvTarov Kal jitiKpora-
Tov Kal vto)TaTov tS>v diroCToXiav IbibaKtv iv tKOTdffei 'iroTk yevofievoVf
OTE kbioJKe TTjv kKKXj)(riav tov Ofov, Kal kiropQu avTr^v, ri oTt kv diroKa-
Xv^ei rbv Swr^pa TsOkaTO, 17 oTt rjpirdyr} elg tov Trapdbeitrov 'i(i)g Tp'iTov
ovpavov' [xeTd bk tov UavXov, Tolg Xonroig dTTOffToXoig kKU kv Ty avTy
iKKXriaiq, biaTrpsTTUV ^tffiriKu, dpxovTag bvrag riixiTspoig Ik ipvXrjg 'lovba
Kal dpxovTag Zaj3ovX(i)v Kal dpxovTag Ns^^aXet/n. Euseb. Com. in
Psalm. Ixvii. § 28. p. 359.
134 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
In ecstasy of mind, Aquila translates : Groveming them ;
Theodotion has it : Their schoolmaster, and in his fifth
edition, He explained discipline and doctrine. Nor," con-
tinues 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 of 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 Saviour
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 some-
times 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 prophesies 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."
Now here is an express testimony to prove that the
apostle Paul was the distinct subject of prophecy, the
only one of the apostles so honoured, 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 commentary, and says that they were aU
fulfilled in Paul. He was the ruler in the churches, ac-
cording to Aquila, the teacher according to Theodotion,
and he might be truly said to have been in ecstasy of mind
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 1S5
according to the Septuagint 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 Eusebius 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 : " ^ 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 them-
selves, and yet faithfully recording all that is to their own
disadvantage. Thus he states that Matthew is the only
one of the evangelists who mentions the fact that he was
a publican : that Peter, out of an excessive humility, did
not think himself worthy to write a Gospel, and that the
Gospel of St. Mark, written by Peter's companion and
disciple, (and under his direction, as all the ancients
held,) totally omits the famous address of Christ to him :
Thou art Peter, and on this rock, &c. " For Mark,"
says Eusebius ^ " was not present at those things which
were said by Christ, and Peter did not think it right to
^ UputTog ye toi 7rdvT<t)v 6 iepbg aTToffroXog IlavXoQ. Euseb. Praep.
Evangel, lib. 1. cap. 3. p. 7- A.
Your own translator, Francis. Vigerus Rothomagensis, Societat. Jesu
Presbyter, renders the above line thus : Quanquam omnium sane Prin-
ceps Paulus ille sacer Apostolus.
2 ov yap irapijv 6 MapKog rolg virb tov 'Iriaov Xsx^tXffiv, aXX' ovdt
Tlerpog to. Trphg avrbv Kai wept avrov XexOevtu T(p 'It]<tov IStKaiov Si
oiKeiag Trpo^spcij^ fxapTvpiag. Euseb. Demon. Evangel, lib. 3. cap. 7-
p. 121.
136 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
tell those things which Jesus said to him concerning him-
self, by his own testimony." " But those things which
concerned his denial of his Lord, he declared and pub-
lished before all men : and there declares that he wept
for it bitterly \" " We see, therefore," continues our
author, " that the apostles refuse what might bring upon
them a good reputation, while they commit to an eternal
record, what might be charged against them ^."
Now in this passage, it is easy to see how Eusebius
regarded the point of Peter^s supremacy. If the Sa-
viour had been supposed by him to have conferred
upon the apostle a high official pre-eminence, designed
to be perpetuated to his successors in a particular Church
to the end of the world, would Eusebius have praised
St. Peter's modesty and humility in suppressing it ? Was
it not a sacred duty in St. Paul to magnify Ms office^ while
he abased himself ? Do not all your bishops of Rome,
the successors of St. Peter, in this very prerogative which
you suppose granted by our Lord to Peter, continually
claim their official rights as a matter of solemn obliga-
tion ? And would a bishop of Rome be thought worthy
of praise for his modesty or humility, in suppressing this
distinction, and writing on the concerns of the Church as
if he had it not? The answer to all this is plain and
simple, and the conclusion is equally so. Eusebius, de-
signing to shew the modesty and candour of the apostles
in a strong point of view, declares that these things
which were to their praise they mentioned not, but re-
corded all that could be brought in accusation against
them. For an example, he instances Peter, leaving out
^ TO. di Kara rrjv apvijatv avTov dg travTaq kKrjpv^ev dvOpoJirovg, eTrei
Kai eKKavtriv err' avry TriKpCig. Ibid.
2 01 drj ovv TO. fikv SoKavra avTolg ayaBrfV ^eptiv <^i)iiriv irapaiTovfie-
voi, rag dk Ka9' eavTUfV Sia^oXdg dg aXriOTOv aldva Karaypd^ovreg.
Ibid. p. 122.
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 137
of Mark's Gospel (which was dictated by him) the whole
of Clirist's address to him on which you found the doc-
trine of the primacy : Thou art Peter, and on this rock
I will build my Church, &c., while he records his own
iniquity 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 pri-
macy was not simply personal, but official ; and as much
a part of the will of Christ 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 presumed to suppress it in his communications
to Mark 1 Would he have dared to omit it in his preach-
ing 1 And would Eusebius 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 definition of it ?
But the most decisive evidence on this point is fur-
nished by the same author in his celebrated work, the
Ecclesiastical History, in which he undertakes to give a
narrative 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
dominion of the Roman see over the rest of Christendom
must have appeared continually, had Eusebius known of
its existence. 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 his-
tory, which are plainly irreconcilable with your hypo-
thesis, so that the testimony of this most important wit-
ness of the primitive Church, both negatively and circum-
stantially, is absolutely fatal to your claim.
138 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
Of this testimony — in order to exhibit itself 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 authority of the bishops of Rome, and of the dis-
putes concerning Easter, and baptism ; and fourthly, to
some letters of the emperor, distinctly shewing that there
was no ecclesiastical difference between the authority of
the bishop of Rome and that of the other bishops. I
would gladly abbreviate, 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
Eusebius speaks of Peter \
Quoting from Clement of Alexandria, our historian
says, " Peter and James and John, after the ascension
of our Saviour, though they had been preferred before
the rest by our Lord, did not contend amongst them-
selves for the first degree of honour, but chose James
the Just for bishop of Jerusalem." And again, " The
Lord imparted the gift of knowledge to James the Just,
to John and Peter after his resurrection." But at the
close of the chapter (p. 50) mark how he speaks of
Paul*: "In the mean while, Paul, that chosen vessel,
1 Presuming that it might be generally more acceptable to you, I sub-
join, instead of the original Greek of Eusebius, the Latin version of your
own learned and celebrated Valesius. See Historise Ecclesiasticae Scrip-
tores Graeci, Ed. Amstel. torn. i. Euseb. Pamph. Ece. Hist. Lib. 2. cap.
L "Ait enim, (sc. Clem. Alex.) post Servatoris ascensum, Petrum,
Jacobum, et Joannem, quamvis Dominus ipsos caeteris praetulisset, non
idcirco de primo honoris gradu inter se contendisse, sed Jacobum cog-
nomine Justum Hierosolymorum episcopum elegisse." "Jacobo, in-
quit, Justo et Johanni et Petro Dominus resurrectionem scientise donum
impertiit."
2 Ibid. lib. 2. cap. I. " Interea Paulus vas illud electionis, non ex
hominibus nee per homines, sed per revelationem Jesu Christi, et Dei
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 139
not of men nor through men, but by the revelation of
Jesus Christ himself and God the Father who raised him
from the dead, is appointed an apostle, being called tp
that honour by a celestial vision and a voice addressed to
him at the time of that manifestation." Here there is
nothing to distinguish Peter, but much to indicate the
opinion which Eusebius seems to have entertained, that
Paul was the chief of the apostles.
Again, in the 14th chapter of the same book, (p. 64)
Peter is spoken of with strong praise, where, recording
the defeat of the magician Simon by tliis apostle, Eusebius
says ', that " Peter, the powerful and great apostle, who
on account 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 stated 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
Patris qui ilium suscitavit a mortuis, Apostolus constituitur, coelesti
visione ac voce quae tempore illius revelationis ad ipsum delata est, ad
hunc honorem vocatus."
1 Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 14. I regret to find an instance of unfaithfulness
in Valesius' translation of this passage, altogether unworthy of him. The
Greek is in these words : Trpovoia tov Kaprepbv Kal fikyav tHjv airocTTo-
\<i}v, TOV dpsTrjg sveKa tSjv Xoittwv cnrdvTiov Trporjyopov Tlsrpov eTri rriv
'Pojfirjv wg eiri r/yXt/eowrov Xvfitiova jSiov xtijoaywyct. And Valesius
renders it : " Dei providentia fortissimum et maximum inter Apostolos
Petrum et virtutis merito reliquorum omnium principem ac patronum
Romam adversus ilium generis humani labem et pestem perducit." Now
here his zeal for Peter's supremacy has led him into an extraordinary
amplification. Instead of the positive degree, powerful and great, ac-
cording 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 Trporjyopog, he has
called him their prince and patron.
140 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
for his clients, is a very different matter from the autho-
ritative primacy which the judge exercises over the
cHents themselves. The first is the thing intimated by
Eusebius ; the second is that which your doctrine de-
mands for Peter and his successors.
In the very next chapter, the historian relates the
establishment of the Roman Church, and the writing of
St. Mark's Grospel, in the following words \ " So
greatly," saith he, " did the splendour of truth enlighten
the minds of Peter''s hearers, that it was not sufficient
to hear but once, nor were they content to have received
the doctrine of the divine word, by oral communication,
without having it committed to writing ; but they
urgently besought Mark, the follower of Peter, whose
Gospel remains to this day, that he would leave with
them some written monument of what they had received.
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 Eusebius says nothing on the relation of
the Church of Rome to the other Churches, nor on the
subject of Peter's authority.
In the third book, chapter 1, the subject of Peter at
Rome occurs again ^. " The holy apostles and disciples
1 Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 15. " Tantu sautem veritatis fulgor emicuit in
mentibus eorum qui Petrum audierant, ut parum haberent semel au-
disse, nee contenti essent coelestis verbi doctrinam viva voce, nuUis tra-
ditam scriptis accepisse : sed Marcum Petri sectatorem, cujus hodieque
extat Evangelium, enixe orarent ut doctrinae illius quam auditu acce-
perant, scriptum aliquod monumentum apud se relinqueret. Nee prius
destiterunt quam hominem expugnassent, auctoresque scribendi illius
quod secundum Marcum dicitur, Evangelii extitissent."
2 Ibid. lib. 3. cap. 1. " Apostoli et discipuli Domini ac Servatoris nostri
per universum orbem dispersi Evangelium praedicabant. Et Thomas
quidem, ut a majoribus traditum accepimus, Parthiam sortitus est :
Andreas vero Scythiara, Joanni Asia obvenit, qui plurimum temporis in
ea commoratus, Ephesi tandem diem obiit. At Petrus per Pontum,
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 141
of our Lord and Saviour,"" saith the historian, " being
scattered over the whole world, preached the Gospel.
And Thomas, as we have received it from our prede-
cessors, was allotted to Parthia. Andrew went to Scythia,
and John to Asia ; where, after continuing for some
time, he died at Ephesus. But Peter is supposed to
have preached through Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cap-
padocia, 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 of Paul who can sufficiently
speak, spreading the Gospel of Christ from Jerusalem
to lUyricum, and finally suffering martyrdom at Rome,
under Nero V Here again, the historian gives no colour
to your favourite 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
statement, that he expressly names Linus as the first
Roman bishop \ " After the martyrdom of Paul and
Peter," saith he, " Linus was the first that received the
episcopate at Rome. Paul makes mention of him in his
Galatiam, Bithyniam, Cappadociam atque Asiam Judaeis qui in disper-
sione erant, praedicasse existimatur. Qui ad extremum Romam veniens,
cruci suffixus est capite deorsum demisso : sic enim ut in cruce coUoca-
retur oraverat. De Paulo jam quid attinet dicere, qui a Hierosolymis
usque ad lUyricum munus Evangelicae praedicationis implevit, ac postre-
mo Romae sub Nerone martyrio perfunctus est."
1 lb. lib. 3. cap. 2. '^Caeterum post Pauli Petri que martyrium
primus Ecclesiae Romanae episcopatum suscepit Linus. Hujus mentionem
facit Paulus in epistola quam ab urbe Roma ad Timotheum scripsit,
inter salutationes quae ad calcem epistolae leguntur : Salutat te, inquit,
Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, et Claudia." Valesius converts this unques-
tionable fact into a general observation, where in his annotations upon
the 14th ch. of the same book, he says expressly, that the " Apostles were
not reckoned in the number of the bishops." "Apostoli vero extra ordinem
erant f nee in Episcoporum numero censebantur"
142 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
epistle from Rome to Timothy, saying, Eubulus and
Pudens, and Linus and Claudia, salute thee."
Here Eusebius accords with Irenseus in the important
fact, that Linus, and not the apostle Peter, was the
first bishop of Rome ; thus opposing a positive negative
to your doctrine.
His mode of speaking of the Church of Rome, seems
to my mind altogether irreconcilable with your hypothe-
sis. Thus in the 4th book, 16th chapter, he calls Rome
simply " the great city \" And in the 6th book, 14th
chapter, speaking of Origen, he says, that " he came to
Rome, being desirous of seeing the very ancient Church
of Rome ^" Would he say no more than this, if he had
been taught to believe that Rome was the mother and
mistress of all the Churches ? Such, however, is the
constant style of the historian ; for he gives no intima-
tion, throughout his works, of any superior headship or
authority existing in favour of the supposed see of Peter.
I come, in the second place, to show the mode in which
Eusebius records the successions of the various bishops,
in which you will find no mark of distinction in favour of
Rome.
In book 4, chapter 4, he gives us an account of what
the title to the chapter calls, " the bishops of Alexandria
and Rome, under the same emperor." ^ " But in the
^ Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 16. ry neydXy TroXet.
2 Ibid. lib. 6. cap. 14. ep^dnevog rrjv apx^^^ordrriv 'Piofiaiojv kKKXrjaiav
idelv. Here again Valesius amplifies, rendering the words " Romanam
ecdesiam, omnium antiquissimam^'' whereas Eusebius does not say the
*' Roman Church, the most ancient of all,'^ but, " the very ancient Church
of the Romans."
3 Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 4. "Qui sub eodem Imperatore Episcopi Romae
fuerint et Alexandriae.
" Anno autem principatus Adriani tertio Alexander Romanae urbis epis-
copus fato functus est, cum decern annos administrationis explesset. Cui
successit Xystus. Eodem circiter tempore mortuo Primo anno episco-
patus sui duodecimo, Alexandrinae ecclesiae sacerdotium suscepit Justus."
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 143
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 time. Primus dying, in the twelfth year of his
episcopate, was succeeded by Justus in the Church of
Alexandria."
Again, in chapter 10 \ 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 chapter 19. ^ " 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 Agrip-
pinus."
Immediately after this, Eusebius notices that ^" 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
* Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 10. rovrov Se iv irei TrpdjTqt Te\e(T<p6pov tov ^iov
evdeKdr<i> tyiq XsiTOtpyiag lviavT<p fiETaWa^avTog, 'Yylvog tov KXrjpov
TiJQ 'P(x)fiai(i)v ETTio-KOTT^e TrapoXaix^dvu. Here, again, is a little speci-
men of Valesius' propensity ; for whereas Eusebius says that Hyginus
took the lot of the episcopate of the Romans, Valesius makes it look as
well as he can by calling it a pontificate : Ponti/icatum Romance urbis sor-
titus est Hyginus.
2 Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 19. " Porro supradicto Imperatore jam octavum prin-
cipatus annum agente, cum Anicetus Ecclesise Romanae episcopatum
undecim annis obtinuisset, Soter in ejus locum successit. Apud Alex-
andriam quoque cum Celadion per annos quatuordecim ecclesiae prae-
fuisset, Agrippinus sedem ejus obtinuit."
^ Ibid. lib. 4. cap. 20. " Antiochenae vero ecclesiae episcopatum sextus
ab Apostolis Theophilujs gubernabat. Quippe Cornelius Heronis suc-
cessor, quartus ab Apostolis eidem ecclesiae praesederat.
8
144 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
bearing your interpretation as any that he uses in the
case of Rome.
In the opening sentence of book the 5th, he states
that ^ " Soter, bishop of Rome, died, having held the
episcopate eight years. And Eleutherius, the twelfth
from the apostles, succeeded in his place.^' And in
chapter the 22d, he mentions, that ^ " in the tenth reign
of Commodus, Eleutherius, who had held the episcopate
for thirteen years, was succeeded by Victor."
Now these may serve as a specimen of the mode in
which the father of ecclesiastical history speaks of the
bishops of Rome and the Church of Rome. Nothing is
here said of the apostolic see — the chair of Peter — the
chief see — the mother and mistress of all the Churches —
the vicar of Christ, or any other allusion or epithet which
accords with the claims of your canon law. Indeed, the
only episcopal seat to which Eusebius attaches any pecu-
liarity, is that of Jerusalem. ^ For " James,"' saith he,
book 7, chapter 19, " being the first that received the
dignity of the episcopate at Jerusalem from our Saviour
himself and the apostles, as the sacred Scriptures show
that he 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
* Ibid. lib. 5. cap. I. " Igitur Sotere Romanae urbis episcopo post
octavum episcopatus annum vita functo, duodecimus ab Apostolis Eleu-
therius in ejus locum successit."
^ Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 22. " Interea Commodo decimum annum imperii
agente, cum Eleutherius tredecim annis episcopatum administrasset,
Victor, in ejus locum successit."
3 Ibid. lib. 7- cap. 19. " Sane et Jacobi illius cathedram, qui primus
Hierosolymorum episcopus ab ipso Servatore et ab Apostolis est consti-
tutus, et quem fratrem Domini cognominatum fuisse divina testantur
volumina, ad nostra usque tempora conservatam, fratrea ilUus ecclesise
jam inde a majoribus magna prosequuutur reverentia."
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 145
says about the controversies concerning Easter, and the
baptism of heretics, where the facts are utterly at war
with your theory. The first of these subjects occurs in
the 23d chapter of the 5th book, and is related in the
following words.
^ " There was a considerable discussion raised about
this time," saith he, " on the following account. The
Churches of all Asia, guided by a certain ancient tradi-
tion, 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 pas-
chal lamb ; and thought it incumbent on them 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 celebrate it in this manner in the Churches through-
out the rest of the world, who observe the practice that
^ Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 23. " lisdem temporibus gravi controversia exorta,
eo quod omnes per Asiara ecclesise vetusta quadam traditione nixae
quartadecima luna salutaris Paschse festum diem celebrandum esse cen-
sebant, quo die praescriptum erat Judaeis ut agnum immolarent : eaque
omnino luna in quemcunque demum diem septimanae incidisset, finem
jejuniis imponendum esse statuebant : cum tamen reliquae totius orb is
ecclesiae alio more uterentur, qui ex Apostolorum traditione profectus
etiamnum servatur, ut scilicet non alio quam resurrectionis Dominicae
die jejxmia solvi liceat : Synodi ob id, coetusque episcoporum convenere.
Atque omnes uno consensu ecclesiasticam regulam universis fidelibus per
epistolas tradiderunt : ne videlicet uUo alio quam Dominico die myste-
rium resurrectionis Domini unquam celebretur : utque eo dimtaxat die
Paschalium jejuniorum terminum observemus. Exstat etiamnum epis-
tola Sacerdotum, qui tunc in Palestina congregati sunt : quibus praeside-
bant Theophilus Caesareae Palestrnae, et Narcissus Hierosolymorum epis-
copus. Alia item exstat epistola Synodi Romanae, cui Victoris episcopi
nomen prsefixum est. Habentur prseterea literae episcoporum Ponti,
quibus Palma utpote antiquissimus praefuit. Epistola quoque ecclesia-
rum Galliae exstat, quibus praeerat Irenaeus. Ecclesiarum quoque in
Osdroenae provincia et in urbibus regionis illius constitutarum literae
visuntur. Seorsum vero Bachylli Corinthorum Episcopi, aliorumque
complurium epistolae exstant ; qui omnes eandem fidem eandemquo
doctrinam proferentes, unam edidere sententiara."
H
146 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
has prevailed from apostolic tradition until the present
time, namely, that it was not lawful to terminate the
fast on any other than the day of the resurrection of our
Lord. Hence there were synods and councils of the
bishops on this question ; and all unanimously drew up an
ecclesiastical decree, which they communicated by letter
to the faithful 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, is still extant,
over whom presided Theophilus, bishop of 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 of Pontus, over whom Palmas, as the most ancient,
presided ; also of the Churches of Gaul, over whom Ire-
nseus presided. Moreover, one from those in the province
of Osrhoene, and the cities there. And a particular epistle
from Bachyllus, bishop of the Corinthians ; and epistles
of many others, who, advancing the same faith and the
same doctrine, also pronounced the same opinion."
^ " Over the bishops, however, of Asia, who sharply
contended that the custom handed down to them from
their fathers, should be retained," continues Eusebius
* Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 24. "Episcopis vero Asise, qui morem sibi a
majoribus traditum retinendum esse acriter contendebant, Polycrates
prseerat. Qui quidem in ea epistola quam ad Victorem et ad Romae
urbis ecclesiam scripsit, traditionem ad sua usque tempora propagatam
exponit his verbis. Nos igitur verum ac genuinum agimus diem."
" Possem etiam episcoporum qui mecum sunt, facere mentionem, quos
petiistis ut convoearem, sicut et feci ; quorum nomina si adscripsero,
ingens numerus videbitur." — "His ita gestis, Victor quidem Romanae
urbis episcopus illico omnes Asise vicinarumque provinciarum ecclesi-
as tamquam contraria rectse fidei sentientes, a communione abscin-
dere conatur ; datisque Uteris universes qui illic erant fratres proscri-
bit, et ab unitate ecclesise prorsus alienos esse pronuntiat. Verum haec
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 147
in the following chapter, " Poly crates presided. He,
indeed, had also set forth the tradition which had de-
scended to his time, in a letter which he addressed to
Victor and the Church of Eome. We, said he, observe
the true and 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 appear a vast number."
" Upon this, Victor, the bishop of the Roman city,
forthwith endeavours to cut off from the communion all
the Churches of Asia, and of the neighbouring provinces,
as holding opinions contrary to the true faith. And he
publishes abroad by letters, and proclaims, that all the
brethren are wholly excommunicated. But these doings
did not please all the bishops. They immediately ex-
horted 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, " their
letters, in which they pressed upon Victor with great
severity. Amongst the rest, Irenaeus, in an epistle
which he wrote in the name of the brethren over whom
he presided in Gaul, defended indeed the opinion, that
the mystery of our Saviour^s resurrection should be cele-
brated only on the Lord's day. Nevertheless he admo-
nishes Victor, in a becoming manner, not to cut off
non omnibus placebant episcopis. Proinde Victorem ex adverso hor-
tati sunt, ut ea potius sentire vellet quae paci et unitati caritatique er-
ga proximum congruebant."
" Exstant etiamnum eorum literae, quibus Victorem acerbius perstrin-
gunt. Ex quorum numero Irenaeus in epistola quam scripsit nomine
fratrum quibus praeerat in Gallia, illud quidem defendit, solo die Do-
minico resurrectionis Domini mysterium esse celebrandum : Victorem
tamen decenter admonet, ne integras Dei eeclesias morem sibi a ma-
joribus traditum custodientes, a communione abscindat," &c. " Nee
vero ad Victorem solum, sed ad multos alios ecclesiarum antistites de
quaestione proposita literas in eandem sententiam misit."
h2
148 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
from communion whole Churches of Grod, who observed
the tradition of an ancient custom." Here follows the
extract which I have already quoted as a part of the tes-
timony of Irenseus ; and Eusebius concludes this chapter
by saying, that "not only to Victor, but likewise to
many of the other rulers of the Churches, Irenseus sent
letters on the question proposed, expressing the same
opinion."
Now in this long extract, there are several points of
importance, all hostile to your claims. First, there are
various councils held upon the question, over some of
which Theophilus, bishop of Cesarea, and Narcissus,
bishop of Jerusalem, 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 authority in Victor ? Nay : although
Victor had the unanimous decree of the Western
Churches in support of his opinion. And when Victor,
in pursuance of his threat, endeavoured to have the
bishops of Asia cast out of the communion of the
Western Churches, did he prevail 1 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 mother and
mistress of all the Churches 1 Surely, brethren, no can-
did mind can read the narrative without seeing, that the
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 149
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
baptisms, which was under review when the testimony of
Cyprian 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 irreconcilable
with your doctrine of supremacy. ^ " After Cornelius,"
saith he, (Book 7. chap. 2.) "had held the episcopal
office at Eome 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, Dionysius wrote the first of his epistles on
baptism, as there was no little controversy at that time,
whether those turning from any heresy whatever should
be purified by baptism : for the ancient practice prevailed
with regard to such, that they should only have imposi-
tion of hands with prayer."
* " Cyprian," continues the historian in the next chap-
ter, " who then governed the Church of Carthage, was of
opinion, that they should not be admitted unless they
were first cleansed from their error by baptism. But
Stephen, who thought that no innovations should be
^ Ibid. lib. 7. cap. 2. " Interea Romae cum Cornelius tribus circiter
annis episcopatum tenuisset, Lucius in ejus locum substituitur ; qui vix
octo mensium spatio perfunctus eo munere, moriens episcopale officium
Stepliano dereliquit. Ad hunc Stephanum Dionysius primam earum
quae de Baptismo conscriptae sunt epistolam exaravit, cum per id tempus
non mediocris controversia exorta asset, utrum eos qui ex qualibet
hseresi convertuntur, baptismo purgari oporteret. Quippe antiqua con-
suetudo invaluerat, ut in ejusmodi hominibus sola manuum impositio
cum precationibus adhiberetur."
2 Ibid. lib. 7- cap. 3. "Primus omnium Cyprianus qui tunc tem-
poris Carthaginensem regebat ecclesiam, non nisi per baptismum ab
errore prius emundatos, admittendos esse censuit. Verum Stephanus
nihil ad versus traditionem quae jam inde ab ultimis temporibus obtinuerat
innovandum ratus, gravissime id tulit."
h3
150 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
made contrary to the tradition that had prevailed from
ancient times, was much offended at this." Now, here,
again, there is not a hint of your doctrine, although it is
obvious that questions of authority and rights of official
government are always brought prominently forward,
when there is any thing like strife or contention.
The twenty-seventh chapter of the same book, pre-
sents to us another occasion of episcopal jurisdiction,
when the heresy of Paul, the bishop of Antioch, rendered
a council of bishops necessary to preserve the Church.
* " The other pastors of the Churches," says Eusebius,
"aroused from every quarter, met together at Antioch,
as against a destroyer of the flock of Christ." — " Among
these,^ (chap. 18) the most eminent were Firmilianus,
bishop of Cesarea in Cappadocia, Gregory and Atheno-
dorus, brothers and bishops of the Churches in Pontus ;
also Helenus, bishop of the Church at Tarsus, and Nico-
mas, bishop of Iconium, besides Hymenseus, who ruled
the Church at Jerusalem, and Theotecnus, who presided
over the adjacent Church at Cesarea. Moreover Maxi-
mus, who governed the Church of Bostra with great cele-
brity. Six hundred others also assembled together with
the presbyters and deacons, whose names it would not
be difficult to recite. But those whom I have mentioned
* Ibid. lib. 7. cap. 27. " At reliqui ecclesiarum pastores undique
exciti, tanquam adversus gregis Dominici vastatorem simul omnes An-
tiochiam convenerunt."
2 Ibid. cap. 28. " Inter quos maxime eminebant Firmilianus Caesareae
Cappadocum episcopus ; Gregorius et Athenodorus fratres, ecclesiarum
apud Pontum episcopi : Helenus quoque Tarsi, et Nicomas Iconii antis-
tites. Sed et Hymenaeus qui ecclesiam Hierosolymitanam regebat, et
Theotecnus qui Csesariensem illi finitimam administrabat. Maximus
praeterea, qui Bostrensem ecclesiam summa cum laude gubemavit. Sex-
centos quoque alios qui una cum presbyteris et diaconis eo confluxerunt,
nequaquam difficile fuerit recensere. Verum hi quos dixi, illustres prse
caeteris habebantur."
XV.] EUSEBIUS. 161
were the most distinguished,'' * " In the reign of the
emperor Aurehan a final council was convened, in which
bishops almost innumerable were assembled, and Paul,
the author 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." ^ " The bishops, therefore," continues Eu-
sebius, "who had been convened, wrote an epistle, hy
common consent^ to Dionysius, bishop of Rome, and to
Maximus of Alexandria, and sent it to all the pro-
vinces. And here it may not be inexpedient to narrate
their very words, as a perpetual memorial for posterity.
To Dionysius and Maximus^ and to all our fellow-
ministers throughout the worlds the bishops, presbyters, and
deacons, and to the whole Catholic Church under heaven:
Helenus and Hymenseus, Theophilus, Theotecnus, Maxi-
mus, Proculus, Nicomas, ^lianus, Paul, Bolanus, Pro-
togenes, Hierax, Eutychius, Theodorus, Malchion, and
Lucius, and all the rest who with us are bishops of
the neighbouring cities and provinces, and the presbyters
* Ibid. lib. 7. cap. 29. "Hujus temporibus (sc. Aureliani) postrema
Synodus innumerabilium fere episcoporum congregata est ; in qua auc-
tor ille nefariae apud Antiochiam haereseos Paulus, convictus et ab
omnibus manifestissime deprehensus falsi dogmatis reus, ab universa
quae sub coelo est ecclesia Catholica eliminatus est."
* Ibid. lib. 7« cap. 30. " Omnes itaque in unum congregati antistites,
unam ex communi sententia ad Dionysium Romanae urbis episeopum, et
ad Maximum Alexandrinum scripserunt epistolam : eamque ad omnes
deinde provincias transmiserunt. Porro ipsamet illorum verba, ad
perpetuam posterorum memoriam non incommodum fuerit hie referre.
" Dionysio et Maximo, et omnibus per universum orbem comministris
nostris ; episcopis, presbyteris, et diaconis ; et universse ecclesiae catho-
licae quae sub coelo est, Helenus et Hymenaeus, Theophilus, Theotecnus,
Maximus, Proculus, Nicomas, ^lianus, Paulus, Bolanus, Protogenes,
Hierax, Eutychius, Theodorus et Malchion et Lucius, et reliqui omnes
qui nobiscum sunt vicinarum urbium et provinciarum episcopi, presbyteri
ac diaconi, et ecclesiae Dei, carissimis fratribus in Domino salutem."
H 4
152 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
and the deacons, and the Churches of God, to the be-
loved brethren in the Lord, greeting." The epistle pro-
ceeds to set forth the heresy of Paul, and the various
accusations against him, and concludes in these words :
* " Since, then, we have rejected from our communion this
man, proclaiming war against God, and unwilling to yield,
we have found it necessary to ordain another bishop of
the catholic Church in his place, not, as we believe,
without divine providence : viz. Domnus, the son of
Demetrianus, the bishop of blessed memory, and who,
before this, presided with much honour over the same
Church, a man adorned with all the qualities which
become a bishop. We have accordingly communicated
this to you, that you may write to him^ and receive
letters of communion from him^ " Paul, therefore,"
proceeds the historian, " having thus fallen from the epis-
copate, as well as from the true faith, as already said,
Domnus succeeded in the administration of the Church at
Antioch. But Paul being unwilling to leave the ecclesi-
astical edifice, an appeal was made to the emperor Aurelian^
who decided most equitably on the business, ordering the
building to be given up to those whom the Italian bishops
of the Christian religion, and the Roman bishop, should
appoint. Thus, then, this man was driven out of the
1 Ibid. " Hunc igitur, Deo bellum indicentem, nee cedere volentera,
cum a communione nostra abdicassemus, necesse habuimus alium ejus
loco ecclesiae catholicae episcopum ordinare, non absque divina ut credi-
mus pyovidentia. Demetriani scilicet, beatae memoriae episcopi, qui ante
hunc magna cum laude eandem rexit ecclesiam, filium, Domnum ; virum
omnibus quse episcopum decent dotibus exomatum : quod quidem idcirco
vobis significavimus, ut ad eum scribatis, et ab eo communicatorias literas
accipiatis." " Igitur cum Paulus a recta fide simul et episcopatu ex-
cidisset, Domnus, ut dictum est, administrationem Antiochensis ecclesiae
suscepit. Sed cum Paulus e domo ecclesiae nullatenus excedere vellet ;
interpellatus Imperator Aurelianus rectissime hoc negotium dijudicavit,
lis domum tradi prsecipiens, quibus Italici Christianae religiouis antis-
XV.] EtrsEBius. 153
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
pro\incial one. The see of Antioch was of high import-
ance, the heresy of Paul was of an aggravated character,
and more than one council was holden before the matter
was determined, and yet nothing is said about the bishop
of Eome. What these bishops did, too, you perceive,
was done on behalf of the whole catholic Church under
heaven, because 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 the bishop of Eome.
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 conclusion, where the council state the purpose for
which they wi'ite, they do not refer to any act of the
bishop of Rome being necessary to confirm their proceed-
ings, but taking it for granted that they had as much
authority as any other portion of the catholic Church,
they communicate their acts in 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 letters of communion
from him. Where then was your present doctrine of
tites et Romanus episcopus scriberent. Hoc modo vir supra memo-
ratus cum summo dedecore per ssecularem potestatem ab ecclesia extur-
batus est."
h5
154 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
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 translating bishops ?
Can circumstantial evidence be stronger than this, where
you have Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical 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
climax 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 canon law, must be to the bishop of Rome —
the chief pontiff. But does the ecclesiastical record of
the third century say so 1 Nay, brethren, for Eusebius
expressly tells us that the appeal was made to the emperor.
And the emperor referred 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 episcopal 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 and 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 schis-
matic 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 relation to the other bishops, according to
the doctrine of your canon law and the Doway cate-
chism.
XV.] THE EMPEROE CONSTANTINE. 155
But did he complain ? Nay, brethren, he acquiesced.
There is not a word intimating the sHghtest dissatisfac-
tion, but the contrary. So that here we have the action
of the council of Antioch, the condemnation of Paul, the
ordination of Domnus, the epistle addressed to the catho-
lic Church, the appeal to the emperor, the acquiescence
of the Roman bishops, and the testimony of Eusebius, all
concurring to demonstrate that the primitive Church of
Rome knew nothing of the supremacy which you now
claim over the Christian world.
I doubt not, brethren, that you are weary of this wit-
ness, and I would, for my own sake, as well as yours, that
I might dismiss his testimony ; but justice requires that
I should extract from his pages the evidence of another
celebrated name, Constantino, the Roman emperor, under
whose zealous patronage the Church obtained a final vic-
tory over heathenism.
Eusebius 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
attention.
Co]^y of the emperor's epistles, in which he orders a council
of bishops to he held at Borne for the unity and peace of
the Church.
^ " Constantino Augustus, to Miltiades, bishop of Rome,
and to Marcus. As many communications of this kind
1 Ibid. lib. 10. cap. 5. " Exemplum epistolae Constantini Imperatoris,
qua episcoporum Concilium Romae fieri jubet pro unitate et concordia
ecclesiarum.
" Constantinus Augustus Miltiadi episcopo urbis Romae et Marco. Quo-
niam hujusmodi plures libelli a viro clarissimo Anulino Africse Procon-
sule ad me sunt missi, in quibus continetur Csecilianum Carthaginensium
urbis episcopum a quibusdam collegis suis per Africam constitutis multis
de causis insimulari. Quod quidem permolestum mihi videtur, in istis
provinciis quas divina providentia meae devotioni spontanea deditione
tradidit, et in quibus maxima est populi multitudo, plebem quasi in duas
h6
156 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
have been sent to me from Anulinus, the most illustrious
proconsul of Africa, in which it is stated that Csecilianus,
the bishop of Carthage, is accused, on many accounts, by
his colleagues in Africa ; and as it appears very grievous
to me, that in those provinces which divine providence
has entrusted to my devotion by his free-gift, and in which
there is a vast population, the multitude are found inclin-
ing to deteriorate, and in a manner divided into two
parties, and that even 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 before
Reticius, Maternus, and Marinus, your colleagues, whom
I have commanded to hasten to Rome for this purpose,
he may be heard, in such manner as you think most con-
sistent with the divine law.*"
Here, it is evident, that the bishop of Rome is not
addressed as a man who already held the office of
appellate judge over the whole Church, but conjointly
with Marcus, and merely as an equal amongst his
colleagues. The complaints of the African bishops against
Csecilianus 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 of Rome by the imperial appoint-
ment, and not on him alone, but along with Marcus,
Reticius, Maternus, and Marinus, bishops of Italy, the
whole forming a council. To show still more distinctly,
partes divisam ad deteriora deflectere, et episcopos inter se dissentire.
Placuit mihi ut idem Caecilianus una cum decern episcopis qui accusare
ipsum videntur, et cum decem aliis quos ipse ad suam causam necessarioa
esse judicaverit, Romam naviget ; ut ibi coram vobis et coram Reticio,
Materno, ac Marino coUegis vestris, quos ea causa Romam properare
jussi, possit audiri, quemadraodum sanctissimse legi convenire optime
nostis."
XV.] THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE. 157
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.
" Copy of the epistle of the emperor Constantine^ in which
he commands another council to he held^ for the purpose
ofremomng all the dissension of the bishops.
^ " Oonstantine Augustus to Ohrestus bishop of Syra-
cuse. As certain persons, some time ago, perversely and
wickedly began to dissent from our holy religion and
from celestial virtue, and from the doctrine of the
catholic Church, I being desirous of putting an end to
their contention, ordered that certain bishops should be
sent from Gaul, and that those who are divided into two
parties, pertinaciously and obstinately contending with
each other, should be summoned before them from Africa,
the bishop of Rome being also present ; that the cause
of dissension might be settled by diligent examination
in the presence of them all. But since it has happened
that some, forgetful of their own salvation, and of the
reverence due to our most holy faith, still continue their
private quarrels, and are unwilling to conform to the
1 Ibid. " Exemplum epistolae Constantini Imperatoris, qua alteram
episcoporum Synodum fieri jubet ut omnis episcoporum dissensio tollatur.
" Constantinus Augustus Chresto Syracusanorum Episcopo. Jam quidem
antea cum nonnuUi pravo ac perverso animo, a sancta religione coelestique
virtute et ab Ecelesige Catholicae sententia dissidere coepissent, hujusmodi
eorum contentionem prsecidere cupiens ita constitueram, ut missis e
Gallia quibusdam episcopis, accitis etiam ex Africa iis qui duas in
partes divisi, pertinaciter inter se atque obstinate contendunt ; praesente
quoque Romanae urbis episcopo, id quod commotum fuisse videbatur, sub
horum prsesentia posset diligentissima examinatione componi. Sed quo-
niam nonnulli, ut fere fit, et propriae salutis et venerationis quae sanctis-
simae fidei debetur obliti, privatas adhuc simultates prorogare non ces-
sant ; prolatae jam sententiae acquiescere nolentes" " idcirco mihi
sedulo providendum fuit, ut haec quae post depromptum judicium volun-
158 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
decision already pronounced," " it has appeared neces-
sary to me to provide that these disputes which ought
to have been voluntarily composed after the first sentence
was pronounced, should at length be fully settled by the
judgment of many."
" We have therefore commanded the bishops to meet
together from various and almost innumerable places, in
the city of Aries, before the Calends of August, and we
have also thought proper to write to thee, that thou
mayest take a public vehicle from the most illustrious
Latronianus, corrector of Sicily, and have with thee two
presbyters of thine own selecting, as also three servants
to afford thee services on the way, and so meet them
within the same day at the aforesaid place : that through
thy firmness and the prudence and unanimity of the
rest that assemble, this dispute, which has continued
incessantly until the present time, in the midst of most
disgraceful contentions, may be discussed, after hearing
all the allegations of the contending parties, whom we
have likewise 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
taria assensione jam finita esse debuerant, nunc tandem multorum inter-
ventu finem possint accipere."
" Quoniam igitur plurimos ex diversis ac prope infinitis locis episcopos
in urbera Arelatensem intra Calendas Augusti jussimus convenire ; tibi
quoque scribendum esse censuimus, ut aceepto publico vehiculo a viro
clarissimo Latroniano Correctore Siciliae, adjunctis tibi duobus secundi
ordinis quos tu eligendos putaveris, tribus item servulis qui in itinere
vobis ministrare possint, intra eundem diem ad praedictum locum oc-
curras : quo tum per tuam gravitatem, [the Greek word is aTtppoTijTog,
which signifies firmness,] tum per ceterorum in unum coeuntium unani-
mem concordemque solertiam,controversia hsec quae per foedissimam alter-
cationem ad hoc usque temporis perduravit, auditis omnibus eorum qui
nunc inter se dissident, quos etiam adesse jussimus, allegationibus, ad
congruam religionis et fidei observantiam fraternamque concordiam tan-
dem aliquando possit revocari."
XV.] THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE. 159
had not been restored by the judgment of the bishops of
Italy, including the bishop of Eome. The emperor,
therefore, summons a large council, for the purpose of
composing the dissension, and addresses Ohrestus, the
bishop of Syracuse, in a strain which would suit your
doctrine admirably if it had been addressed to the
Roman pontiff. For the former 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 favorable 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 recurrence 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
convert; and handed down to us as an interesting part of
the annals of the primitive Church, by a contemporary
bishop, the father of ecclesiastical history.
Now I beseech you, brethren, as men who love the
truth, to contemplate these documents stedfastly, and
see how perfectly inconsistent 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 of the other apostles" — if those apostles, and
through them the whole Church, " were built on him" —
if " since the translation of St. Peter^s chair from Antioch
to Rome, the particular Roman Church has been head
of all the Churches," — if " the pope, by the LorcTs appoint-
ment^ is the successor of the blessed apostle Peter, and
holds the place of the Redeemer 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
160 CANON OF THE [cHAP.
lords, gave to the Roman pontiff, 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 recur and receive
their decision according to her sentence," — if "the
Roman Church, hy the appointment of our Lord^ is the
MOTHER AND MISTRESS of all tlic 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, honoured
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 perogative — that he recorded nothing which at
all resembles it ; but, on the contrary, recorded so much
which is totally irreconcilable 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
the papal supremacy, but acted and wrote as if he had
the whole authority to direct, and as if the bishops, as-
sembled 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 Constantine refers, knew nothing of
this papal supremacy, and that of the two epistles which
I have cited, that which Constantine addressed to Chres-
tus, bishop of Syracuse, looks more like the acknowledg-
ment of a primacy, than the epistle addressed to the
bishop of Rome ?
And, lastly, how is it, that the eighth canon of this
XV.] COUNCIL OF ARLES. 161
very council of Aries, mentions the controversy between
Stephen and Cyprian, 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 sinned so grievously 2 For this
is the language of the canon in question : ^ " With
regard to the Africans, since they use their own rule of
rebaptizing, the council declared, 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 imposition 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 Stephen — had he been justifiable in
his high claim to their submission — should not we have
had, in this canon, some reprehension of the African
independence, and some assertion of the Roman autho-
rity — the more especially too, as the canon proceeds to
decree, for the future^ the same course which Stephen
had advocated ; viz. that if heretics had been baptized in
the orthodox /orm, 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 ap-
1 Concil. Hardouin. torn. i. p. 264. " De Afris autem, quod propria
sua lege utuntur ut rebaptizent, placuit ut ad ecclesiam si aliquis haereti-
cus venerit, interrogent eum symbolum ; et si perviderint euin in Patre,
et Filio, et Spiritu Saneto esse baptizatum, manus tantum ei imponatur.
Quod si interrogatus symbolum, non respondent Trinitatem banc, merito
baptizetur."
162 CANON OF THE COUNCIL OF ARLES. [cHAP. XV.
pears to my understanding, I do say, that of all the
claims which the world has yet witnessed, the claim
which appeals to the testimony 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 now arrived, in the order of chronology, to the
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 infallibility. 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),
" and is therefore to be believed ; and all men may rest
securely on her judgment. This is proved, First, be-
cause she is the pillar and ground of truth. (1 Tim. iii.
15.) Secondly, 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 (xiv. 26), ' But the Para-
clete," 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 same catechism declares, that " the defini-
tions of a council perfectly oecumenical, that is, a general
council, approved by the pope, are infallible in matters
of faith ; because, first, such a council is the Church
164 DOCTRINE OF THE CANON LAW [CHAP.
representative, and has the same infallibility that the
Church spread over the world hath. Secondly, because
the definitions of such a council are the dictates of the
Holy Ghost according to that of the apostles, deciding
in council : It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and
to us."
As the subject, however, is of such peculiar import-
ance, let me ask your attention to the more systematic
statement of your canon law.^
" What is required to constitute a general council 9
RULE.
" In order that a council may be general, no other
requisites are necessary than these :
1. That all the bishops should be called.
2. That it should be convoked by him who has the
right to convoke it.
3. That he should preside in it, either by himself, or
by some other.
A general council is nothing else than the whole Church
congregated together."
§2.
" To whom does the right belong, to convene and preside
in a general council ?
RULE.
" According to the canons, it belongs to the pope alone
to convoke and preside in a general council. Because a
* Expositio Juris Canon. Jo. Pet. Gibet. torn. i. p. 66.
§ 1. Quid requiratur ut concilium sit generale ?
Regula.
Ut concilium sit generale non alia requiruntur, quam quae sequuntur.
1. Ut omnes episcopi ad illud vocentur.
2. Ut convocetur ab eo, cujus est illud convocare.
3. Ut iste in eo prsesit per se, vel per alium. Concilium generale non
sit nisi ecclesia universalis congregata.
§2.
Cujus sit concilium generale convocare, eidemque prsesidere ?
XVI.] CONCERNING COUNCILS. 165
council is the Church congregated together. But the
Church is a body : and the pope is the head of this body.
Therefore as in other bodies, it is the head that con-
vokes, 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. If 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
approve 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."
" From hence it follows, 1st, that a general council
Regula.
Juxta canones corpore juris inclusos solius est papse concilium genetule
convocare, eidemque prseesse.
Ratio. Concilium, ut dictum, non est nisi Ecclesia congregata : Eccle-
sia autem est corpus : papa vero hujus corporis caput. Ideoque, sicut
in aliis corporibus, capitis est corpus convocare, et convocato prseesse,
papae est concilium generale convocare eidemque praeesse. 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 tempus et locum praefiniat.
Decreta concilii Constantiensis et Basileensis haec quatuor probant.
166 DOCTRINE OF THE CANON LAW [cHAP.
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
the greatest, since it is the same with the authority of the
Holy 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, re-
presenting her entire, and because it is the interpreter
of the revelation made by the Holy Spirit, whether con-
tained in Scripture or in tradition."
" But you will say, If the authority of a general coun-
cil is the same with that of the Holy Spirit, how is it
§ 3.
Quae concilii generalis autoritas ?
Regula.
Eadem est concilii generalis, ac Ecclesise, imo et Scripturse Sanctae
autoritas.
Ratio : Ecclesiam totam repraesentat, ipsiusque definitiones dictat
idem Spiritus Sanctus, qui Scripturam Sanctam dictavit.
Hinc sequitur, 1. non magis posse concilium generale a veritate et jus-
titia deviare, quam Ecclesiam, et Scripturam sanctam : ideoque nihil
posse contrarium fidei, vel bonis moribus definire, vel statuere.
2. Maximam esse concilii generalis autoritatem, cum eadem sit ac
Spiritus Sancti, qui Deus est. Idque duplici titulo, quo illud regit Spi-
ritus Sanctus ; nempe prout est sponsse Spiritus Sancti congregatio
ipsam totam reprsesentans, 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 facta non sunt divina, sed humana ; ut patet ex eo,
quod non obligant cum vitae discrimine 1 Respondetur : Id pro venire ex
eo, quod concilium generale non sit Spiritus Sancti organum extra ea,
quae sunt revelata, illave, quae fidem, vel bonos mores, proximo tangunt :
idque, quia Ecclesia, quam repraesentat, constituta est tantum visibilis
fidei morumque regula.
Dices iterum : Quomodo eadem est generalis concilii ac Scripturae
Sacrae autoritas, cum c. 4. de Elect, dicatur, a Romano pontifice autori-
tatem, roburque suum accipere; Scriptura autem sacra a Deo, non ab
homine, suam accipiat autoritatem ? Sed respondetur : Cap. oppositum
ad rem non facere j quia, de rebus spectantibus disciplinam, loquitur, ac
XVI.] CONCERNING COUNCILS. 167
that the precepts enjoined by it are not divine, but hu-
man, as appears from this, that they do not bind at the
peril of Hfe ? It may be answered, Because a general council
is not the organ of the Holy Spirit beyond those things
which are revealed, or those which nearly affect faith
and morals : and this is because the Church which it re-
presents is only constituted to be the visible rule of faith
and morals. You will say again. How should the autho-
rity of a general council, and that of the Holy Scrip-
tures, be the same, when it is said in the canon (0. 4,
de Elect.) that the council derives its force and authority
from the Roman pontiff, whereas the Holy Scripture
derives its authority, not from man, but from God I The
answer however is. That the passage referred to does
not concern this matter ; because it speaks of what re-
gards discipline, and the rule which compares the autho-
rity 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 general councils ?
RULE.
" The only distinction to be noted between general
councils, is that which regards the constitutions about
discipline, in which respect some have decreed purer
constitutions than others."
hie comparatur generalis concilii autoritas cum Scripturse autoritate,
quoad res, quae fidem moresque contingunt.
§ 4.
Quae sit inter concilia generalia distinctio.
Regula.
Unica est inter concilia generalia notanda distinctio, quae petitur ex
constitutionibus circa disciplinam, quseque in eo sita est, quod alia aliis
puriores ediderint.
Ratio : Duo tantum in conciliis generalibus considerari possunt. 1.
Potestas definiendi et statuendi. 2. Definitiones et Constitutiones.
Quod
168 DOCTRINE OF THE CANON LAW [cHAP.
" The reason is as follows : Two things only are to
be considered in general councils: 1. The power of
defining and decreeing. 2. The definitions and decrees
themselves."
" As to the first, there can be no distinction among
general councils, because the power of the Church neither
increases nor decreases ; it 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 affected by time."*'
" As to the second, there can be no distinction be-
tween general councils, if we refer to those definitions
and constitutions 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 which concern discipline with re-
gard to which, the constitutions of the earlier councils
appear purer than the constitutions of the others."
" But you will say, that general councils are distin-
Quod primum, nulla potest esse inter ea distinctio : quia nee crevit nee
decrevit Ecclesise potestas, eadem semper mansit, ut et manebit : moderna
etenim Ecelesia non minus est sponsa et organum Spiritus Sancti, corpus,
cujus caput est Christus, columna et firmamentum veritatis, castrorum
acies ordinata, adversus quam portae inferi praevalere nequeunt, aliaque
similia, quam primitiva : promissiones Ecclesiae factse non sunt tempori
obnoxise.
Quoad secundum, nulla etiam potest esse inter concilia generalia dis-
tinctio, si sermo sit de definitionibus, quae fidem moresve respiciunt:
cum circa ilia, deiinitiones et constitutiones nequeant esse alise aliis
puriores. Restat ergo ut concilia generalia non distinguantur, nisi
ratione constitutionum, circa disciplinam circa quam priorum con-
ciliorum constitutiones caeterorum constitutionibus videntur puriores.
6
XVI.] CONCERNING COUNCILS.' 169
guished from each other, as respects their authority and
their dignity, and you will produce as proof for this, the
canon law, (c. 28. Dist. L.) in which it is said : When-
ever the decrees of councils, are discordant, the authority
of the stronger 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
disciphne, in which the more ancient councils are pre-
ferable to the others ; because devotion was fervent in
the first ages, but grew cold in succeeding times, and on
this account the earlier councils are held in greater
honor, according to the saying : The fathers established
reverence for antiquity.""
§v.
" In what respects a general council differs from a par-
ticular one.
RULE.
" The principal differences between a general and a
particular council, are the following :
Dices : concilia generalia, quoad autoritatem, et dignitatem, distingui
inter se, afferesque ad hoc C. 28. Dist. L. in quo haec leguntur : Quoties
concUiorum discors est sentential illius magis tenenda est cujiis antiquior et
potior est autoritas.
Respondetur : 1. Ilium canonem loqui de conciliis non generalibus ;
conciliat enim concilium Ancyranum, quod est provinciale, cum alio con-
cilio particulari ; 2. Etsi loqueretur de conciliis generalibus, restringi
posset ad res disciplinae, in quibus antiquiora concilia sunt aliis prse-
ferenda : quia, quae prioribus saeculis fervebat devotio, succedentibus
temporibus tepuit, et propterea majori in honore habentur : juxta illud :
Antiquitati patres sanxerunt reverentiam.
§ 5.
In quibus concilium generale, a particulari prsecipue differat.
Regula.
Proecipua inter concilium generale et particulare discrimina non alia
sunt, quam quae sequuntur.
I
170 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
"1. The pope alone can convoke a general council, and
preside in it, but the right of convoking the others (sc.
particular councils) and of presiding in them, belongs to
other bishops.
"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.
"5. The judgment of general councils upon matters of
law is infallible, but contrariwise of their judgment on
other things."
These extracts may suffice to shew your present doc-
trine 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 under-
take to prove, by the acknowledged records of the first
general council, taken from your own writers, that ever^^
important item of your theory is a change from your pri-
mitive system.
For 1 . Your canon law requires that a general council
be called by him who has " the right to call it,"' the pope
alone. But the council of Nice was convoked by the
emperor.
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.
1. Solus papa potest concilium generale convocare, in eoque prsesidere;
jus vero alia convocandi in iisque prsesidendi ad alios pertinet.
2. Generalia concilia non sunt eiTori,nec peccato obnoxia; particularia
vero, utrique.
3. Generalia obligant totam Ecclesiam ; particularia vero, ex se ipsis,
non ligant, nisi illius partem.
5. Judicium conciliorum generalium circa jus, est irreformabile; secus
de aliorum judicio.
XVT.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 171
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
apostles : " It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us."
But the council of Nice adopted no such style of ex-
pression : 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
authority 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 de-
fend 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 infalli-
bility. The true origin, therefore, of this your favourite
distinction seems to have been, that the decrees on faith,
being esteemed sound interpretations of the Scriptures,
grew into authority as such ; while the decrees on disci-
pline, 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
argument 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 essential to every lover of truth.
I 2
CHAPTER XVII.
Brethren in Christ,
The two first subjects presented by the plan of the pre-
ceding chapter, respect the person who called and pre-
sided over the council of Nice.
In consistency with the requisitions of your canon law,
you assert that ^ " Constantine the emperor, in order that
he might succour the Church in her difficulties, hy the
OMthority of Sylvester^ the chief pontiffs 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, you state the presidency over the council
in these terms : ^ " Among the assembled bishops, the
chief, as leader of the whole host, were Hosius, bishop of
Cordova, Vitus and Vincentius, who were sent hy the
blessed Sylvester^ that they might preside over the council a^
legates of the apostolic see, and Alexander, bishop of Alex-
andria."
1 " Constantinus imperator ut laboranti subveniret ecclesiae, Silvestri
summi pontificis auctoritate, aliorumque sacerdotuin sententia, ex uni-
versis orbis terrarum partibus episcopos in Nicaeam Bithyniae urbem, ad
lacum Aseanium ab Antigono conditam, honorificentissimis Uteris accer-
sivit." Mansi Concil. torn. ii. p. 637-
2 " Inter hos primas obtinebant, ut totius agminis ductores, Osius
episcopus Cordubensis, Vitus et Vincentius, qui a beato Silvestro missi,
ut apostolicse sedis legati synodo praeerant, et Alexander Alexandrinus."
Ibid.
CHAP. XVII.] TESTIMONY OF THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 173
These statements are the work, as you are aware,
brethren, of no cotemporary writer. The records which
you have handed down to us give not the slightest warrant
for them, but rather, as I shall now proceed to show,
contradict 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.
* " The Oration of the Emperor Constantine to the Nicene
council^ on 'peace,
" Inasmuch as I have so greatly longed, beloved friends,
to avail myself of this your licence, I acknowledge that I
ought to render thanks to God, the King and Governor of
all, that he has bestowed upon me this peculiar favour,
the beholding you at length convened together in one,
and about to manifest, as I trust, an unanimous agree-
ment. Do not, therefore, suffer any storm of hatred,
hostile to our prosperity, to drive this good away : and,
since the warfare undertaken by tyrants against God has
been terminated through His divine power, let not the
lost fiend cast down the sacred discipline and religion of
* " Constantini Imper. oratio ad Concilium Nicaenum de pace.
" Quoniam mihi admodum in optatis fuit, amici carissimi, isto vestro
concessu aliquando frui; jam eo potius, regi et moderatori omnium Deo
ideo gratias me agere debere fateor, quod mihi praeter alia omnia largitus
est, ut istud quod omnibus bonis antecellit, nempe vos in unum convo-
catos, unamque omnes et consentientem habituros voluntatem oculis
tandem aspiciam. Nolite igitur pati ut uUa invidise tempestas, nostris
rebus prosperis inimica, istud bonum labefaetet ; neque cum tyrannorum
dimicatio contra Deum suscepta, jam Dei virtu te profligata sit, ut denuo
perditus diemon divinam Christi disciplinam et religionem, malevolorum
obtrectationibus lacerandam objiciat ; quandoquidem intestina seditio in
ecclesia Dei conflata multo plus molestiarum et acerbitatis, quam quodvis
I 3
174 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
Christ, to be torn by the malevolent opposition of the
wicked. For intestine sedition excited in the Church
seems to me to include within itself far more of trouble
and acrimony than any secular strife, and these are far
more prolific of grief than any external calamity. Since,
then, 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 Grod, and that, together with
those for whom, by the aid of God, I have obtained liberty,
I should sympathize in the common joy. As soon, there-
fore, as the tidings of your dissension reached my ears, I
did not neglect the unwelcome rumom- ; lut mainly desi-
rous that through my labour and care a remedy might he
founds I summoned you all without delay. And now,
although I rejoice exceedingly in beholding your assembly,
yet, nevertheless, I think it becomes me chiefly so to order
matters hy the expression of my sentiments^ that I may see
you all bound together by the conjunction of your minds,
and that one common and peaceful agreement may grow
and flourish amongst you, which, indeed, it is right for
bellura pugnave, videtur milii in se complecti: atque heec longe plus,
quam externa, doloris afferre videntur. Cum igitur Dei optimi maximi
nutu et auxilio adjutus, victoriam ab hostibus reportassenij nihil que am-
plius mihi reliquum putarem, quam ut tum Deo gratias agerem, turn una
cum his qui, Deo opem ferente, per me essent in libertatem vindieati,
communem Isetitiam animo perspicerem : ut primum dissensio vestra ad
aures meas prseter omnem spem pervenit, rumorem ilium de ea allatum
non plane neglexi ; sed optans in primis, ut huie rei mea opera et seduli-
tat remedium inveniretur, omnes vos absque mora accersivi. Ac tametsi
Isetor equidem vehementer, cum jam vestrum consessum intueor ; tunc
tamen arbitror me res maxime ex animi sententia gesturum, ubi omnes
vos animorum conjunctione colligatos, et unam eamque communem inter
omnes, et tranquillam concordiam (quam quidem vos, cum sitis Deo con-
secrati, aliis etiam a Deo impetrare consentaneum est) vigere florereque
intellexero. Itaque ne ulla sit, quseso, in vobis mora, O carissimi, ac
ministri, bonique famuli Dei, et communis omnium nostrum Domini et
Salvatoris ; ne gravemini, inquam, deinceps causas dissensionis inter vos
XVII.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 175
you, since you are consecrated to God, and also for others,
to make the subject of earnest petition 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 Saviour of us all ; neither burden your-
selves, I say, thenceforth, by bringing forward the causes
of the dissension which has been raging amongst you ;
but first of all things give your labour, in order that every
chain by which controversy has been upheld may be dis-
solved by the laws of peace. For thus you will perform
a work acceptable to God the supreme Governor, and
bestow upon me, your fellow-servant, the greatest favour."
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
emperor expressly takes to himself the whole matter, both
in its design and in its execution. " I did not neglect
the rumour of your dissension,"" saith he, " but being
chiefly desirous that through my labour and care a
REMEDY MIGHT BE DISCOVERED, I SUMMONED YOU ALL
WITHOUT DELAY." Where is Silvester, the pope at that
time, mentioned in this address of Constantino? No-
where ! Yet you imagine that the pope was the princi-
pal, and the emperor only his agent. Yea, you imagine
that the right to summon a general council belongs to the
pope alone, and that this is a right descending to him
from St. Peter, having its origin in the grant of Christ
himself. And yet, in truth, there is no evidence that the
apostle Peter ever called a general council ; nor did any
bishop of Rome contemplate such a measure, until long
grassantis jam in medium afferre : primoque omnium operam detis, ut
omnia vincula, quibus constricta tenetur controversia, pacis legibus om-
nino dissolvantur. Sic enim estis et Deo omnium gubernatori gratum
facturi, et mihi vestro conserve maximum prsestaturi beneficium." Mansi
Concil. torn. ii. p. 662.
I 4
176 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
after the period of the council of Nice. The apostoHc
council of which we have the history in the fifteenth
chapter of the Acts, does not appear to have been con-
vened by the authority of any one apostle : we are
only told "that the apostles and ancients (elders) came
together to consider of this matter." The sentence of
the council was adopted on the suggestion of James, the
bishop of Jerusalem, " Men and brethren,*" saith he,
(ver. 13,) "hear me," and in verse 19, he concludes by
saying, " Wherefore, I judge," &c. " And it pleased
the apostles and ancients, with the whole Church," (ver.
22,) to decree accordingly, and the letter sent to the
Gentiles was written in the name of all the apostles, with-
out 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 apostles are mentioned but James. " Paul went
in with us to James, and all the ancients were assembled."
(ver. 18.) From that time until the conversion of Con-
stantino, there is not the slightest trace of an attempt
to summon a general council. 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 shown, from Eusebius, that the pope had no con-
cern. The council of Aries, to which great respect is
due, was summoned by Constantino; and you do not
claim any jurisdiction for the pope on that occasion : so
that the first instance of what you rightly call a general
council occurred more than three centuries after the com-
mencement of the Christian era ; and that council is ex-
pressly stated, by the emperor himself, to have been a
remedy devised by his own care for the Church ; in perfect
consistency with which we find him exhorting the bishops
in person, without even mentioning the pope, or in any
XVII.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 177
way alluding to him. Can any candid mind ask for more
conclusive evidence to disprove your present doctrine, and
to demonstrate the proposition, that the primitive Church
of Rome held no such sentiments upon the right of sum-
moning a general council, as her successor advanced at a
subsequent day ?
An answer to the address of Constantino, however,
was delivered, as a proper token of respect on the part
of the council of Nice, by Eustathius, the bishop of An-
tioch. And you might expect that this would supply the
omissions and gently insinuate the mistake of the em-
peror, in passing over, so strangely, the paramount au-
thority of the bishop of Eome. But you will find in it,
brethren, nothing of the kind, as I shall show by giving
it entire, in the following extract :
1 " 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 tranquillity in the minds of the faithful. The
stench of demons has ceased : that false religion, the
worshipping a multitude of gods, is dissolved : the sha-
dows of infidelity are driven away, the whole world is
enlightened by the rays of divine knowledge. The Father
is glorified, the Son is adored together with him, the
Holy Spirit is announced, the consubstantial Trinity,
one Deity in three persons and hypostases, is preached.
1 " Deo agimus gratias, optime imperator, qui terrarum tibi regnum
dirigit, qui errorem simulacrorum per te abolevit, at in fidelium aniinis
tranquillitatem coUocavit. Cessavit nidor daemonum : multiplicis deorum
cultus soluta est falsa religio ; expelluntur tenebrse impietatis, luce divinse
cognitionis orbis terrarum illustratur. Pater glorificatur, Filius simul
adoratur, SpLritus sanctus annunciatur, Trinitas consubstantialis, una
divinitas in tribus personis et hypostasibus, praedicatur. Per eum, O
imperator, tibi munitur tuse pietatis potentia. Earn nobis serva integram
et inviolatam. NuUus heereticus subiens Ecclesiam de Trinitate unum
aliquid auferat, reliquum quod restat affectum ignominia. Arius nobis,
I 5
178 NOT CONVOKED BY THE POPE. [CHAP.
Through him, emperor, the power of your piety is
fortified. Preserve it for our sake, whole and inviolate.
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 how, 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 worshipper of the creature contends that the creature
should be numbered with the Creator. But you will
persuade him, O emperor, that his judgment should be
changed, that he may no longer oppose the apostolic doc-
trine ; 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 flattery of his words he should
poison the souls of the simple.""
Now I confess that these documents carry with them, to
my mind, the clearest evidence against the primitive anti-
quity of your present doctrines. For manifest it seems
to me, that if the Church of Rome, in the days of Con-
stantino, had claimed a supremacy, and if the catholic
Church had then understood and allowed this claim as
qui a furore accepit denominationem, orationis causa est et conventus :
qui nescio quomodo allectus in presbyteratum Ecclesise Alexandrinae nos
latuit, cum asset alienus a doctrina beatorum apostolorum et prophe-
tarum. Unigenitum enim Filium et Verbum Patris non veretur privare
eadem et sequali cum Patre substantia, et Creatorem cum creatura cre-
aturse cultor contendit connumerare. Eum autem persuaseris, imperator,
mutata sententia, non repugnare doctrinse apostolicae ; aut si vanae
opinionis, cujus est convictus, perstiterit in impietate, eum de Christi et
nostro coetu funditus sustuleris, ne suis turbidis verborum blanditiis
venetur animas simpliciorum." Ibid. p. 663.
XVII.] ADMITTED BY GIBERT. 179
you suppose, the emperor could never have made the
address which I 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 sove-
reign belonging to your communion, acting and speaking
like Constantino, summoning a council from every part of
Christendom ; telling this council, when assembled, that
he^ IN HIS CARE, had devised this remedy for the troubles
of the Church ; and finishing 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 being or the authority
of the vicar of Christ, the bishop of bishops. What
would you say of such an address and such an answer I
Could they, by any stretch of fancy, be attributed to a
modern assembly such as the council of Trent I And can
they be honestly reconciled with the idea, that pope Sil-
vester, and the emperor Constantino, and the fathers of
the Nicene council, had any conception of those claims of
the papacy, which you now require us to acknowledge 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.
* "As to the convocation of general councils," saith
this writer, " the eastern and the western differ greatly.
In this respect, namely, that the former were convoked by
1 " Circa convocationem conciliorum generalium, orientalia multum ab
occidentalibus discrepant. Scilicet in eo, quod priora singula, ab impe-
ratoribus convocata fuerint, posteriora vero a pontificibus, excepto Pisano,
a cardinalibus convocata. Facile probatur utrumque factum. Et qui-
I 6
180 MANY GENERAL COUNCILS [cHAP.
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 Constan-
tino in his first address to the Nicene council, expressly
declares^ that he had convoked it. So the first council of
Constantinople 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 command. The same thing is asserted in the title
to the canons of this council."
" In the council of Ephesus, manifold is the proof that
it was convened by the emperors Theodosius and Valen-
tinian. It is expressly declared in the exordium of the
council, that it was held by the decree of the most reli-
gious and Christian emperors. The same is repeated in
the beginning of all its sessions."
" The care which the council of Ephesus manifests, in
proving that it was convoked by the emperors Theodosius
and Valentinian, was imitated by the council of Chalce-
don ; for in the beginning of all its acts, it makes express
mention of the command of the emperors Valentinian and
Marcian, by whom it was convoked. It does the same
in the title of the epistles which it wrote to those empe-
rors, or to the empress Pulcheria."
dem imperator Constantinus iii prima sua ad synodum Nicsenam oratione,
expresse dicit, se illam convocavisse. Primum concilium Constantino-
politanum in sua ad Theodosium epistola, qua ipsi gratias agit, rationem-
que gestorum a se reddit, declarat, se ipsius jussu congregatum fuisse.
Idem dicitur in inscriptione canonum ejus."
" In concilio Ephesino multiplex occurrit probatio, illud ab Impp.
Theodosio et Valentiniano coactum fuisse. Illud in exordio concilii
expresse dicitur, ex Decreto Religiosissimorum et Christianissimorum
Imperatorum. Idem repetitur in principio uniuscujusque actionis."
" Curam, quam concilium Ephesinum crebro indicat, se ab Imperatori-
bus Theodosio et Valentiniano convocatum fuisse, imitata est synodus
Calcedonensis ; namque, in principio singularum actionum, quae sunt xv.
numero, jussionis Impp. Valentiniani et Marciani, a quibus convocata
XVII.] NOT CONVOKED BY THE POPE. 181
" St. Leo asks Theodosius, that he would grant a
general council to Italy. And many rescripts of the em-
perors follow, which teach that the calling and the trans-
lation of general councils belonged to their office. What
we have observed of the convocation of the foiu' first gene-
ral councils, is confirmed by the letter of the emperor
Justinian to the bishops assembled at Constantinople by
his command; for in order that he might defend his
convocation of this council by the example of his prede-
cessors, 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 objec-
tion. Your canon law lays down as a primary requisite
of a general council, that it be summoned by him who
alone " 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 ap-
plicable to all the four first general councils, and to many
others. Hence, your primitive system has been changed
in this important particular, and your canon law now ties
the definition of a general council to a restriction which
the primitive Church never knew.
2. The second point in which I am to prove your inno-
fuerat, expressam mentionem facit ; similemque facit in epistolarum
inscriptione, qua ad eosdem imperatores vel ad Pulcheriam imperatricem
scripsit."
" S. Leo Theodosium rogat, ut Italiae concilium universale largiatur.
Sequuntur plura imperatorum rescripta, quae docent, ad eorum officium
pertinere conciliorum convocationem, ac translationem. Quod de quatuor
priorum conciliorum generalium convocatione observatum fuit, confir-
matur per epistolam Justiniani imperatoris, ad episcopos Constantinopoli
ex ipsius jussu congregatos ; ut enim convocationem hujus concilii a se
factara suorum praedecessorum exemplo tueretur, refert, qua ratione
concilia praecedentia convocaverint." Expos. Jur. Canon, torn. i. p. 77-
182 GENERAL COUNCILS WHERE [cHAP.
vation upon your own ancient doctrines, is that which
concerns 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 show.
^ " As to the presidency of 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 honour, as being the
legate of the apostolic see ; but there is not a vestige
or 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
subscriptions of this council which are read in the coun-
cils, &c. it might be concluded that the bishops sat in it
according to the order of their respective jproviiices.''^
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 show that the pope did
^ " Quoad prsesidentiam in concilio Nicseno, vulgo hsec tribuitur Osio,
Cordubensi episcopo, sed ambigitur quern ob titulum, aliis dicentibus,
ilium hoc honore potitum fuisse, quatenus legatum sedis Apostolicae ; sed
nullum est- istius legationis loestigium. Putant alii hoc factum fuisse, ob
virtutem ejus, scientiam, et experientiam singulares, necnon grandee vita-
tem, quae ipsi magnam venerationem conciliabat. Si fides haberi posset
subscriptionibus hujus concilii, quae leguntur concil. torn. ii. p. 50, &c.,
inde concluderetur, episcopos in eo sedisse, secundum ordinem suse pro-
vincige." Expos. Jur. Can. torn. i. p. 87.
XVII.] THE POPE DID NOT PRESIDE. 183
not preside over other general councils, which yet were
never doubted by the Church.
^ " The same thing," (viz. that the bishops sat accord-
ing to the order of their provinces) " may be inferred,"
says Gibert, " from the subscriptions of the first council
of Constantinople, so far as concerns the session of those
who were actually present, if they are worthy of credit :
namely, that Nectarius presided, since his subscription is
first of all. But this head of the presidency brings sus-
picion upon the subscriptions ; because it is certain that
St. Gregory Nazianzen presided, for Nectarius was not
elected until after the fathers had subscribed. The same
may be said of the subscriptions 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 subscriptions of this council,
in the ' Bibliotheca' of Justellus, carry a notable mark
of falsehood ; for among those who subscribed that coun-
cil, there are reckoned three who were legates of S. Leo,
the pope, at the council of Chalcedon, 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
1 " Idem inferri licet ex subseriptionibus Constantinopolitani I. quoad
sessionem eorum, qui illi interfuerunt, modo tamen fide dignse sint. Item
Nectarium in eo praesedisse, cum primus omnium scribatur ; sed hoc
prsesidentiae caput subscriptiones suspectas facit : quia certum est sanc-
tum Gregorium Nazianzenum praesedisse, cum Nectarius non nisi post
subscriptiones patrum, electus fuerit. Idem est de subseriptionibus
episcoporura Egypti, qui ad concilium non advenerunt, nisi perfecta jam
subscriptione. Factum utrumque discimus a Gregorio in ejus vita,
Subscriptiones hujus concilii in Bibliotheca Justelli, p. 303, insignem
gerunt falsitatis notam : nempe, iis, qui hoc concilium subscripsere, annu-
merantur tres legati S. Leonis, pontificis, ad concilium Calcedonense
Lxx. annis post celebratum, nempe, ann. 451. Constantinopolitanum ann.
381,habitumfuit." Ibid. p. 87.
6
184 GENERAL COUNCILS WHERE [cHAP.
simple fact that it furnishes another general council
where the pope did not preside, either in person or by
proxy, thereby confirming 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 sub-
scriptions — ^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, 1 have promised that I will take them as I
find them, and will only question their truth, when I
have your own warrant for doing so. But here is that
warrant, furnished by one of your most celebrated canon-
ists ; and what, I pray you, is the inference to an unso-
phisticated 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 evi-
dence against it ? Tell me whether a claim known to be
true, primitive, universally acknowledged by those who
lived before us, and, above all, derived from the autho-
rity of heaven, was ever yet defended by human forgery ?
Yea, tell me, whether the employment of a forgery in
support of this prerogative, by those who first stooped to
such a wretched artifice, does not demonstrate their per-
fect conviction, that the claim itself was utterly unfounded
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 rehed
XVII.] THE POPE DID NOT PRESIDE. 185
upon it. But it is not the only instance which will meet
our eyes before 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 :
* " 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, established, that St. Cyril, the patriarch of Alex-
andria, presided."
^ " In all the meetings of the fifth general council,"
continues our author, " called the second council of Con-
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 choose to be present,
either by himself or by legates."
Here we have a fact, bretliren, which, although evi-
* " Quoad reliqua sex concilia generalia orientalia, ex eorum actis
certo cognoscitur, quis illis praesederit, quisque sessionis ordo fuerit.
Utque ab antiquissimo eorum, Ephesino, ordiar, in plerisque vii. actionum
ejus, cemitur, sanctum Cyrillum, Patriarcham Alexandrinum, praese-
disse." Ibid.
2 " In singulis coUationibus quinti concilii generalis, sive Constantinop.
II. cemitur, patriarcham hujus urbis ipsi prsesedisse ; nam primus om-
nium patrum scribitur, in principio singulanun. Idem videtur in fine 8,
sen ultimae, ubi subscriptiones referuntur, nam subscriptio patriarchae
omnium prima est, Cone. tom. v. Hie autem patriarcha prsefuit huic con-
cilio, quia Vigilius pontifex, neque ipse, neque per legatos, interesse
voluit." p. 88.
186 THE EMPERORS [CHAP.
dently stated as a mode of accounting for the patriarch
of Constantinople presiding over the council instead of
the pope, proves, in truth, a great deal more. For, ac-
cording to your canon law, it is necessary to the very
existence 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
appearance, either in person or by his legates. It was
not one of the excepted cases in which the council of
Constance long afterwards determined that the consent
of the pope was 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 Jield^ although the pope was not willing to sanction
it by his presence or by his legates ; thus clearly shewing
that THE FATHERS OF THAT COUNCIL DID NOT ACKNOW-
LEDGE YOUR DOCTRINE, but held themselves as com-
petent to the celebration 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 he very consistently calls singular. " In the sixth
general council," saith he, " there is something singular
about the presidency, namely, that in the beginning of
eighteen of its sessions, it is said, that the emperor Con-
stantino Pogonatus presided: Our most pious emperor
Nor is this a solitary instance, for he proceeds to
mention, " The singularity above observed in the sixth
general council, concerning the presidency, has also a
place occasionally in the seventh general council, for
1 " Est aliquid singulare in sixto concilio general!, circa praesidentiam,
iiimirum, in principio singularum xviii. actionum ejus, dicitur, imperato-
rem Constantinum Pogonatum prsefuisse; Prcesidente inismm Imperatore."
Ibid.
XVII.] PRESIDED IN COUNCIL. 187
there it is said, in the eighth session, that the empress
Irene, with the emperor, her son, presided \"
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
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
were some instances totally subversive of the importance
which it claims. Thus ^, " It is certain," says Gibert,
" that the pope was not 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 sessions when he recalled
them," &c.
Brethren, how much more evidence is necessary to
demonstrate the proposition, that your second canonical
essential 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 inge-
niously your writers manage this difficulty, so as to leave
unharmed your modern doctrine ; but the facts them-
^ " Singularitas supra observata in concilio general! sexto circa praesi-
dentiam, locum habet aliquatenus in concilio generali vii. ibi enim in
actione 8. dicitur, Irenem Imperatricem, cum filio suo Imperatore prse-
fuisse." Ibid.
2 " Eadem fere videntur in octavo concilio generali circa prsesidentiam
ut in sexto et in septimo, nam ia Actionibus 6, 7j 8, dicitur Imperatorem
Basilium prsefuisse ; PrcBsidente piissimo Imperatore." Ibid. p. 89.
2 " Quoad I'eliqua concilia, certum est, pontificem nuUo modo inter-
fuisse concilio Pisano, neque per se, neque per legatos, quoad con-
cilium Basileense, legatos pontificis non adfuisse nisi quibusdam ses-
sionibus, cum eos revocaverit, quoties dissolvit," &c. Ibid. p. 86.
188 THE SUBSCRIPTIONS [cHAP.
selves 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 pre-
sidents were taken sometimes from one see, and some-
times from another, and that frequently the sovereigns
that called them presided :
That even in the neighbourhood 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 several
councils 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 catholick
Church by divine right ; that the general councils of the
Church when summoned and presided over by him,
possess the attribute of infallibility, but that if he does
not summon and preside in them, they are unlawful.
And hence I think it is demonstrated, that in the
second requisite of the doctrine of councils, the primitive
Church of Rome did not hold your present system, and
therefore, in this too, you have changed.
I 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 states 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
XVII.] OF THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 189
the ocean, by those who were with him, Vito and Vincent,
presbyters of Rome \''*
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 little attention
shows 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 Oesarea in Cappadocia, the
ornament of the Church of the Lord"" — " Protogenes,
that admirable man," &;c.^ 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 subscrip-
tions.
But the common version of the doings of this council,
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.
^ " Hosius, bishop of the city of Cordova of the province
of Spain, has said : Thus I believe, as it is above
wi-itten."'
" We, Victor and Vincent, presbyters of the city of
1 " Osius episcopus Cordubae Sanctis Dei ecclesiis, quae Romae sunt, et
in Italia et Hispania tota, et in reliquis ulterius nationibus usque ad
oceanum commorantibus, per eos qui cum ipso erant, Romanes presby-
teros Vitonem et Vincentium." Gel. Hist. Concil. Nicaen. Mansi Concil.
torn. ii. in loco.
2 " Letfntius Caesareae Cappadociae, ecclesiae Domini ornamentum,"
" Protogenes ille admirabilis," &c. Ibid.
' " Subscripserunt trecenti decern et octo episcopi, qui in eodem con-
cilio convenerunt.
" Osius episcopus civitatis Cordubensis provinciae Hispaniae dixit : Ita
erode sicut superius scriptum est.
« Victor
190 SUBSCRIPTIONS OF NICE. [cHAP. XVII.
Eome, 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 con-
clusion stated by your canonist Gibert, nor, indeed, is it
fairly capable of any other construction.
" Victor et Vincentius presbyteri urbis Romae pro venerabili viro papa
et episcopo nostro sancto Silvestro subscripsimus, ita credentes, sicut
supra scriptum est." Mansi Concil. torn. ii. p. 692.
CHAPTER XVIII.
Brethren in Christ,
In examining the testimony directly borne by the council
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.
^ " Let the ancient customs be kept, which are esta-
blished in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the bishop
of Alexandria may have power over all these, forasmuch
as this is the custom 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 preserved. This, too, is altogether manifest,
1 " Antiqui mores serventur, qui sunt in Egypto, Libya, et Pentapoli,
ut Alexandrinus episcopus horum omnium haheat potestatem, quando-
quidem et episcopo Romano hoc est consuetum. Similiter et in Antiochia,
et in aliis provinciis sua privilegia ac suae dignitates et auctoritates eccle-
siis serventur. Illud autem est omnino manifestum, quod si quis absque
raetropolitani sententia factus sit episcopus, eum magna Synodus definivit
non esse episcopum. Quod si quidem communi omnium electione, quae
et rationi consentanea, et ex regula ecclesiastica facta est, duo vel tres
propter suam, qua delectantur, contentionem contradicant, vincant plu-
rium suffragia." Gent. Herveto interprete. Mansi Concil. torn. ii. p.
669.
192 THE NICENE CANONS. [CHAP.
that if any be made bishop, without the decision of his
metropoHtan, 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 con-
tention in which they delight, let the suffrages of the
greater part prevail."
CANON 7.
' " Since an ancient tradition and custom has obtained,
that he who is bishop in Jerusalem should be honoured,
let him have the fruits of this honour, the proper dignity
of the metropolis being preserved."
Now 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
important particulars.
For, in the first place, it is obvious to any reflecting
mind, that there could have been no motive for passing the
sixth canon, unless the fathers of the council had reason
to apprehend some encroachment on the liberties of the
catholic Church. What this encroachment was, we have
already learned from Irenseus, Cyprian, and Eusebius.
The disposition to lord it over God's heritage, for which
Irenseus rebuked Victor, one pope of Rome, and Cyprian
and Firmilian 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 immense advantage which the Church of Rome pos-
sessed by her location in the empire city of the world,
thereby giving the Church of Rome a real primacy of
influence, was doubtless not only understood by her rulers,
but by the other portions of the catholic Church ; and
1 " Quoniam obtinuit consuetude et antiqua traditio, ut qui est in ^lia
episeopus honoretur ; habeat honoris consequentiam ; metropoli propria
dignitate servata." lb. p. 673.
XVIII.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 193
its tendency towards a far stronger and more lofty kind
of pre-eminence was perhaps sufficiently manifest to excite
a natural apprehension in the patriarchs of the other pro-
vinces. 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.^
But look, I pray you, at its provisions. " Let the an-
cient customs be kept in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis,
that the bishop of Alexandria may have power over all
these, forasmuch 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 preroga-
1 I am sorry to be obliged, here, to notice one of those cases in which
your writei's 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 : " Ecclesia Ronlana semper habeat pri-
matum." i. e. " Let the Roman Church always have the primacy,"
after which follows the rest.
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 doubted 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 for-
getful of the Roman dignity." The words of the author are added for
your greater satisfaction.
" An vero verba haec : Romana Ecclesia semper primatum habuit vel
habeat : partem Canonis constituant, an titulum, in dubium a nonnuUis
vocatur. Litem, ni fallor, dirimunt Codices MSS. in quibus et suus
titulus ab his verbis distinctus canoni tribuitur, et haec canonem ipsum,
ut pars, ordiuntur : Ut pars, inquam, sed adjectitia : quae videlicet nee
in ipso posteriori Codice Romano Dionysii reperitur : ut dubium non
sit vel eam ex margine irrepsisse in textum, vel a Romanae Ecclesiae
clericis aliisve esse additam, ne Romanoe dignitatis obliti esse SS.
Patres viderentur." Leonis Mag. 0pp. om. torn. ii. p. 13.
xr You
194 THE COUNCIL OF NICE. [cHAP.
tive over Alexandria? 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 Alexandria power over the Churches of
Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis. The one power is mani-
festly 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 pre-
served." Why so ? What was threatening them ? Men
do not usually say, " Let a thing be preserved," unless
there is danger. Why did not the council of Nice mani-
fest the same solicitude for the dignity and the authority
of the Church of 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 I Ah !
You are probably accustomed, brethren, to read this canon with this
addition : but many of you are aware, and all of you ought 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 shall support my reasoning, are
copied verbatim from your own collection of the councils ; and when I
deny the authority of the unwarrantable addition made to the real canon,
I shew you that I am borne out by the acknowledgment 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 Roman
bishop, [p. 15, 16. Can 30, 31. and 34.] belongs to the same class. And
the whole of this subject calls for the acknowledgment of the same
Quesnel, where in his preface, p. xi. he states that the discipline of the
Roman Church led her to reject some of the oriental canons and to change
others, in order to accommodate them to her own use. " Prseterea antiqua
Romanse Ecclesise disciplina ex ista versione [sc. Isidori] innotescit,
dum aliquos Canones Orientales ab ea rejectos docet, alios mutatos
suoque accommodates usui : quod ex Dionysii versione obscurum manet,
quippe qui Canones ad fidem Grseci textus transtulit, non habita ratione
receptee ab Ecclesia Romana disciphnae." How does this acknowledg-
ment 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 your traditions on the other ?
XVIII.] THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 195
brethren, it is easy to understand why this famous canon
extended a shield of protection over the rest of the Catho*
lie Church, and left Rome to take care of herself. There
was no lack of strength in that quarter, but rather the
manifestation of undue vigour, which then, indeed, only
showed the proportions of the infant Hercules, but reached
a marvellous 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 Alex-
andria, 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 ? 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 children to the mother
and mistress Church of Rome.
A third point of no small importance meets us in the
latter part of this canon, namely, that no one should be
made bishop without the consent of his proper metro-
politan. 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 confirmation of the electors, after
their election, is reserved to the Roman pontiff alone, by
reason of the spiritual bond." How is it, brethren, that
the council recognized 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 all
K 2
196 NICENE CANONS [CHAP.
ecclesiastical authority, having derived from the grant of
Christ himself, through the person of Peter, the pleni-
tude OF POWER ?
The same principle meets us under another form, in
the seventh canon, which the council of Nice passed in
favour of the bishop of Jerusalem. " Since an ancient
tradition and custom has obtained, that he who is bishop
in Jerusalem should be honoured," saith this canon, " let
him have the fruits of this honour, the proper dignity of
the metropolis being preserved/"* Of course, brethren,
you are aware that the metropolis of Jerusalem was
Oesarea ; and frequent were the disputes which afterwards
arose between the rights of the metropolitan and the
honour of Jerusalem. But here, as in the other canon,
we see the council referring to custom and ancient tradi-
tion ; desirous to prevent encroachment, and altogether
silent with respect to Rome.
I proceed to some other canons of this celebrated
council, 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 words : ^ " Concerning
those who are separated from the communion, whether
they 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
examined whether they have been expelled from the con-
gregation, by the pusillanimity, or by the contention, or
by any severity of the bishop concerned. And in order
1 " De lis qui a communione segregati sunt^sive clericorum sive laicorum •
sint ordinis, ab episcopis, qui sunt in unaquaque provincia, valeat sententia
secundum canonem, qui pronunciat eos, qui ab aliis ejecti sunt, non esse
ab aliis admittendos: examinetur autem, numquid vel pusillanimitate, vel
contentione, vel aliqua ejusmodi episcopi acerbitate, congregatione pulsi
XVIIT,] NOT OBSERVED. 197
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 pro-
vince 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 milder sentence. And one of these
councils shall be held before Lent, in order that all stains
may be cleansed from the mind, and a pure offering be
made unto God," (sc. at Easter) " and the second shall
be held in autumn."
The twelfth canon is as follows : * " Those who have
been called by grace, and have manifested their first
ardour, and have laid aside their girdles, but have
returned, afterwards, like dogs to their vomit," &c.
" Let these be prostrate suppliants for ten years, after
having been hearers for three years. But in all these cases
the ground and appearance of the penitence 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 com-
sint. Ut hoc ergo convenientem examinationem accipiat, recte habere
visum est, ut singulis annis in unaquaque provincia bis in anno synodi
fiant: ut cum omnes provinciae episcopi in eundem locum communiter
conveniant, ejusmodi quaestiones examinentur ; et sic quos episcopum
offendisse constiterit, juste esse a congregatione separati apud omnes
videantur, donee episcoporum congregationi videatur pro iis humaniorem
proferre sententiam. Synodi autem fiant, una quidem ante quadragesi-
mam, ut omnibus animi sordibus sublatis, purum munus Deo oflFeratur :
secunda autem autumni tempore." Mansi Concil. tom. ii. p. 669.
12.
^ "Qui autem a gratia quidem evocati, et primum suum ardorem osten-
derunt, et cingula deposuerunt, postea autem ut canes ad suum vomitum
reversi sunt," &c. " hi decem annis prostemantur supplices, etiam post
triennii auditionis tempus. In his autem omnibus examinare convenit
consilium et speciem poenitentiae. Quicumque enim et metu, et lachry-
K 3
198 NICENE CANONS [cHAP.
munion in the prayers when the above-mentioned period
of hearing is fulfilled : besides which, it may be lawful
for their bishops to establish something more indulgent
respecting them. But as for those who do not feel their
condition so seriously, nor think it of much consequence
whether their privileges are restored, but esteem it enough
for their conversion to enter the Churches, let them fulfil
the whole time appointed."
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 \"
Now here, brethren, permit me to remind you, that the
authority of a general council, according to your canon
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, speak-
ing 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
mis, et tolerantia, et bonis operibus conversionem et opere et habitu
ostendunt, hi impleto auditionis tempore quod praefinitum est, merito
orationum communionem habebunt, cum eo quod liceat etiam episcopo
humanius aliquod de eis statuere. Quicumque autem non adeo graviter
tulerunt, nee multum sua referre existimarunt, satisque esse putarunt in
ecclesias ingredi ad conversionem, tempus omnino impleant."
^ " Quoniam sunt quidam in die Dominico genua flectentes, et in die-
bus pentecostes: ut omnia in universis locis consonanter observentur,
placuit sancto concilio, stantes Domino vota persolvere." Hard. Cone,
tom. i. p. 331.
XVIII.] NOT OBSERVED. 199
important canons, which, even among yom:"selves, not-
withstanding their infallible and supreme authority, were
soon considered a dead letter.
For I beseech you, how do you regard the rights and
privileges 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
law, 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
offenders 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 pre-
sume, that the Church of Rome pursued the very course
which the canon censured, in saying, " There are some
who bend their knees on the Lord's day," &;c. And you
know, also, that the Church of Rome disregarded this
decree of the council, and continues her own custom until
the present hour. Here, then, you perceive two facts,
well deserving your attention. 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
K 4
200 THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN [cHAP.
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 favour-
ite distinction between matters of faith and disciphne, 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, on what basis you
rest this allegation.
Certainly not on the Scriptures ; for the very instance
referred to in your Doway catechism, when the apostles
passed their decree, saying, " It seemed good to the
Holy Ghost and to us," was altogether respecting what
you would call disciphne, 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 be-
seech 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 autho-
rity of the fathers, for none of the early fathers claim
infallibility for the decrees of a general council, except
on the foundation 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
concern disciphne, 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 principles of the faith are proposi-
XVIII.] FAITH AND DISCIPLINE. 201
tions concerning the nature, the attributes, and the pur-
poses of Grod, 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
G-ospel; 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 faith which was professed by St. Paul. While on
the other hand, the disciphne directed for the Church in
the patriarchal 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 therefore we have the same substantial faith,
in connexion with many forms of discipline. This is all plain
and incontrovertible, but it does not warrant your infer-
ence from it. For, I beseech you, were not all these forms
of discipline the dictates of the Holy Spirit, at the time
they were estahlished^ and were they not binding, as such,
until the authority of the same Spirit sanctioned a change ?
Was not the discipline of the Mosaic economy given
under the solemn obligation of " Thus saith the LordT'
And was it not believed to be applicable to the Gentile
Churches, until their freedom was established by the very
same authority : " It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost
and to us ? " Yea, was there ever a period within the
whole course of the Scripture history, in which the Lord
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 delibe-
rations than it claimed in all l
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
K 5
202 THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN [cHAP.
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-day 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 necessarily
connected with that faith, in its lowest and apparently
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 discipline ;
for we agree that the ministry and the sacraments are
essential to the existence of the visible Church on earth,
and yet these, at least in their details, are matters of dis-
cipline, and are therefore not embraced in the creed of
the council of Nice, nor in any of the earlier synods.
But are not the ministry and the sacraments as truly
ordained by Christ and the Holy Spirit, as any other
branch of the divine system ? Nay, does not the great
apostle, when regulating many minor 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, 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 infal-
libly 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 Scripture, or from the analogy of the other
works of God : and therefore I must needs conclude that
it is an hypothesis devised to meet the difficulty, in which
your confessed departure 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
XVIII.] FAITH AND DISCIPLINE. 203
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.
k6
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." In proof of this assertion, let us
turn to the next witness in the order of chronology,
viz. the celebrated Athanasius ; 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, indeed, 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 author's labours were devoted
to sustaining the council of Nice against the opposition
of the Arians, and hence it is manifest, that if your
present doctrine of general councils had then been the
doctrine of the Church, his writings would furnish
abundant evidence in your favour. 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 show that he defends
CH. XIX.] ATHANASIUS ON THE COUNCIL OF NICE. 205
the council by Scripture and tradition, 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 his epistle by stating ^ that the " Arians
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
consubstantial, which words are not to be found in Scrip-
ture." 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.
^ " The cause of it," (saith he) " was the following :
* Epist. Decret. de Synod. Nic. Op. om. S. Athan. ed. Col. 1686. torn,
i. p. 248. "Ab omnibus condemnati, [sc. Ariani] etiam nunc quoque
more Judaeorum obmurmurare ausint, expostulantes scilicet, cur patres,
qui Niceae convenerant, has voces, Essentiam et Consubstantialitatem,
nusquam in sacris literis repertas, usurparint."
2 Ibid. p. 267. " Causa autem hujusmodi fuit. Cum Sjnodus in hoc
esset, ut Arianorum impia vocabula tolleret, et voces adhibere vellet,
quae sine controversia sacrarum literarum essent, nimirum eum Filiura
esse, et nequaquam ex non entibus esse, sed ex Deo : eumque et Verbum
esse, et Sapientiam, et nequaquam creaturam aut facturam, sed germen
proprium sui Patris : Eusebiani pro inveterata sua et prava opinione
volebant illud, ex Deo esse, commune esse,et ad homines quoque pertinere,
neque quicquam Christum eo nomine a nobis differre, eo quod scriptum
esset, Unus Deus, ex quo omnia ; et rursum, Vetera transierunt, ecce nova facta
sunt otnnia : omnia vero ex Deo. Ibi patres, animadversa illoinim fraude
et impietatis vafritie, coacti sunt clarioribus verbis exponere, quid sit ex
Deo esse, et scribere, Filium ex substantia Dei esse, ne ex Deo esse, et
commune, et aeque ad Filium et creaturas pertinere existimaretur ; caetera
igitur omnia creaturas dixere, excepto Verbo, quod solum ex Patre
genitum esse crediderunt, et caetera quoque ex Deo esse, verum non
eadem ratione, qua Filius." " Certe cum Paulus omnia dixisset ex Deo
esse, statim subintulit : Et unus Dominus Jesus Christm^ per quern omnia :
ut omnibus ostenderet, Filium esse alium a caeteris rebus a Deo creatis."
" Ideo enim Sacrosancta Synodus liquidius dixit, eum ex substantia
Patris esse," &c.
206 ATHANASIUS ON THE [cHAP.
When the council were occupied in taking away the
impious language of the Arians, and desired to avail them-
selves of those phrases which were allowed to be Scrip-
tural, namely, that Christ was the Son, that he did not
come from non-existence 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, exhibiting their inveterate and wicked
opinion, wished it to be understood that Christ's being
of God was common to mankind, and that in this respect
he differed nothing from ourselves, inasmuch as it was
written, " One God^from whom are all things ;" and again,
" Old things haw passed away^ hehold all things are made
new : and all things are of God!'"' Then the fathers,
observing their fraud and impious subtlety, were con-
strained to express in clearer words what it was to be
from God, and to write that the Son was of the sub-
stance 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
beheved was generated from the Father, and the rest
were also indeed from God, but not in like manner as
the Son." " For certainly, when Paul saith that all
things are of God, he immediately adds : And one Lord
Jesus Christy hy whom are all things : that he might show
to all that the Son was distinct from all other things
which were created by the Deity."" " Hence the
holy council said more clearly, that he was consubstantial
with the Father," &;c. How very different, brethren, is
this style of defence from your doctrine ! How much
more short and simple would Athanasius' argument
appear if he could have said : All general councils are
infallible, because their decrees are dictated by the Holy
XIX.] COUNCIL OF NICE. 207
Ghost, and are equal to Scripture. The council of Nice
was a general council, and therefore the controversy is
settled by its decision.
Again, however, he repeats substantially his former
justification in these words : ^ " Assuredly I should not
deny that the signs and symbols of truth are expressed
with more ^perfection in the language of the holy Scrip-
tures than in any other : but the mahgnity and cunning
impiety of the Eusebians compelled the bishops, as I
before said, to use clearer words in order to subvert
their impiety. Nevertheless 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 Eusebius 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
Ariminum and Seleucia, Athanasius speaks thus of the
Nicene fathers : ^ " 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 show that it was not a new
opinion, but apostoUc ; and that the things which they
had written were not their inventions, but apostoUc
* Ibid. p. 282. " Certe id aequum esse nee ego abnuerim, eo quod signa
indiciaque veritatis perfectiora ex scripturis Sanctis, quam aliunde, de-
promantur : sed malignitas et versipellis Eusebianorum impietas episco-
pos coegit, quemadmodum dixi, ut elarioribus verbis uterentur ad eorura
impietatem subvertendam. Sed tamen satis demonstratum est, et liquide
apparet, scripta Synodi rectam sententiam eontinere," &c.
2 Ibid. p. 873. " De fide vero non scripserunt, Visum est, sed Ad istum
modum credit Catholica Ecclesia, et statim confessio ipsa credendiad-
juncta est, ut ostenderent, earn non novam esse sententiam sed apostoli-
cam : et quae ipsi scripsissent, non esse sua inventa, sed Apostolorura
documenta."
208 ATHANASIUS ON THE [cHAP.
Proceeding to show his reverence for Scripture, he
censures the mania which existed for holding councils,
and says : ^ " In vain therefore they (the Arians) run to
and fro, pretending that they are asking councils con-
cerning 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 the
word consubstantial employed by the Nicene fathers.
^ " We know certain learned and famous bishops among
the ancients," saith he, " and other writers, who used the
word consubstantial, when speaking of the deity of the
Father and the Son."
And again, he saith, ' " With this understanding,
truly, the fathers of the Nicene council wrote that the
Son was consubstantial with the Father, and they pro-
nounced an anathema against those who should say that
the Son was of any other substance. Nor did they es-
tablish those words for themselves on that occasion, but
they learned them from the fathers tvho were hefore them^
as we said already." Now in these passages Athanasius
gives us no intimation whatever of the Holy Spirit dic-
tating the decrees of the council, but by necessary infer-
ence asserts the contrary ; for surely, brethren, it needs
no argument to show, that if he had thought the council
was under the guidance of an infallible inspiration, he
1 Ibid. " Frustra igitur circumcursitantes praetexunt, ob fidem synodos
sese postulare, cum sit divina scrip tura omnibus potentior."
2 Ibid. 937. " Novimus quosdam ex priscis eruditos et praeclaros
antistites, aliosque scriptores, cum de Patris et Filii deitate loquerentur,
voce consubstantialitatis usos esse."
^ Ibid. 939. *' Hoc intellectu videlicet, scripserunt patres Niceni Con-
eilii, Filium Patri consubstantialem esse, eosque anathemate damnarunt,
qui dicerent, ex alia substantia esse Filium. Neque hac in parte sibi ista
vocabula finxerunt, sed a patribus, qui ante fuerunt, ea didicerunt,
quemadmodum diximus."
XIX.] COUNCIL OF NICE. 209
would not have defended it merely by a recurrence to
Scripture and tradition.
To show 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 tlie same as the authority of
Scripture.
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 Arian subtlety to adopt words which they learned
from those that were hefore them.
You refer your faith to the decrees of the Council^ calling
it infallible.
But Athanasius refers his faith only to the word of
God, says not one word of this infallibility, and treats the
counciFs decision as being correct, solely because it was
truly warranted hy the Scriptures.
I trust that the testimony of this most unexceptionable
witness is sufficient to justify the assertion, that your
doctrine on the inspiration and infallibility, of general
councils was not the doctrine of your Church, at his day.
His testimony on the other points of your claims to
supremacy shall be presented in our next chapter.
CHAPTER XX.
Brethren in Christ
I PROCEED to notice a few other passages in the works
of the celebrated Athanasius, in which his ideas of the
CathoHc Church will be easily discerned.
In his apology, addressed to the emperor 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 Arian enemies,
in the following words :
* " And these things, truly, the Egyptians communi-
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 he called^ and
referred the arbitration of the case to Julius himself if he
were willing. When, therefore, we had come to Rome,
Julius immediately wrote to the Eusebians, by two of his
presbyters, Elpidius and Philoxenes : but they, when they
^ St. Athan. ad Imperat. Constant. Apol. Op. torn. i. p. 739.
** Haec ^gyptii ad omnes et ad episcopum Romanum Julium scripsere.
Quin et Eusebiani ad Julium literas misere, et ut nos terrerent, Synodkim
jusserunt convocarif et ipsi Julio, si vellet, arbitrium causae detulerunt. Cum
igitur Romam pervenissemus, Julius continue ad Eusebianos literas
seripsit, missis eo duobus ex suis presbyteris Elpidio et Philoxeno : illi
vero, ubi nostram Romae praesentiam audivissent, plurimum conturbati
sunt, quod contra spem eorum me Romam contulissem. Rejecto igitur
itinere, futiles inanesque tergiversando causificationes commentae sunt, eu
CH. XX.] ATHANASIUS AGAINST THE SUPREMACY, 211
heard of our presence at Eome, were greatly troubled,
because, contrary to their hopes ^ I had hetaken myself to
Borne. Their journey 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 defence was allowed, and
they confirmed their communion and love towards us, and
were very indignant against the Eusebians, 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
EIGHT. But the Arians, saith Athanasius, ordered a
council to he called^ and referred the cause to the arbitre-
ment of Julius, if he were 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 incon-
sistent with your canon law. For if the bishop of Rome
was then acknowledged to be the appellate Judge, by
divine right, of all ecclesiastical causes, Athanasius should
have been cited before him. The Arians could not have
offered to make him arbitrator,, if he were willing,, because
quod ingenti metu retinebantur, ne de iisdem criminibus, quae Valens et
Ursacius confess! erant, ipsi quoque convincerentur. Presbyter deinde
Vito plures episcopos, quam quinquaginta, in concilium adduxit, ubi et
nostra defensio recepta fuit, et confirmarunt in nos communionem et
charitatem : magnaque indignatio exorta est contra Eusebianos, quibus
Julium, cum ab eis literas acceperat, rescribere jusserunt. Scripsit
igitur JuliuSj et misit literas per Gabianum Comitem."
212 ATHANASIUS [cHAP.
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 belonged to him to
pronounce a binding and authoritative decree.
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 com-
mon custom 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. ^ " Where
is there any ecclesiastical 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, Georgius should be sent in, who was a stranger
and a foreigner, neither baptized at Alexandria nor known
to the people, nor asked for by the presbyters, — that he
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
1 Ibid. pp. 748, 9. *' Ubi enim est istiusmodi ecclesiasticus canon, aut
istiusmodi traditio apostolica ? Ut in pace agenti ecclesise, et episcopis
concordibus cum episcopo Alexandriae Athanasio, immittere Georgium
peregrinum et externum hominem, neque Alexandriae baptizatum neque
plebi cognitum, neque postulatum a presbyteris, eumque Antiochiae cre-
are episcopum, atque inde deducere Alexandriam, non cum presbyteris
aut diaconis civitatis, non cum episcopis ^gypti, sed cum militibus ?
Hsec enim dixere et conquesti sunt, qui hue venerunt: si enim post
Synodum in culpa fuisset deprehensus Athanasius, non tamen oportuit
XX.] AGAINST THE SUPREMACY. 213
with soldiers ? For such is the assertion and complaint
of those who have come here. If, truly, 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 ecclesiastical
can^n, but the bishop of the province should have con-
stituted 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
primacy, which was yet far from being established. For
near the close, Julius uses this language :
^ " Therefore inform us more accurately, beloved breth-
ren, 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 con-
demned, and there be no further trouble in the Church.''*
" For if, as you say, they were guilty, judgment should
have been given according to the canon, and not in this
creationem novi episcopi ita illegaliter et praeter canonem ecclesiasticum
fieri, sed in ipsa ecclesia, et ex ipso sacerdotali ordine, et ex ipso clero
ilium ab episcopis provinciae constitui oportuit, et nequaquam nunc
Apostolorura Canones violari. Age, si in queraquam vestrum id com-
missume sset, nonne vociferaturi essetis ? Nonne vindictam, quasi vio-
latis canonibus, postulaturi fuissetis ? Dilecti credite, tanquam Deo prse-
sente, cum veritate loquimur. Non est istud pie factum, non ex jure,
lion ecclesiastice."
1 Ibid. p. 753. " Certiores igitur nos, dilectissimi, de ea re facite, quo
et illis scribamus, et caeteris item episcopis, qui hue debent convenire, ut
214 ATHANASIUS [cHAP.
manner : yon should ham written to us all^ that so, 5y all,
that which is just might he 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 esta-
blished \ On which account, if any suspicion arose against
a bishop, it ought to be referred to our Church. But
noWj after they have done what they thought proper,
these men wish to have us approve the condemnation of a
bishop, at whose doings we were not present, and con-
cerning which we were not informed. 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 be done. But observe, first, brethren, that Julius
contemplates the action of a council. " You should have
written to us all," saith he, " that so, ly all, that which is
just might he decreed^ In the second place, this giving
information to the Church of Rome is put on the score of
custom. ''''Are you ignorant,'''' saith Julius, " that this is
the custom T"* and not one word is to be found that looks
like a claim by divine right. Thirdly, here is no personal
coram omnibus, qui culpae obnoxii sunt condemnentur, et ne ulterius
perturbatio in ecclesia fiat."
" Nam si ut dicitis, omnino in culpa fuerunt, oportuit secundum ca-
nonem, et non isto modo judicium fieri : oportuit scriberi omnibus nobis,
ut ita ab omnibus, quod justum esset, decerneretur.
" Cur igitur, in primis de Alexandrina civitate nihil nobis scribere
voluistis ? an ignari estis banc consuetudinem esse, ut primum nobis
scribatur, ut bine, quod justum est, definiri posset ? Quapropter si
isthic hujusmodi suspicio in episcopum concepta fuerat, id hue ad nos-
tram ecclesiam referri oportuit. Nunc autem nos, quos certiores minime
fecerunt, postquam jam egerint quod libuit, suff'ragatores suse damna-
tionis, cui non interfuimus esse volunt. Non ita se habent Pauli ordi-
nationes, non ita Patres docuerunt, sed aliud exemplum et novum est
institutum."
6
XX.] AGAINST THE SUPREMACY. 215
authority for Julius himself as the vicegerent of Christ,
the chief ruler and governor of the whole Church, &c.
according to your present system. So that the whole
case of Athanasius, 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 suc-
cessor holds at the present day*
CHAPTER XXI.
Brethren in Christ,
We may not in justice dismiss the testimony of Athana-
sius until we see the course by which he was restored to
his diocese, which will show 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. ^ " When the Roman
council," continues Athanasius, "had written thus by
Julius, the bishop of Rome, the Eusebians again, with
wicked audacity, 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
number of bishops assembled from Spain, Italy, Graul,
Africa, Egypt, Cyprus, Palestine, Phrygia, Isauria, the
names of whom Athanasius has for the most part set
down, and computes the whole at three hundred and forty-
1 Ibid. p. 754. "Hsec cum Romae Synodus per Julium Romanum
Episcopum scripsisset, improba iterum audacia Eusebiani in Ecclesiis
perturbandis, insidiisque tendendis usi sunt. Quod cum rescitum esset ab
religiosissimis Imperatoribus, Constantio et Constante, jussi sunt episcopi
orientis et occidentis, Sardim convenire."
CHAP. XXI.] ATHANASIUS AGAINST CYRIL. 217
four. From the synodical epistle of this celebrated
council I extract one sentence at the beginning, showing
that it was convened by the emperors ; and another near
the close, referring to Athanasius. 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 proceed to say :
' " On which account, the grace of Grod co-operating,
our most religious princes called us together from divers
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 at
length, and the violent expulsion of the orthodox bishops,
especially Athanasius, they say :
' " 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 ; letters 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 presided, and signed first ; and Julius of
Rome, by his presbyters Archidamus and Philoxenus,
signed after him. '
A few other little matters may be noticed in connexion
with this witness.
* Ibid. 760, I. " Quapropter, co-operante Dei gratia, religiosissimi
principes nos ex diversis provinciis et civitatibus in unura convocaverunt
cupientes, ut sancta synodus in Sardorum civitatem conveniret, quo
omnis controversia praecideretur."
* Ibid. 766. " Ideo nos dilectos fratres et comministros nostros Atha-
nasium, Marcellum, Asclepam et cseteros, qui cum illis Deo nobiscum
serviunt, innocentes et puros pronunciamus ; Uteris ad singulas paroecias
missis, ut populi cujusque ecclesiae cognoscant sui episcopi sinceritatem."
' Ibid. 767. " Hosius ab Hispania, Julius Romae per Archidamum et
Philoxenum presbyteros suos, Protogenes Sardicge," &c.
L
218 ATHANASIUS [CHAP.
* The emperor Constantine writes to him, caUing him,
pope. The same style of address, as you know, brethren,
was used to all the primitive fathers who were bishops.
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.
^ Again, I remark an epistle addressed to sundry bishops
by the presbyters and deacons under Athanasius, styhng
him the bishop of " the catholic Church of Alexandria.*"
Again, I find the terms in which Liberius and Eome are
mentioned, rather inconsistent with your doctrine. For
Athanasius, in his epistle to the hermits of Egypt, speak-
ing of the persecuting spirit of the Arians, uses these
words :
' " Nor truly did they spare Liberius, the Roman bishop,
for they were led by no reverence, either because that
was an apostolic see, or because Rome was the me-
tropolis of the Roman power; nor did they remember
that in their letters they had called them apostolic men ;
but confounding all together, they were equally forgetful
of all, having no solicitude but for impiety alone."
Compare this with the terms Athanasius uses with
regard to Hosius : * " Although they committed so many
^ Ibid. 785. " Victor Constantinus Maximus Augustus, Papae Athana-
sio."
2 Ibid. 790. " Theogno, Mari, Macedonio, Theodoro, Ursacio, et
Valenti Episcopis e Tyro profectis, presbyteri et diaconi sub reverendis-
simo Episcopo Athanasio, Catholicae Ecclesise Alexandriae."
3 Ibid. S. Athan. ad solit. vitam agentes epist. Op. om. 1. 832. " Ne
Liberie quidem Romano episcopo pepercerunt, nulla reverentia ducti,
vel quod sedes ilia Apostolica esset, vel quod Roma Metropolis esset
Romanse ditionis, neque recordati, se eos apostolicos viros in suis Uteris
appellasse, sed omnia simul miscentes, aeque omnium obliviscebantur,
neque quicquam illis curse, nisi sola impietas fuit."
* Ibid. 837. " Tantis ac talibus sceleribus factis, nihil omnino se adhuc
fecisse arbitrabantur, quamdiu magnus ille Hosius eorum malitiam ex-
XXI.] AGAINST CYRIL. 219
and so great iniquities, yet they thought they had done
nothing, so long as that great man Hosius had not expe-
rienced their mahce. For they studied to 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 heresy, 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 banishment the
bishop of the Romans, and before him we had made exiles
of many other bishops, we have filled every place with
terror, nevertheless thy works are all vain, nor do we
reckon that we have effected any thing, so long as Hosius
is left. For while he acts among his followers, it seems
as though all were acting in their Churches. He is 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,"' &c.
From the whole of which, brethren, the following de-
ductions seem to my mind irresistible.
pertus uon esset. Nam in eum talem tantumque virum, suam rabiem
proteudere studuerunt; neque quod pater esset episcoporum, reveriti
sunt ; neque quod confessor erat, pudore moti sunt ; neque quod sexa-
gesimum annum et eo amplius in episcopatu agebat, respexerunt, sed
omnia simul vilipendentes, ad solam suam haeresin oculos intentos liabu-
ere, homines revera neque Deum timentes neque hominem verentes.
Adorti igitur Constantium talibus verbis alloquuntur, omnia quidem a
nobis facta sunt, profligavimus in exilium Romanorum episcopum, et jam
ante eum extorres fecimus quam plurimos episcopos, omnia loca terrori-
bus implevimus, sed tamen pro nihilo sunt tanta tua opera, neque quic-
quam profecimus, quamdiu reliquus est Hosius. Quamdiu enim ille in
suis agit, omnes in suis ecclesiis agere videntur. Hie princeps est Syn-
odorum, et si quid scribit, ubique auditur: hie formulam fidei in Nicena
synodo concepit, et Arianos ubique pro haereticis traduxit," &c.
L 2
220 FORGED EPISTLES ATTRIBUTED [cHAP.
That the charge against Athanasius, which the council
of Rome, with JuHus, the bishop of Rome, at their head,
had not authority sufficient to settle, was settled by the
council of Sardis.
That this council, like the council of Nice, was convened,
not by the bishop of Rome, but by the emperor.
That the bishop of Rome was present by his legates,
Archidamus 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 Alexandria was the proper form of speech, not the
Roman catholic 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 apostolic see, which reason applied to many
Churches. But the other reason was of a secular character,
since Athanasius censures the Arians for not respecting
Rome, as the metropolis of the Roman power.
Lastly, the extraordinary esteem and reverence dis-
played towards the venerable Hosius, the father of bishops
— the prince of councils, while there is not a word upon
the point of Julius or Liberius possessing the vicegerency
of Christ, the authority 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 Athanasius' evidence clear and decisive, as it
seems to my mind, in demonstration of the difference be-
tween the primitive Church of Rome, and her successor.
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 cen-
turies under his name. Of these, two of the most impu-
dent and barefaced appear to have been intended, not only
XXI.] TO ATHANASIUS. 221
to supply the supposed deficiencies of this eminent father
on the subject of the supremacy of Eome, but also to sup-
port the Roman additions to the canons of the Nicene
council. They purport to be a letter of Athanasius and
the Egyptian bishops, addressed to Marcus the pope, for
fresh copies of the canons of this council, on the ground
that the Arians had burned 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 believe they
are not extant in any other language.
1 " To the holy and venerable lord Marcus, pope of
the apostolic dignity, of the holy and apostohc see, and
of the universal Church, Athanasius and all the bishops
of Egypt send greeting." Then presently we have this
expression, " by the authority of your holy see, which is
the mother and head of all the Churches ^"
The reply of the pope is framed according to the same
model, being, no doubt, the work of the same hand.
' " To the venerable lords my brethren, Athanasius,
and all the bishops of Egypt, Marcus, bishop of the holy
apostolic and Roman see, and of the whole Church.'''
Then we read of " the holy Roman Church which has
always remained without spot, and, by the Providence of
God, and through the help of the blessed apostle Peter,
^ Athan. Op. om. 2. 623. " Domino sancto et apostoliei culminis vene-
raudo Marco sanctae Romanae et apostolicae sedis, atque universalis
Ecclesiae Papae, Athanasius et universi iEgyptiorum Episcopi salutem."
2 lb. " Optamus, ut a vestrse sanctae sedis Ecclesiae autoritate, quae est
mater et caput omnium ecclesiarum," &c.
* Ibid. 624. " Dominis venerabilibus fratribus, Athanasio, et universis
.^gyptiorum Episcopis, Marcus sanetae Romanae apostolicaeque sedis, et
mxiversalis Ecclesiae Episcopus."
l3
222 FORGED EPISTLES ATTRIBUTED [cHAP.
will always remain the sanies'" and then we have the
" holy and apostolic Church, the mother of all the
Churches of Christ, which, by the grace of God, is
proved never to have wandered from the track of apos-
tolic tradition ^."
You will do me the favour to recollect, brethren, that
I have promised to take your own witnesses'* statements,
according 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, treating them
with the severity they deserve, but showing a determi-
nation to do substantial justice in a spirit equally credit-
able 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
cardinal Bellarmine speaks of them :
' " 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 sup-
And Nannius, the learned translator of Athanasius,
places them in the third class, of which he says : * " In
this third class I have collected all the supposititious
books, which I do not think to he the work of Athanasius.''^
* Ibid. " Sancta Komana Ecelesia, quae semper immaeulata mansit, et
Domino providente, et beato Apostolo Petro opem ferente, in future
manebit," &c.
2 Ibid. 525. " Haec sancta et Apostolica mater omnium Ecclesiarum
Christi Ecelesia, quae per omnipotentis Dei gratiam a tramite Apostolicae
traditionis nunquam errasse probatur," &c.
^ Elogia S. Athan. in Praefat. Op. om. " De Epistolis Athanasii ad
Marcum Papam, et Marci Papae ad Athanasium, constat ex ratione tem-
poris, eas epistolas esse supposititias."
* Athan. Op. om. Ep. Nuncupatoria. *' In tertiam [classem] relegavi
omnes supposititios libros, quos Athanasii non puto."
XXI.] TO ATHANASIUS. 223
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 Athanasius, but also to myself, and to you : to Athan-
asius, because these letters are no part of his testimony :
to myself, because otherwise you might have supposed
my quotations partial and unfair ; and to you, partly lest
you might overlook the mark of reprobation which your
critics have affixed to these forgeries, and partly because
it gives me real satisfaction to acknowledge such instances
of candour. It only needs an extension of this candour,
as it seems to me, to bring all our controversies to the
point of concord and peace.
l4
CHAPTER XXII.
Brethren in Christ
The next writer presented to us in the order of time, is
the eloquent Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, whose cateche-
tical lectures are amongst the most interesting monu-
ments of Christian antiquity. He flourished in the same
century with Athanasius, and his works bear date about
A.D. 345. From the Latin version of your own learned
Touttee (except in a few places where I do not think him
accurate, and which I have noted with the original, for
your greater satisfaction), 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 nothing : 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 : ^ " The Lord is merciful,
1 S. Cyril. Archiepis. Hierosol. cap. 11. § 19. Ed. Paris, a.d. 1720. p.
31. " Benignus est Dominus et ad condonandum promptus, tardus autem
ad ulciscendum. Nemo igitur suam ipsius salutem desperet. Petrus
apostolorum summus et princeps, coram vili ancUlula ter Dominum nega-
vit, sed poenitudine tactus flevit amare," &c. The original Greek does
not warrant this translation of the learned Touttee. UkrgoQ 6 Kopv^aio-
raTOQ Kat TrpiOTOcfTCLTriQ tCjv aTrooroXwv, strictly means no more
than, " Peter the most leading [Coryphaeus] and foremost of the apostles."
CHAP. XXII.] TESTIMONY OF CYRIL. 225
and prompt to pardon, but slow to avenge. No one,
therefore, need despair of salvation. Peter, the chief
leader and foreman of the apostles, denied the Lord thrice
before a poor maid-servant, but touched by repentance,
he wept bitterly," &c.
Again, Cyril styles Peter the " foreman of the apostles,
and the leading preacher of the Church \'''' That is, the
preacher who took the lead; inasmuch as he preached
the first sermon to the Jews, and, as in the case of Cor-
nelius, he also may be said to have preached the first
discourse to the Gentiles.
Again, Cyril mentions Peter along mth Paul, in the
following passages, where, arguing against the Jews, he
contends for the superiority of the Christian over the Mo-
saic dispensation. ' " Be not ashamed of your apostles,"
saith he, " for they are not inferior to Moses and the
prophets, 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 he
loosed in heaven. Elias was only taken up into heaven ;
but Paul was taken into heaven and into paradise (for it
In themselves, these words do not import any jurisdiction or authority
over others ; whereas a chief and a prince are persons hearing rule and
dominion. The difference is obvious, and is altogether necessary to be
well noted, in order to understand the Fathers rightly. I might add
that there are two copies of this celebrated discourse of Cyril's extant, of
which the second [see page 87- F.] has the same passage speakmg of
Peter, without any expletive whatever.
1 Ibid. p. 150. [Cat. xi. § iii.] " Petrus apostolorum princeps et su-
premus Ecclesiae praeco," another case of strong ampUfication ; for the
Greek has it : Iltrpog 6 Trpwroorarj/g rwv aTTooroXwi/, Kal rrjQ iKKXrjmaQ
Kopvipaiog Ktjpv^, signifying, " Peter the foremost or foreman of the apos-
tles, and the leading preacher of the Church ;" certainly a very different
pair of titles from the prince of the apostles and the supreme preacher of
the Church.
2 Ibid. Catechesis xiv. § 26. p. 218. " Non te tuorum pudeat aposto-
lorum, non sunt Moyse deteriores, nee prophetis inferiores, sed boni sunt
L 5
226 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
was becoming that the disciples of Christ should receive
an increase of favour), 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 re-
ceived should partake of his mortal lot, and that after he
had descended with an accession of honour, 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 re-
ceived the keys of the kingdom of heaven, yet he is con-
trasting him, not with the other apostles, but with Elias ;
and it is evident that, on the whole, he expresses him-
self more fully and warmly in favour 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.
^ " 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 he was proudly
exhibiting himself as if he thought he was a god. For
cum bonis, et bonis meliores. Nam Elias revera in coelum adsumptus
est, at Petrus habet claves regni coelorum, cum audierit : Qucecumque sol-
'7>ens super terram, erunt soluta in coelis. Elias in coelum dimtaxat est sub-
latiis; Paulus vero et in coelum et in paradisum, (decebat enim Jesu
discipulos multiplicatam gratiam accipere,) cmdivit ineffahilia verba quoe
non licet homini loqui. Descendit autem desursum Paulus, non quod
tertii coeli habitatione indignus foret ; sed ut perceptis humanam sortem
superantibus donis, cumque honoris accessione descendens, cum Christum
praedicasset, et mortem pro ipso toleravisset, martyrii quoque coronam
adsequeretur."
1 Ibid. Cat. vi. § 15. p. 96. " Cum vero error se latins spargeret,
vitium illud correxit egregium par virorum, Petrus et Paulus, Ecclesiae
prsesules illuc appulsi ; Simonemque, ilium videlicet opinione Deum, su-
perbe se ostentantem, subita morte perculerunt. Nam cum pollicitus
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 227
Simon having promised that he would rise up on high
into the air, and be borne through the air in a chariot of
demons, these servants of God fell upon their knees, dis-
playing that concord of which Jesus spake ; If two of
you shall agree on any thing that they shall asJc^ it shall he
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 admirable, for Peter
was he who carried the keys of heaven. Nothing won-
derful 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 favour
of your 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 Coryphseus — but
every one knows that these terms do not mrport Jurisdic-
tion or dominion, but simply a certain precedency among
esset Simon se sublimem in coelos elatum iri, ac daemonum vehiculo sub-
latus per aera ferretur, genibus provoluti servi Dei, concordiamque illam
demonstrantes, de qua Jesus dixerat: Si duo ex vobis concoi'darintf de
omni re quamcumque petierint, fiet eis : concordiae telo per precationem
ad versus magum immisso, praecipitem ad terra m dejecerunt. Neque
tibi res ilia mira videatur, tametsi alioqui admiranda : Petrus namque
erat is qui coeli claves circumferebat. Nihil quoque miri : Paulus enim
erat is qui in tertium coelum atque in paradisum raptus erat, audieratque
arcana verba quae non licet homini loqui." It is a little strange that
your learned translator should give us a different version here from that
which the former passages exhibited. lisTpog kuI UavXoQ Trapaysvofie-
voi, 01 Trjg lKK\r](TiaQ TTpoffraTai. Peter and Paul together are propei-iy
enough called presidents of the Church, whereas Peter alone, when Cyril
styled him only 'irpbtToardrriQ, a term of much weaker signification, was
called a prince.
l6
228 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
equals. His having the keys of the kingdom of heaven is
compared with PauFs being taken up into heaven ; they
are spoken of as being ahke personal privileges, and there
is nothing to warrant the inference 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 Simon at Rome
is mentioned, nor in any other part of CyriPs books, con-
veying the slightest allusion to St. Peter's having any
government over the other apostles, or having established
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 ac-
knowledged it as a part of his system.
^ " 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 inconsist-
ent with your doctrine, but yet it appears to me that the
subject would naturally suggest the vicegerency of the
pope, who bears the person and authority of the Re-
deemer ; and who, though not the successor of Christ's
pontificate, does nevertheless perform the same functions
and claim the same powers, according to your system,
which the successors of Christ, if he could have them,
would properly exercise.
There is another short passage of Cyril, which has
seemed to me worthy of some attention, on account of its
indirect bearing. You know, brethren, that you recom-
^ Ibid. Cat. X. § xiv. p. 143. "Christus autem est summus sacerdos,
non transferendum habens sacerdotium : qui neque in tempore sacerdos
esse coepit, neque alteram habet pontificatus sui successorem."
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 229
mend your doctrine of the primacy, or rather the supremacy
of Rome, because it is such a bond of union, and admir-
able preventive of schism. But we have ah-eady had oc-
casion to notice how much the primitive Church was
troubled with heresy and schism, and Cyril adds his tes-
timony to the same melancholy evidence. For speaking
of the coming of Antichrist, he enumerates the signs
predicted in the Scripture, and acknowledges himself to
be filled with alarm : " The wars among the nations,"
saith he, " terrify me ; the schisms of the Churches
terrify me, and the mutual hatred among brethren.*" *
He assigns no cause for these schisms, which resembles
your argument. He makes no allusion to that departure
from the supposed see of Peter, which is the great oc-
casion 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 reconcilable with your favourite dog-
ma. ^ " The Holy Spirit," saith Cyril, " is great, om-
* Ibid. Cat. XV. § 18. p. 233. " Terrent me bella nationum, terrent
ecclesiarum scissiones ; terret mutuum fratrum odium."
2 Ibid. Cat. xvi. § 22. p. 255. " Magnum quiddam, et omnipotens in
donis, et admirabile, Spiritus Sanctus. Cogita quot ntmc hie assidetis,
quot animse adsumus. Unicuique convenienter operatur, et medius
adstans uniuscuj usque compositionem videt, videt et cogitationem et
conscientiam, quidque et loquamur et mente agitemus. Magnum quidem
est id quod modo dixi, sed adhuc tenue. Consideres velim mente ab eo
illustratus, quot sint totius hujusce paroeciae Christiani ; quotquot totius
provinciae Palaestinae. Rursus protende mentem ab hac provincia in
totum Romanorum imperium ; et ab hoe adspectum converte in mimdum
universum ; Persarum genera, et Indorum nationes, Gothos et Sauroma-
tas, Gallos Hispanosque, Mauros et Afros, et ^thiopas, et reliquos
quorum nee nomina novimus : multi sunt enim populi, quorum ne ipsa
quidem nomina ad notitiam nostram devenere. Conspice cuj usque g«ntis
episcopos, presbyteros, diaconos, monachos, virgines, et reliquos laicos : et
230 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
nipotent 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 illuminated, 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 nations of whom the very
names have not reached our notice. Look at the bishops
of each nation^ the fresbyters^ the deacons^ the monks^ the
mrgins, and the rest of the laity, and behold the great
Ruler and superintendent of all, the bestower of gifts,
how through the whole world he gives to one, modesty ;
to another, perpetual virginity; to another, pity; to
another, zeal for the poor ; to another, the power of re-
sisting evil spirits ; so that even as the sun, by one im-
pulse of its rays, enlightens all things, so the Holy Spirit
illumines those who possess spiritual vision."
Now here, brethren, I think that the scope of this fine
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
vide magnum rectorem ac praesidem donorumque largitorem ; quomodo
in omni mundo illi pudicitiam, isti perpetuam virginitatem, liuic miseri-
cordiam, alii paupertatis studium, alteri adversantium spirituum effugandi
vim adtribuit, et quemadmodum lux uno radii conjectu omnia coUustrat,
sic et Spiritus Sanctus eos qui oculos habent illuminat."
6
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 231
Holy Spirit in the Church, and to this end he reckons
the bishops, the presbyters, the deacons, &;c. 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 guidance of the Holy Spirit than
any of those whom Cyril mentions ? To my mind it ap-
pears 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, therefore, as fur-
nishing strong circumstantial evidence against your doc-
trine.
Again, we find Cyril speaking of the apostles without
distinction, when he saith, ^ " Christ imparted the com-
munication of the Holy Ghost to his apostles, for it is
written : 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 retained."'*' 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 main-
taining the claim of Jerusalem, with far greater reason,
to be the mother Church. ^ " No one can deny," saith
1 Ibid. Cat. xvii. § 12. p. 270. "Hujus Sancti Spiritus communica-
tionem Apostolis impertivit, scriptum namque est : Et quum hoc dixisset,
insufflavit, et dicit eis: Accipite Spiritum Sanctum: Quorumcumque
remiseritis peccata, remittuntur eis ; quorumcumque retinueritis, retenta
sunt."
2 Ibid. Appendix ad Cateches. v. p. 82. § 7- *' Praecipuam esse Sym-
boli Hierosolymitani authoritatem, nuUus inficiari potest qui ad ista
respexerit. 1. Hanc ecclesiam caeterarum omnium matrem esse ; ibi
232 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
he, " that the authority of the symbol (or creed) of Jeru-
salem is chief, if he 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 favourite title of
mother is most manifestly disputed.
We shall derive much greater satisfaction, however,
from contemplating the description which Cyril gives us
of the catholic Church, in his catechetical lecture 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 Holy Catholic Church."
* " The Church is called catholic," saith he, (or uni-
versal) " because it is diffused from the farthest bounds to
the utmost limits of the earth. Also, because she teaches
universally 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 subjects to a right worship all ranks of men,
princes and private individuals, the learned and the igno-
traditionis ecclesiasticae fontem, et religionis Christianse cunabula. 2. Ibi
antiquam traditionem, prsesentibus Christi et apostolorum monumentis,
jugiter ad memoriam revocatam fuisse."
^ Ibid. Cat. xviii. De Ecclesia Catholica, § 23. " Catholica enim vero
(seu universalis) vocatur, eo quod per totum orbem ab extremis terrse
finibus ad extremes usque fines diffusa est. Et quia universe et absque
defectu docet omnia quae in hominum notitiam venire debent dogmata,
sive de visibilibus et invisibilibus, sive de coelestibus et terrestribus
rebus. Turn etiam eo quod omne hominum genus recto cultui subjiciat,
principes et privatos, doctos et imperitos. Ac denique, quia generaliter,
quidem omne peccatorum genus quae per animam et corpus perpetrantur,
curat et sanat, eadem vero onMie possidet, quovis nomine significetur,
virtutis genus, in factis et verbis et spiritualibus cujusvis speciei donis."
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 233
rant. And finally, because she cures and heals every
kind of sin which is committed by the mind or by the
body, and at the same time possesses every kind of vir-
tue, by whatever name it may be 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. ^ " The psalmist truly," saith
he, " had sung before : In the Church praise the Lord
from the fountains of Israel. But since, on account of
their treachery towards the Saviour, the Jews were cast
away from favour, the Saviour built up a second from the
Gentiles, our holy Church of Christians, of 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 openly : of the first truly which was
cut off: I 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 honour of thy house ; and presently in the
following verses : In the Churches I will praise thee, O
Lord. For that one which was in Judea being rejected,
* Ibid. § XXV. p. 297. " Prius quidem cecinerat Psalmista : In ecdesia
henedicite Deum Dominum ex fontibus Israel. Ex quo vero propter struc-
tas adversus Salvatorem insidias, abjecti sunt a gratia Judaei ; secundam
ex gentibus aedificavit Servator, sanctam nostram Christianorum Eccle-
siam, de qua dixit Petro : Et super hanc petram cBdijkaho meam Eccle-
siam, et portce inferi non prcevcdebunt adversus earn. De ambabus illis
prophetans aperte dicebat David ; de priori quidem quae abjecta fuit ;
Odio hahui ecclesiam malignantium : de secunda vero quae aedificata est, in
eodem Psalmo : Domine, dUexi deeorem domus tucB ; et mox in conse-
quentibus : In ecclesiis benedicam te, Domine. Rejecta namque una ilia
quae in Judaea erat, per totum orbem deinceps Christi multiplicantur
ecclesiae, de quibus dictum est in Psalmis: Cantate Domino canticum
novum, laus ejv^ in ecdesia sanctorum. Quels consentanea propheta Judaeis
dixit, Non est mihi voluntas in voUs, dicit Dominus omnipotens. Statimque
subdit : Propterea ab ortu solis usque ad occasum, nomen m^um glorificatum
est in gentibus. De eadem sancta Catholica Ecclesia seribit ad Timotheum
Paulus : Ut sclas quomodo oporteat in domo Dei versari, qucB est Ecclesia Dei
Tiventis, columna et stabUim^ntum veritatis."
234 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
the Churches of Christ are thenceforward multipHed
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 agree-
ing 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."
^ " But since," continues Cyril, " the name of Church
is 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) : properly and truly it may be said that the
Church of the wicked is the assembly of heretics, I say,
of the Marcionites, the Manicheans, and the rest : there-
fore now the faith delivers it to you to be most carefully
1 lb. § xxvi. " Quoniam vero Ecclesiae nomen diversis accommodatur
rebus, ut et de multitudine quae in theatro Ephesiorum erat, scriptum est :
Et quum hsec dixisset, dimisit ecclesiam, (seu concionem) propria autem et
vere quis dixerit ecdesiam malignantium esse hsereticorum coetus, Marcio-
nistarum dico,etMamch8eorum reliquorumque: idcirco nunccautissime tibi
tradidit fides ita tenendum : et in unam sanctam catholicam ecclesiam ;
eorum abominanda collegia fugiens, adhsereas semper sanctae Catholicse
Ecclesiae, in qua et renatus es. Et si quando peregrinatus fueris in civi-
tatibus, ne simpliciter requiras ubi sit Dominicum ; (i. e. Ecclesiae et
sacri conventus aedes) — nam et caeterae impiorum sectae atque haereses,
suas ipsorum speluncas Dominicorum nomine honestare nituntur ; — neque
ubi sit Ecclesia ; sed ubi sit CathoUca Ecclesia ; hoc enim proprium no-
men est hujus sanctae, et matris omnium nostrum, quae quidem et sponsa
est Domini nostri Jesu Christi unigeniti filii Dei, (scriptum est enim :
Sicut et Christus dilexit Ecclesiam, et semetipsum tradidit pro ea, et
omnia quae consequuntur:) et figuram prae se fert atque imitationem
Superioris Hierusalem quce libera est, et mater omnium nostrum. Quae quum
prius sterilis fuerit, nunc est uumerosae prolis parens."
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 235
preserved, and in one holy catholic church, in
order that you may avoid the abominable assembhes of
these men, and may adhere always to the holy catholic
Church, in which you were regenerated. 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 here-
tics endeavour 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 follows) ;
and she bears the figure and image of that Jerusalem
above, which is free, and is the mother of us all. Who,
although she was barren, is now the parent of a nume-
rous seed."
* " The first, then, being repudiated, in the second,
namely, the catholic Church, God, as saith St. Paul,
placed first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers,
afterwards powers, then the gifts of healing, helps, go-
vernments, divers kinds of tongues, and every kind of
virtue ; wisdom and understanding, temperance and jus-
tice, mercy and humanity, and patience not to be over-
come by persecutions. Which, truly, by the armour of
righteousness, on the right hand and on the left, by
^ lb. § xxvii. p. 298. " Priore namque repudiata, in secunda, catholica
videlicet Eeclesia, Deus^ uti Paulus ait, pomit pnmum apostolos, secundo
prophetaSf tertio doctores, postea potestates, turn gratias curationum, opitula-
tiones, guhernationes, genera lingua/rum, et omnem cujuslibet virtu tis speci-
em : Sapientiam dico et intelligentiam, temperantiam et justitiam,
misericordiam et humanitatem, insuperabilemque in persecutionibus
patientiam. Quae quidem jper armajustiticB dextra ac sinistra, per gloriam
et ignominiam, primum in persecutionibus et angustiis sanctos martyres
diversis et multiplici flore nexis patientise coronis redimivit ; nunc vero in
pacis temporibus, Dei gratia debitos honores recipit a regibus, et viris
dignitatum sublimitate conspicuis, et omni denique hominum genere ae
236 TESTIMONY . [cHAP.
honour and dishonour, at first in persecutions and sor-
rows, adorned her holy martyrs with divers crowns woven
with many a flower of patience ; but now, in times of
peace, receives, by the favour of God, due honour 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, has placed peace for her boundary.
Of which if I were io declare every thing, my discourse
must be continued for many hours."
I have given you this long extract, brethren, from the
admirable Cyril, in order to show the striking difference
between 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, obliging every child to say that the Church " is the
congregation of all the faithful under Jesus Christ, their
invisible head, and Ms vicar upon earthy the pope^'''' — while
it defines the essential parts of the Church to be " a pope
or supreme head^ bishops, pastors, and laity," — while it
teaches that from " the 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 con-
nexion to these must needs he dead^ and not accounted a
memher of the Church^'''' — Cyril, expounding the same creed,
describing the parts of the Church, and speaking largely
on all that is most important to a true understanding of
specie. Quumque reges distributarum diversis locis gentium, suae po-
teatatis limites habeant ; sola est sancta Catholica Ecclesia, quae per
orbem totum indeterininata gaudet potestate. Posuit enim Deus, ut
scriptum est, terminum ejus pacem. De qua si omnia dicere vellem, mul-
tarum mihi horarum habenda esset oratio."
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 237
the Holy Catholic Church, says not one word of
pope or council ; nor does he, in the whole of his admir-
able discourses, afford even an allusion to the existence
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 show, that although he took no
note of pope or council, he knew how to value the Scrip-
tures. Thus, in one place, he saith, * " Are not the
divine Scriptures our salvation?" And again, ^ " 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 ! how little did this great luminary of
the primitive Church know of the modern boundaries of
faith, when he thus confined it to the word of Grod re-
corded in the Scriptures, instead of looking for the same
dictates of inspiration in the decrees of councils, and
attributing equal infallibility to the catholic Church. Ee-
member, I beseech you, that Cyril flourished in the very
next generation after the council of Nice ; that Macarius,
the patriarch of Jerusalem, and eighteen bishops of Pa-
lestine, had assisted at it ; that the controversy with the
* lb. Cat. xii. § 16. p. 170. " Nonne divinse scripturse sunt salus
nostra ?"
* lb. Cat. xvi. § 2. p. 243, 4. " Dicamus igitur nos de Spiritu Sancto
ea tantum quse scripta sunt : si quid vero scriptum non fuerit, ne curiose
scitemur. Ipse Spiritus Sanctus eloquutus est scripturas : ipse de seipso
quoque dixit qusecumque voluit, seu qusecumque capere potuimus. Di-
camus ergo quae ab ipso dicta sunt : nam quae ille non dixit, nos non
audemus."
288 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
Arians and Semi-Arians continued throughout his own
day, and gave him no small disturbance, so that, 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 contro-
versy. ^ " Thus,*" saith Thomas, " Cyril, the patriarch
of Jerusalem, declares, speaking in the person of Christ
to Peter : Thou for a while^ and I for ever^ with all
whom I shall set in th^ place : fully and perfectly^ with the
sacrament and with authority^ will I he with them^ as I
am with thee^ " Launoy,*" observes Touttee candidly,
" in the epistle which he wrote to Paul Ratuy, where he
examines many similar testimonies adduced by St. Tho-
mas 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. ^ " But that which an ignorant and imprudent
1 Ibid. p. 388. ^^ Item CyrUlus Hierosolymitanus" saith S. Thomas,
"patriarcha dicit ex persona Christi loquens," [ad Petrum :] * Tu cum
fine, et ego sine fine cum omnibus quos loco tui ponam : plene et per-
fecte, Sacramento et authoritate cum eis ero, sicut sum et tecum.'
Launoius epistola ad Paulum Ratuynum Parisiensem Theologum, qua
multa similia excutit testimonia, a sancto Thoma in opusculo contra
errores Greecorum objecta, hujus quoque voBdav probat."
2 Ibid. Dissertatio de Cataches. S. Cyril, cap. 1. p. xcv. "Sed omnem
fere impudentiam vincit, quod inscitus et imprudens nebulo Augustini ad
Cyrillum, et Cyrilli ad Augustinum epistolas finxit de obitu et miraculis
XXII.] OF CYRIL. 239
knave has feigned of epistles from Augustin to Cyril, and
Cyril to Augustin, concerning the death and miracles of
Jerome, excels every thing else in impudence ; and I have
doubted whether, instead of committing it to the press,
I ought not rather to have committed it to the flames.
The argument in favour of printing it, however, pre-
vailed; lest any thing should be omitted in the work,
which might be desired ; and that by this one example it
should be shown how much could be done by lying. Of
the same chaff is the fragment cited hy S. Thomas, under
the name of Cyril.''''
Brethren, I cite this passage not only that I may do
credit 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 sufiiciently ex-
purgated, who can assure us ? The fact that a writer so
profound and so justly celebrated as Thomas Aquinas
could either have been himself so deceived, or so willing
to deceive, is one which you will not read without morti-
fication and sorrow. And when we consider that your
whole fabric of ecclesiastical polity and peculiar faith is
supported by appeals to the remains of antiquity, 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 ? Ad-
miring, as warmly as yourselves, the pure gold of the
ancient Church, are not our best efforts well spent in
separating it from the alloy of unauthorized innovation ?
S. Hieronymi : quae quidem flammis digniora quam typis num recu-
derem dubitavi. Vicit tamen sententia, ne in hoc opere desiderarentur,
ut hoc uno exemplo, quantum mendacio licuerit declararetur. Ejus-
dem furfuris est fragmentum a S. Thoma sub nomine Cyrilli citatum."
CHAPTER XXIII.
Beethren 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 favour of your doctrine.
In his treatise on the Trinity, he introduces, in a fine
address to Christ, a sketch of the sacred history, speaking
of Moses, and David, Solomon, and the prophets, and
then proceeds to say, ^ " 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 acJcnowledgment of the
mystery^'' (i. e. the mystery of the incarnation,) " lying
beneath the foundation of the Church and receiving the keys
1 Hil. De Trinitat. lib. vi. Ed. Paris. 1652. p. 110. « Electus ex
publicano Matthseus in apostolum, et ex familiaritate Domini revelatione
coelestium mysteriorum dignus Joannes, et post sacramenti confessionem
beatus Simon sedificationi ecclesiae subjacens, et claves regni ccelestis
accipiensj et reliqui omnes Spiritu Sancto prsedicantes, et ex persequu-
toi'e apostolus vas electionis tuse Paulus, in profundo maris vivens, in
coelo tertio homo in paradiso ante martyrium, in martyrio perfectse fidei
consummata libatio. Ab his ergo quae teneo edoctus sum, his imme(^-
cabiliter imbutus sum. Et ignosce, omnipotens Deus, quia in his nee
emeudari possum, et common possum."
CHAP. XXIII.] HILARY OF POICTIERS. ^41
of the celestial Jcingdom^ 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 martyr-
dom. By these I am instructed in the doctrines which I
hold, vdth these I am unalterably 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
privileges of the apostles after this manner, makes no
allusion to the point for which you cite the words I have
italicised. For the question is not whether St. Peter was
blessed, whether he lay beneath the foundation of the
Church, or whether he received the keys of the kingdom
of heaven. But these are the questions to be decided :
Did Peter receive any power of jurisdiction or government
over the other apostles, and was that power transferred
to the bishops of Rome 1 on neither of which points does
this, your favourite passage, shed a ray of light. Taken
by itself, brethren, 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 jostles 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 : * " You," saith he,
^ Ibid. p. 1 18. E. " Tanta et tam Deo propria, vos, O sancti et beati
viri, ob fidei vestrse mejitum claves regni coelorum sortiti, et ligandi
M
242 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
" holy and 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 heaven^ and the
right of binding and loosing in heaven and in earthy do you
protest that you now, for the first time, understood the
truth, that the Saviour had come forth from GodT' In
this 'passage 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,
hut 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. * " Peter," saith he, " con-
fessed Christ to be the Son of God : but at this day, you,
the lying priesthood of a new apostolate, cast forth Christ
as being a creature from nothing. What force do you
give to these glorious 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 secu-
rity of eternity, from this are the keys of the kingdom of
heaven, from this his earthly judgments are accounted
heavenly."
atque solvendi in coelo et in terra jus adepti, gesta esse per Dominum
nostrum Jesum Christum Dei filium videratis; et ad id quod a Deo
exisse se dixit, nunc primum vos veri intelligentiam assequi protes-
tamini ?"
1 lijid. 121. F. "Ille (i. e. Petrus) confessus est Christum filium Dei:
at mihi tu hodie novi apostolatus mendax sacerdotium ingeris Christum
ex nihilo creaturam. Quam vim affers dictis gloriosis ? Filium Dei con-
fessus, ob hoc beatus est. Hsec revelatio Patris est, hoc ecclesiae funda-
mentum est, hsec securitas seternitatis est, hinc regni coelorum habet
clavem, hinc terrena ejus judicia coelestia sunt."
XXIII.] OF HILARY. 243
He pursues his argument in the following animated
strain : ^ " Let there be, truly, another faith, if there be
any other keys of the kingdom of heaven. Let there be
another 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 he is.
But if this only faith which confessed Chi-ist 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 creature, out of nothing, cannot obtain the
keys of the kingdom of heaven ; 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 difficulty.
Speaking of the cure of Peter^s mother-in-law, and ex-
pounding it rather mystically, Hilary observes : ^ " For
he first believed, and is the beginning of the apostolate."
The word which I have here translated beginning, is
' Ibid. 122. D. " Sit sane fides alia, si alise claves regni eoelorum sunt.
Sit fides alia, si eeclesia alia est futura, adversum quam portse inferi non
preevalebunt. Sit fides alia, si erit alius apostolatus, ligata et soluta per
se in terra ligans in coelo atque solvens. Sit fides alia, si Christus filius
Dei alius prseterquam qui est, praedicabitur. Sin vero heec sola fides
confessa Christum Dei filiura, omnium beatitudinum gloriam meruit in
Petro ; necesse est, ut ea quae creaturam potius ex nihilo confitebitur,
claves regni ccelorum non adepta, et extra fidem ae virtutem apostolicam
constituta, nee eeclesia sit ulla, nee Christus."
2 Ibid. Com. in Mat. p. 524. D. " Nam primus credidit, et apostolatus
est princeps." It may be observed that the phrase princeps Ecclesice, a
prince of the Church, occurs to denote a bishop in the eighth book of
Hilary's Treatise on the Trmity, p. 158. D. Speaking of St. Paul's
instructions to Titus, he saith : " Non enim Apostolicus sermo probitatis
honestatisque prseceptis hominem tantum sseculo conformat ad vitam,
M 2
244; TESTIMONY [cHAP.
Princeps^ which also signifies a prince, a ruler, and a
governor. Hence, in your quotations of the passage,
your writers give it: Princepsapostolorum, vri^c^ of the
APOSTLES. But you know, perfectly well, brethren, that
the word princeps has the meaning of Jirst, original, primi-
tive, for its primary 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 Hilary, nor to the other fathers,
to confine this word to that single meaning, which the
modem languages of Europe have derived from it. More
especially would this be indefensible when Hilary says
not, Princeps apostolorum. The prince of the apostles,
but Princeps apostolatus, The beginning of the aposto-
LATE, i. e. the apostolic office, which could not properly
exist until the apostles knew that Christ was the Son of
Grod, because no man could be an apostle under the
Oospel dispensation, until he was enabled to preach the
fundamental doctrine of the Gospel. I beg your candid
attention, brethren, to these remarks, in the firm persua-
sion, that the great bulk of your supposed authority for
Peter''s jurisdiction, 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 evi-
dence upon the point in question. " ^ The confession of
neque rursum per doctrinae scientiam scribam synagogse instituit ad
legem: sed perfectum Ecclesice principem perfectis maximarum tirtntum
bonis instituit, ut et mta ejus ornetur docendo, et doctrina vivendo." In all
cases of words admitting of more than one meaning, the subject matter
and the context must solve the difficulty.
1 Ibid. 572. E. " Et dignum plane confessio Petri prsemium consecutai
XXIII.] OF HILARY. 245
Peter," saith he, " obtained a worthy reward, for that he
saw the Son of God in man. Blessed was he who was
praised, inasmuch as his eyes saw and beheld beyond
human nature, not beholding that which was of flesh and
blood, but\ discerning the Son of God by the revelation
of his hea\'fenly Father; and judged worthy, who first
acknowledged what was of God in Christ. 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. 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 hea-
ven, 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 Hi-
lary'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 decla-
ration of the same witness, asserting the same privileges
of all the apostles.
Again, we read, in the same work of Hilary : ^ " This
est, quia Dei Filium in homine vidisset. Beatus hie est, qui ultra huma-
num oculos intendisse et vidisse laudatus est : non id quod ex came et
sanguine erat contuens, sed Dei Filium coelestis Patris revelatione con-
spiciens: dignusque judicatus, qui quod in Christo Dei esset, primus
agnoseeret. in nuneupatione novi nominis felix Ecclesiee fundamen-
tum: dignaque sedificatione illius petra, quae infernas leges, et tartari
portas, et omnia mortis claustra dissolveret. O beatus coeli janitor, cujus
arbitrio claves seterni aditus traduntur, cujus terrestre judicium prse-
judicata autoritas sit in coelo : ut quae in terris aut ligata sint aut soluta,
statuti ejusdem conditionem obtineant et in coelo."
1 Ibid. 565. Com. in Mat. " Et hoc in Petro considerandum est, fide
eum cseteris anteisse. Nam ignorantibus cseteris, primus respondit : Tu
68 filius Dei vivi. Primus passionem, dum malum putat, detestatus est.
M 3
246 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
is to be considered in Peter, that he preceded the others in
faith. For while the others were still ignorant, he first
answered : Thou art the Son of the living God. He first
expressed his abhorrence of the passion of Christ, while
he thought it evil. He first asserted, 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 suppose Christ's) " 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 indi-
cated. And because then he came, (in power) so mani-
fest, they all, justly astonished, said ; Truly he is the Son
of God."
This passage is one of many, which explains what the
ancients meant by Peter's primacy. He was first, primus^
in order of time, to profess his faith ; 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, brethi*en, 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, presently, more proof, that such a doctrine
had no place in the system of Hilary.
For listen to him, commenting on the 118th Psalm :
" * What is thy portion, Peter I Thou hadst renounced
Primus et moriturum se, et non negaturum spopondit. Primus lavari
sibi pedes prohibuit. Gladium quoque adversus eos, qui Dominum com-
prehendebant, eduxit. Aseensu autem ejus in navim, ventum et mare
esse sedatum : post claritatis suse reditum, setema ecclesise pax et tran-
quillitas indicatur. Et quia tum manifestus adveniet, recte admirantes
universi loquuti sunt : Vere films Dei est."
' Ibid. p. 890. Enar. in Psalm, cxviii. " Quid est, Petre, istud quod
possides ? Renunciaveras omnibus, Deo tuo dicens : Ecce nos omnia
XXIII.] OF HILARY. 24?
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 pro-
mised that they should receive an hundred fold, and after-
wards, 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 calcu-
lation. For thou sayest : What I have, I give unto thee,
in the name of Jesus Christ, arise and walk. happy
possession ! perfect portion of Grod ! 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 orderest a man born lame,
to walk, and incitest a man of many years to leap with
vigour. He bestows this wealth, whose portion is God.
And Paul knows the glories 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
dereliquimus, et secuti sumus te, quid erit nobis ? Et tibi ille respond-
erat : Amen dico vobis, quod vos qui secuti estis me, in regeneratione
sedebitis super duodecim thronos judicantes duodecim tribus Israeli. Et
exemplo vestro cseteris relinquentibus cuncta spoponderat, quod et cen-
tuplum acciperent, et dehinc vitam seternam possessuri essent. Quid est
igitur istud, Petre, quod habes ? Habes plane, et non audeo dicere plus
te centuplo obtinere, dico tamen te sine multiplicatione calculi possidere.
Dicis enim : Quod habeo, hoc tibi do, in nomine Jesu Christi surge et
ambula. felix possessio ! O perfecta Dei portio ! Non terrena largiris,
Bed naturae opus rependis : et vitiosi partus damna restauras. Claudum
natum ingredi jubes, et multae setatis 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 raei Jesu Christi,"
M 4
^48 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
he, in thus setting forth the portion of Peter, have passed
by that pecuhar portion in which none of the other apos-
tles shared, viz. the plenitude of power ^ as the ruler of
them all?
Again, in his comment on the 51st Psalm, Hilary re-
peats the declaration that " ^ 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 ^" These titles
would far better suit your hypothesis, than any thing
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 refer-
ring the emperor to Scripture for the truth of the ortho-
dox doctrine on the Trinity. In my opinion, it exhibits
clearly the polity of the Church, and the small regard
paid to councils, in the days of Hilary.
^ " 1 am a bishop," saith he, addressing the emperor,
" in the communion of all the Churches and bishops of
Graul, although continuing in exile, and as yet distributing
1 Ibid. In Psalm, li. Enar. p. 706. " Apostoli coelorum claves sortiti
sunt."
2 Ibid. De Trinit. lib. vi. p. 125. D. " Non incerta et infirma ille, qui
electionis est vas, locutus est : Nee Magister gentium, et Apostolus Christi
ambiguse doctrinse suae errorem reliquit."
Ibid. lib. vii. p. 158. F. " Non ignoravit doctor hie gentium, et ex con-
scientia loquentis atque habitantis in se Christi Ecclesise electus magister."
' Ad Constantium Augustum liber. Ibid. p. 341. " Episcopus ego sum
in omnium Gallicarum Ecclesiarum atque episcoporum communione,
licet in exilio permanens, et Ecclesise adhuc per presbyteros meos com-
munionem distribuens. Exulo autem non crimine, sed factione, et falsis
nunciis synodi apud te Imperatorem pium," &c. *
XXIII.] OF HILARY. 249
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.
* " 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 off a
part from that only faith ; 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
difficulty in consent, while one begins to pronounce
1 Ibid. 343. " Periculosum nobis admodum, atque etiam miserabile
est, tot nunc fides existere, quot voluntates : et tot nobis doctrinas esse
quot mores : et tot causas blaspheroiamm puUulare, quot vitia sunt :
dum aut 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 quse sola est : et dum plures
fiunt, ad id coeperunt esse, ne ulla sit. Conscii enim nobis invicem su-
mus, post Niceni conventus synodum nihil aliud quam fidem scribi.
Deum in verbis pugna est, dum de novitatibus qusestio est, dum de am-
biguis occasio est, dum de autoribus querela est, dum de studiis certa-
men est, dum in consensu difficultas est, dum alter alteri anathema esse
coepit : prope jam nemo Christi est. Incerto cum doctrinarum vento
vagamur ; et aut dum docemus, perturbamus ; aut dum docemur, erra-
mus. Jam vero proximi anni fides, quid jam de immutatione in se habet?
Primum quse homousion decemit taceri : sequens rursum, quse ho-
mousion decernit et preedicat. Tertium deinceps, quse usiam simpliciter
a patribus prsesumptam, per indulgentiam excusat. Postremum quar-
tum, quse non excusat, sed condemnat."
M 5
250 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
anathema against another ; already we are near the
point when no one is of Christ. We are driven about
by an uncertain wind of doctrines, and either we trouble
others while we mstruct, or we err while we are in-
structed. Already it may be asked, whether the creed
of the last year has any thing immutable 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 : afterwards a
third, which excuses the word substance by way of in-
dulgence, inasmuch as it was taken in simplicity from
the fathers; lastly a fourth, which excuses not, but
condemns it."
I pass on however to the conclusion of Hilary^s intro-
ductory address, where, with honest boldness, he claims
the attention of the emperor on a different ground from
the decrees of councils \ " Hear," saith he, "I ask,
those things which are written concerning Christ, lest,
instead of these, those things which are not written
should be preached. Submit your ears to what I shall say
to you, from the sacred books. You may raise your faith
to God. Hear what is profitable for faith, for unity, for
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 conscience, under contending councils,
under notorious strife. I give you beforehand, mean-
^ Ibid. p. 345. D. " Audi, rogo, ea quae de Christo sunt scripta, ne
sub eis ea quae non scripta sunt prsedicentur. Summitte ad ea, quee de
libris locuturus sura, aures tuas : fidem tuam ad Deum erigas. Audi,
quod proficit ad fideni, ad unitatem, ad eetemitatem. Locuturus sum
tecum cum honore regni et fidei tuse, omnia ad orientis et occidentis
pacem profutura ; sub publica conscientia, sub synodo dissidente, sub
lite famosa. Preemitto interim pignus futuri apud te sermonis mei.
Non aliqua ad scandalum, neque quse extra Evangelium sunt, defen-
dam," &c.
XXIII.] OF HILARY. 251
while, 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
these extracts 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/rom 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 l
Or at least, why does he not tell the emperor something
about the true system 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 held " the authority not of a
mere man, but of the true God upon the earth," in the
words of your canon law I Is it credible that a banished
bishop, seeking the favour of his prince, and believing that
ly divine right the pope of Rome was what you declare 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 God ?
But this extract shews, further, the miserable dis-
tractions of the Church, and the total inefficiency of
councils to command acquiescence or general consent.
How does this consist with your doctrine, that in the
judgment of the fathers, a general council, approved by
the pope, was an infallible director, being the special
organ of the Holy Ghost ? Where does Hilary speak
in such a strain of the council of Nice l Does he not,
on the contrary, make light of all these councils, speak
of them all with the same apparent disapprobation, and
M 6
252 TESTIMONY OF HILARY. [CHAP. XXIIl.
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 manifest, then,
brethren, does it seem to my mind, 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 infalhbility of general councils. So
that on the whole, I consider this witness as a decided
adversary 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 compare the weight
of evidence, there is none so convincing, because there is
none so little exposed to fraud or imposition.
CHAPTER XXIV.
Bretheen in Christ,
To Basil, sumamed the Great, the celebrated bishop of
Oesarea, 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 seem to me conclu-
sive, that your doctrine of papal 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
principle, that by the names of men, we do not under-
stand their essence or their substance, but only those
circumstances or qualities by which one individual stands
personally distinguished from others, he says: ^ " There-
fore by this word," (sc. Peter,) "we understand the son
of Jonah, who was of Bethsaida, the brother of Andrew,
who, from a fisherman, was called to the ministry of the
^ In the citations from Basil, I quote your own Latin version.
Basil, Op. om. Ed. Benedict. Paris, a.d. 1721. torn. i. p. 240.
" lUico enim per hanc vocem intelligimus lonse filium, qui fuit ex Beth-
saida, Andrese fratrem, qui ex piscatore ad apostolatus ministerium voca-
tus est. Qui quoniam fide prsestabat, Ecclesise sedificationem in seipsura
recepit : quorum nihil quidquam essentia est, si essentia tamquam sub-
stantia intolligatur. Qua re nomen characterem quidem Petri nobis cir-
cumscribit," &c.
254 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
apostolate : and because he preceded the rest in faith,
received to himself 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, be-
cause 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 ; instead 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
Basil; and embraces that part where prayer is offered
for the bishop 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 interesting liturgy, the slightest refe-
rence to the " vicar of Christ," the " chief ruler," the
pope of Rome. The passage to which I refer is as
follows :
^ " Let us again beseech the omnipotent and merciful
God, the Father of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus
* Ibid. torn. ii. p. 675. " Oratio pro papa."
" Rursus etiam rogemus omnipotentem et misericordem Deum, Patrem
Domiiii, Dei et Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, per quem obsecramus et
^ogamus te, amator hpminum, bone Domine. Memento, Domine, sane-
tissimi et beatissimi Pontificis nostri, Abba N. Papse et Patriarchae
magnae urbis Alexandrise. Conservans, conserva eum nobis, per annoa
multos et tempora pacifica, perfecte fungentem eo qui illi a te commissus
6st pontifieatu sancto, secundum sanctam et beatam tuam voluntatem,
recte dispensantem verbum veritatis, pascentemque in sanctitate et jus-
XXIV.] OF BASIL. 253
Christ, through whom we pray and implore thee, lover
of men, good Lord. Remember, 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 committed to him, according to thy holy and blessed
will, rightly dispensing the word of truth, and feeding
thy people in holiness 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 Borne ; 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 century, the pope of Rome had
no distinct place in the devotions of the Church at Alex-
andria. If your chief pontiff was then universally re-
garded as you imagine, how, I beseech you, could it have
been, that a liturgy providing so honorable a place for
the pope of Alexandria, should have omitted all mention
of that " vicar of Christ" who was, ly divine appoint-
mmt^ the supreme pastor of the whole Church — the chief
ruler over all ?
Let me proceed, however, to another passage, where
Basil laments the distracted state of the Church, and
accounts for it, in terms altogether irreconcilable with
titia populum tuum: cum omnibus orthodoxis Episcopis, Presbyteris,
Diaconis, cum omni plenitudine sanctse, solius, Catholicse et Apostolicse
tuse Ecclesise : pacem et sanitatem ipsis et nobis benigne concedens, die-
bus omnibus."
256 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
your doctrine. The extract is long, but it will abun-
dantly repay an attentive perusal.
^ " By the favour and benignity of the most High Grod,"
saith our author, " through the grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and from the operation of the Holy Spirit, 1 was
liberated from the false doctrines of the gentiles, and
educated from the first, by Christian parents, 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 conversant, 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 widely, 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
diversity of opinion and sentiment among themselves, so
1 Basil. Prooemium de judicio Dei, § 1. torn. ii. p. 213.
" Optimi Dei benignitate ac humanitate, per gratiam Domini nostri Jesu
Christi, ex Spiritus Sancti operatione, a falsa quidem Gentiliura traditione
ac doctrina liberatus, ab antiqua vero origine et ab initio a Christianis
parentibus edueatus, vel a puero didici ab ipsis literas sacras, quae me ad
veritatis cognitionem adduxerunt. Ubi vero ad virilem aetatem perveni,
tunc ssepius peregrinatus, et in pluribus, ut credi par est, negotiis versa-
tus, in ceeteris quidem artibus et scientiis maximam inter eos qui illarum
quasque diligenter excolebant, concordiam animadverti : contra vero, in
sola Dei Ecelesia, pro qua Christus mortuus est, et super quam large
Spiritum Sanctum effudit, multos vidi et inter se, et in divinis Uteris
intelligendis valde admodum dissentire. Et quod maxime horrendum
est, reperi ipsos Ecclesise prsefectos in tanta inter se sententiae ac opinio-
nis diversitate constitui, sicque Domini nostri Jesu Christi mandatis
adversari, Deique Ecclesiam tam immisericorditer dilacerare, tamque
crudeliter obturbare ejus gregem, ut exortis Anomoeis, nunc, si unquam
alias, in ipsis quoque impleatur illud : Ex vobis ipsis exsurgent viri hquentes
perversa, ut abducant discipulos post se."
XXIV.] OF BASIL. ' 257
hostile to the precepts of our Lord Jesus Christ, lace-
rating with so little pity the Church of God, and so
cruelly troubling his flock, that now, if ever, the Ano-
moeans ^ seemed to have arisen, in whom that prophecy
was fulfilled : And also of yourselves shall men arise,
speaJcing perverse things, that they might draw away dis-
ciples after them!'''
" When I beheld these and other things of the like
description,^^ continues Basil, "and was perplexed to
discover the cause of so much evil, I lived some time
as if in profound darkness, and in a balance ; now in-
clining 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 re-
mained for a long while in this condition, and had looked
diligently into the cause of which I have spoken, the
book of Judges came into my mind, which relates how
§ 2. " Hsec atque ejusdem generis alia cum intuerer, prsetereaque cum
dubitarem quae et unde esset tanti mali causa ; primum quidem quasi in
profundis tenebris degebam, et tanquam in statera constitutus, modo hue
modo illuc propendebam, quod alius alio aut ad seipsum me traheret, ob
diutinam hominum consuetudinem, aut rursus alio propelleret, ob earn
quam in divinis Scripturis agnovissem veritatem. Cum autem in eo
statu diu permansissem, et earn quam dixi causam diligenter perscrutarer,
mihi in mentem venit libri Judicum, qui narrat unumquemque fecisse
quod in oculis suis rectum erat, atque etiam causam ejus rei declarat, his
verbis : In diebus Ulis non erat rex in Israel. Horum igitur cum mihi in
mentem venisset, illud quoque de praesenti rerum statu excogitavi : quod
forte dictu quidem horrendum est et mirabile, sed tamen, si intelligatur,
verissimum est. Num videlicet inter alumnos Ecclesise tanta hsec dis-
cordia ae pugna hodieque exoriatur ob imius magni verique et solius
universorum regis ac Dei contemptum, cum quisque deserat Domini
nostri Jesu Christi doctrinam, et quasdam ratiocinationes ac regulas
peculiares suapte auctoritate sibi arroget, malitque adversus Dominura
imperare quam a Domino regi ?"
* The original Greek is very expressive, signifying those who were
unlike each other ; instead of being, according to the rule of the Gospel,
*' of the same mind"
258 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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 king in Israel. When I
recollected this, I thought the same might be applied to
the present state of things : which is verily fearful and
wonderful 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 contempt 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
seeing 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 dis-
tractions, the contentions, in which the bishops them-
selves 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 wretch-
ed 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 supremacy 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,
rather than being governed by him. What can more
plainly prove the non-existence of your present doctrine
at that day ? Is it not precisely in times of anarchy and
XXIV.] OF BASIL. 259
confusion, that the lovers of order insist most upon the
rights of governors? And if the catholic Church had
then acknowledged an universal 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 Doway commentary,
Christ had given the plenitude of power, how should the
great Basil, himself an archbishop, have complained of
the contentions which distracted the Church, without
one word of reference to the only regular and authorita-
tive tribunal by which they could have been appeased \
The same topic occurs with melancholy frequency in
many other parts of the works of our author ; but 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
favoured Arianism, and that BasiPs 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 writing to Athanasius, the cele-
brated bishop of Alexandria, whose testimony we have
already examined, in order to engage him to interest the
bishops of the western empire, on behalf of their eastern
brethren. From this epistle I shall extract some para-
graphs worthy of your serious attention.
* "I have of late,*" saith Basil, addressing Athanasius,
" bethought me, according to my moderate knowledge of
things, of one way by which our Churches might be aided,
1 Basil. Ep. Athauasio Episcopo Alexandriae, Op. om. torn. iii. p. 159.
* Dudum novi et ipse pro mediocri mea rerum notitia, unam esse eccle-
siis nostris auxilii viara, si nobiscum eonspirent Occidentales episcopi.
Nam si voluerint, quod adhibuerunt studium in uno aut altero perverse
in Occidente sentire deprehensis, illud etiam pix» nostrarura partium
paroecia ostendere j fortasae rebus communibus nonuihil accesserit utili-
11
260 , TESTIMONY [cHAP.
if the western bishops would consent with us. For if
they were wilHng to shew for the sake of our diocese, the
care which they have used towards those who have been
detected in one heresy or another, in the west ; perhaps
it might yield some benefit to the common welfare : since
the emperor reverences the authority of numbers, and
the people every where are disposed to follow the majo-
rity without hesitation. But who is more influential in
executing such a design than thee? Who is more acute
in the discovery of what is expedient ? Who more effi-
cient 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 honoured father.
Adorn thine innumerable labours 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 op-
pressed : suggest the method of relief : thou mayest
become a Samuel to the Churches : be afflicted together
with those who are involved in war : offer thy prayers for
peace : ask favour from the Lord, that he may graciously
appoint to us some memorial of peace.^'
tatis, Imperatore multitudinis auctoritatem reverente et popuHs ubique
ipsos sine dubio sequentibus. Quis autem ad hsec perficienda potentior
est prudentia tua ? Q,uis ad videndum quid deceat acutior 1 quis ad per-
ficienda quae prosunt efficacior ? Quis ad dolendum ex fratrum afflictions
propensior ? Quis perquam reverenda canitie tua Occidenti toti venera-
bilior 1 Relinque aliquod monumentum mortalibus, tua vivendi ratione
dignum, pater in primis venerande. Innumeros illos pro pietate exan-
tlatos labores hoc uno facto exorna : mitte aliquos ex sancta tua ecclesia
viros in s^na doctrina potentes ad Occidentales episcopos : expone illis
calamitates quibus premimur : suggere modum opis ferendse : fias
Samuel ecclesiis : affligere una cum populis bello pugnatis : offer pacifi-
cas preces : pete gratiam a Domino, ut aliquod pacis monumentum
ecclesiis immittat," &c.
XXIV.] OF BASIL.,' ^ 261
In this passage, brethren, you clearly see how distinct
were the Churches of 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 favourably influence the eastern
emperor and the people at large. It was to be a volun-
tary effort throughout. It depended for its execution on
the disposition of Athanasius, on the disposition of the
west, and, finally, on the disposition 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 willingness 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 supremacy over
the catholic Church, in the mind of Basil ; that the do-
minion 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.
There are several other epistles on the same subject,
addressed to the bishops of Italy and Gaul, and one ad-
dressed to Damasus, then bishop of Rome ; in all of
which there is the same evidence of principle and polity,
262 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
and the same absence of ecclesiastical rule and domina-
tion. 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 which seems to recog-
nise your present doctrine.
The other passage which I designed to cite from this
epistle, will show you how Basil was accustomed to speak
of other Churches. Recommending in the first place, as
demanding the earliest attention of Athanasius, the con-
dition of the Church at Antioch, he says : ^ " 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 strengthened, will supply health to the whole body."
Did Basil know any thing of Roman supremacy, or be-
lieve that the Church of Rome was the mother and mis-
tress of the whole Christian world, when he wrote this
passage ? And again, in another of his epistles, he calls
the Church of Nicopolis " the mother Church^ ^'''^ clearly
showing the equality of the great dioceses of the Christ-
ian world in that day, and that the confining these
phrases to the Church of Rome, and the dominion
claimed for her over the whole Church, were no parts of
Basil's system.
But it may be well to cite the opinion of Basil on an
incidental question of Roman authority. The passage
occurs in his epistle to Amphilochius concerning the
' Ibid. " Quid autem habeant orbis terrarum ecclesise, quod prse-
ferendum sit Antiochise \ Quam si contingeret ad concordiam redire, nihil
impediret, quominus velut caput corroboratum universe corpori sanita-
tem suppeditet.
2 Ibid. Ep. Clericis Coloniensibus, p. 350. " Cavete litigetis cum ves-
tra matre Ecclesia Nicopolitana :" and in the next epistle, ^^ Ad Colonke
magistraivs" he calls that Church " teneram matrem," &c.
XXIV.] OF BASIL. 263
canons ; and it will probably aid you in discerning the
independence of the Churches in his day. It is as
follows :
^ " 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
concerning them ; but what concerns the others has been
past by in silence. Nevertheless we re-baptize such ac-
cording to the one manner. But if re-baptization is pro-
hibited with you, as it is among the Romans^ yet for the
sake of a certain order, let our mode prevail." I do not
see, brethren, how this passage can be brought to accord
with your favourite doctrine ; for, manifestly, if Bome
was held by Basil to be the mother and mistress of all
the Churches, and if every ecclesiastical question, ac-
cording to your canon law, was then to be decided at the
tribunal of her bishop, a prohibition of re-baptization
amongst the Romans could not be made consistent with
an allowance of it amongst the Greeks.
Let us next inquire into BasiPs 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.
^ " We are the heirs of those fathers," saith he, " who
formerly promulgated at Nice that great proclamation of
piety; of which the other parts, truly, are above the
^ Ibid. p. 296. "Encratitse, et Apotactitse non subjiciuntur eidem
rationi, cui et Novatiani, quia de illis editus Canon, etsi varius; quae
autem ad istos pertinent, silentio sunt prsetermissa. Nos autem una
ratione tales rebaptizamus. Quod si apud vos prohibita est rebaptizatio,
sicut et apud Romanos, ceconomiae alieujus gratia, nostra tamen ratio vim
obtineat."
* Ibid. p. 145. " Siquidem et eorumdem patrum hseredes sumus, qui
quondam Nicsese magnum pietatis prseconium promulgarunt : cujus reli-
quse quidem partes calumniee nulli obnoxise sunt; sed vocem consub-
264 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
reach of calumny; but the word consubstantial being
badly understood by some, there are those who do not
yet receive it ; whom one might indeed censure justly, and
might nevertheless 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 re-
prehension, 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
present 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 consequently infallible? Did Basil think
that the Nicene creed was inspired, when he claimed par-
don for those who condemned the most important word
in the whole formulary ? Did he hold it to be the work
of the Holy Ghost, when he censured those who liked it
not, as being " full of arrogance, became they walked not
in the steps of the fathers V Only imagine, brethren, yne
of yourselves \mting in favour of the council of Nice, in
terms so moderate as these, and say, whether the appel-
lation of heretic would not be the immediate fruit of his
presumption %
It is to be remembered, however, in justice to your
doctrine, that there is another passage in which Basil
approaches your ideas much more closely. It is in his
stantialis male a nonnuUis acceptam, sunt qui nondjim receperint : quos
quis et jure \ZiKaihiQ\ reprehenderit, ac rursus venia dignos judicarit.
Nam Patrum vestigiis non insistere, nee sua sententia vocera illorum
potiorem ducere, res est reprehensione digna, ut plena arrogantise. Rur-
sus autem vituperatam ab aliis vocem, suspectam habere videtur id quo-
dam mode mediocrem illis excusationis veniam conciliare."
XXIV.] OF BASIL. 265
epistle to Cyrlacus ; where he exhorts that the brethren
at Tarsus should profess the faith, * " 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 hundred and eighteen 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 coun-
cil 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 "by the operation of
the Holy Ghost?" If this be doubtful, ask St. Paul
what he means by declaring (1 Cor. xii. 8), " No
man can say^ The Lord Jesus, hut hy the Holy Ghostr
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, agree-
able 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
1 Ibid. p. 207. " Ut fidem a patribus nostris, qui Nicsese quondam
convenerunt, editam profiteamini, nullamque in ea vocem rejiciatis, sed
sciatis trecentos decern et octo patres, qui citra contentionem conve-
nerunt, non sine Spiritus Sancti afflMu, [Greek, kvepyeia, signifying aa-
tiorif operation, which your translator has turned into a word bearing the
sense of inspiration,^ " locutos esse, atque illud etiam huie fidei addatis,
Spiritum Sanctum creaturam dici non oportere, nee cum iis qui dicunt,
communicandum," &c.
N
266 TESTIMONY OF BASIL. [cHAP. XXIV.
men of old. Yet this does not raise their words to the
dignity of Scripture. And if Basil had supposed other-
wise, 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 witnesses 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 attach-
ment to Gregory Nazianzen is conspicuous. We apply,
therefore, to this cotemporary and friend of our last wit-
ness, to furnish our next testimony on the doctrine of
Roman supremacy.
And first, let us hear him on the subject of the apos-
tles. ^ " Dost thou desire," saith he, after discoursing
largely on the Aaronic priesthood, " that I should also
set forth another example of order and discipline, and
one truly excellent and admirable, and worthy of the
highest commemoration and regard at the present day ?
Thou seest that among the disciples of Christ, who were
all, indeed, great and eminent, and deserving such elec-
tion, this one is called a rock, and receives in faith the
1 I quote your own Latin version, as before, only inserting the Greek
where emendation may seem necessary.
Gregor. Nazian. Orat. 26. Ed. Paris, a. d. 1609. p. 453, 4.
" Vis aliud quoque ordinis et disciplinse exemplum in medium profe-
I'am, idque prseclarum et laudahile, ac preesenti commemoratione atque
admonitione in primis dignum ? Vides quemadmodum ex Christi discipu-
lis, magnis utique omnibus et excelsis, atque electione dignis, hie petra
vocetur, atque Ecclesiee fundamenta in fidem suam recipiat. [Gr.rotf S-e/xjj-
Xtoic Trjg kKK\T)(Tiag iriareverai, i. e. believes in the foundations of the
Church f which your translator renders ; receives in faith the foundations of
N 2
268 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
foundations of the Church ; another is loved more exceed-
ingly, and reclines upon the breast of Jesus, and the
other disciples endure the preference bestowed upon these
with an equal mind. Again, when Christ was about to
ascend into the mount, that he might show his glory in
corporeal form, and manifest his divinity, and unclothe
himself of the fleshy covering, who ascended the mount
with him ? (for all were not admitted to behold this mi-
racle) Peter, John, and James, who were before the
others, and were reckoned so. Again, when depressed
in mind, and withdrawing himself a little before his pas-
sion, commending those who were present to labour 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, Philip another, Judas another, Thomas
another, and any one else another ; neither do all ask the
same, npr does one ask every thing ; but each by turns,
and severally. You will here say, perhaps, that each
the Church. I have taken his version, however : although the original
does not warrant it : because in the result the difference is but a trifle.]
** Ille impensius ametur, et supra pectus Jesu requiescat, ac reliqui dis-
cipuli eos sibi prseferri aequo ferant. Jam cum in montem ascenden-
dum fuisset, ut Christus corporea forma splenderet, ac divinitatem suam
patefaceret, eumque, qui came tegebatur, nudaret, atque aperiret, qui-
nam simul ascendunt ? (Nee enim omnes ad hujus miraculi spectaculum
admittuntur) Petrus, Johannes, et Jacobus, qui ante alios, et erant, et
numerabantur. Rursus cum animi anxio, et paulo ante passionem se-
cedenti, ac precibus operam danti quosdam adesse oporteret, quinam ad
earn rem asciti sunt ? lidera illi. Atque hsec Christi prselatio et electio
fuit. Quid ? reliqua moderatio ordinisque disciplina, quanta ? Aliud
Petrus interrogat, aliud Philippus, aliud Judas, aliud Thomas, aliud alius
quispiam, neque aut idem omnes, aut omnia unus, sed vicissim quisque,
ac sigillatim. Dices hie fortasse, hoc singulos qusesivisse, quod cuique
opus erat. Quid ? Quale illud tibi videtur ? Philippus quiddam dicere
gestit, nee solus audet, verum Andream quoque adhibet. Petrus aliquid
percunctari cupit, et Joannem capitis nutu proponit. Ubi hie morositas ?
Ubi dominandi Ubido %"
XXV.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 269
asked what he had need of. How should it seem so?
Philip desires to say somewhat, 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 V
There is surely nothing in this interesting passage,
brethren, that can be rendered consistent with the idea
of Peter'^s single government over the other apostles.
Gregory considers Peter, John, and James, as the distin-
guished 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 un-
like the style in which an advocate of your present sys-
tem 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, * " The new
Jerusalem, a second ark rising above the waves, like that
of the great Noah, the second parent, of the world."
And proceeding in the same strain, he adds that " this
Church surpasses others in celebrity, as much as they
surpassed it in numbers ; being in this respect like Beth-
lehem, which, although it was a Httle city, was yet the
* Ibid. p. 297. " Ut nova Hierusalem, ac secunda qusedam area undis
eminens quemadmodum ilia magni illius Noe, secundique hujus mundi
parentis, haec Ecclesia [sc. Nazianzena] vocaretur," " Quantumque
aliis numero cedebat, tanto eas nominis celebritate vinceret, idemque
ipsi usu veniret, quod Bethlehem accidisse videmus, quam nulla res pro-
hibuit, quominus simul, et parva civitas esset, et totius terree metropolis,
utpote Christi orbis conditoris ac victorisy^parentem atque nutricem."
n3
270 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
metropolis of the whole earth, by reason of its being the
parent and the nurse of Christ, the Creator and Con-
queror 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 mono-
polize for Rome ; since I find the elder Gregory using
expressions still stronger in favour of the Church of Cse-
sarea. The passage occurs in an epistle, written to that
Church for the purpose of commending Basil to their
choice as their bishop ; inasmuch as Gregory was pre-
vented by sickness from visiting them in person.
^ " Moreover," saithhe, " while we should regard all the
Churches with the utmost care and solicitude, as being
the body of Christ, yet should we chiefly thus regard
your Church, which was not only the mother of almost all
tJw Churches from the heginning^ but is so now, and is so
considered; towards which the whole Christian common-
wealth 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 favour." Greatly, brethren, am I mistaken with
respect to the meaning of words, if this passage does not
far exceed any thing which we have yet met with, in
favour of the Church of Rome.
Under this head, I only add two examples of the phrase
Catholic Churchy applied by Gregory, in his last will and
1 Greg. Naz. Epist. Ibid. p. 785. D. " Porro cum omnibus Ecclesiis,
tanquam Christi corpori, summa cura et solicitudine prospiciendum sit,
turn maxime vestrse, quae omnium fere Ecclesiarum mater et antiquitus
[Greek, cl-k dpxVQ> from the beginning,'] fuit, et nunc est, atque censetur,
et ad quam tota Respublica Christiana oculos conjicit, haud secus ac
circulus centro circumscriptus, non modo propter fidei integritatem jam
olim omnibus prsedicatam, sed etiam ob concordiee gratiam, divino haud
dubie beneficio ipsi concessam."
XXV.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 271
testament, to the Church at Nazianzum, and the Church
at Constantinople. ^ " I Gregory, bishop of the cathohc
Church of Constantinople,"" direct " that my heir shall
restore all my goods moveable and immoveable, to the
holy catholic Church of Nazianzum," &;c. 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 appearance 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 thinking only of the orthodox Church
at large, as opposed to lieresy. In justice to the primitive
writers, it should be well understood, therefore, that when
the fathers use the phrase The holy catholic Churchy they
mean the orthodox Church throughout the worlds 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 synonymous
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 majority
which seemed to favour the heresy of Arius. Yet even
' Append. Op. Greg. Naz. " Gregorius Episeopus Catholicae Con-
stantinopolis Ecclesise, vivens et prudens, sanoque judicio," &c. " Ita
quidem, ut ipse meam omnem substantiam, mobilem et immobilem,
sanctse Catholicse Nazianzi Ecclesige restituat," &c.
N 4
272 TESTIMONY OF '[cHAP.
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 por-
tion of the Church which accords with the primitive
system now, has the best right to be called the Catholic
Churchy even if, numerically, it were the smallest body in
Christendom.
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
regard 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. * " 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, ^ " Grievous wolves, intercepting us on every
^ Ibid. Orat. Vicesima, p. 345. C. " Cumque magnam illam Dei haere-
ditatem, ipsiusque (sc. Christi) doctrina et legibus atque cruciatibus
acquisitam, gentem illam sanctam, regium Sacerdotium, male se habere
atque in sexcentas opiniones et errores distractum esse ; vineamque
illam, quae ex ^gypto, hoc est ex impia et caliginosa ignorantia, trans-
lata et transplantata fuerat, atque ad tam immensam pulchritudinem et
magnitudinem pervenerat, ut terram universam operiret, ac supra
montes et cedros assurgeret," &c.
2 Ibid. Orat. Vicesimatertia, p. 415. ** Gravesque lupi, alii aliunde
nos intercipientes, Ecclesiam discerpunt. Armantur sacerdotes ad versus
sacerdotes, plebs adversus plebem furibundo impetu fertur. Imperator
XXV.J GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 273
side, tear the Church to pieces. Bishops are armed
against bishops, people are opposed against people with
a furious excitement. The emperor himself gives authority
to impiety, and enacts laws against orthodox doctrine."
And again, ^ " 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. Oh !
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 immediate 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 show 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 :
^ " I have resolved, if I may declare the tmth, to
avoid henceforth every convention of bishops ; because I
ipse impietati authoritatem prsebet, atque adversus orthodoxam doctri-
nam leges instituit," &e.
^ Ibid. p. 380. " Quodque Actorum liber de Atheniensibus narrat, ad
nihil aliud vacamus, quam ut novi aliquid dieamus vel audiamus. O quia
Hieremias confusionem nostram caliginemque deplorabit, qui solus
lamentationes calamitatibus exeequare novit !"
2 Greg. Naz. Ep. Procopio, Op. om. p. 814. " Ego, si vera scribere
oportet, hoc animo sum, ut omnem Episcoporum conventum fugiam:
quoniam nuUius concilii finem Isetum et faustum vidi, nee quod depul-
sionem malorum potius, quam accessionem et incrementum habuerit.
Portinaces enim contentiones et dominandi cupiditates (ae ne me queeso
gravem et molestum existimes, hsec scribentem) ne uUis quidem verbis
N 5
274 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
have never yet seen a prosperous and happy conclusion
of any council ; nor any that might not be said to have
increased 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 find any remedy of use to me. On this account,
therefore, 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 weak-
ness :" &;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 endeavour to
evade its force. A specimen of their argument is very
carefully inserted, as an admonitory prologue to the
explicari queant: citiusque aliquis improbitatem arcessetur, dum aliis
judicem se prsebet, quam ut aliorum improbitatem comprimat. Prop-
terea memetipsum collegi, animseque securitatem in sola quiete ac soli-
tudine milii positam judicavi. Nunc vero huic quoque meo judicio
patronus morbus accedit, quippe qui me ita distorqueat, ut quotidie fere
extremos spiritus efflem, nee ulla re meipso uti queam. Atque ob banc
causam ignoscat mihi tua animi magnitude ; detque operam ne pientissi-
mus imperator me inertise atque ignavise condemnet, sed infirmitati
ignoscat."
6
XXV.] GREGORY NAZIANZEN. 275
epistle in question ; and I present it to you entire, for
your greater satisfaction.
^ " 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 Calvin for the purpose of impugning councils ;
but no pious mind should be moved thereat. For Gregory
is not speaking of general councils, but of certain par-
ticular or provincial ones. Otherwise he would con-
tradict himself, since in many places he praises the
Nicene council to the skies, and he was himself a prime
actor in the council of Constantinople, which condemned
and anathematized the Macedonians, who opposed the
Holy Spirit."
What think you, brethren, of this ratiocination ?
Gregory had attended many councils ; some general,
some provincial. For a long course of years he had
been a spectator of their influence upon the Church, with
the best possible opportunities of observation ; since he
was first, bishop of Nazianzum, and afterwards, bishop of
Constantinople, and was distinguished far more by his
learning and his disinterestedness, than by his exalted
station. And near the close of his life, he gives his true
1 Ibid. Argumentum. " Constantinopolim ad concilium quoddam
vocabatur Gregorius. Ait igitur se ab omnibus Episcoporum conciliis
abhorrere, propter rixas et contentiones, quibus inter se conflictantur :
simulque valetudinem excusat. Hujus quidem epistolae authoritate ad
conciliorum oppugnationem Calvinus abutitur, sed neminem piorum
movere debet. Nee enim de generalibus, sed de particularibus quibus-
dam conciliis loquitur. Alioqui enim secum ipse pugnaret, utpote qui
pluribus locis Nicsenum concilium laudibus in coelum ferat, et magna ipse
pars fuerit Constantinopolitanse synodi, in qua Macedoniani, qui Spiritui
Saucto bellum indixerant, damnati atque anathemate percussi sunt."
N 6
276 TESTIMONY OF GREGORY NAZIANZEN. [CH. XXV.
sentiments, in a private letter to a friend, declaring that
he had resolved to avoid all conventions of bishops, for he
had never seen an^ council come to a prosperous con-
clusion, 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
Grregory did not mean general councils at all, but only
provisional 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, that all the councils
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 emperors, and the bishops could not absent them-
selves, 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 muct have included the general
councils amongst the rest. The modem 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 and quarrels of the
bishops ; both were equally liable to witness the most
shameful contests for power ; and from all councils,
therefore, without distinction or difference, he had 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 favourites, Ambrose, the bishop of Milan,
who boldly closed the doors of the Church against the
emperor Theodosius himself, in the just administration
of ecclesiastical discipline. From the works of this dis-
tinguished man, I proceed to cite some testimony on the
point in question, which will show 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 Peter 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 favour your system^
the whole together are utterly opposed to it. But let
him speak for himself, brethren, and judge accordingly.
In his elaborate discourses on the Psalms, for instance,
278 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
we read as follows : ^ " This is that Peter to whom
Christ said : Thou art Peter ^ and upon this rock 1 will
huild 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 pre'Gail against it ; and I will give 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 hell, 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 :
^ " It is this Peter who answers for the other apostles,
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, there-
fore, IS THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH : foT it WaS
not said of the flesh of Peter, but of his faith, that the
1 S. Ambros. Op. Ed. Benedict, torn. i. p. 879. F. [in Psalm xl. Enar.
§ 30.] " Ipse est Petrus cui dixit : Tu es Petrm, et super hanc petram
cedificaho Eccles'iam meam. Ubi ergo Petrus, ibi Ecclesia, ibi nulla mors,
sed vita seterna. Et ideo addidit : Et portce inferi non prcevalebunt ei :
et tihi daho dates regni ccelorum. Beatus Petrus, cui non inferorum porta
prsevaluit, non coeli portas se clausit ; sed e contrario destruxit infemi
vestibula, patefecit coelestia. In terris itaque positus coelum aperuit,
inferos clausit."
2 Ibid. torn. ii. p. 711. (De Incam. Sacram. Cap. 4. § 33.) "Hie est
ergo Petrus qui respondit pro ceteris apostolis, imo prse ceteris ; et ideo
fundamentum dicitur, quia novit non solum proprium, sed etiam com-
mune servare. Huic adstipulatus est Christus, revelavit Pater. Nam
qui veram generationem loquitur Patris, a Patre adsumsit, non sumsit ex
carne." § 34. " Fides ergo est Ecclesite fundamentum : non enim de
XXVI.] OF AMBROSE. 279
gates of death should not prevail against it : but the con-
fession (of faith) overcame hell. And this confession does
not exclude one heresy only ; 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 favourite texts of Scrip-
ture 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 saith : '
" Beheve therefore as Peter believed, that you also may
be blessed, that you may deserve to hear : Flesh and
hlood hath not revealed it unto thee^ hut my Father who is
in heaven. For whoever overcomes the flesh, is a
FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH : if hc cauuot cqual Peter,
he can imitate him : for the gifts of God are great, who
has not only repaired in us what is ours, but has even
vouchsafed to grant us what is his own." And again : ^
" The rock," saith Ambrose, " is Christ : For they drank
of that spiritual rock which followed them^ and that rock
was Christ : and he has not denied to his disciple even
the favour of this word, that he may also he a Peter ^ because
came Petri, sed de fide dictum est quia portse mortis ei non prsevale-
bunt : sed confessio vicit infemum. Et hsec eonfessio non unam haeresim
exclusit ; nam cum Ecclesia multis tamquam bona navis fluctibus ssepe
tundatur, adversus omnes hsereses debet valere Ecclesise fundamentum."
1 Ibid. torn. i. p. 1406. [Expositio Evang. sec. Luc. lib. vi. § 94.]
" Crede igitur sic quemadmodum Petrus credidit, ut et tu beatus sis, ut
et tu audire merearis : Quoniam non caro et sanguis tibi revetavit, sed Pater
mens qui in ccelis est."
Ibid. § 95. " Qui enim camem vicerit, Ecclesise fundamentum est :
si eequare Petrum non potest, imitari potest : magna sunt enim Dei
munera, qui non solum nobis quae nostra fuerant reparavit, verumetiam
quae sunt sua propria concessit."
^ Ibid. § 97. p. 1407. " Petra est Christus : Bibebant enim de Spiri-
tuali sequente petra, petra amtem erat Christus : etiam discipulo sue hujus
280 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
from the rock he derives the solidity of perseverance, 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 correspondence to be complete. ^ " But what," con-
tinues our author, " are the gates of death, that is, the
gates of hell, unless they be the several sins 2 If thou
art a fornicator, thou hast entered the gates of death.
If thou hast violated thy faith, thou hast gone through
the gates of hell. If thou hast committed any mortal
sin, thou hast passed the gates of death: but God is
mighty, who exalteth thee from the gates of death ; that
vocabuli gratiam non negavit, ut ei ipse sit Petrus, quod de petra habeat
soliditatem constantiee, fidei firmitatem.
Ibid. § 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 sedificatur domus tua ; ut nuUis possit nequitise spiritualis
reverberari procellis. Petra tua fides est, fundamentnm Ecclesise fides
est. Si petra fueris, in Ecclesia eris : quia Ecclesia supra petram est.
Si in Ecclesia fueris, portse inferi non prsevalebunt tibi. Portae inferi,
portse mortis sunt : portae autem mortis, portee Ecclesise esse non pos-
sunt."
1 Ibid. § 99. " Quae autem sunt portse mortis, hoc est, portse inferi,
nisi singula quseque peccata ? Si fornicatus fueris, portas mortis ingressus
es. Si fidem Iseseris, portas inferi penetrasti. Si peccatum mortale
commiseris, portas mortis intrasti : sed potens est Deus, qui exaltet te
XXVI.] OF AMBROSE. 281
thou mayest announce all his praises in the gates of the
daughter of Sion. And the gates of the Church are the
gates of chastity, the gates of righteousness, into which
the just enter," &;c. In all this, it is undeniable that
Ambrose sustains most fully the authority of Origen, upon
the points in question.
Another interesting passage occurs elsewhere, which
may aid in showing you the true sentiments of this emi-
nent father. Speaking of David's seeming violation of
the ceremonial law, on the occasion mentioned by our
Redeemer, Ambrose saith : ^ " 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 show 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 priesthood, offering ourselves
as spiritual sacrifices unto God."
But let us next look at a few examples of the mode in
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 shown.
I Thus, arguing against the error of the Novatians, he
de portis mortis ; ut annunties omnes laudes ejus in portis filiae Sion.
Portse autem Ecclesise portse castitatis sunt, porta justitise, quas Justus
intrare consuevit," &c.
1 Ibid. (p. 1364.) lib. v. § 33. " Quomodo autem ille observator legis
atque defensor, panes et ipse manducavit, et dedit iis qui secum erant,
quos non licebat mandueare nisi tantummodo sacerdotibus ; nisi ut per
illam demonstraret figuram, sacerdotalem cibum ad usum transiturum
esse populorum ? Sive quod omnes vitam sacerdotalem debemus imitari :
sive quia omnes filii Ecclesiae sacerdotes sunt, ungimur enim in sacerdo-
tium, offerentes nosmet ipsos Deo hostias spiritales."
282 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
saith : ^ " To thee, saith our Lord, I will give the keys
of the kingdom of heaven, that thou mayest loose and
bind. Novatian did not hear this, but the Church of
Grod heard it. What is said to Peter, is said to the
apostles.''''
Again : ^ " For as Peter, James, and John, and
Barnabas, seemed to be pillars of the Church, so also
whosoever shall overcome the world, becomes a pillar of
Godr
Again : ' " Therefore,'' saith Ambrose, " three are
chosen 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 Hke-
wise James, y^\\Q first ascended the episcopal chair T
Again : * " 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 gates, inasmuch as they are the sons
of thunder. The Churches are eternal gates, where the
prophet, desiring to announce the praise of Christ, saith,
* lb. in Psal. 38. Enarr. (torn. i. p. 858.) § 37- " Tibi, inquit, dabo claves
regni coelorum, ut et solvas et liges. Hoc Novatianus non audivit, sed
Ecclesia Dei audivit . Quod Petro dicitur, apostolis dicitur."
2 lb. in Psal. 118. Expositio, (p. 1030.) § 38. " Nam sicut Petrus, Jaco-
bus, et Johannes, et Barnabas columnae esse videbantur Ecclesise ; et
quicumque vicerit hoc saeculum, fit columna Dei," &c.
3 lb. Expositio Evang. sec. Luc. lib. vii. § 9. p. 1413. " Tres igitur
eliguntur, qui adscenderent montem . Petrus adscendit, qui claves
regni coelorum accepit: Johannes quoque, cui committitur Domini mater:
Jacobus etiam, qui primus solium sacerdotale conscendit."
* lb. tom. ii. p. 525. De fide, lib. iv. cap. 2. § 25. " Vade ergo ad
fratres meos, hoc est, ad illas portas seternales, quee cum Jesum viderint,
elevabantur. ^Eternalis porta est Petrus, cui portse inferi non praevale-
bunt. -^temales portse Johannes et Jacobus, utpote filii tonitrui. .^ter-
nales portse sunt Ecclesiae, ubi laudes Christi annuntiare propheta deside-
rans dicit : JJt minuntiem omnes lavdationes tuas in portis JUice Sion."
XXVI.] OF AMBROSE. 283
that I may announce all thy 'praise m the gates of the
daughter of Sion^
In his treatise concerning the Holy Spirit, there are a
few other passages, which ought perhaps to be presented,
before we close this part of our witness'*s testimony.
They are as follows :
^ " 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
authority of the heavenly Constitution.""
^ " Therefore we behold unity of government, unity of
system, unity of bounty."
' " This is the heritage of apostolic faith and devotion,
which may be gathered from the consideration of the acts
of the apostles themselves. Therefore Paul and Barnabas
obeyed the commands of the Holy Spirit. And all the
postles obeyed the same."
* " Nor was Paul inferior to Peter, although the one
was the foundation of the Church, and the other a wise
architect, knowing how to establish the steps of those
who believed : nor was Paul, I say, unworthy of the
apostolic college, since he may also be compared with
the first, and was second to none. For he who does not
acknowledge himself inferior, makes himself equal."
1 Ibid. p. 662. De Spiritu Sancto, lib. 11. cap. 13. § 148. "Nee so-
lum una operatic in Petro Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti invenitur, sed
etiam in omnibus apostolis divinse operationis unitas revelatur, et quae-
dam supernse constitutionis auctoritas."
2 Ibid. p. 663. § 153. " Unitas igitur imperii, unitas constitutionis,
unitas largitatis.'*
^ Ibid. p. 664. § 155. " Hsec est apostolicse fidei et devotionis heredi-
tas, quam licet et ex ipsorum apostolorum considerare actibus. Parue-
runt ergo Paulus et Barnabas Sancti Spiritus imperatis. Paruerunt et
omnes apostoli," &c.
* Ibid. § 158. " Nee Paulus inferior Petro, quam vis ille Ecclesiae
fundamentum, et hie sapiens architectus sciens vestigia credentium fun-
dare populorum : nee Paulus, inquam, indignus apostolorum coUegio,
284 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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 unno-
ticed, of which my Hmits compel me to extract much less
than I would otherwise rejoice to set before you. Our
next quotation, however, I regard as peculiarly valuable,
beeause it gives us not only a direct proof of the inde-
pendence which Ambrose exercised with regard to the
Church of Rome, but some other intimations 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 : ^ " 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 endeavour to
excuse her by the plea, that this custom is not a sacred
rite : it is not to be done in baptism, nor 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
cum primo quoque facile conferendus, et nulli secundus. Nam qui se
imparem nescit, facit sequalem."
* S. Ambrosii De Sacramentis, lib. iii. cap. 1. § 5. torn. 2. p. 362, 3.
** Non ignoramus quod Ecclesia Romana hanc consuetudinem non habeat,
cujus typum in omnibus sequimur et formam : hanc tamen consuetudi-
nem non habet, ut pedes lavet. Vide ergo, forte propter multitudinem
declinavit. Sunt tamen qui dicant et excusare conentur quia hoc non in
mysterio faciendum est, non in baptismate, non in regeneratione : sed
quasi hospiti pedes lavandi sint. Aliud est humilitatis, aliud sanctifica-
tionis. Denique audi quia mysterium est et sanctificatio : Nid la/vero
XXVI.] OF AMBROSE. 285
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 I may cen-
sure others, but that I may commend my office. I desire
in all things to follow the Church of Rome : but, never-
theless, we men have sense also ; and therefore whatever
is more correctly practised elsewhere^ we are more correct in
practising^''
^ " In this respect," continues Ambrose, " 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^ hut 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
Irenseus, whose catalogue was adopted by Eusebius, the
ecclesiastical historian. But Cyprian, although a little
earlier than Eusebius, favours the statement, being one
of the Latin fathers, and much more liable to the in-
fluence 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
t»6i pedes, non hahehis mscum partem. Hoc ideo dico, non quod alios re-
prehendam, sed mea officia ipse commendem. In omnibus cupio sequi
Ecclesiara Romanam : sed tamen et nos homines sensum habemus ; ideo
quod alibi rectius servatur, et nos rectius custodimus,"
^ § 6. " Ipsum sequimur apostolum Petrum, ipsius inhseremus de-
votioni. Ad hoc Ecclesia Romana quid respondet 1 Utique ipse auctor
est nobis hujus adsertionis Petrus apostolus, qui sacerdos fuit Ecclesise
Romanse. Ipse Petrus ait : Domine, non solum pedes, sed etiam manus et
caput. Vide fidem,"
286 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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 ex-
ample 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 dis-
course, to charge her with declining after the multitude,
and to prefer his own judgment and the custom of other
Churches, on a point of sacred order, which he regarded
as a means of sanctification ; opposing to the opinion of
Rome, the Scripture^ and significantly asking : " What
can the Chiirch of Home say to this .^"
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,
" We desire to follow the Church of Rome in all things ;"
provided we might be allowed, with him, to honour the
authority of Scripture above 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 retaining."
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 Arian 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, bre-
XXVI.] or AMBROSE. 287
thren, held in a city of Italy, before which were sum-
moned several bishops accused of heresy. Two only
appear to have attended, viz. Palladius and Secundianus,
who were condemned unanimously. I cite the following
passages from the record to prove that even a particular
council was held in It^y 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.
At the opening of the council, ^ " Ambrose the bishop
said : Our discussions upon this matter are to be con-
firmed by the imperial warrant, that they may be alleged
with authority."
Accordingly, " The imperial warrant is recited in the
council." After which, " Ambrose the bishop said : Be-
hold what our Christian emperor has determined. He
desires not to injure the priesthood, and therefore he has
constituted 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, Palla-
dius refused, saying : ^ " By your management it is con-
trived that this should not be a full and general council :
our colleagues, therefore, being absent, we cannot an-
swer.
* Ibid. torn. ii. p. 787. " Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Disceptationes
nostrse ex re firmandse sunt seripto imperiali, ut allegentur."
" Scriptum imperiale recitatur in Concilio," &c.
" Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Ecce quod Christianus constituit impe-
rator. Noluit injuriam facere sacerdotibus, ipsos interpretes constituit
episcopos."
2 Ibid. p. 788. § 6. " Palladius dixit : Vestro studio factum est, ut non
esset genemle et plenum Concilium : absentibus consortibus nostris, nos
respondere non possumus.
" Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Qui sunt consortea vestri ?
" Palladius dixit : Orientales episcopi.
§ 7. " Ambrosius
288 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
" Ambrose the bishop said : Who are your col-
leagues ?
" 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, according 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 coun-
cils 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.
1 " To the most clement, most Christian, and most
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 of God,
who preserves your kingdom in his piety, in whom we
give thanks to you, most clement princes, because you
§ 7. " Ambrosius episcopus dixit : Interim quia superioribus tempori-
bus concilium sic factum est, ut orientales in orientis partibus constituti
haberent concilium, occidentales in occidente ; nos in occidentis partibus
constituti, convenimus ad Aquileiensium civitatem, juxta imperatoris
praeceptum. Denique etiam preefectus Italiae litteras dedit, ut si vellent
orientales convenire, in potestate haberent : sed quia scierunt consuetu-
dinem hujusmodi, ut in oriente orientalium esset concilium, intra occi-
dentem occidentalium, ideo putaverunt non esse veniendum."
Ambros. Op. tom. ii. p. 806,
" Imperatoribus clementissimis et christianis, beatissimisque princi-
XXVT.] OF AMBROSE. 289
have proved the zeal of your faith, and have laboured . to
convene a council of bishops, to remove dissensions ;
and have so far honoured the bishops in your condescen-
sion, that no one desirous to be present should be
omitted, and that no one who was unwilling should be
compelled."
Now, brethren, I beseech you to transfer these pro-
ceedings 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 l
Would an assembly of your bishops think it consistent
with their obedience, to hold such a council, for such a
purpose and under such a warrant ?
And if Ambrose, with all his disposition to acknow-
ledge and favour the rights of the Church of Rome, acted
and wrote as is here recorded, could he have known any-
thing of the papal prerogative, as laid down in your
canon law ?
Surely, brethren, I cannot err, in leaving these ques-
tions to be answered by any lover of candour and of
truth.
pibus Gratiano, Valentiniano et TheodosiOj sanctum concilium quod con-
venit Aquileise.
"Benedictus Deus Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi,qui vobisRomanum
imperium dedit ; et benedictus Dominus noster Jesu Christus unigenitua
Dei Filius, qui regnum vestrum sua pietate custodit, apud quem gratiaa
agimus vobis, clementissimi principes, quod et fidei vestrse studium pro-
bavistis, qui ad removendas altercationes congregare studuistis sacerdo-
tale concilium, et episcopis dignatione vestra honorificentiara reservastis,
ut nemo deesset volens, nemo cogeretur invitus."
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 honoured by your canon law, that nothing but fa-
vour could be expected at his hands towards the claims
of Roman supremacy. Nor is it to be disputed, that in
drawing to the close of the fourth century, we find in-
creasing proofs of the advancement of those claims;
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
strongest declarations in your favour, from his famous
letter to pope Damasus ; and then present to you his
equally celebrated epistle to Evagrius. His comments
on the passages of Scripture which you cite as the foun-
dation 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. ^ " Jerome to Damasus. Since
the east, dashed together by the old madness of the
1 S, Hieron. Op. om. Ed. Franc, a. d. 1684. Tom. ii. p. 90. " Hiero-
nymus Damaso. Quoniam vetusto Oriens inter se populorum furore
CHAP. XXVIl.] TESTIMONY OF JEROME. 291
people, tears piecemeal the seamless tunic and coat of the
Lord : and the foxes destroy the vine of Christ, as among
reservoirs worn out, which hold no water ; and it is diffi-
cult 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 apostle'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 lody is, there
are the eagles gathered together. The prodigal son having
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
the salt of the earth, you are vessels of gold and silver :
collisus, indiscissam Domini tunicam et desupert extam, minutatim per-
frustra discerpit : et Christi vineam exterminant vulpes, ut inter lacus
contritos, qui aquam non habent, difficile, ubi fons signatus, et hortus ills
conclusus sit, possit intelligi : ideo mihi cathedram Petri et fidem apos-
tolico ore laudatam censui consulendam ; inde nunc mese animse postu-
lans cibum, unde olim Christi vestimenta suscepi. Neque vero tanta
vastitas elementi liquentis, et interjacens longitude terrarum, me a pre-
ciosse margaritse potuit inquisitione prohibere. Ubicumque fuerit corpus,
iUuc congregantur aquilce. Profligato a sobole mala patrimonio, apud vos
solos incorrupta patrum servatur hsereditas. Ibi cespite terra foecundo
dominici seminis puritatem centeno fructu refert : hie obruta sulcis fru-
menta in lolium avenasque degenerant. Nunc in occidente Sol justitise
oritur : in oriente autem Lucifer ille qui ceciderat, supra sidera posuit
thronum suum. Vos estis lux mundi, vos sal terroe, vos aurea vasa et
argentea : hie testacea vasa vel lignea, virgam ferream et seternum
operiuntur incendium. Quanquam igitur tui me terreat magnitude, in-
vitat tamen humanitas. A sacerdote victimam salutis, a pastore prsesi-
o 2
292 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
here, the vessels of earth and wood are shut up for the
rod of iron and eternal fire. Notwithstanding, therefore,
your greatness 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 depart : 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 united in communion to
your blessedness, that is, to the chair of Peter : on that
roch^ 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 in the flood. And
because, for my sins, I have dwelt in this wilderness
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 intervening dis-
tance : therefore 1 foUow hither your colleagues, the con-
fessors of Egypt ; and among the largest vessels, I lie
hid in a little boat. I know nothing of Vitalis, of Me-
letius, or Paulinus. Whoever does not gather with thee,
scatters : that is, whoever is not of Christ, is of Anti-
christ. For now, — shame ! — after the Nicene faith,
dium ovis flagito. Facessat invidia : Romani culminis recedat ambitio :
cum successore piscatoris et discipulo crucis loquor. Ego nullum pri-
mum, nisi Christum, sequens, beatitudini tuae, id est, cathedrae Petri
communione consocior : super illam petram cedificatum ecclesiam scio. Q,ui-
cumque extra hanc domum agnum comederit, prophanus est. Si quis in
area Noe non fuerit, peribit regnante diluvio. Et quia pro meis facino-
ribus ad earn soUtudinem commigravi, quse Syriam juncto Barbarise fine
disterminat, nee possum sanctum Domini tot interjacentibus spatiis a
sanctimonia tua semper expetere : ideo hie collegas tuos -^gyptios con-
fessores sequor : et sub onerariis navibus, parva navicula delitesco. Non
novi Vitalem, Meletium respuo, ignoro Paulinum. Quicumque tecum
non colligit, spargit : hoc est, qui Christi non est, Antichristi est. Nunc
igitur, proh dolor ! post Nicsenam fidem, post Alexandrinum juncto
pariter Occidente decretum, trium hypostaseon ab Arianorum prsesule et
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 293
after the Alexandrine decree, the west also concurring,
the new plirase of three Jiypostases is exacted of me, a
Roman, by the Campenses, and the chief of the Arians.
What apostles, I 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 per-
sons. 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 hypostasis 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
branded together."
Here, brethren, you have all that is important of this
celebrated document, to which your writers so triumph-
antly refer. And I do not hesitate to say, that, if ma-
turely considered, it will be found to have no reference
whatever to the real question at issue. That question is
a question of ecclesiastical polity or government. Your
Campensibus novellum a me homine Romano nomen exigitur. Qui quse-
so ista Apostoli prodidere ? Quis novus magister gentium Paulus haec
docuit ? InteiTOgemus, quid tres hypostases posse arbitrentur intelligi ?
Tres personas subsistentes aiunt. Respondemus, nos ita credere. Non
sufficit sensus, ipsum nomen efflagitant : quia nescio quid veneni in
syllabis latet. Clamamus, si quis tres hypostases, aut tria enypostata,
hoc est, tres subsistentes personas non confitetur, anathema sit. Et quia
vocabula non ediscimus, hseretici judicamur. Si quis autem hypostasin
usian intelligens, non in tribus personis unam hypostasin dicit, alienus
a Christo est : et sub hac confessione vobiscum pariter cauterio unionis
inurimur."
o 3
294 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
doctrine is, that the Church was built on Peter, person-
ally and officially, as being the constituted chief and
ruler, the vicar of Christ, to whom was committed the
whole Church, apostles and all : that his supreme author-
ity was transferred to his successors in the Roman see,
which thenceforward became, by virtue of this transfer,
the mother and mistress of all the Churches : and that,
by necessary consequence, the being in communion with
the Church of Rome, as such^ is essential to the being a
member of the catholic Church. Whereas I shall show
you, distinctly, that Jerome did not hold your construc-
tion of the Saviour's address to Peter : that, on the con-
trary, he held the same which the fathers in general had
held before him : viz. that the Church was built, not on
Peter personally ^ hut on the faith which he professed:
that, in consistency with this opinion, the expressions on
which you rely, in the above document, were not in-
tended by Jerome to mean a personal communion with
Damasus, as being 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 that we examine Jerome's declara-
tions 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 construe every author, so that he
shall not appear to contradict himself.
I ask you, then, to turn to the epistle to Evagrius,
which Calvin and his disciples have praised as loudly as
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 295
your writers have lauded the other. And here we shall
have a better 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 enlarge on the offices
of bishop, priest, and deacon, with their relative powers ;
especially declaring his opinion as to the comparative
authority of the Church of Rome. Of course, therefore,
the very topic naturally led to the point under discussion ;
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:
^ " 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 all the
barbarian nations, adore also one Christ, and observe the
same rule of truth. If authority is sought for, the
WORLD IS GREATER THAN ONE CITY. Wlieremr there is
a hishop, whether at Borne, or Euguhium, or Constanti-
Hieron. Op. torn. ii. p. 221. " Hieronymus Evagrio.
" Nee altera Romanse urbis Ecclesia, altera totius orbis ex-
istimanda est. Et Gallise et Britanniae et Africa et Persis et Oriens et
India et omnes barbarse nationes unum Christum adorant, unam obser-
vant regulam veritatis. Si autoritas quseritur, orbis major est urbe.
Ubicumque fuerit Episcopus, sive Romse sive Eugubii, sive Constanti-
nopolis, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriae, sive Tanis : ejusdem meriti, ejus-
dem est et sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis humilitas,
vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Cseterum omnes
apostolorum successores sunt. Sed dicis, quomodo Romse ad testimo-
nium diaconi presbyter ordinatur ? Quid mihi prefers imius urbis con-
suetudinem ?"
o 4
296 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
?, or Bhegium^ or Alexandria^ or Tanis : he is of
THE SAME EXCELLENCY, OF THE SAME EPISCOPATE.
The power of wealth and the lowHness of poverty does
'not make a bishop either less or greater. For 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 deacon ? Why do you urge to me the custom of a
single city V The conclusion of the epistle is in these
words ^ : "And that we may know the apostolic tradi-
tions 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
testimony 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 sur-
prised when you examine the proof which this most
Messed of the fathers (according to your canon law) will
afford us.
^ " You say," says Jerome, " that the Church is
founded on Peter, although the same thing is elsewhere
done upon all the apostles^ and all receive the heys of the
kingdom of heaven^ so that the strength of the Church is
consolidated upon them all alike: nevertheless, on this
account one is elected amongst the twelve, in order that
a head being constituted, the occasion of schism might
1 lb. " Et ut sciamus traditiones apostolicas sumptas de Veteri Testa-
mento, quod Aaron et filii ejus atque Levitse in templo fuerunt, hoc sibi
Episcopi et presbyteri et diaeoni vendicent in Ecclesia."
2 Hieron. adversus Jovinianum, lib. 1. Op. om. torn. ii. p. 26. H.
" At dicis, super Petrum fundata est Ecclesia, licet id ipsum in alio loco
super omnes Apostolos fiat; et cuncti claves regni coelorum accipiant, et
ex aequo super eos Ecclesise fortitudo solidetur : tamen propterea inter
duodecim unus eligitur, ut capita constituto, schismatis tollatur occasio."
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 297
be taken 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 building 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 :
^ " On this rock the Lord founded his Church, from
this rock the apostle Peter obtained his name." — " The
foundation 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 ^ : " As the
Lord gave light to the apostles, that they might be
called the light of the world, so did they obtain other
names from him: thus on Simon who beheved in the
rock Christ, the name of Peter is bestowed. And accord-
ing to the metaphor of a rock, it is rightly said to him :
I will build my Church on thee."
1 Hieron. Com. in Mattlifeum. Cap. vii. v. 61.
" Fundata enim, &c.] Super banc petram Dominus fundavit Eccle-
siam, ab hac peti^ Apostolus Petmis sortitus est nomen.
" Qui cedificavit, &c.] Fundamentum quod Apostolus arehitectus posuit,
unus est Dominus noster Jesus Christus : super hoc fundamentimi sedifi-
catur Christi Ecclesia."
2 lb. cap. xvi.
" JEt ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram cedificaho Eccle-
siam meam.] Sicut ipse lumen Apostolis donavit, ut lumen mundi appel-
larentur, cseteraque ex Domino sortiti sunt vocabula, ita et Simoni qui
credebat in petram Christum, Petri largitus est nomen. Ac secundum
metaphoram petrse, recte dicitur ei : ^dificaho Ecdesiam meam super te.'*
o 5
298 TESTIMONY [CHAP.
Upon the words which follow: And the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it, Jerome saith, ^ " 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, " / will give unto thee the Tzeys of the
kingdom of heaven,^"* Jerome's commentary is worthy of
your particular notice. * " Bishops and presbyters,"' saith
he, " not understailding this passage, assume to them-
selves 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 Leviticus," continues he, " of the lepers,
where they are ordered to show themselves to the priests,
and if they had the leprosy, then the priest should pro-
nounce them unclean ; not that the priest could make
them leprous and unclean ; but 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 announced the clean and the unclean, so now the
bishop and the presbyter do not bind or loose those who
^ *^ Et portcB inferi non prcBvalebunt adversus earn} Ego portas inferi reor
vitia atque peccata, vel certe hsereticorum doctrinas, per quas illecti
homines ducuntur ad tartarum."
2 *' Et dabo tibi daves regni coelorum, ^c] I stum locum episcopi et
presbyter! non intelligentes, aliquid sibi de Pharisseorum assumunt super-
cilio, ut vel damnent innocentes, vel solvere se noxios arbitrentur, cum
apud Deum non sententia sacerdotum, sed reorum vita quaeratur. Legi-
mus in Levitico de leprosis, ubi jubentur ut ostendant se sacerdotibus, et
si lepram habuerint, tunc a sacerdote immundi fiant, non quo sacerdotes
leprosos faciant et immundos, sed quo habeant notitiam leprosi et non
leprosi, et possint discernere qui mundus, quive immundus sit. Quomodo
ergo ibi leprosum sacerdos mundum vel immundum facit, sic et hie
alligat, vel solvit episcopus et presbyter, non eos qui insontes sunt vel
noxii, sed pro officio suo, cum peccatorum audierit varietates, scit qui
ligandus sit, quive solvendus."
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 299
are innocent or guilty, but by virtue of their office, when
they hear the varieties of sins, they know who should be
bound, or who should be loosed." I have translated
these passages as literally as possible. The latter sentence,
especially, might be better arranged, but the meaning of
Jerome is sufficiently plain.
We have not yet, however, closed this important wit-
ness's testimony, but shall ask your attention to some
farther extracts bearing on the point in question.
In his commentary on St. Paul's epistle to Titus, he
saith : ^ " It belongs to the apostolic dignity to lay the
foundation 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 for the same
office, and that the distinction was introduced for the pur-
pose of preventing schism, he uses the following language :
* " Peter, who received his name from the firmness of
his faith, in his epistle, saith: The preshyters who are
among you^ I who am your fellow presbyter^ and a witness
of the sufferings of Christy and a companion of the glory
which is to he revealed hereafter^ beseech you^ feed the flock
of the Lord among you^ not as if hy constraint^ hut wil-
» Hieron. Com. in Epist. ad Titum, cap. 1.
" Hujm rei, ^c.'\ Apostolicse dignitatis est Ecclesise jacere funda-
mentum, quod nemo ponere, nisi Architectus. Fundamentum autem non
est aliud prseter Christum Jesum. Qui inferiores artifices sunt, hi pos-
sunt aedes super fundamenta construere."
2 lb. " Et Petrus qui ex fidei firmitate nomen accepit, in Epistola sua
loquitur dicens : Presbyteros ergo in wbis ohsecro compresbyter, et testis
Christi passionum, qui et ejus gloricB quw in futuro revelanda est socius sum,
pctscite eum qui in mbis gregem Domini, non quasi cum necessitate, sed wlun-
tarie. Haec propterea, ut ostenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse pres-
byteros quos et Episcopos, paulatim vero ut dissensionum plantaria evel-
lerentur, ad unum omnem sollicitudinem esse delatam. Sicut ergo pres-
o 6
300 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
Here we show," continues Jerome, " that with
the ancients, presbyters and bishops were the same ; but
by degrees, in order that the plants of dissension might
be rooted up, the care of government was committed to
one. Therefore, 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 her 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 the episcopacy deserves to be
placed on far higher ground than the mere custom of the
Church. But the passage is important as exhibiting the
construction which ought to be affixed to other parts of
his w^orks. And you will perceive at once, that an author
who thus argued for the original equality of bishops and
presbyters, 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 ^'''' not only over his
own presbyters, but over all the bishops, priests, deacons,
and laity, throughout the whole Christian world.
A few quotations of another character will show Je-
rome's regard for Rome in a light but poorly adapted to
sustain your doctrine. Thus, in his preface to the trea-
byteri sciunt se ex Ecclesise consuetudine ei qui sibi prsepositus fuerit
esse subjectos, ita Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam dispo-
sitionis dominicse veritate, presbyteris esse majores, et in commune debere
Ecclesiam regere, imitantes Moysen, qui cum haberet in potestate solus
prseesse populo Israel, septuaginta elegit cum quibus populum judi-
caret."
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 301
tise on the Holy Spirit, addressed to his friend Paulinian,
he uses the following expressions : ^ " When I 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 somewhat concerning the Holy Spirit ; and the
work being begun, I designed to dedicate it to the pontiff
of that city.''
Strange language this, brethren, from the most Messed
of the fathers. But it is not the only instance, for I
shall show you another more positive and sober declara-
tion of the same kind. In his epistle to Marcella, where
he argues in favour of a solitary life, and especially
recommends her to leave Rome, and take up her resi-
dence at Bethlehem, the birth-place of the Saviour ; he
saith : ^ " This is a far holier place, as I think, than the
Tarpeian rock, which the frequent stroke of the thunder-
bolt proves to have displeased the Lord. Read the
Apocalypse of John, and behold what he declares of the
scarlet woman, on whose forehead were written blasphe-
mies ; of the seven hills, of many waters, and of going
out from Babylon. Go out from her^ my people^ s,aith the
Lord^ that ye he not partakers of her sins, and that you
receive not of her plagues. Fly ye from the midst of
Bahylon, and save every one of you his own soul. She
* S. Hieron. ad Paulinianum in Lib. Didymi de Spir. Sane, praefatio.
" Cum in Babylone versarer, et purpuratse meretricis essem colonus,
et jure Quiritum viverem, volui garrire aliquid de Spiritu Sancto, et
coeptum opusculum, ejusdem urbis Pontifici dedicare."
2 S. Hieron. ad Marcellam, Op. om. torn. i. p. 82.
" Et hie [nempe Bethlehem] puto locus sanctior est Ta/rpeia rupe, quae
de coelo ssepius fulminata ostendit, quod Domino displiceret. Lege
Apocalypsim Joannis, et quid de muliere purpurata, et scrip ta in ejus
fronte blasphemia, septem montibus, aquis multis, et Babylonis cantetur
exitu, contuere. Exite, inquit Dominus, de ilia populus mens, et ne parti-
cipes sitis delictorum ejus, et de plagis ejus non accipiatis. Fugite de medio
Babylonis, et salvate unusquisque animam suam. CecidU enim, cecidit Baby-
lon magnay et facta est kabitatio Dcemonum, et custodia Spiritus immundi.
302 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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 of the apostles and martyrs, there is a
true confession 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 calumniate, to hear or to speak,
with the necessity of seeing such a crowd of people,
however unwillingly, these things are quite foreign to
the quiet and design of monks. For either we must see
those who come to visit us, and thereby lose the 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 the
language 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 was trodden down^'' But if he had
Est quidem ibi sancta Ecclesia, sunt trophsea Apostolorum et martyrum,
est Christi vera confessio, est ab Apostolo prsedicata fides, et gentilitate
calcata, in sublime se quotidie erigens vocabulum Christianura : sed ipsa
ambitio, potentia, magnitude urbis, videri et videre, salutari et salutare,
laudare et detraliere, vel audire vel proloqui, et tantam frequentiara
hominum saltern invitum videre, a proposito monachorum et quiete aliena
sunt. Aut enim videmus venientes ad nos, et silentium perdimus, aut
non videmus, et superbise arguimur. Interdumque ut visitantibus red-
damus vicem, ad superbas fores pergimus, et inter linguas rodentium
ministrorvun postes ingredimur auratos."
6
XXVII.] OF JEROME. SOS^
believed that the vicar of Christ, the pastor and ruler of
the whole Christian world, had 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 venera-
tion? Or could you imagine an orthodox presbyter of
your Church, distinguished as Jerome was, for piety
and learning, delivering 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.
^ " As to your questions concerning the sabbath,
whether it is lawful to fast on it, and concerning the
eucharist, whether it should be taken every day, as the
Churches of Rome and of Spain are said to practise,
Hippolytus, truly a very learned man, has written, and
several others, here and there, have also published
opinions, from various authors. But I think it best
briefly to admonish you, that the ecclesiastical traditions,
(especially those which do not meddle with faith) are
to be observed, as the elders have delivered them. Nor
should the custom of some be subverted by the contrary
mode of others."
^ " Nor do I say this because T think it proper to fast
1 Hieron. ad Lucinium, ib. p. 126. A. " De sabbaco quod quseris, utrum
jejunandum sit, et de eucharist ia, an accipienda quotidie, quod Romanse
Ecclesise et Hispanise observare perhibentur, scripsit quidem et Hippo-
lytus vir disertissimus, et carptim diversi scriptores e variis autoribus
edidere. Sed ego illud te breviter admonendum puto, traditiones Eccle-
siasticas [praesertim quee fidei non officiant] ita observandas, ut a majo-
ribus traditse sunt. Nee aliorum consuetudinem aliorum contrario more
subverti."
* Ib. " Nee hoc dico quod dominicis jejunandum putem, et contextas
sexaginta diebus ferias auferam, sed unaquseque provincia abundet in
sensu suo, etprsecepta majorum leges Apostolicas arbitretur."
804 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
on the dominical days, or because I wish to take away the
holydays of the sixty successive days, but let each province
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
plainly ; and fully accord with the general strain of our
author's testimony.
Now then, let us turn, if you please, to your favourite,
the epistle of Jerome to Damasus, and see whether it
conflicts with the various quotations which I have set
before you. It commences with a reference to the dis-
tracted state of the eastern Church, in consequence of the
prevalence of Arianism, so that it was difficult to know
where to find the true faith amongst them. From the
east, therefore, Jerome turns to the west, to that Rome
in which he had become a presbyter some years before,
and whose bishop he was desirous to propitiate, in order
to secure a kind and favourable reception. He introduces
a comparison between the Churches 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, " Let envy depart: 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 united in com-
munion to your blessedness, that is, to the chair of Peter,
On that rock I Jcnow that the Church is huilt ; whoever eats
the lamb out of that house is 'profane. If any one was not
in the ark of Noah he must perish in the flood." — " Who-
ever does not gather with thee, scatters : that is, whoever is
not of Christ is of antichrist. For now — O 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.
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 305
The whole question, here, turns upon the sense of the
words I have itahcised. 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. ^ " Not upon Rome," was the
Church built, " as I think," saith this celebrated com-
mentator. " For it might happen 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 : ^ " Here, truly, Jerome seems to
think, that all the Churches should be subject to the
Roman see, or at least, not to be separated from that
Church, which particularly glories in the apostle who held
the primacy among the rest ; and which is therefore
orthodox, as standing in the first dignity of the orthodox
^ Hieron. Op. torn. ii. 91. Epist. Hieron. ad Damasum Scholia. "Super
illam petram.] Non super Romam, ut arbitror. Nam fieri potest, ut Roma
quoque degeneret ', sed super eam fidem, quam Petrus professus est,
et quam haetenus Romana servavit Ecclesia, qua non alia minus laboravit
hseresibus."
2 Ibid. "Extra hanc domum.'\ Hie Hieronymus omnino videtur sentire,
oranes ecclesias debere subesse Romanse sedi, aut certe ab hac non
alienas, quae peculiariter hoc apostolo gloriatur, qui inter apostolos pri-
mas tenuit : et sic est oithodoxa, ut sit orthodoxarum prima dignitate,
AUusit autem ad domum, in qua Christus cum duodecim apostolis come-
dit agnum paschalem. Et quod legitur Exodi duodecimo de esu phasse :
In una domo comedetur, nee efferetis de camibus ejus foras."
306 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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
communion to which Jerome alluded throughout this
epistle was a communion in the orthodox faith, as opposed
to the heresy of Arius. He had left Rome, in disgust ;
and had repaired to the eastern Church, in order to enjoy
the peace and retirement of monastic life. But the
eastern Church becomes torn by heresy, his peace is des-
troyed, his faith is impeached, and he desires to return
to his former habitation. Addressing 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 heretical
Arians, saith he, our faith is not the same. But I am in
communion with thee, for thou boldest the faith of Peter,
together with his chair. On that faith — ^that rock — I
know that the Church is built, out of which Church who-
ever eateth 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 : since without this
faith, he cannot be of Christ, and therefore must needs
be of Antichrist.
To show still more clearly, that this is the true ex-
position of Jerome*'s meaning, let me remind you of the
expressions with which he so carefully guards his inde-
pendence. " Let envy depart,"'* Isaith he : " Let the ambi-
tion of the Roman chief be banished. I speak with the
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 307
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 in-
tended to acknowledge pope Damasus as the " mcar of
Christ ^^"^ holding the place, '^ not of a mere man^ hut of the
true God upon the earthy'''' according to your canon law ?
Had such been his meaning, would he not have said so ?
Since his very object was to ingratiate himself with the
pope, and obtain an honourable recal from his self-im-
posed exile, would not every motive induce him to employ
the strongest language of devotion to the Roma:n chief,
which his real sentiments could possibly allow ?
But this is not the greatest difficulty which your con-
struction of the epistle has to overcome. According to
your hypothesis, the Church of Rome was appointed, by
divine 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 of God, of
which system, 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 ? Why does he accuse the
eastern Church of persisting in their error, after the
council of Nice had pronounced 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 con-
sider, that your construction of this single epistle requires
us to set Jerome against himself, and to adopt a doubtful
comment upon one passage, in the very face of the re-
808 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
mainder of his testimony. For have we not heard our
witness expressly 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 Eugubium, or Constantinople, or
Rhegium, or Alexandria, or Tanis i 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 high-priest over Aaron
— the very doctrine, in substance, which Cyprian had
delivered more than two centuries before.
Again: have we not heard Jerome expounding the
Scriptures in manifest contradiction to your doctrine ;
asserting positively 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 I Have we not even heard him re-
ducing the very power of the keys to so moderate a mea-
sure, 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
bishops 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 presby-
ters, 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 him-
self, for the bishop of Rome ?
Again : have we not heard your favourite Jerome ap-
plying 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
XXVII.] OF JEROME. 309
the Apocalypse : " Go out from her, my people, saith the
Lord, that ye be not partaker of her sins V
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,
" let each province be satisfied with its own way ?"
I doubt not, brethren, that I may err, as all men are
liable to do, in my estimate of the force of evidence on
the minds of others. But I confess myself perfectly un-
able to conceive, how the testimony of this important
witness, taken as a whole, can be brought into accordance
with your system. His vast learning, his zeal for celi-
bacy, his devotion to monachism, and his letter to pope
Damasus, have combined to place him in the high rank
which he has obtained upon your calendar. And I am
willing to add that his candour, 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 per-
suaded, that if the Church of Rome would consent to a
thorough adoption of the sentiments of Jerome, there
would be very little material for serious controversy
remaining \
^ Having promised, when T 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 Trspl apx***^i "^i loquitur [sc. Origenes] : Si-
cut enim incongruum est dicere, quod possit Filius videre Patrem : ita
inconveniens est opinari, quod Spiritus Sanctus possit videre Filium.
Secundum, quod in hoc corpore quasi in carcere sunt animae religatse :
et antequam homo fieret in paradiso, inter rationabiles creaturas in
coelestibus commoratee sunt. Unde postea in consolationem suam an-
ima loquitur in Psalmis ; Priusquam humiliarer, ego deliqui. Et :
Revertere anima mea in requiem tuam. Et : Educ de carcere animam
meam ; et csetera his similia. Tertium, quod dicat, et diabolum et dse-
mones acturos poenitentiam aliquando, et cum Sanctis ultimo tempore
310 TESTIMONY OF JEROME. [cHAP. XXVII.
regnaturos. Quartum, quod tunicas pelliceas humana corpora inter-
pretetur, quibus post offensam et ejectionem de paradiso Adam et Eva
induti sunt, haud dubium, quin ante in paradiso sine carne, nervis, et
ossibus fuerint. Quintum, quod carnis resurrectionem membrorumque
compagem, et sexum, quo viri dividimur a foeminis, apertissime neget :
tam in explanatione primi psalmi, quara in aliis multis tractatibus.
Sextum, quod sic paradisum allegorizet, ut historise auferat veri-
tatem, pro arboribus Angelos, pro fluminibus virtutes coelestes intelli-
gens, totamque paradisi continentiam tropologica interpretatione sub-
vertat. Septimum, quod aquas, quae super coelos in Scripturis esse
dicuntur, sanctas supernasque virtutes : quae supra terram et infra
terram, contrarias et dsemoniacas esse arbitrentur. Octavum, quod
extremum objicit, imaginem et similitudinera Dei, ad quam homo con-
ditus fuerat, dicit ab eo perditam, et in homine post paradisum non
fuisse." Hieron. ad Pammachium adversua errores Joan. Hierosolym.
Op. om. torn. ii. 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, which is more
satisfactory 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 which I have adduced
from Origen stands fully accredited, by the very language of your canon
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 testi-
mony, 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 his " Retractations," where his account of the
matter is as follows :
' " I wrote a book against the epistle of Donatus,"
saith he, " while I was a presbyter, in which I said, in a
1 S. Augustini Op. om. Editio Benedict, torn. i. p. 23. Retract, lib. i.
c. xxL § i. " Librum contra epistolam Donati eodem presby-
terii mei tempore scripsi, .... in quo dixi in quodam loco de apostolo
Petro, quod in illo tamquam in petra fundata sit ecclesia .... Sed scio
me postea ssepissime sic exposuisse quod a Domino dictum est, Tu es
Petrm, et super hanc petram cedijicabo Ecclesiam meam : ut super hunc
intelligeretur quem confessus est Petrus dicens, Tu es Christus flius Dei
vivi : ac sic Petrus ab hac petra appellatus personam Ecclesise figuraret.
312 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
certain place, concerning the apostle Peter, that the
Church was built on him, as on a rock .... But I know
that very frequently afterwards I expounded our Lord's
saykig : Thou art Peter ^ and upon this rock I will build
my Churchy 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 having confessed, as
the whole Church confesses him, was called Peter."
A few other extracts will assist in showing the opinion
of our witness more clearly. Thus in his treatise upon
Christian Doctrine, Augustin has these words, viz. ^ " 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 believe 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 transgressions, being settled in the bosom of
his Church, should be healed by that faith and reforma-
quse super hanc petram sedificatur, et accepit claves regni coelorum. Non
enim dictum est illi, Tu es petra : sed, Tu es Petrus. Petra autem erat
Cliristus, quem confessus Simon, sicut eum tota Ecclesia confitetur, dictus
est Petrus."
^ lb. torn. iii. p. 8. De Doctrina Christiana, lib. i. c. xvii. " Has igitur
claves dedit Ecclesiae suae, ut quae solveret in terra, soluta essent in coelo,
quae ligaret in terra, ligata essent in coelo : scilicet ut quisquis in Ecclesia
ejus dimitti sibi peccata non crederet, non ei dimitterentur ; quisquis
autem crederet, seque ab his correctus averteret, in ejusdem Ecclesiae
gremio constitutus, eadem fide atque correctione sanaretur. Quisquis
enim non credit dimitti sibi posse peccata, fit deterior desperando."
XXVIII.] OF AUGUSTIX. 313
tion. 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,
giving the power of the keys to each individual, as soon
as he becomes united with the Church of Christ, so that,
being once baptized, repentance and faith are sufficient for
every 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
Gospel of St. John, he enlarges upon the gift of the
keys to Peter, in the following words : viz. ^ " And since
those also who are walking in the Lord are not without
sins, which steal upon them unawares, through the infir-
mity 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 dehts^ even as we
also forgive our debtors. This thing, with a blessed hope,
the Church performs 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
1 lb. torn. iii. pars secunda, p. 599. c. In Johan. Evang. cap. 21. Tract.
124. § 5. " Et quia in ipso quoque ambulantes non sunt sine peccatisi
quae de hujus vitse infirmitate subrepunt, dedit eleemosynarum remedia
salutaria, quibus eorum adjuvaretur oratio, ubi eos dicere docuit, Dimitte
nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Hoo
agit ecclesia spe beata in hac vita serumnosa : cujus Ecclesise Petrus
apostolus, propter Apostolatus sui primatum, gerebat figurata generalitate
personam. Quod enim ad ipsum proprie pertinet, natura unus homo erat,
gratia unus Christianus, abundantiore gratia unus idemque primus apos-
tolus ; sed quando ei dictum est, Tihi daho dates regni coelorum, et quod-
cumque Ugareris super terram, erit ligatum et in coelis, et quodcwmque solveris
super terram, erit solutum et in coelis, universam significabat Ecclesiam,
quae in hoc sseculo diversis tentationibus velut imbribus, fluminibus,
P
314 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
he was a man, by grace he was a Christian, by more
abundant grace he was one and the first apostle : but
when it was said to him, / will give unto thee the Tceys of
the Jcingdom of heaven^ and whatsoever thou shalt hind on
earthy shall he hound also in heaven^ and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earthy shall he 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 Christian from
Christ. Moreover the Lord saith. Upon this rock I will
huild my Churchy because Peter had said. Thou art Christy
the Son of the living God. Upon this rock, therefore, which
thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the rock
was Christ ; upon which foundation Peter himself also
was built. For another foundation can no man lay, be-
sides 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 power of
binding and loosing sins."
Again, saith this eminent master in Israel, ^ " What
does this saying mean. Upon this rock I will huild my
tempestatibus quatitur, et non cadit, quoniam fundata est super petram,
unde Petrus nomen accepit. Non enim a Petro petra, sed Petrus a
petra ; sicut non Christus a Christiano, sed Christianus a Christo vocatur.
Ideo quippe ait Dominus, Super hanc petram sedificabo Ecclesiam meam,
quia dixerat Petrus : Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi. Super hanc ergo,
inquit, petram quam confessus es, sedificabo ecclesiam meam. Petra enim
erat Christus ; super quod fundamentum etiam ipse sedificatus est Petrus.
Fundamentum quippe aliud nemo potest ponere prseter id quod positum
est, quod est, Christus Jesus. Ecclesia ergo quse fundatur in Christo,
claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro, id est, potestatem ligandi
solvendique peccata."
^ lb. 651. B. *' Quid est, super hanc petram sedificabo Ecclesiam
meam ? Super hanc fidem, super id quod dictum est, Tu es Christus
Filius Dei vivi."
XXVIII.] OF AUGUSTIN. 315
Church ? Upon this faith, upon that which was spoken,
Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God^
And again : Augustin presents the same idea para-
phrastically, in the following lively manner : * " And I
say unto thee. Thou art Peter: because I am a rock
(petra), thou art Peter (Petrus) ; for the rock is not
from Peter, but Peter from the rock, as Christ is not
from Christian, but Christian from Christ. And upon
this rock I will huild my Church : not upon Peter, which
thou art ; but upon the rock which thou hast confessed :
but / will huild my Church ; I will build thee, who in
this answer bearest the figure of the Church."
It is surely impossible, brethren, after reading these
multiphed proofs, to avoid understanding the settled and
matured interpretations which this celebrated teacher
attached to your favourite text. And yet it is worth re-
marking, 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 apostle John, in a beautiful passage, which
I cannot deny myself the pleasure of placing before you.
^ " Nevertheless," saith our witness, " let no one sepa-
rate these distinguished apostles. In that which Peter
signified, they were together : and in that which John
1 lb. torn. V. p. 764. E. " Et ego dico tiMj Tu es Petrus : quia ego petra,
tu Petrus ; neque enim a Petro petra, sed a petra Petrus : quia non a
Christiano Christus, sed a Christo Chris tianus. Et super hanc petram cedifi-
caho Ecdesiam meam : non super Petrum, quod tu es ; sed supra petram,
quam confessus es. JEdificabo autem Ecdesiam meam ; sedificabo te, qui
in hac responsione figuram gestas Ecclesise."
2 lb. 600. F. " Nemo tamen istos insignes apostolos separet. Et in eo
quod significabat Petrus, ambo erant : et in eo quod significabat Johannes,
ambo futuri erant .... Nee ipsi soli, sed universa hoc facit sancta
Ecclesia sponsa Christi, ab istis tentationibus eruenda, in ilia felicitate
servanda. Quas duas vitas Petrus et Johannes figuraverunt, singuli sin-
gulas Omnibus igitur Sanctis ad Christi corpus inseparabiliter
pertinentibus, propter hujus vitae procellosissimse gubernaculum, ad
Uganda et solvenda peccata claves regni coelorum primus apostolorum
p2
316 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
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 tempta-
tions, in being saved for this felicity. Which two modes
of life Peter and John represented, severally. ... On be-
half OF ALL THE Saints, therefore, who belong inse-
parably 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 behalf of all
the same saints, in order to the obtaining that most
serene haven of the hidden life, John the evangeUst
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
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 be-
held 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 show how he un-
derstood your other favourite passage in the Gospel of
Petrus accepit : eisdemque omnibus Sanctis propter vitse illius secretissi-
mse quietissimum sinum, super pectus Christi Johannes Evangelista dis-
cubuit. Q,uoniam nee iste solus, sed universa Ecclesia ligat solvitque
peccata : nee ille in principio Verbum, Deum apud Deum, et cetera de
Christi divinitate, et de totius divinitatis Trinitate atque unitate sublimia,
quae in illo regno facie ad faciem contemplanda, nunc autem donee veniat
Dominus, in speculo atque in senigmate contuenda sunt, quae prsedicando
ructaret, de fonte Dominici pectoris solus bibit : sed ipse Dominus ipsum
Evangelium pro sua cuj usque capacitate omnibus suis bibendum toto
terrarum orbe difFusit."
XXVIII.] ^ OF AUGUSTIN. 317
St. John, on which you rest your assertion, that in com-
manding Peter to feed his sheep, our Lord committed to
him and his successors, in the see of Rome, the pastoral
care and government of the whole catholic Church under
heaven.
In his discourse upon the day held in honour of the
martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, we read as follows :
viz. ^ " 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 his blood for the sheep that were saved.
But come, brethren,^' 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 only, 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
* S. Augustin. Sermo in Natali Apostolorum Petri et Pauli.
lb. torn. V. p. 836. E. " Pasce oves meas, commendo tibi oves meas. Quas
oves ? Quas emi sanguine meo. Mortuus sum pro eis. Amas me ?
Morere pro eis. Et quidem servus ille hominis homo pecuniam redderet
pro consumptis ovibus : Petrus sanguinem reddidit pro ovibus conser-
vatis. § 5. Eia, Fratres, aliquid pro tempore volo dicere. Quod Petro
commendatum est, quod Petro mandatum est, non Petrus solus, sed etiam
alii Apostoli audierunt, tenuerunt, servaverunt, maximeque ipse eonsors
sanguinis et diei apostolus Paulus. Audierunt ista, et adnosaudiendatrans-
miserunt. Pascimus vos, pascimur vobiscum. Det nobis Deus vires sic
amandi vos, ut possimus etiam mori pro vobis, aut effectu, aut affectu."
p3
318 TESTIMONY [cHAP^
by all. Not one word, brethren, is to be found of your
exclusive comment on these portions of Scripture in the
matured system of this celebrated teacher : but his tes-
timony, both positive and negative, is directly hostile
to your claims.
Let me next beg your attention to Augustin's style of
expression, 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 >vith him. Referring to the
Donatists, this document proceeds as follows : ^ " They
have made their confession against the catholic Church,
which is diffused throughout the whole world, and have
no more that they can say ; because they are borne down
by the divine testinionies 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 other nations."
Again, saith Augustin, elsewhere, ^ " The Church is
the house of God. But this house is not built in one
corner of the earth, but through all the earth."
And again : ' " The body of Christ," saith he, " is
^ Condlii Tertensis ad Donat. epistola. Augustin. Op. torn. ii. p. 347.
" Confess! sunt enim contra ecclesiam Catholicam, quae toto terrarum orbe
diffunditur, nihil se habere quod dicerent : quia divinis sanctarum scrip-
turarum testimoniis oppressi sunt, quibus Eeclesia designatur incipiens ab
Jerusalem crevisse per loca in quibus apostoli prsedicaverunt, et nomina
eorundem locorum in suis epistolis et actis conscripserunt, et inde diffundi
per ceteras gentes."
2 Aug. Op. torn. ii. p. 350. " Ecclesiam eamdem esse domum Dei.
Sed hsec domus non orbis terrae uno angulo sedificatur, sed per omnem
terrara."
3 Ibid. p. 330. D. ** Corpus autem Christi, eeclesia. Firmamenta
autem ecclesise qui, nisi Apostoli, qui etiam columnse alibi nuncu-
pantur ?"
XXVIII. J OF AUGUSTIN. 319
the Church. But who are the supporters of the Church,
unless it be the apostles, who are also called pillars f
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
mcar 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 occasion to speak
of Rome.
Thus he saith, in one place, ^ " For the Lord pro-
mised with an oath, to the seed of Abraham, not the
Romans, but all nations : through which promise it has
already happened, that some nations who are not under
the Roman authority, 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
supposed " motJier 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 eccle-
siastical order, saith : ^ " 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, pursuing the subject, he relates the rule which
V Ibid. torn. ii. 577. B. " Non enim Romanos, sed onmes gentes Do-
minus semini Abrahse, media quoque juratione promisit : ex qua pro-
missione jam factum est, ut nonnullge gentes, quae non tenentur ditlone
Romana, reciperent Evangelium, et adjungerentur Ecclesise, quae fructi-
ficat et crescit in universo mundo."
2 Ibid. tom. ii. p. 59. F. " Et de die quidem sabbati facilior causa
est, quia et Romana jejunat Ecclesia, et aliee nonnuUse etiamsi paucse
sive illi proximse sive longinquse."
p 4
320 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
Ambrose delivered to him at Milan, soon after he was
baptized, ^ " 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 former master, Augustin con-
cludes by this general rule. ^ " 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."
What prelate, brethren, holding your 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 every bishop, either to follow her ritual or to
depart from it, precisely as he pleased ?
One quotation more, however, must close the testi-
mony of Augustin ; for the limits assigned to this portion
of my humble labours have been passed already, and I am
compelled, 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
* Ibid. torn. ii. p. 62. A. "Quando hie sum, non jejuno sabbato ;
quando Romse sum, jejuno sabbato : et ad quamcumque ecclesiam vene-
ritis, inquit, ejus morem servate, si pati scandalum non vultis aut
facere."
2 Ibid. " Quapropter si consilio meo libenter adquieseis : Episcopo tuo
in hac re noli resistere, et quod facit ipse sine uUo scrupulo vel discepta-
tione sectare."
XXVIII.] OF AUGUSTIN. 321
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 rehgion throughout the civiHzed
world — you refer to the injunctions of the Saviour that
his followers should be one, and you demonstrate the
necessity of all the peculiar rights of the pope, from the
apparent impossibility of governing the Church in unity
and peace, without a vicar of Christy and a diocese which
shall be acknowledged 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
in its full extent ; for the numerous and important Church
of Greece — ^the descendants of the eastern, as yours is of
the western branch — the Syrian Churches, besides some
other sects whom you call heretics — were known and
acknowledged exceptions to the universality of your domi-
nion, even then. But admitting, for the sake of argu-
ment, 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 because you were united, therefore
your system must be all divine ? Most willingly we grant
that religious truth, when fully understood, must produce
ecclesiastical union : but it would be miserable logic
which should undertake to prove, that ecclesiastical
union can onlp be produced by religious truth. Union,
in itself, is neither good nor evil. To give it character,
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
p 5
322 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
be deprecated, as union in error. I must needs say,
therefore, brethren, that this favourite 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 ques-
tion 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 after their departure ; and at the close of the
fourth century, Augustin gives us a list of them amount-
ing 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 original ; ^ and to me it seems,
of itself, an incontestable 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 universally to revere the judgment of
this oracle of God, could not have been induced to
1 S. Augustin. Op. torn. viii. p. 3. 1. Simoniani. 2. Menandriani. 3. Sa-
turniniani. 4. Basilidiani. 5. Nicolaitani. 6. Gnostici. T. Carpocratiani.
8. Cerinthiani. 9. Nazarsei. 10. Ebionsei. 11. Valentiniani. 12. Secun-
diani. 13. Ptolemsei. 14. Marcitae. 15. Colorbasii. 16. Heracleonitse.
17. Ophitse. 18. Caiani. 19. Sethiani. 20. Archontici. 21. Cerdoniani.
22. Marcionitse. 23. Appellitse. 24. Severiani. 25. Tatiani, vel Encra-
titse. 26. Cataphryges. 27. Pepuziani, alias Quintilliani. 28. Artoty-
ritse. 29. Tessarescse-decatitae. 30. Alogii. 31. Adamiani. 32. Elcesaei,
et Sampssei. 33. Theodotiani. 34. Melchisedeciani. 35. Bardesanistse.
36. Noetiani. 37. Valesii. 38. Cathari, sive Novatiani. 39. Angelici.
40. Apostolici. 41. Sabelliani, sive Patripassiani. 42. Origeniani. 43.
Alii Origeniani. 44. Pauliani. 45. Photiniani. 46. Manichsei. 47. Hie-
racitse. 48. Meletiani. 49. Ariani. 50. Vadiani, sive Anthropomorphitse.
51. Semiariani. 52. Macedoniani. 53. Aeriani. 54. Aetiani, qui et Eu-
1
XXVIII.] - OF AUGUSTIN. 323
form a sect around a justly condemned 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 unity, you say :
the rejection of his authority is the great source of divi-
sion. But in the time of Augustin there was more
division than there is now ; and therefore, according to
your own reasoning, there could not then have been a
general acknowledgment of the pope's authority. One
vast difference however, is to be observed between the
early and the 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 juris-
diction 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 UPBRAIDING THEIR, ADHE-
RENTS WITH A DEPARTURE FROM THE POPE, OR 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 contro-
versy.
nomiani. 55. ApoUinaristse. 56. Antidicomaritae, 57. Massaliani, sive
Eudritae. 58. Metangismonitse. 59. Seleuciani, vel Hermiani. 60. Pro-
clianitse. 61. Patriciani. 62. Ascitse. 63. Passalorynchitse. 64. Aquarii.
65. Coluthiani. 66. Floriniani. 67. De mundi statu dissentientes. 68.
Nudis pedibus ambulantes. 69. Donatistse, sive Donatiani. 70. Priscil-
lianistse. 71. Cum hominibus non manducantes. 72. Rhetoriani. 73.
Christi divinitatem passibilem dicentes. 74. Triformem Deum putantes.
75. Aquam Deo cosetemam dicentes. 76. Imaginem Dei non esse ani-
mam dicentes. 77. Innumerabiles mundos opinantes. 78. Animas con-
verti in dsemones et in qusecumque animalia existimantes. 79. Libera-
tionem omnium apud inferos factam Christi descensione credentes. 80.
Christi de Patre nativitati initium temporis dantes. 81. Luciferiani. 82.
Jovinianistse. 83. Arabici. 84. Helvidiani. 85. Paterniani, sive Venus-
tiani. 86. TertuUianistse. 87- Abeloitse. 88. Pelagiani, qui et Coeles-
p6
CHAPTER XXIX.
Brethren in Christ,
The evidence of the eloquent Ohrysostom, 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 : ^ " For he," namely Christ, " conversing with
the prince of the apostles, saith, Peter ^ lovest thou me f
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 in-
formed (for how should he seek information to whom the
hearts of all men are open) but in order that he might
^ St. Jo. Chrysost. de Sacerdotio, lib. 2. Op. om. Latine, torn. v. p. 418.
" Hie enim cum apostolorum prineipe verba faciens : Petre, amas me ?
inquit, atque illo id confitente, adjungit : Si amas me, pasce oves meas.
Interrogat discipulum magister, num ab eo ametur : non quo id ipse
edoceatur : (qui enim id edoceri studeat is, cui uni mortalium omnium
corda pervia sunt,) verum ut nos doceat, quantae sibi curse sit gregishujus
praefectura Propterea enim quum respondisset discipulus :
Tu scis,Domine,quod amem te,testemque citasset amoris hujus ipsummet
qui amaretur, baud se hie continuit servator Jesus, sed et amoris quoque
indicium adjunxit. Neque enim tum volebat testatum esse, quantum a
Petro amaretur : siquidem id multis nobis argumentis constabat : verum
hoc ille tum agebat, ut et Petrum et cseteros nos edoceret, quanta benevo-
lentia ac caritate ergo suam ipse ecclesiam afficeretur : ut hac ratione et
nos quoque ejusdem ecclesise studium curamque toto animo susciperemus.
CHAP. XXIX.] TESTIMONY OF CHRYSOSTOM. S25
teach us of what importance he esteemed the oversight
of this flock."
"On which account," 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 index of love. Nor did he desire in this merely to
show 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 bene-
volence he was affected towards his Church : so that we
also might he influenced hy this motive^ to take upon us the
care and charge of the same Churchy with our whole heart.
.... For why did he shed his blood I 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 oi principality ; but it is observable that
his interpretation of the whole passage is altogether dif-
ferent 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 other fathers, viz. that what was
addressed to Peter was intended for all. You also per-
ceive, 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 bre-
thren, the observation made on the Latin word trans-
lated prince, in the chapter upon the evidence of Hilary.
To which I have only to add, that there is nothing in it, as
Quanam item de causa idem ille sanguinem effudit suum ? certe
ut pecudes eas acquireret, quarum curam tum Petro, turn Petri succes-
soribus committebat."
326 TESTIMONY [cHAP.
used by Chrysostom, which necessarily implies authority
over the other apostles.
Again, I find Chrysostom referring to yom* other proof-
text in the following manner. * " To those who cultivate
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 whatsoever 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 I
speak, concerns also the soul, and extends even to the
heavens." .... And again, ^ " 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
considered, not as being conferred on Peter and his suc-
cessors in the see of Rome, according to your doctrine,
but as granted to the apostolic priesthood collectively ;
according to the enlarged construction so frequently ex-
1 Lib. iii. p. 429. B. " Etenim qui terrain incolunt atque in ea ver-
santur, iis commissum est ut ea qu£e in coelis sunt, dispensent ; iis datum
est ut potestatem habeant, quam Deus optimus neque angelis neque arch-
angelis datam esse voluit : neque enim ad illos dictum est, Qusecumque
alligaveris in terra, erunt alligata et in coelo ; et qusecumque solveris
in terra, erunt soluta et in coelo. Habent quidem et terrestres prin-
cipes vinculi potestatem, verum corporum solum. Id autem quod dico
sacerdotum vinculum, ipsam etiam animam contingit, atque ad coelos
usque pervadit "
2 " Quorumcunque, ait, peccata retinueritis, retenta sunt. Quae-
nam, obsecro, potestas hac una major esse queat ? Pater omnifariam Filio
potestatem dedit : caeterum video ipsam eandem omnifariam potestatem
a Deo Filio illis traditam."
XXIX.J OF CHRYSOSTOM. • S27
hibited to us by all the other witnesses, and in the pre-
vious passage, by Chrysostom himself.
Let me next show you, that the famous text concerning
the foundation of the Church, was interpreted by our
present witness precisely as it was by those who preceded
him. For in his comment on the 26th chapter of
Matthew, Chrysostom saith that Christ ^ " 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,
* " 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. ^ "There is no one who loved Christ more vehe-
mently than Paul," saith he, " and none who was a greater
famurite with God; nevertheless, after so many privi-
leges conferred on him by the Almighty, he fears and
trembles, on account of those who were the subjects of
this princi'palityr The object of this venerable father''s
argument is to show the awful responsibility of the epis-
copal ofl&ce, and therefore he recurs to St. Paul, as to
1 Ibid. In cap. xxvi. Math. Homil. 83. comment, torn. i. p. 866.
" Nam qui super confessionem ejus Ecclesiam ita fundavit atque munivit,
ut nullum periculum, neque mors ipsa posset eam superare."
2 Ibid. Homil. 55. in cap. xxvi. Math. p. 591. ^^ Et ego dico tibi, Quia
Ui es Petrus, et super hanc petram cedificaho Ecclesiam tneam : id est, super
jldem confessionis." The original Greek is ry TriVrtt ttjq ofioXoyiag, upon
the faith of his confession. Which your translator has expressed with
great carelessness, to say the least, in these words : fidem atque confes-
sionem.
3 Ibid. p. 430. D. *' Christum nemo est qui Paulo vehementius dilex-
erit, nemo qui apud Deum gratiosior quam Paulus fuerit : tamen post
tot privilegia a Deo accepta veretur adhuc ac tremuit, principatus istius
subditorumque suorum gratia."
328 TESTIMONY OF CHRYSOSTOM. [cHAP. XXIX.
him who was not a whit behind the very chief of the
apostles, caUing his office a principahty. Take these few
specimens, brethren, as a fair sample of the testimony of
Ohrysostom, and you will have no difficulty in reckoning
him among the rest, as plainly opposed to that interpre-
tation of Scripture by which you sustain your exclusive
claims.
CHAPTER XXX.
Brethren in Christ,
As your canon law gives a special place to the
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. ^ " It
was not,'' saith this witness, " because Christ was igno-
rant of the various opinions which men had formed con-
cerning him that he demanded of his disciples. Whom do
men say that I am f for he penetrates the very heart.
But it was in order that he might deliver to all men, by
this means, a sure confession^ which Peter^ inspired hy
Him^ laid dovm as a hasis and foundation^ whereupon the
Lord built his Church.''''
You perceive in this passage, brethren, a distinct inter-
pretation of your favourite 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.
1 S. Isidori Pelusiotse de interpret, divin. Scrip. Epistol. lib. i. ep.
235. " Non ea de causa Christus, qui pectus ipsum penetrat, ex disci-
pulis suis percontabatur : Quem me dicunt homines esse ? quod variam
hominum de se opinionem ignoraret, sed ut hac ratione certam omnibus
confessionem traderet, quam ab eo inspiratus Petrus, tamquam basim ac
fundamentum jecit, super quod Dominus Ecclesiam suam extruxit."
830 TESTIMONY OF [CHAP.
' " The threefold interrogation of the Lord addressed
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, hy this triple
assent^ expelled the triple denial.''''
The same explanation occurs amongst the fathers so
frequently, that there is hardly any text on which their
comments 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.
^ " The sons of the servants of God," saith he, " are
the sons of the just, the sons of the patriarchs, the pro-
phets, 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,
' " The whole Church with her head, which is Christ,
is one man, whose proper office is, through all time, to
bless God, and to encourage herself in his praise, whom
she loves 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
^ lb. lib. i. Ep. 103. " Triplex Domini ad Petrum de charitate interro-
gatio/a Domini ignoratione proficisci minime existimanda est ; (ne ita
quidam decipiantur) verum triplicem negationem triplici assensione bonus
medicus depulit."
2 S. Prosperi Aqnitan. Expos, in Psal. ci. Ed. Paris. 1711. p. 378.
" Filii servorum Dei, sunt filii justorum, filii patriarcharum, prophetarum,
Apostolorum et martyrum : filii postremo totius Ecclesise quae corpus est
Christi, et quae mater est omnium patrum omniumque filiorum."
' lb. in Psal. cii. " Tota Ecclesia cum suo capite, quod est Christus,
unus est homo, cujus proprium officium est in omne tempore benedicere
Dominum, seque in laudem ejus, quem ex tota virtute sua diligit, cohor-
tari. Interiora autem ejus sunt ratio intelligentise, spes fidei, humilitas
timoris, fortitudo caritatis : et si quse sunt alise afFectiones, quibus mens
in admirationem sui auctoris erigitur."
XXX.] VINCENT OF LIRENS. 331
be any other affections, 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 of Eome, I
find nothing in the works of Prosper ; so that his testi-
mony yields no support to your system.
But the name of Vincent of Lirens stands high in
your esteem, brethren, on account of his admirable book
in favour of apostolical tradition. Let me next quote
from this shrewd and powerful writer, a part of his cele-
brated argument, and we shall then occupy a Httle space
in marking its application.
^ " 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 sound faith, he ought to fortify his faith, by
the help of God, in a twofold manner ; first, by the au-
thority of the divine law, and next, by the tradition of
the catholic Church. But here, perhaps, some one may
say : Since the canon 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 1 I answer : Because all men
do not receive the sacred Scripture 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
* 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 exsnrgentium hsereticorum fraudes
deprehendere laqueosque vitare, et in fide sana sanus atque integer per-
manere, duplici modo munire fidem suam, Domino adjuvante, deberet ;
primum scilicet, divinse legis auctoritate, turn deinde Ecclesise catholicae
traditione. Hie forsitan requirat aliquis : Cum sit perfectus scripturarum
canon, sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat, quid opus est ut ei eccle-
siasticse intelligentise jungatur auctoritas ? Quia videlicet scripturam
sacram pro ipsa sua altitudine non uno eodemque sensu universi accipiunt,
332 TESTIMONY OF [cHAP.
almost as many different opinions as there are men to
form them. Thus, Novatian expounded the Scriptures
in one way, Sabelhus in another, Donatus in another,
Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, had each his several inter-
pretations; Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, Jovinian,
Pelagius, Celestius, and finally, Nestorius, all construed
the same Scriptures in their several ways. And there-
fore it is altogether necessary, on account of the many
and various distortions of error, that the line of prophetic
and apostolical interpretation should be directed, accord-
ing to the rule of ecclesiastical and cathoHc construction.
And in the catholic Church herself^ likewise, care is above
all things to be taken, that we hold that which has been
believed everywhere^ always^ and hy all. For this is truly
and properly catholic, since the very force and reason of
the word declares, that it comprehends all things univer-
sally. 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 main-
sed ejusdem eloquia aliter atque aliter alius atque alius interpretatur ;
ut pene quot homines sunt, tot illinc sententise erui posse videantur.
Aliter namque illam Novatianus, aliter Sabellius, aliter Donatus exponit,
aliter Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius ; aliter Photinus, Apollinaris, Pris-
cillianus ; aliter Jovinianus, Pelagius, Ceelestius ; aliter postremo Nesto-
rius. Atque idcirco multum neeesse est, propter tantos tam varii erroris
affractus, ut prophetiese et apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum
ecclesiastici et Catholici sensus normam dirigatur. In ipsa item Catho-
lica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod
semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Hoc est etenim vere proprieque
catholicum. Quod ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat, quae omnia fere
universaliter comprehendit. Sed hoc ita demum fiet si sequamur univer-
salitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem. Sequemur autem universitatem
hoc modo, si hanc unam fidem veram esse fateamur quam tota per orbem
XXX.] VINCENT OF LIKENS. 333.
tain 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
present faith explains the Scriptures in direct opposition
to the interpretations which 1 have cited from the an-
cient authorities : 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
passage quoted from Vincent should impress the mind of
a discerning reader. For your canon law expressly as-
cribes 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 tribunal — this living oracle of judg-
ment — 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 univer-
sality, 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
terrarum confitetur Ecclesia ; antiquitatem vero ita, si ab his sensibus
nullatenus recedamus quos sanctos majores ac patres nostros celebrasse
manifestum est : consensionem quoque itidem, si in ipsa vetustate om-
nium vel certe pene omnium sacerdotum pariter et magistrorum defini-
tiones sententiasque sectemur."
334 TESTIMONY OF VINCENT OF LIKENS. [cHAP. XXX.
the only thing required to avoid heresy was to abide by
the decisions of the vicar of Christ : whom God had ap-
pointed, hke the Urim and Thummim of ancient Israel,
to resolve every doubt, and settle every controversy ?
Brethren, is it possible that you can avoid seeing the
indirect but invincible objection here furnished, to your
present claims? Or can it remain a question, with a
candid and a conscientious mind, that the rule of Vin-
cent, connected 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, " care
is above all things to be taken that we hold that
WHICH HAS BEEN BELIEVED EVERYWHERE, ALWAYS,
AND BY ALL. FoR THIS IS TRULY AND PROPERLY CA-
THOLIC." Judged by this standard, your doctrine may
be Roman now, but it could not have been Eoman at the
beginning. God grant that the time may not be far
distant, when that primitive Catholic faith which was
once Roman, may be Roman again.
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
Scriptures. Then we examined the apostolic canons, the
apostolic constitutions, and the epistle of Clement, the
bishop of Rome, which brought us to the close of the
first century. Irenseus and TertuUian gave us the evi-
dence of the second century. Clement of Alexandria,
Origen, Cyprian, Firmilian and Lactantius, carried us
onward to the close of the third century. And, multi-
plying as we advanced, Eusebius of Cesarea, the emperor
Constantino, the council of Nice, Athanasius, the emperor
Constantius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Hilary of Poictiers,
Basil of Cappadocia, Gregory Nazianzen, Ambrose,
Jerome, Augustin and Chrysostom, brought us through
the fourth century. Beyond this we progressed with
Isidore of Pelusium, Prosper of Aquitain, and Vincent
of Lu-ens, which leaves us about the middle of the fifth
century ; and at this point we have ceased from a task,
laborious to the writer, and, I fear, wearisome to the
reader; but entitled, notwithstanding, to serious con-
sideration from those who love the truth, and value the
venerable remains of Christian antiquity.
336 INTERPOLATIONS [cHAP.
And here, brethren, permit me to remind you, that I
have not questioned the fidehty with which the writings of
the fathers have been handed down to us, except in those
instances where your own authors have compelled me.
Nevertheless, I owe it to truth to state my conviction,
that the expurgations which your scholars have made of
these ancient writings have left them, still, far from
immaculate ; although the labours of your critics are
highly creditable to their learning and candour. I shall
not trouble you with a statement of my reasons for this
conviction : but shall sustain its correctness by quoting
the opinions of two among your most able men.
The translator of Athanasius saith, ^ " 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, endeavour to present
the same arguments concerning the Trinity, but with no
skill, genius, or erudition : indeed they take the most
mysterious subjects, and with a wonderful unskilfulness,
involve them more and more, until you would think
yourself to be not merely in a labyrinth, from which at
least the proper clue might extricate you, but rather in
a Grordian knot ; or else, there being no appearance of
1 In S. Athan. Op. Epistola Nuncupatoria. " Ut enim fertilissimis
agris multa zizania una cum optimis frugibus nascuntur, ita optimo
cuique autori plurimi falsi et nothi libri adscribuntur : nulli autera plures,
quam Athanasio. Illi porro, qui simite sunt Athanasii, eadem argumen-
ta de Trinitate tractare conantur, sed nulla cum mente, ingenio aut
eruditione : iidemque res implicatissimas mira infelicitate magis ae magis
implicant, ut non in labyrintho, ubi saltern filio exitus inveniri poterat,
sed in nodo Gordio te hserere putes : adeo illic nee caput nee cauda
apparet, arbitrerisque te in antique quasi chao volutari. In hos libros
adulterines quum incidisset Desiderius Erasmus, et nihil melioris vense
expeetaret, semel deposito onere fessus, nauseabundusque, exclamavit,
liXiQ dpvbg, nolens amplius glandes gustare."
XXXI.] OF THE FATHERS. 337
either head or tail, you might fancy yourself rolling about
in the primaeval chaos. When Desiderius Erasmus
happened upon these adulterated books, and expected
nothing of a better quality, disgusted and wearied 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 ^ " 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 interpolations, 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 benefit.""
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 your-
selves. 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, that if I have been able to place
before you such a body of evidence against your present
system, from books which your predecessors have thus
confessedly interpolated, to suit the doctrine of their
1 Ad S. Leonis Mag. op. prsefatio. " At SS. Patrum scripta, per qu»
velut per alterum alveum Veritas a Christo capite ad nos usque volventi-
bus seculis traducitur, nondum ab erratorum et interpolationum fsece
satis purgata sunt, nondum suse puritati plene reddita : tametsi jam a
centum quinquaginta et amplius annis hoc moliri coeperint baud medio-
cribus vigiliis viri impense docti, ut nobis sancti Patres, toti quasi rC'
nascerentur."
338 INTERPOLATIONS OF THE FATHERS. [CHAP. XXXI.
day, we should doubtless have made out a far stronger
case, if the testimony of those primitive 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 Oheist,
I CONCEIVE it proved by superabundant testimony, that
the primitive Church of Rome professed to hold no autho-
ritative supremacy over the other Churches, and that
she interpreted the language of Christ to Peter, in
precise accordance with the general voice of the fathers,
as conveying no official grant of supreme power or
domination. It was stated, however, as you probably
recollect, in connexion with our remarks upon the testi-
mony of Irenaeus, that a secular primacy 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 subse-
quent magnitude. I doubt not, indeed, that the bishops
of Rome conceived the idea of establishing this supre-
macy, 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 policy
of earthly wisdom could find no objection to the theory
of such a system. According to human judgment, it
promised a fair and useful result. But these good men
forgot that religion was not committed to the wisdom of
this world. They forgot that the Almighty had predicted
34.0 SECULAR SUPEEMACY. [cHAP.
ruin and not success, as the final issue of every attempt
to unite God and Mammon. They lost sight of the dis-
tinguishing glory of the Gospel, which chose the weak
things of the world to confound the things that were
mighty ; and 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 wonderful 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 subject to the usual fate
of earthly mutation. It would be as unkind as it is
useless to press the comparison between the literal Babel
and the mystic Babylon. I prefer leaving 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 reply, that the rank and influence of the Roman
see, having given it a great and increasing preponderance
in the councils of the Church, the canons of these coun-
cils by degrees confirmed its dignity. Thus the right of
receiving appeals was conferred upon it first by the council
of Sardica, some years subsequent to the council of Nice.
The acknowledgment 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, and that of
the council of Chalcedon bore witness to its strength,
while it sanctioned, in favour of Constantinople, the claims
of a rival, which the fathers of that council called " a new
Rome.'"* Besides these recognitions of Roman preponder-
ance, the emperors, particularly Valentinian in the west,
and Marcian in the east, had established the power of
XXXII.] SECULAR SUPREMACY. 341
appeals hy law^ and 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 alto-
gether beside my design, 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 elaborate 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.
^ " 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 : " The execution of the sentence
followed in due season. Rome ceased to be the capital
of the empire, after Constantino had transferred his seat
to 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 degrees, her splendour, her riches, her people. . . .
Meanwhile she was taken and pillaged several times by
the barbarians, who ravaged and tore in pieces all the
western empire."*' . . .
^ Histoire Eccldsiastique par M. Fleury, ed. de 1758. torn. xiii. Dis-
cours sur 1' Histoire Eecle'siastique, depuis Fan 600 jusqu'a I'an 1100.
" Les beaux jours de I'^glise sont passes.
" Rome idolatre, souill^e de tant de crimes et enyvrde du sang de tant
de martyrs, devoit etre punie, et la vengeance divine devoit ^clater sur
elle, a la face de toutes les nations L'exdcution suivit en son tems.
Rome cessa d'etre la capitale de I'empire, depuis que Constantin en eut
transfdr^ le sidge a Bizance : et depuis que I'empire fut partag^, les em-
pereurs d'Occident r^siderent a Ravenne, a Milan, et partout ailleurs qu'
a 3
Si2 fleury's admissions. [chap.
" These barbarians, it is true, became converted ; some
sooner ; some later, .... but in becoming Christians, they
did not abandon altogether their former character, they
continued, for the most part, light, fickle, violent^ and
acted upon more by passion than by reason. They re-
tained also their contempt for literature and the arts, and
only occupied 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
honour and interest no longer sustain it."
" In the following ages, the most enlightened men, such
as Bede, Alcuin, Hincmar, 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 under illustrious names ; and this not only
by the heretics, but by the catholics, and even with good
a Rome. Ainsi elle perdit peu h peu son dclat, ses richesses, son peuple.
.... Cependant elle fut prise et pill^e plusieurs fois par les barbares,
qui ravagerent et mirent en pieces tout I'empire d'Occident
Ces barbares, il est vrai, se convertirent ; les uns plutot, les autres
plus tard ; mais les barbares, en devenant Chretiens, ne quit-
terent pas entierement leurs aneiennes moeurs ; ils demeurerent la plu-
part legers, changeans, emportes, agissant plus par passion que par
raison Ces peuples continuoient dans leur m^pris pour les
lettres et pour les arts, ne s'occupant que de la cliasse et de la guerre.
De-la vint I'ignorance, meme chez les Romains leurs sujets. Car
les moeurs de la nation dominante prevalent toujours, et les etudes lan-
guissent, si I'honneur et I'interet ne les soutiennent." ....
" Dans les siecles suivans, les hommes les plus eclair^s, comme Bede,
Alcuin, Hincmar, Gerbert, se sentoient du malheur des tems : voulant
embrasser toutes les sciences, ils n'en approfondissoient aucune, et ne
s9avoient rien exactement. Ce qui leur manquoit le plus ^toit la critique
XXXII.] fleury's admissions. 84S
intentions. Thus Virgil of Thaspis avows that he bor-
rowed the name of St. Athanasius, in order to attract the
attention of the Vandal Arians. In like maimer, when-
ever they had not the acts of a martyr to read on the day
of his festival, they composed 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 Oonstantine" (grant-
ing Rome to the pope) " of which there was no doubt in
France during the ninth century. But of all these for-
geries, the most pernicious were the decretals attributed
to the popes of the first four centuries, which inflicted an
incurable wound on the discipline of the Church, by the
new maxims which they introduced, for the judgments of
bishops, and the authority of the pope."
" Another effect of this ignorance, was to render men
pour distinguer les pieces fausses des v^ritables. Car il y avoit des-lors
quantity d'ecrits fabriquds sous des noms illustres, non seulement par
des hdrdtiques, mais par des catholiques, et meme a bonne intention.
J'ai marqud que Virgile de Thaspe avoue lui-meme avoir empruntd le
nom de Saint Athanase, pour se faire ^couter des Vandales Ariens.
Ainsi quand on n'avoit pas les actes d'un martyr pour lire au jour de sa
f^te, on en composoit les plus vraisemblables on les plus merveUleux que
I'on pouvoit ; et par la I'on croyoit entretenir la pidte des peuples. Ces
fausses Idgendes furent principalement fabriqudes a I'oecasion des trans-
lations de reliques, si fr^quentes dans le neuvieme siecle."
" On faisoit aussi des titres, soit a la place des vdritables que I'on avoit
perdus, soit absolument supposes : comme la fameuse donation de Con-
stantin, dont on ne doutoit pas en France au neuvieme siecle. Mais de
toutes ces pieces fausses les plus pemicieuses furent les decr^tales attri-
butes aux papes des quatre premiers siecles, qui out fait une playe irre-
parable a la discipline de I'^glise, par les maximes nouvelles qu'elles ont
introduites touchant les jugemens des ^veques et I'autorit^ du pape. . . .
[p. 7.] « Un
a4
344 fleury's admissions. [chap.
credulous and superstitious, for want of having sure prin-
ciples of belief, and an exact knowledge of the duties of
religion."
" And a further consequence of the domination of the
barbarians, 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 finding 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 themselves, and fought, and were
taken and killed in war."
" But after the bishops found themselves lords, and
admitted on the part of the government of states, they
supposed that they possessed, as bishops, what they only
possessed as lords ; and pretended to judge kings, not
only in the tribunal of penitence, but in their councils.
" Un autre effet de I'ignorance est de rendre les hommes cr^dules et
superstitieux, faute d'avoir des principes certains de cr^ance et une con-
noissance exacte des devoirs de la religion."
*' Un autre effet de la domination des barbares, c'est que les dveques
et les clercs devinrent chasseurs et guerriers comme les laiques."
" Les dveques avoient leurs vassaux obliges a servir a leur ordre pour
les fiefs qu'ils tenoient d'eux ; et quand I'eveque lui-meme dtoit mande
par le roi, il devoit marcher a la tete de ses troupes. Charlemagne trou-
vant ce droit ^tabli, voulut bien s'en relacher a la priere de son peuple ;
et il dispensa les ^veques de servir en personne, pourvu qu'ils envoyas-
sent leurs vassaux. Mais ce r^glement fut mal observd, et nous voyons
apres comme devant, les dveques arm^s, combattans, pris et tu^s a la
guerre."
" Mais depuis que les ^veques se virent seigneurs et admis en part du
govemement des dtats, ils crurent avoir, comme dveques, ce qu'ils
n'avoient que comme seigneurs : ils prdtendirentjugerles rois non-seule-
ment dans le tribunal de la penitence, mais dans les conciles. ... La
XXXII.] fleury'^s admissions. S45
The coronation 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, under-
took 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 tes-
timony, that of the famous Bernard, in the following
terms: viz.
"St. Bernard represents to us," saith Fleury, " the
consistory of the cardinals, as a parliament, or a sove-
reign tribunal, occupied in judging causes from morning
till night : and the pope who presides there, is so over-
whelmed with affairs, that he hardly has time to breathe.
The court of Rome is full of advocates, of solicitors, of
passionate pleaders, insincere, interested, seeking only to
take each other by surprise, and each trying to enrich
himself at the expense of his neighbour."
c^rdmonie du sacre, introduite depuis le milieu du huitieme siecle, servit
encore de prdtexte : les dveques, en imposant la couronne, sembloient
donner le royaume de la part de Dieu." p. 22.
" Les papes croyant, avec raison, avoir autant et m^me plus d'autorit^
que les ^veques, entreprirent bientot de re'gler les diff^rens entre les
souverains : non par voie du mediation et d'intercession seulement, mais
par autoritd : ce qui en effet dtoit disposer des couronnes,"
lb. torn. 16. Discours 14. p. xlv.
" Saiat Bernard nous reprdsente le consistoire des cardinaux comme
un parlement ou un tribunal souverain, occupe a juger des proces depuis
le matin jusqu' au soir, et le pape qui y presidoit tellement accabl^
d'affaires, qu' h, peine avoit-il un moment pour respirer. La cour de
Rome pleine d'avocats, de solliciteurs, de plaideurs passionnes, artificieux,
interessds, ne cherchant qn'k se surprendre Tun I'autre et s'enrichir aux
depens d'autrui."
q5
346 fleury''s admissions. [chap.
"I know that this crowd of prelates and other stran-
gers 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 advantage when we are treating of religion.
For, was the pope established at Rome in order to en-
rich, or in order to sanctify it V
" 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 : for
during 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 farther than these decretals in order to extend
the authority of the pope, maintaining that the pope was
not subject to the 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 prin-
ciple once estabhshed, many consequences were drawn
from it, in accordance with the articles formally expressed
in the false decretals ; and the modern theologians have
" Je sais que cette foule de prelats et d'autres strangers que divers
intdrets attiroient a Rome, y apportoit de grandes richesses, et que son
peuple s'engraissoit aux depens de tous les autres : mais j'ai honte de faire
mention d'un tel avantage lors qu'il s'agit de la religion. Le pape etoit-il
done etabli a Rome pour Tenrichir ou pour la sanctifier V p. xvi.
" Le decret de Gratien acheva d'affermir et d'etendre I'autorite des
fausses decretales que I'on y trouve semees partout : car pendant plus de
trois siecles on ne connoissoit point d'autres canons que ceux de ce re-
cueil, on n'en suivoit point d'autres dans les dcoles et dans les tribunaux.
Gratien avoit meme encheri sur ces d^crdtales pour etendre I'autoritd 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'autoritd. Ainsi se forma dans
d'dglise Latine une idee confuse que la puissance du pape e'toit sans
bornes ; ce principe une fois pos^, on en a tire plusieurs consequences
au-dela des articles exprimes formellement dans les fausses d^cr^tales,
XXXII.] fleury's admissions. 347
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 west-
ern empire, 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 Scriptures, the fathers, the ancient canons.
You have seen,"" continues the historian, " 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. Neither did they address them-
selves to him on the subject of the translation of bishops,
nor of the erection of bishopricks : 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
et les nouveaux thdologiens n'ont pas assez distingud ces opinions d'avec
I'essentiel de la foi catholique, touchant la primaute du pape et les regies
de I'ancienne discipline."
lb. xix. " Chez les Grecs tons les honnetes gens ^tudioient, les laiques
comme les clercs : et ils s'instruisoient dans les livres originaux, I'dcri-
ture, les peres, les anciens canons, . . . Vous avez vu que tons leurs
eveques et les patriarches memes etoient jug^s et souvent deposes dans
les conciles : qu'on ne demandoit point au pape la permission de les
assembler, et qu'on n'appelloit point a lui de leurs jugemens. On ne
s'adressoit point a lui pour les translations d'eveques ni les Erections
d'^veches : on suivoit les canons compris dans I'ancien code de I'^glise
Grecque
Q 6
348 FLEURy's admissions. [chap. XXXII.
from the time of Photius, they did not recognize- him as
the chief of the Church. But did they address them-
selves to him before that time ? And during that period
when they were most united with the Roman Church, did
they observe any part of that which I call the new disci-
pline ? They were very far from it, because the Latins
themselves did not observe it, and because this discipline
was then unknown 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, Fleury allowed to Rome, in the shape of a pri-
macy ; 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 antiquity with his fidelity to his
vows. But granting all this, I claim his acknowledg-
ment as conclusive upon the point which I have under-
taken to establish — ^that a change — a vast and deplora-
ble change, has passed over your primitive doctrine. The
extent of this change may still be disputed, but the fact
cannot be denied.
lb. XX. " Vous direz peut-etre : II ne faut pas s'^tonner que les Grecs
ne s'adressassent pas au pape, soit pour les appellations, soit pour tout
le reste, puisque des le terns de Photius, ils ne le reconnoissoit plus pour
chef de I'^glise. Mais s'y adressoient-ils aupavarant ? Et dans les terns
oil ils etoient le plus unis avec I'^glise Romaine, observoient-ils rien de ce
que j'appelle nouvelle discipline ? lis n'avoient garde de la faire, puis-
que les Latins memos ne le faisoient pas : et que cette discipline dtoit
encore inconnue a toute I'dglise." ....
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Brethren in Christ,
Resting, for the present, from our examination of
antiquity, I proceed, according to our proposed plan, to
examine the two conflicting theories concerning the
limits of papal power, which have excited so much
serious controversy amongst yourselves. The result of
this examination will prove, as it seems to me, that
the claims of your canon law have never been relin-
quished, but continue to represent 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, Esq. so well known for his legal erudition, his
stores of general literature, his admirable tact, and his
polished urbanity, has perhaps proved one of your hap-
piest advocates in relation to the question before us : and
his work entitled, " The Book of the Eoman Catholic
Church," in a series of letters addressed to the distin-
guished Dr. Southey, having been republished at Bal-
timore 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) " was published in 1564, in
350 THE CREED OF [
CHAP.
the 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. Non-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 re-
marks may be necessary, is as follows : " I most firmly
admit and embrace apostolical and ecclesiastical tradi-
tions, and all other constitutions and observances of the
holy catholic and apostohc 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 interpretation of the Holy Scriptures ; nor will I
ever take or interpret them otherwise^ than according to the
unanimous consent of the fathers.''''
8. "I acknowledge the holy catholic and apostolical
Roman Church the mother and mistress of all Churches^
and / 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. "7 also profess and undoubtedly receive all other
things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred
canons, and general councils, and particularly by the holy
council of Trent ; and / also condemn, reject, and ana-
thematize all things contrary thereto, and all heresies what-
soever 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 pro-
fess whole and entire, with God's assistance, to the end
of my life, Amen."
XXXII.] POPE PIUS IV. 351
After setting forth this creed, the author proceeds to
say, (p. 11) " It is most true, that the Roman cathoHcs
beHeve their doctrines to he unchangeable : and that it is
a tenet of their creed, that what their faith ever has heen^
such it was from the beginning^ such it now is, and such it
ever will he.''''
Now brethren, inasmuch as this, your present creed,
contains an oath of " true obedience to the Roman
bishop, the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the
apostles and vicar of Christ," 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 extent to which the pope has a just right
to demand it.
And here I must trouble you with several pages, ex-
tracted from Mr. Butler's able work, which well deserve
your close and careful attention. " A chain of Roman-
cathohc writers," saith he, (p. 104) " might be supposed:
on the first link we might place those who have immo-
derately exalted the prerogative of 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 that full power was delegated to the bishop
of Borne, 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 of
THE Roman-catholic Church on the authority
OF the pope," continues Mr. Butler, " and beyond it
no Roman-catholic is required to beHeve. Some opi-
nions, 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 author of the
learned treatise entitled, Quis est Petrus? who explain
the doctrine expressed in the council of Florence, in a
6
352 MODERN DOCTRINE [cHAP.
manner very favourable 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 appellation of Transalpine divines ; the
latter are called Cisalpine. I will endeavour to present
a short view of their different systems ; first premising
what the Roman-catholic Church considers to be of faith
upon this important article of her creed."
" Universal doctrine of the Roman-catholics respecting the
supremacy of the pope?''
"It is an article of Roman-catholic faith, that the
pope has, by divine right, first, a supremacy of rank ;
second, a supremacy of jurisdiction in the spiritual con-
cerns of the E/oman-catholic Church; and third, the
principal authority in defining articles of faith. In con-
sequence of these prerogatives, 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 ecclesiastical cause may he
brought to him as the last resort., hy appeal ; he may pro-
mulgate definitions and formularies of faith to the universal
Church ; and when the general hody or a great majority of
her prelates^ have assented to them^ either hy formal consent^
or tacit assent^ all are hound to acquiesce 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 the proceedings ; and, in extra-
ordinary cases, to act in opposition to the canons. In those
spiritual concerns, in which, by strict right, his authority
XXXIII.] OF THE PAPAL POWER. 353
•
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
Cisalpine 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, 5y his divine commission^
to deprive him of his sovereignty, and absolve his subjects
from, their obligations of allegiance ; and that, even on
ordinary occasions, he might enforce obedience to his spi-
ritual legislation 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 obedience to his spiritual legislation or ju-
risdiction, by temporal power; and, consequently, had
no right to deprive a sovereign of his sovereignty, to absolve
his subjects from their allegiance, or to enforce his spiritual
authority over either, by civil penalties. This differ-
ence OF opinion exists now no longer, the trans-
alpine DIVINES having AT LENGTH ADOPTED, ON THIS
SUBJECT, THE CISALPINE OPINIONS.*"
Here, brethren, you will be pleased to mark with es-
pecial 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.
354 TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE. [cHAP.
" But though, on this important point," continues Mr.
Butler, " both parties are at last agreed^ they still
DIFFER ON others."
" In spiritual concerns, the Transalpine opinions as-
cribe to the pope a superiority and controlling power over
the whole Churchy should she chance to oppose his decrees^
and consequently over a general council, her representa-
tive ; and the same superiority and controlling power ^ even
in the ordinary course of business, over the canons of the
universal Church. They describe the pope as the foun-
tain 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 bene-
fices, in or out of his dominions, by paramount authority ;
of exempting individuals and communities from the juris-
diction of their prelates ; of evoking to himself , or to judges
appointed by him, any cause actually pending in an eccle-
siastical 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 inter-
mediate superior court. They, further, ascribe to the
pope the extraordinary prerogative of personal infal-
libility, when he undertakes to issue a solemn decision
on any point of faith."
" The Cisalpines affirm, that in spirituals the pope is
subject, in doctrine and discipline, to the Church, and
to a general council representing her ; that he is subject
to the canons of the Church, and cannot, except in an
extreme case, dispense with them ; that even in such a
case, his dispensation is subject to the judgment of the
Church ; that the bishops derive their jurisdiction from
God himself immediately, and not derivatively through
the pope ; that he has no right to confer bishoprics, or
XXXII.] CISALPINE DOCTRINE. S55
other spiritual benefices of any kind, the patronage of
which, by common right, prescription, concordat, or
any other general rule of the Church, is vested in another.
They admit that an appeal lies to the pope from the sen-
tence 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 is a great
division of opinion, an appeal lies from the pope to a
general council."'*'
" Such are the Transalpine, and such the Cisalpine
opinions respecting the power of the pope," concludes
Mr. Butler. — " Both are tolerated hy the Roman-catholic
Churchy BUT NEITHER SPEAKS ITS FAITH I this, aS I
have mentioned, is contained in the canon of the council
of Florence, 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, and the consequences justly deducible
from it, are the Roman-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
supremacy recognised amongst you :
1. The Transalpine doctrine, which, besides all his
other prerogatives, ascribes to the pope, hy divine rights
the power of dethroning sovereigns, and absolving sub-
jects from their allegiance, and enforcing his authority by
civil penalties.
2. The Transalpine doctrine, which rejects this exer-
cise 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 confer 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 infallibility 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 infalli-
bility in the decision of the whole Church, speaking by^
XXXIV.] FOUR STATEMENTS OF THE PAPAL POWERS. 357
general councils 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 canons, in extreme cases.
4. And fourthly, the doctrine of the council of Flo-
rence, 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 bi-
shop OF ROME, IN THE PERSON OF PETER, TO FEED, RE-
GULATE, AND GOVERN THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH, AS
EXPRESSED IN THE GENERAL COUNCILS AND HOLY
CANONS."*^ But what this phrase, /?^^^jt?o^^6r, means, Mr.
Butler will not allow us to learn, either from the Trans-
alpine 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 hishop 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.
Butler^s assertion, that the first and strongest of the
Transalpine 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-
358 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [CHAI'.
quent pope, Pius V., acted on the principle, by publish-
ing his famous bull, deposing queen Elizabeth, and
absolving her subjects from their oath of allegiance 1
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 supported the divine right of this prerogative, have
now abandoned it, simply because it has of late years
been disapproved by their Cisalpine brethren ?
It was in the latter end of the seventeenth century,
viz. A. D. 1682, when the clergy of France made the first
successful assault upon this doctrine, in their famous De-
claration, explicitly pronouncing that " kings and sove-
reigns are not subjected to any ecclesiastical power, by
the order of 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 \"
And how, I beseech you, was this declaration received ?
Hear the account, brethren, given by a distinguished
author among yourselves. " No sooner was it published,"
saith he, " than a multitude of writers, excited by differ-
ent motives, hastened to combat it. Some, delivering
themselves with a blind zeal to every thing which the
* Abrege de la Defense de la Declaration de VAssemUee du Clerge de
France, de 1682, Introduction, p. iv. " Les rois et les souverains ne sont
soumis a aucune puissance eccldsiastique, par I'ordre de Dieu, dans les
choses temporelles ; leurs sujets ne peuvent etre dispenses de I'obeissance
qu'ils leur doivent, ni absous du serment de fidelity."
XXXIV.] STILL MAINTAINED. 359
spirit of party could inspire, of tricks, of subtilties, of
false applications, accommodated 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 of the laws of decency, and
borrowing from a scandalous animosity the most reproach-
ful qualifications, spoke only of thunders and anathemas
against the bishops of France \" And had the bishops
of France been exposed to the storm with no other pro-
tection than the streng-th of their argument, the result
might have proved, that these menaces were not intended
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
Declaration 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
parHament of France. By this edict the king forbade
all persons, secular and regular, 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 of divi-
nity, licentiates, &c. to inculcate diligently the doctrine
therein contained. ^ Whether, under these circum-
stances, the toleration of the Cisalpine doctrine on this
^ lb. " A peine cette declaration fut-elle publi^e, qu'une multitude
d'derivains, excites par differens motifs, s'empresserent de la combattre.
Les uns se livrant avec im zele aveugle a tout ce que I'esprit de parti pent
inspirer de detours, de subtilit^s, de fausses applications, accommodoient
les Merits des peres a leurs opinions, au lieu de rectifier leurs opinions sur
la sagesse et I'autoritd de ces Merits. Les autres, oubliant jusq'aux lois
de la d^cence, et empruntant d'une scandaleuse animosite les qualifica-
tions les plus injurieuses, ne parloient que de foudres et d'anathemes
contre les dveques de France :"
2 Ibid. At the end.
360 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [cHAP.
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
trouble. For " 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 cler-
gy ; 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 HIMSELF, PROTESTING TO HIS HOLI-
NESS, THAT THE CLERGV OF FRANCE HAD NEVER IN-
TENDED 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 clamours., 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 with kind-
ness and charity., in his paternal hosom \"
1 Ibid. Introduction, p. xxv. " Ici cependant nous devons convenir
qu'il s'dleva quelques nuages entre la cour de Rome et la France, au
sujet de la declaration du clerg^, et que le pape Innocent xi. refusa pen-
dant quelque temps des buUes d'institution a plusieurs dveques nommes
a des sieges vacans. Mais tons ces nuages furent dissipes par les lettres
que ces dveques nommds ecrivirent au pape Innocent xii. chacun en leur
particulier, pour protester a sa saintetd que le clergd de France n'avoit
jamais eu I'intention de faire un decret de foi par sa declaration ; I'assu-
rant d'ailleurs de leur profonde soumission aux droits du St. Si^ge. In-
nocent XII. n'en exigeapas davantage, dit M. Bossuet, et toutes les clameurs,
toutes les machinations, toutes les menaces de nos ennemis n'emp^cherent
pas ce pape, vraiment saint, de nous recevoir et tout le Clergd de France,
avec douceur et charitd dans son sein patemel."
XXXIV,] STILL MAINTAINED. 361
It appears, then, that the supposed abandonment of
the pope's temporal power rests on nothing stronger than
the unwiUing sufferunce of a declaration which was cer-
tainly disapproved by Innocent XI. ; as certainly not ap-
proved by his successor ; and made the subject of some-
thing very like an apology, by the French bishops them-
selves. I confess I cannot see in this, a sufficient warrant
for Mr. Butler's assertion that " the transalpine di-
vines 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 returned in accordance to the Cisalpine
doctrine. And it is equally unquestionable that the oath
taken by the English Roman-catholics, under the provi-
sions^ of the Act passed for their relief, in the year 1791,
condemns and abjures the doctrine of the pope's tempo-
ral power in plain terms \ 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 construc-
tion in a case like this ? You know, brethren, that such
an allegation would be regarded by you all as totally pre-
posterous.
Let me, therefore, solicit your serious attention to the
true state of the question. That it is of the very highest
importance to yourselves, from the pope, who claims this
true obedience^ down to the lowest and the least who
swears that he will faithfully render it, can be denied by
no man. It enters into your creed, the creed of pope
Pius IV., which your Church allows to be the universally
» See Appendix to Mr. Butler's book, p. 287, 8, and 9.
K
362 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE [cHAP.
received summary of your faith. Out of this fait\ saith
this creed in its last clause, " none can be saved f^ and
herein it well sustains the Doway catechism, which de-
clares, " that he who has not a due subordination and con-
nexion to the pope and councils^ must needs be dead,
and cannot be accounted a member of the Church'" in
any sense whatever. A principle so fundamental, so
universal, so essential, in your esteem, to the very being
of your Church, ought surely to be understood and satis-
factorily defined amongst yourselves. Instead of which,
your own able advocate, himself a profound jurist, and
better qualified, perhaps, than any man in England, to
put your doctrine of papal supremacy in the most favour-
able light, gives us four statements of the matter, of
which three are perfectly irreconcilable : and the remain-
ing 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
centuries, to mean, what your advocate tells us, is now as
generally 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 " &^er has been., such it now is, and such it ever will
be.'''' Ah, brethren ! you will not blame my stupidity if I
cannot comprehend the unchangeableness 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 the same thing, and then gravely in-
form 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. Buttery's work where he lays
down the miiversal doctrine of the Boman-catholics
12
XXXIV.] STILL MAINTAINED. S63
respecting the supremacy of the pope, he expressly
says* :
"It is an article of Roinan-catholic faith that the
pope has, hy divine right, 1. a supremacy of rank, 2. a
supremacy of jurisdiction in the spiritual concerns of the
Roman-catholic Church, and 3. the principal authority in
defining articles of faith."" — " Every ecclesiastical cause
may he brought to him, as the last resort, by appeal;
he may promulgate definitions and formularies of faith to
the universal Church, and when the general body, or a
great majority of the prelates, have assented to them,
either by formal consent, or tacit assent, all are bound
to AcauiEscE. 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 Roman-catholics ^
Now, brethren, I beseech you tell me, what is the
worth of your Cisalpine definition, according to the above
principle 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 therefore 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 parlia-
ment for the Roman-catholics, and the answers oi five
universities, and the opinions of the Galilean and English
divines, with others, 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 declaration of an assembly of country
justices, and the opinions of five chamber counsellors, in
the very face of the authoritative decrees and practice
» See page 352.
r2
364 THE TRANSALPINE DOCTRINE. [cHAP.
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 abandoned, such an assu-
rance would hardly be thought worthy of any other an-
swer than a smile of contempt. But I pray you, bre-
thren, how much more to the purpose has been the course
taken on the question before us ? The pope, you tell us,
hy divine rights holds a supremacy of jurisdiction. All
questions may be determined by him in the last resort^ by
appeal. Borne has then spoken, according to your phrase-
ology, and the cause is determined. Has this cause been
so determined, against the Transalpine, or in favour 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
Sorbonne, Louvaine, and Doway, (the only three, with
the answers of which Mr. Butler's work has favoured us)
while the other two were the universities of Alcala and
Salamanca, so that not one of the five was even on Ita-
lian territory ! So fearful does he seem to have been of
the real doctrine of Rome.
But Rome has spoken, and the cause has heen determined,
over and over again, according to your own unquestioned
records. From the days of Gregory VII. down to the
time of Sixtus V. the claim of temporal as well as spiritual
supremacy was constantly proposed by the popes as an
article 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
not my object, brethren, to enter more deeply into his-
torical details than the nature of my subject requires ;
but let me cite a few sentences from the book last quoted,
in order to show, /row the facts admitted hy the Cisalpines
themselves, how the question must stand, in the event of
XXXIV.] CISALPINE DIVINES. 365
your submitting the canon of Florence to the construction
of your only definitive tribunal.
" Gregory is the first," saith our author, " who endea*
voured to subject all the crowns to the obedience of the
popes in temporal things \*"
" After the death of Gregory VII. there were many
provincial councils holden, in which what he had done
was approved : chiefly, however, under Victor III. and
Urban 11. ; afterwards Oalixtus II., in a council at Rheims^
excommunicated Henry V., and gave his subjects absolu-
tion from their oath of allegiance ; so completely had the
example of Gregory VII. established this false doctrine
in the mind of the Eomans. 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 enterprise of this first author of the papal
monarchy ^.■"
" 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 ^■''' I may observe here,
' Abr^g^ de la defense de la declaration de I'assembl^e du Clerg^ de
France, p. 10. Innovations de Gr^goire VII.
" Gr^goire est le premier qui ait voulu assujettir toutes les cou-
ronnes a I'obeissance des papes, dans les choses temporelles."
2 Ibid. p. 11. " Apres la mort de Grdgoire VII. il se tint plusieurs
conciles particuliers, ou I'on approuva ce qu'il avoit fait ; et princi-
palement sous Victor III. et Urbain II. ensuite Calixte II., dans un
concile de Reims, excommunia Henri V., et donna a ses sujets I'abso-
lution du serment de fiddit^ ; tant I'exemple de Gr^goire VII. avoit
etabli cette fausse doctrine dans I'esprit des Remains."
* lb. p. 12. " Le troisieme canon du iv. Concile de Latran, tenu sous
Innocent III., ordonne k tous les seigneurs de chasser les li^r^tiques de
leurs terres, d'en faire le serment, et en cas que quelqu'un y manque
R 3
366 ADMISSIONS OF THE [cHAP.
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 sove*
reign and in that of the feudal lord, is precisely the same.
If the council was infallible in sanctioning the one, it
would be equally infallible in sanctioning the other.
Again, your author acknowledges, that ^ " The council
of Trent, in the xxv. session, deprives princes of the pos-
session of cities, in which they permit duels." His argu-
ment to evade this fact is amusing. " The council marks
clearly enough," saith he, " 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 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
reasoning, 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 autho-
rity. If the French parliament thought the council of
Trent referred only to the fiefs of the Church, why was
this decree rejected as contrary to the rights of sove-
reigns ? 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 tenure — ^and one so important that
a breach of it should work a forfeiture — unless it were
dans un an, il ordonne que le pape en soit averti, pour exposer leurs biens
en proie, et absoudre leurs vassaux de I'ob^issance qui'ils leur doivent."
* lb. p. 13. " Le concile de Trente, dans la xxv. session, prive les
princes de la possession des villes, dans lesquelles ils permettent le duel.
Mais ce concile marque assez elairement, qu'il ne parle que des lieux que
les princes tiennent en fiefs de I'Eglise. Et on rejeta ce d^cret dans les
€tats tenus a Paris, en 1593, comme contraires aux droits des souverains ;
quoique ces ^tats fussent tenus pendant la %Me. Ce nMtoit d'ailleur^
qu'un decr^t de discipline."
XXXIV.] CISALPINE DIVINES. 867
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 endeavours to evade, as follows : * " Pope
Innocent IV.,"" saith he, " assembled a council at Lyons,
in which he deposed the emperor Frederick II. 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 hy the authority of the
cowficil. We shall say that Innocent IV. supposing,
without hesitation, that he could depose a prince who
abused his authority, deliberated only whether Frederic
deserved this punishment ; but that he never tot)k 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
^ lb. " Innocent IV. assembla un concile h, Lyon, dans lequel il ddposa
I'empereur Fr^ddric II. ou plutot il confirma la deposition de ce prince,
faite par Gr^goire IX., quelques anndes auparavant. Nous conviendrons
d'abord que I'opuiion du pouvoir des papes, touchant la deposition des
princes, etoit alors tellement rdpandue, qu'il n'y av^oit que les personnes
les plus edairdes qui soutinssent I'ancienne vdrite. Mais nous dirons
aussi que la deposition de I'empereur ne fut pas un decret du concile.
Ce ne fut qu'une sentence pontificale, prononcee en presence du concile,
et nonpar I'autorite du concile. — Nous dirons qu' Innocent IV. supposant,
sans hesiter, qu'il pouvoit ddposer un prince qui abusoit de son au-
torite, deiibera seulement si les fautes de Frederic meritoient cette
peine, mais qu'il ne mit nuUement en deliberation, si, en vertu du pou-
voir pontifical, il pouvoit lier I'empereur et deiier ses sujets, ce qui
auroit ete necessaire pour faire passer cet article, comme une chose
decidee par I'Eglise. Nous dirons enfin que si c'etoit une decision d'un
R 4
368 CISALPINE AKGITMENT [CHAF,
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 maintain the
contrary. And yet they have never treated as heretics,
either the faculty of Theology of Paris, or the parliament
of France, who have maintained that the dependence of
kings was contrary to the word of God/"*
Here, brethren, it seems to me, that your Cisalpine
logician 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 5y 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 supposition that the council of Con-
stance was not a general council, he yet very properly
contends, that if it published an unanimous decree,
which was in no respect censured hy the Churchy no one
should presume to assail it. " For," saith he \ " here is
precisely the case where the maxim ought to be applied :
Not to oppose error is to approve it : a maxim chiefly
true, when questions of faith are concerned, 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."*^ -^PPty
concile general, ce seroit une hdr^ie de soutenir le contraire. Et ce-
pendant jamais on n'a traitd d'h^retiques, ni la faculty de theologie de
Paris, ni les pariemens de France, qui ont soutenu que la d^pendance
des rois dtoit contraire a la parole de Dieu."
^ Ibid. p. 216. " Car voila precis^ment le eas ou doit avoir lieu cette
maxime r c' est approwcer V erreur que de ne pas s'y opposer : maxime
principalement vraie, lorsqu'il s'agit des questions de foi, et surtout
lorsque I'erreur se produit sous le nom d'un concile oecum^nique. Le
silence dans une telle circonstance devient une veritable approbation, au
moins de la part de ceux qui, en quality d'^v^ques, et de pape chef de
I'eglise, sont par leur ^tat obliges de parler.'*
XXXIV.] EXAMINED. 369
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
Innocent, in this instance, confirmed what Gregory IX.
had done some years he/ore ; that the opinion was then
90 diffused that " none hut the niost 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 l The point
was taken for granted^ assumed without hesitation^ as a prin-
ciple which needed not to be considered formally by the
council, because no man was supposed to question its truth.
The concluding remarks of your Cisalpine author, where
he asserts, that " if this were the decision of the council
it 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 asserted by Bossuet in the plainest terms. ^ " They
have gone so far," saith he, "as to proscribe the Decla-
ration, 2i^ favouring heretics^ despoiling the Roman pontiff
of his primacy, overturning the apostoKc chair ; absurd,
detestable, perilous in faith, distilling the venom of the
most frightful schism, under a false covering of piety.
1 Ibid. 42- " lis vout jusqu'a le proscrire comme favorisant les
hdretiques, d^pouillant le pontife Romain de sa primaute, renversant
le siege apostolique ; absurde, detestable, perilleux dans la foi, distillant
le venin du schisme le plus affreux, au travers d'une fausse ^corce de
pi^te. Mais le plus furieux de tous, c' est I'archeveque de Valence. II
commence par dire que quiconque n'admet pas I'infaillibilite du pape est
hdrdtique."
E 5
370 THE AUTHORITATIVE DECISION [cHAP.
But the most furious of them all,'" continues he, "is the
archbishop of Valentia. He begins by saying that who-
ever 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 defended — is indeed true ; but it may be
accounted for by a simple recurrence to the temper of the
times. Surely, however, brethren, it cannot be necessary
for me to remind you, that the doctrine of your ecclesias-
tical 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 candour to say, what would the supreme judge of all
ecclesiastical questions — the pope himself — ^be likely to
pronounce, if the point were submitted to him, instead of
to the Cisalpine divines, 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 always best understood, when
they have received their construction from judicial
authority. And although it is admitted, that construc-
tion, 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 construction
on the canon of Florence l Would it not be the duty
of the pope to consider, that before this council was
holden, the practice of idis predecessors, with the
sanction of several councils, had fixed the claim of the
temporal supremacy ; that the fathers of Florence were,
therefore, perfectly familiar with the doctrine ; and that
there is nothing in the language of the canon intimating
the design of disturbing its exercise ? For if they had
intended to restrict this power, it is plain that they would
XXXIV.] OF THE PAPAL TRIBUNAL. 371
have intimated it by negative words. Since the world
began, laws intended to restrain existing evils, have been
expressed in the language of prohibition. Instead of
which, the canon professes 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 Borne in the person of Peter ^ to feed, regulate,
and govern the universal Church," &;c. Would not the
pope be further likely to consider, that after the passage
of this canon, there was a continuance of the same claims
and acts of 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 even 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
accordingly \ I believe history does not record any oppo-
sition of the clergy of France on that occasion. With
all these centuries of precedents, with the claims of papal
consistency at stake, with the whole edifice of eccle-
siastical infallibility to be sustained or prostrated by his
decision, could you expect the pope to sanction any other
construction, than that which his predecessors had esta-
blished? Surely not, my brethren. And therefore I
am compelled to conclude, that the oath to render true
obedience to your supreme pontiff, takes high precedence
of every human obligation, 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 — alas ! for the
honour of Christianity — in characters of blood.
r6
CHAPTER XXXV.
Brethren in Christ,
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 informa-
tion 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 people,
is a fact so manifest throughout the writings of the
fathers, that it cannot be, and never has been, questioned
by any. The extract on p. 115, 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 of your own P. Sir-
mondi, S. I. inserted in the fifth volume of Hardouin's
Councils, (p. 1426.) where the subject is treated at large,
and formularies are given for the holding of these ancient
elections '.
^ " Vetus olim totius ecclesise mos fuit, episcopos cleri et plebis cui
prsefuturi erant, suffragiis creari. Sic enim, ut altius non repetam, Cor-
nelium Romse clericorum suffragio episcopum factum, Cyprianus epist.
41 et 52, &c. In occidentalibus ecclesiis jus idem suffragii populo in
renunciandis episcopis etiam post Synodum Nicsenam perseverasse, tum
CHAP. XXXV.] MODE OF ELECTING THE POPE. 373
It appears, however, that after the establishment of
Christianity in the Roman empire, the sovereigns exer-
cised the right of confirming the election of the pope ;
from which the transition was not difficult to their endea-
vouring to select the persons to be chosen. After much
contest and bickering upon the subject, which it is
beside our design to detail, it was left to the cardinals,
in the 11th 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 \
The mode usually followed, and styled election by
scrutiny^ is certainly the most extraordinary known
in the history of man. The cardinals, shut up in
what is called the conclave — not allowed to hold con-
verse 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 securing a re-
sult which is to be attributed to the divine direction,
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 men-
tion a few of those which bear, most directly, upon
the official character which the pope is supposed to
sustain.
Romanorum Pontificum Siricii, Cselestini, Leonis, decreta, quae cleri pie-
bisque consensu eligendos statuunt ; turn Damasi, Ambrosii, Augustini,
Fulgentii, et aliorum, quos eo modo creates constat, innumera passim
exempla declarant."
^ See Cdrdmonies et Coutumes Religieuses par B. Picard, torn. i. 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.
874 CEREMONIES ON THE [cHAP.
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 cardi-
nals, adore his holiness on their knees, kiss his foot,
and then his right hand," &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 pon-
tifical chair, mider a grand canopy of red fringed with
gold, to the Chm-ch 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. ^
At his coronation, he is seated on his throne, and an
anthem is sung, the words of which are the prophecy of
the psalmist, relative to Christ : " Thou shalt set a crown
of pure gold upon his head,'''' Sfc " The second
cardinal deacon takes the mitre from him, and the first
puts the tiara on his head, saying: Beceive this tiara
which is adorned with three crowns, and forget not, in
wearing it, that you are the father of princes and of Icings,
the ruler of the world, and on earth the vicar of Jesus
^ Ibid. p. 60. " Le pape est port^ dans sa chaire devant I'autel de la
chapelle ou s'est faite I'dlection, et c'est la que le cardinal doien, et en-
suite les autres cardinaux adorent a genoux sa saintet^, lui baisent le
pied, puis la main droite :" &c "Le meme jour deux heures avant
la nuit, le pape revetu de la chappe et couvert de sa mitre est port^ sur
I'autel de la Chapel de Sixte, o\x les cardinaux avec leurs chappes
violettes viennent adorer une seconde fois le nouveau pontife qui est
assis sur les reliques de la pierre sacr^e. Cette adoration se fait comme
la premiere," &c "les cardinaux pr^ced^s de la musique descen-
dent au milieu de I'^glise de St. Pierre. Le pape vient ensuite portd
dans son sidge pontifical sous un grand dais rouge embelli de frangea
d'or. Les estafiers le mettent sur le grand autel de St. Pierre, ou les
cardinaux I'adorent pour la troisieme fois, et apres eux les ambassadeurs
des princes," &c.
XXXV.] INSTALLATION OF THE POPE. 875
Christ our Saviour \" 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 spoken of in the history of the popes, is that
of Damasus II. in 1048 ^" 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 pieces of gold^." The magnifi-
cence of all the other appendages 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 primi-
tive 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 council of Nice *. But it is
* lb. p. 65. " Ddsque le pape s'est assis (sur le trone) le choeur chante
I'antienne Corona cmrea super caputs &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 omatam, et scias
te esse patrem principum et regum, rectorem orbis, in terra vicarium
Salvatoris noatri Jesu Christi," &c.
2 lb. 52 note. " Le pape Urbain V. fut le premier qui porta les trois
couronnes. Avant lui on n'en mettoit qu'une sur la tete des pontifes.
Le premier couronnement dont il est parld dans I'histoire des papes, c'est
celui de Damase second, en 1048."
3 lb. 55, note f. " Ce bonnet conique omd de trois couronnes toutes
brillantes de pierreries est d'un prix inestimable. Celui que le pape
Paul II. consacra, quoique chargd de joiaux, ne valoit pas le triregne de
Clement VIII. que Ton estimoit, dit on, cinq cent mille pieces d'or."
* Hard. Con. tom. v. p. 1426. Dissertatio Sirmondi.
The canon in question directs the ordination of bishops by aU the
376 CHANGE OF THE PRIMITIVE SYSTEM. [cHAP. XXXV.
enough for my undertaking to exhibit these changes, in
order to show, how well they harmonize with the system
of your canon law, how consistent they are with the
Transalpine construction of the council of Florence, and
how unlikely it is, that the wearer of the dazzling tiara,
who is exhorted, in the very act of his coronation, to
remember his prerogative, as father of kings and princes^
and ruler of the worlds will ever assist his Cisalpine
adherents to reduce his power within the moderate circle
of Christian antiquity.
of the province, unless in cases of necessity, when three were al-
lowed to ordain, after the absent bishops had consented by letter. But
the whole order of antiquity seems to be done away. The pope is com-
monly chosen from among the cardinals, many of whom are bishops, al-
though 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 ordination, any more
than in his assumed powers, do we find any conformity 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 papal system shall be universally abandoned ;
when the definition of the catholic Church shall be
restored to its original 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 ser-
vants 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 councils, and so do we. And if the
378 FIRST PRACTICAL ERROR [CHAP.
Church of Rome had been satisfied with that faith — if
she had abstained from those innovations which your own
Cisalpine divines in part deplore, — I doubt whether any
other aspect would now be presented by the universal
Church, than the aspect of unity and peace. 'N
With respect to the modern Church of Rome, we are
PROTESTANTS, bccausc we have been compelled to pro-
test against these innovations. But with respect to the
primitive Church, we profess ourselves catholics, be-
cause 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 my 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
equally belonging to the catholic Church, because they
are alienated from each other on minor points of poHty
or doctrine ? 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 feeding side by side in peace 1 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
ecclesiastical disease, to commune in its members. The
XXXVI.] IN THE DOCTRINE OF UNITY. 379
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
itself, 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 2 When Paul and
Barnabas 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 Irenseus, or when Stephen subsequently excom-
municated Cyprian, did they cease to belong to the catho-
lic Church ? Hence the plain unreasonableness of your
favourite 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 acknow-
ledgment with a heavy heart. But still the Church may
be one cathohc Church with respect 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 ought, indeed, to follow from our union
with Christ our Head, just as the perfect 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 health of all the bodily organs. But woe be to
our bodies, if every pain and sickness of our mortal frame
were death ! And woe be to our souls, if every discord in
the communion of the Church were destruction !
But secondly, why do you aver that the creed of the
primitive catholic Church warrants you in placing the
supremacy of the pope amongst the articles of faith I It
380 SECOND ERROR IN THE CREED. [cHAP.
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 favourite doctrine, which is the essen-
tial characteristic of the present Church of Rome, whereby
obedience to the pope is made an article of faith itself —
NECESSARY TO SALVATION — was unkuowu to the primi-
tive Church. It came in along with the doctrine of papal
supremacy : 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 influential amongst equals, became the father of
kings and princes, and the ruler of the world ; and the
very creed " out of which no man could he samd^'' presented
to every human 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, unrolled its archives, traced the autho-
rity 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 over-
whelmed — that innovation had overrun the Church — that
for centuries together, ignorance and usurpation, super-
stition 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 authorized. 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 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 salva-
tion I Why not complete the noble work you have begun,
XXXVI.] THIRD ERROR IN THE CREED. 381
and resolutely reform according to the primitive platform,
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 Churchy when there are
so many changes, variations, and innovations, brought in
upon the primitive system ? For where is the kiss of
charity, the communion of the cup, the allowance of mar-
riage to the clergy, the washing of feet, the standing at
prayer on festivals, 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 disci-
pline of the primitive system I All these are gone from
amongst you. Many of them are plainly apostolical tra-
ditions^ by the testimony of the Scriptures and the fathers.
All of them are ecclesiastical traditions^ and constitutions
or observances of the holy catholic and apostolic Church.
Why are men compelled to 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 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 professor
of your faith is bound to say : I also admit the sacred
882 FOURTH ERROR IN THE CREED. [cHAP.
Scriptures according to the sense which the holy mother
Church has held, and does hold, nor will I ever take or
interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous
consent of the fathers^'''' when it is so manifest that the
fathers do almost unanimously interpret your favourite
texts in plain opposition to your present system ? The
extracts I have submitted to you in my humble perform-
ance, 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 reform ?
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 delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred
canons and general 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
" condemns, rejects, and anathematizes all things contrary
thereto, and all heresies whatsoever condemned and ana-
thematized by the Church,'"" when you ought to be so
thoroughly aware, that by making this asseveration, he
may be truly said to anathematize in one part of his
creed what he is bound to maintain in another ?
Not only, however, would I here protest against the
contradictions so manifest on the face of this your fa-
vourite creed, but against the unchristian principle of
pronouncing an anathema — a solemn curse — upon all
heresies whatsoever. True, indeed, it is, that the primi-
tive Church, at a very early day, adopted in her councils
XXXVI.] FIFTH ERROR IN THE CREED. 383
this deplorable custom of cursing ; but at least she con-
fined 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 every 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
hmidred and twenty-four distinct anathemas ; a large pro-
portion of which are directed against opinions which
might be holden in perfect consistency with the great
doctrines of Christianity ! Nay, even in the acclamations
with which the fathers closed their concluding session,
their partiality for this word appears again ; for I find
the last recorded sentence of the presiding legate was :
" Anathema to all heretics^'''' and the council returned the
unanimous response: anathema, anathema^ ! bre-
thren, 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
spectacle more perfectly revolting, none more absolutely
opposed to my notions of the ministry of reconciliation,
than is presented by the picture of these two hundred
and sixty-five dignitaries of your Church, recording this
multitude of formal deliberate curses against millions of
their fellow-creatures, who worshipped the same Triune
God, believed in the same divine and incarnate Saviour,
received the same Gospel, and professed the same primi-
tive creed, with themselves. The malediction of the Al-
mighty is a tremendous exercise of his divine prerogative,
not to be invoked in any other manner than that which
* Hard. Cone. torn. x. p. 193.
" Card. Anathema cunctis hsereticis.
" Resp. Anathema, Anathema."
384 GREAT ABUSE IN THE [cHAP.
his own express word enjoins upon us, as a fearful warn-
ing to the wicked. To add to the Hst of curses which
he has decreed — to devise new modes or subjects or occa-
sions for the purpose, and, especially, to scatter them
abroad with such a liberal hand, is an occupation not
easily reconciled with the religion of love, nor with the
charity that hopeth all things. Nor is it one of the least
striking proofs of the deadly influence of religious bigotry,
that the council of Trent alone should have pronounced
more anathemas than the whole Bible contains ; although
none but God has the right to dictate a curse, as none
but Grod has the power to inflict it.
So strangely, however, has this assumption of the di-
vine judgment become familiarised amongst your doctors,
that it is even adopted as a part of your modern descrip-
tion of the Church. Thus, in the very able tractate " De
Ecclesia,"" by L. E. Delahogue, with which you are doubt-
less well acquainted, he saith \ " The Church of Christ,
as appears from many passages of the New Testament,
is a Church teaching. Teach all nations ; (Matth.
xxviii.) JUDGING ; Tell the Church ; and anathema-
tizing : Whoever shall not hear you^ let him he 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 the publican ? Or did he
mean that his followers should promulgate the Gospel of
peace, by cursing all that opposed them ?
But the time for these ecclesiastical fulminations has?
passed, I trust for ever. I have no disposition to doubt,,
that if a similar council should assemble at the present
day, the artillery of the curse would find no place
1 Tract, de Ecclesia, p. 15. " Ecclesia Christi, ut patet ex multis
Novi Testamenti locis, est ecclesia Docens, Docete omnes gentes, Matth.
xxviii. JuDiCANS, Die Ecdesice, et Anathematizans : Qui non audierU, sU
tibi sicut dhnims et publicanus, Matth. xvi."
XXXVI.] DOCTRINE OF ANATHEMA. 386
amongst the weapons of their warfare. Nor am I willing
to believe that you feel any sympathy with these denun-
ciations.
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 mo-
narch whom you obey as a king ; and are pledged, in the
oath of 1791, to support that <cery protestant succession^
upon which your faith forces you to invoke an unchange-
able malediction. True it is, that even in the United
States, the same melancholy 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 asserts, that her sen-
tence upon earth is ratified in heaven. All this, bre-
thren, 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, how-
ever wrong in theory. I take pleasure in the supposition,
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 yourselves 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 unconsciously perpetrated
within you ; that you pronounce a cm'se with your lips,
while your hearts are ready to convert it into a blessing.
In the last place, however, I would ask, why do yuu
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
386 SIXTH ERROR, IN THE [CHAP.
path of primitive truth once more ? Why endeavour to
maintain, on the one hand, that the faith of the Church
ivas always the same^ while your own Cisalpine divines
allow, on the other, that for many successive centuries,
popes, bishops, councils, kings, nations, all except a few
of the most enlightened^ as Bossuet terms them, were in-
volved in the same gross error with respect to the funda-
mental doctrine of papal supremacy \ You say well, that
our Saviour promised perpetuity to his Church, and that
the gates of 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 council. The
logic, specious and plausible as it is, by which you demon-
strate the necessity of such an infallible directory, 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 dif-
ferent 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 adopting an erroneous doctrine of papal supremacy
ever since the time of Gregory VII., but incapable of
harmoniously interpreting her own system to this day !
Surely, brethren, this simple statement of unquestionable
facts, is enough to demonstrate 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
XXXVI.] DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 387
for him, that his faith should not fail. Therefore,
that faith was certainly infalHble. But although the
apostle's faith was not allowed to fail, it was assuredly
allowed to fall, so that he denied his Master ! He
repented — he was converted — and by the experience of
that fall, he strengthened 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 " with-
stand 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 persuade 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 in-
fallible, she never could have erred. With this argument
to support them, the Transalpine divines are immoveable.
That the pope, for centuries, claimed, 5y divine rights the
exercise of supreme power, and successfully practised on
the doctrine, is unquestionable. That the Church helieved
the doctrine^ is equally certain. That it became engrafted
on the faith of the Churchy 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 neces-
sary inference from the word of God, as an essential in
the constitution of the Church, as requisite 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 helieved 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 im-
s 2
TRUE MEANING OF INFALLIBILITY. [cHAP. XXXVI.
possible for her to err in faith, then this divine right of
temporal and absolute supremacy must still be your
doctrine, and must continue to be so, to the end of the
world.
Hence, as it seems to my mind, the enlightened and
liberal men amongst you, brethren, only encumber them-
selves 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, infallibility 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.
CONCLUDING CHAPTER.
Beethren 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 in-
ferred from this, that I had no other ground of contro-
versy with your claims, I beg leave to say that I have
endeavoured to satisfy my mind in the same manner on
all the other points involved in the principles of the refor-
mation ; and intend, if life and health continue, to present
you with a similar examination of the fathers on these
topics, at some future day. It only remains that I con-
clude my present work, by pointing, with all respect and
kindness, to the path, in which, according to my humble
judgment, duty and advantage would unite to attend you.
You are doubtless aware, that soon after the famous
declaration of the French clergy, a plan to re-unite the
reformed 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^gain renewed, but was finally abandoned.
Th^t there was, indeed, reason to hope for a favourable
conclusion of these efforts will be sufficiently credible,
when it is recollected that such men as Bossuet, Du Pin,
s 3
390 PRESENT STATE
and the cardinal de Noailles, upon the one side, and
Molanus, Leibnitz, and archbishop Wake, upon the other,
thought it not impossible.
It does not appear, however, that the minds of men
were then favourably disposed to such a measure, in
Great Britain. The maxims of intolerance were strongly
established, national antipathies ran high, and the obsta-
cles 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 wane ; and although the Transalpim
doctrines have never been formally disavowed, and are,
therefore, to this day, the doctrines of your Church, yet
they cannot, by any possibility, be enforced, and are more
and more regarded as a dead letter. On the other hand,
the claims of the Roman cathoHcs 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 esta-
blished Church, and assail, in words at least, the upper
house of parliament. Nor are the troubled waters yet at
rest, but still heave and swell with portentous agitation.
In our own country ^ some wild and reckless spirits
have attacked your principles and institutions, with great
bitterness and animosity ; but the reception they have
experienced seems to have borne testimony to the friendly
feelings of the community at large ; and in the neigh-
bouring province of Lower Canada, especially, a prompt
and emphatic declaration of esteem on the part of those
^ America.
OF RELIGIOUS FEELING. 891
who belonged to other Churches, has indicated a sensi-
tiveness to your rights and a regard to your character,
alike honourable to you and to themselves.
Observations might be added from the state of religious
parties in Grermany and Switzerland, from the increasing
power of liberal sentiment in Spain, Portugal, and even
Italy itself, which would further tend to show that there
has been a wonderful diminution of the spirit of bigotry
and intolerance on all sides; a relaxation of that high
tension which previously kept every portion of Christen-
dom in a belligerent 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 pro-
phet ; and I may be deceived in discerning the signs of
the times, by my sincere love of unity, by my strong dis-
like to dissensions of 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 spi-
ritual Israel. But whether I am deceived or not, I have
thought that I saw an approxiifnation towards unity, if it
be nothing more ; and I feel not a little disposed to the
opinion, that a manifestation of primitive zeal amongst
yourselves, with a judicious employment of encouraging
(effort on the part of those governments which have an
established religion to maintain, would soon, 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 sohcitude which the Christ-
ian emperors displayed for the peaceful adjustment of
every religious controversy. Thus the great majority of
the early councils weee ordered by the government.
The sovereigns took part in them with the liveliest ardour.
392 DANGEROUS PRINCIPLES
and employed all the influence of their rank and power to
bring 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 reli-
gious conformity. I praise not these. But apart from
this alloy, I do not see why religious unity should not be
as much the care of government as political unity. Con-
science should never be forced in either case. But with-
out forcing conscience, or putting any shackles on the
reasonable exercise of human liberty, every government
which is so constituted as to touch the subject of religion
at all, may do much to discourage the spirit of dissen-
sion, 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 concerns you,' above all, to make them. For, disguise
it as we may, it is not possible that your Church can be
content with any thing short of her former dominion,
until the changes Irought 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 privileges. 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 upon the common level of your brethren. But
remember, I beseech you, that your Church assumes to
herself, by divine EiGriT, what no other Church as-
sumes, the authority of mother and mistress over all the
Churches. Remember that you exact an oath of true
obedience to the bishop of Rome from every soul, at the
OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM.
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-four 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 discontented until your rulers
conform to your faith ; for it is absurd to suppose that
you are pleased with the duty of cursing, as heretics,
those governors and magistrates whom you are pledged
to honour and obey. And hence you stand in the per-
fectly 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 consis-
tently or honestly stop short of it ; for while you maintain
that the pope has been placed in the throne of universal
supremacy by the voice of God ; and while an oath of
true obedience 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 dig-
nity, as the vicar 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 evidence of primitive antiquity, and with the
duties which devolve on you, in all protestant countries,
as citizens and men I
7
394 THE TRUE LINE
Why not recommence, under happier auspices, the
attempt of Bossuet-and Molanus in France, and a similar
attempt 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 intrigue for mere political rights and Church property,
which only imbitters 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 agreement ?
Why not occupy the attention of the congress of
sovereigns, which, of late years, has so often assembled
to consider the political welfare of Europe, with the far
more sublime and important topic of the unity of Christ-
endom ? 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 challeng-
ing each other to the public war of words ? Why not,
in fine, brethren, — since the Church of Rome, by your
own acknowledgment, has innovated so largely on the
primitive system, — why not frankly cast aside the figments
ofimmutabiliti/ 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 ancient
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 appeUations of
DREAMER ENTHUSIAST 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 ;
OF ROMAN CATHOLIC POLICY. 895
and meanwhile, with the storms and tempests, the dis-
tractions and calamities of the Church of God before me,
let me dream — if you will call it so — of a brighter and a
purer day. Let me indulge the enthusiasm 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 enthusiasm, or not — it is my
deep and solemn- conviction, that no other course is so
likely to avert a tremendous conflict, which may 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 super-
stition of ignorance, the bigotry of fanaticism, the scorn
of infidelity, thinly disguised at best, and often tri-
umphing 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 agitations 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 be
predicted by human sagacity. The violent prostration
of Christianity in any shape, injures it in all ; and there-
fore every conservative maxim of wisdom combines with
every motive of kindness, and every argument of duty, to
recommend the timely magnanimity of a voluntary re-
form, in which all who profess the primitive faith, might
equally unite, and be equally protected. The people of
God, 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
^y
896 CONCLUSION.
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 seclusion. 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 oppor-
tunity 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 principles which I believe to have distinguished
the pure and primitive 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 defects, and vouchsafe to it his accept-
ance and his blessing !
THE END.
Gilbert & Rivingtok, Printers, St. John's Square, London.
14 DAY USE
Rfc 1 URN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
LOAN DEPT.
This book is due on the last date stamped below, or
on the date to which renewed.
Renewed books are subjea to immediate recall.
^JanL632fX
'^^-■D .^ri
^^m
Mr>l» ^\<il^^^
A|Oj|^ i 1^1 Vl^
i
REC'DLD JUN'
7 70 -2PM '^1
\S.ll^:ior47!h'' "■^-"Sg""-'''