see. joyed patriarchal jurisdiction over Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, and this jurisdiction remains till this day attached to his James first governed Jerusalem, and exercised authority over the Churches of Palestine, and the Bishop of Jerusalem remains a patriarch as yet. Peter first sat in the chair of Antioch, and that chair has ever retained its dominion over a large portion of the east. In like manner, therefore, if to the see of Rome he brought not merely the patriarchate of the west, but the primacy over the whole world, this accidental jurisdiction became inherent in the see, and heritable by entail to his successors. 2. But this may appear to place the supremacy of the Holy See upon the same authority as that of the patriarchates, that is on an ecclesiastical or disciplinary authority; whereas we maintain it to be held by a divine imprescriptible right. In the second place, therefore, I say it is transmitted as a divine institution in the Church of God, forming an integral and essential part thereof. Jesus Christ, my brethren, is the same yesterday and to-day. As he established his kingdom at the beginning, so was it to be perpetuated to the end; that form of government which he instituted at its foundation cannot be altered, but must continue to rule it till the end of time. Why else was not episcopal authority merely the prerogative of the apostles and disciples? Why did their successors, in their respective sees, grasp their crosier, and teach, and command, and correct, and punish, even as they had done, but that the very nature of the Church required that time should not alter its hierarchical constitution? Now, if Peter was made the foundation of the Church, it could not be intended, that after his demise the foundation should be broken in pieces, and the stones of the sanctuary dispersed abroad. Two objects are evidently included under the figure of such a foundation, unity, and durability. For, unity in the building results from all its parts being connected by one united ground-plan or basement: and the early fathers understood that the supremacy was conferred on Peter, principally to secure this blessing to the Church. "One of the twelve is chosen," says St Jerome, "that by the appointment of a head, the occasion of schism might be removed."* "To manifest unity," says St Cyprian, "he authoritatively ordained the unity to spring from one."+ "You cannot deny," writes St Optatus, "that St Peter, the chief of the apostles, established an episcopal chair at Rome; this chair was one, that all others might preserve unity by the unity they had with it, so that whoever set up a chair against it, should be a schismatic and a transgressor. It is in this one chair, which is the first mark of the Church, that St Peter sat."‡ Now, my brethren, if to preserve unity in the Church, our blessed Saviour deemed the institution of a primacy necessary, while as yet the fervour of Christianity was glowing and unimpaired, while the apostles yet lived, dispersed over the world, each under the special guidance of Heaven, while the number of Christians was comparatively but small, while almost all the members of the Church belonged to one state, spoke one tongue, and were undivided by political or national prepossession; I will ask, was there less need of such a safeguard, when the coldness of heavenly charity, the inferior lights of pastors, the wider dispersion of the faithful, and the division of states and kingdoms, rendered the human means, and the moral chances, of preserving unity in belief and practice, infinitely smaller? If then, unity is an essential characteristic of the true faith, and if the appointment of a supremacy was made the means of ensuring it, as the very idea of its foundation, and the testimonies of the ancient Church, demonstrate, then does that supremacy necessarily become equally essential to the true religion of Christ, as the unity which it supports; and consequently must be perpetual. The second quality included under the figure of foundation upon this rock, is durability. I have already shown that the words of our Saviour clearly imply, that the durability of the Adv. Jovin. Lib. i. Tom. i. Pa. ii. p. 168. + De Unit. p. 194. Church was a consequence of its foundation. But to be imperishable in consequence of its foundation, implies that the foundation itself will not fail, but shall remain for ever. We have seen that this foundation consisted in a supreme jurisdiction given to Peter; and the necessary conclusion is, that this supreme jurisdiction must last in the Church unto the end of time. 3. Thirdly, the authority of Peter must have been intended to be perpetual in Christianity, because we find that from the earliest ages, all acknowledged it to exist in his successors, as their inherent right. Pope Clement examined and corrected the abuses of the Church of Corinth; Victor, those of Ephesus; Stephen, those of Africa. St Dionysius, in the third century, summoned his namesake, patriarch of Alexandria, to appear before him to give an account of his faith, as he had been accused by his flock at Rome; and the holy patriarch obeyed without demur. When St Athanasius was dispossessed of the same see by the Arians, Pope Julius summoned all the parties before him, and was submitted to by all. Besides restoring this great patriarch to his see, he took cognizance of the cause of Paul, patriarch of Constantinople, and restored him in like manner. The great St John Chrysostome, patriarch of the same Church, when unjustly deposed, wrote to Pope Innocent, entreating that he might be allowed a trial. I have selected these few instances of supreme authority, exercised by the Bishops f Rome over the prelates and even the patriarchs of the east, during the four first centuries, merely as specimens chosen from many more which time will not allow me to adduce. Were I to attempt to give you, at full, the authority of the Fathers upon this subject, I should indeed prolong my dis course even beyond my usual measure. I will, therefore, content myself with a very limited selection. St Irenæus, one of the oldest, writes as follows:-" As it would be tedious to enumerate the whole list of successors, I shall confine myself to that of Rome, the greatest, and most ancient,and most illustrious Church, founded by the glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, receiving from them her doctrine, which was announced to all men, and which, through the succession of her Bishops, is come down to us. To this Church, on account of its superior headship, every other must have recourse, that is, the Faithful of all countries. They, therefore, having founded and instructed this Church, committed the administration thereof to Linus. To him succeeded Anacletus; then, in the third place, Clement. To Clement succeeded Evaristus, to him Alexander; and then Sixtus, who was followed by Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, and Anicetus. But Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius, the twelfth from the Apostles, now governs the Church."* In the same manner, Tertullian gives a brief way of settling differences and controversies-by telling the contending parties to apply to the nearest Apostolic Church-" if in Africa,” he says, "Rome is not far, to which we can readily apply;" and then he adds,-"Happy Church! which the great Apostles impregnated with all their doctrines, and with their blood." Coming down a little later, we find St Cyprian using the very same language; for he writes in these terms:-" After these attempts, having chosen a Bishop for themselves, they dare to sail, and to carry letters from schismatics and profane men to the chair of Peter, and to the principal Church, whence the sacerdotal Unity took its rise; not reflecting, that the members of that Church are Romans, (whose faith was praised by Paul) to whom perfidy can have no access." So that not only does he call it the See of Peter, and the principal Church, but that from which unity alone can spring, and which is secured from all error, by an especial case of Divine Providence. Another remarkable and still stronger testimony, we find in the decrees of the Council held at Sardica, in Thrace, at the request of St Athanasius, at which 300 Bishops were present. De Præscript, c. xxxvi. p. 338. *Adv. Hær. 1. iii. c. iii. p. 175. Ep. lv. p. 86. - In its decrees we have this expression,- It shall seem most proper, if from all the provinces the priests of the Lord refer themselves to the head-that is, to the See of Peter."* So that here we have a Council acknowledging that there was a final appeal to the head of the Church; and this is specified to be the See of Peter, where his successors resided. St Basil the Great has recourse to Pope Damasus, on the distresses of his Church; and to move him the more, gives instances of earlier interpositions by the Roman Pontiffs in the affairs of his See. These are his words:- "From documents preserved among us, we know that the blessed Dionysius-who with you was eminent for his faith and other virtues-visited by his letters our Church of Cæsarea; gave comfort to our forefathers, and rescued our brethren from slavery. But our condition is now much more lamentable.-Wherefore, if you are now at this time induced to aid us, soon all being subjected to the heretics, none will be found to whom you may stretch out your hand." In another passage he says, that Eustathius, Bishop of Sebaste, being deposed, proceeded to Rome; what was transacted between him and the Bishop of that city he knew not; but on his return, Eustathius showed a letter from the Pope to the Council of Thyana, on which he was instantly restored to his See. So that here, an oriental Bishop appeals to the Pope, returns with a letter from him to a provincial synod; and, although it is evident, that in this case St Basil thinks there was some cause for his deposition, yet, on the exhibition of the letter from the holy Pontiff, he is restored to his rights. St Jerome, writing to the same Pope, addresses him in such a strain as any Catholic of the present day might use, and perhaps goes even farther. "I am following no other than Christ, united to the Communion of your Holiness, that is, to the chair of Peter. I know that the Church is founded upon that Rock. Whoever eateth the lamb out of that House, is a profane man. * Ep. Synod. ad Julium Rom. Conc. Gen. T. ii. p. 661. |