Page images
PDF
EPUB

the younger, and he that is chief, as he that doth serve." Luke xxii. 25, 26. Than which, nothing could have been more peremptorily spoken, to rebuke a spirit of pre

They either say, the decree was procured by fraud, and the pope made it from misinformation, or that he did not define it as a matter of faith, sitting in cathedra.

It is a notorious fact, that, as Onuphrius states, there were thirty different schisms existing at one time, within the pale of the Roman church, though it is a principal and fundamental article, which the catholics have always in their mouths, and on which they mainly rely,

that the church of Rome cannot err. The catholics affirm, that the unity of the church, like that of the body, consists in the unity of the members under one head, but how could all the members be united under one head, when there were sometimes two, sometimes three heads? It is evident from historical records, that for fifty or eighty years together, there were two or three popes at the same time, one denying to the other the very name of christian, reproaching each other with the appellation of heretic, and antichrist, and each prnouncing the other to be an unlawful pope: that pope Stephanus VII. in a council assembled for that purpose, annulled all the acts of Formosus, deprived those of their orders, who had been ordained by him, and caused them to be re-ordained, (to which many of the bishops would not submit, particularly Leo, bishop of Nola,) and not content with this, he ordered his corpse to be taken out of the grave, and placed it in the pope's chair, with the pon

eminence; and prevent the apostles from affecting, seeking, assuming, or admitting a superiority of power, one above another.

Further, in all relations, which occur in scripture, concerning religious controversies, there is no appeal made to St. Peter's judgment, no allegation of it as decisive, no argument is built on his authority, dissent from his opinion, non-conformity to his practice, disobedience to his orders, are not mentioned as ground of reproof, or as aggravation of any error; no heretics are sent to be exterminated by his sentence, nor schismatics to be suppressed, by his censure. The apostles convinced gainsayers by scripture testimony, and sound arguments. If they used authority it was their own, which they challenged, as given to them by Christ, for edifi

tifical habits on, where, after he had sufficiently reviled him who could not revile again, he caused the three fingers to be cut off, with which he used to give the benediction, and then commanded the body to be thrown into the Tyber. How then can the Roman church, laying aside the scriptures, as the sole criterion of sound doctrine, say, on the ground of infallibility, either "this is true," or "that is heretical."

cation, or on account of the more than ordinary gifts and graces of the divine spirit.

It is very remarkable how St. Paul reproving the dissentions which were amongst the christians at Corinth, represents the several parties, saying, I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas, I am of Christ. Now supposing the case had been then clear and certain, (and if it were not so then, how can it be so now?) that St. Peter was sovereign of the apostles, how is it possible that any preacher could stand in competition with him, or christians prefer another apostle or minister before him? Of these contentious people, none, St. Austin remarks, made a true confession of the faith, except he who said, I am of Christ. Aug. cont. Crescon i. 27.

Again, if we consider the nature of the apostolic office, the state of things at that time, and the manner of St. Peter's life, it will appear absolutely impossible, that he could manage such a jurisdiction over the apostles, as the catholics assign to him,

Such was the peculiar and urgent duties of the christian ministry that none of the apostles could be fixed in any one particular place of residence, but they were all continually travelling about the world, ready to move, where divine suggestions called them, or opportunities occurred, for the propagation and furtherance of the gospel. St. Thomas, preaching in Parthia, St. Andrew, in Scythia, St. John, in Asia, Simon Zelotes, in Britain, St. Paul, in many places, other apostles and apostolical men in Arabia, in Ethiopia, in India, in Spain, in Gaul, in Germany, in the whole world, and in all the creation under heaven, (as St. Paul speaks,) could not well keep up a correspondence with St. Peter, without knowing even where to find him, or how to obtain an answer to their communications, in any reasonable time. Under such circumstances, it was therefore most requisite, that every apostle should have a complete, absolute, independent authority, in managing the concerns and duties of his office, that he might not be obstructed in the discharge of them, not clogged with any obligation to consult others, not hampered with orders from those

who were at a distance, and could not be proper judges, of what was fit, in every place, to be done. The direction of him who had promised to be perpetually present with them, and by his holy spirit to guide, to instruct, to admonish them upon all occasions, was abundantly sufficient; neither did they want any other adviser or aid, beside that special illumination, and powerful influence of grace, which, in the language of St. Paul, made them able ministers of the new testament.

The next argument on which the pope claims a supremacy over the christian world, rests upon the supposed fact, that St. Peter was the founder of the Roman church.

To illustrate this point, let us search into the history of St. Peter, and examine the records of his ministerial labours.

After our Lord's assension, St. Peter remained for the first year, with the apostles at Jerusalem. In the next year he went with St. John to Samaria, to preach the gospel to that city, and the adjacent country. About three years afterwards, St. Paul met him at

« PreviousContinue »