Page images
PDF
EPUB

tually this faithful witness discharged the duties of his office, braving without dismay, the waves of trouble, and defying the blasts of persecution, from whatever quarter the storm arose.

In this commission of our Lord, "feed my sheep," there was, as St. Cyril observes, a renewal of the apostleship, formerly bestowed on St. Peter, doing away the infamy of his fall, and blotting out the cowardice of human infirmity. Cyril does not say, that our Saviour augmented his dignity, (a doctrine unknown in the primitive ages,) but that he renewed it, or restored him to it, not by raising him præ aliis, above others, but reinstating him in his former office.

It is evident, beyond a doubt, that neither Peter, nor any other apostle, had any power or authority over the rest, but that they all enjoyed an equality in this respect, under the supreme and only head of the church, Jesus Christ. When first separated from the rest of our Lord's followers, they were all distinguished by the same common name of apostles, and there was no difference in their

commission, or instructions. They were all equally commanded to commemorate our Lord's death, received the same authority to teach and baptize all nations, to execute all parts of the apostolic office, and the holy spirit descended, and sat upon each of them, without any partiality or distinction whatso

ever.

As the apostles were admitted to the same office, so they were all of the same order, there being no order above that of an apostle : and if God had designed St. Peter and his successors, to be the true vicars of Christ, and heads of the whole church, the fathers and doctors of all christians, and the full power of feeding, ruling, and governing the whole church, was given to them in Peter, by Christ, (as the council of Florence defines) we might expect to meet, not only with the bishop of Rome's name and title in scripture, but also the time and manner of his instalment, and the deed of conveyance, to his successors, in the most plain and significant forms. But no such document can be produced;*

Hesychius calls St. Andrew, the first born of the apostolical choir, the first settled pillar of the church,

on the contrary, whenever St. Peter is spoken of, as a pillar or foundation of the church, it is never by himself, but always in conjunction with others, and when the apostles were

the Peter before Peter. Hesych. apud. Phot. Cod. 269.

Chrysystom saith of St. John, that he was a pillar of the churches through the world, and had the keys of the kingdom of heaven.-Speaking of St. Paul, he calls him, the ring-leader and guardian of the choir of all the saints, the apostle of the world; who had all the inhabitants of the earth committed to his trust, Chryst. in Rom. xvi. 24. Cor. 92.

Pope Gregory I. saith of St. Paul, that he was made head of the nations, because he obtained the principate of the whole church. Greg. M. in 1 Reg. lib. 4.

St. Ambrose, St. Austin, St. Maximus Taur, speak thus,-Blessed Peter and Paul are the most eminent amongst all the apostles, whether of the two is to be preferred before the other, is uncertain. Vid. Serm. 66. Aug. de Sanct. 27. Max. Taur. Serm. 54.

To these extracts, I add, that if any of the apostles could claim a presidency, or authoritative headship over the rest, St. James seems to have had the best title to it, for Jerusalem was the mother of all churches, the fountain of christianity, the see of Christ himself. Hence in the apostolical constitutions, in the prayer prescribed for the church, the bishops of the principal churches being specified by name, St. James is mentioned before the bishops of either Rome or Antioch, "Let us pray for the whole episcopacy under heaven, for those who rightly

contending about this very thing, who should be accounted greatest, what was our Lord's reply? not," Peter is the man," but he thus quickly decides the case, "The kings of the

dispense the word of truth: let us pray for our bishop James, and all his parishes, for our bishop Clemens, and all his parishes, for Euodius, and all his parishes, Const. ap. viii. 10.

How these facts can be reconciled, with the supremacy of St. Peter, I leave the catholics to determine.

It was a reasonable demand which was made upon our Saviour, "Tell us by what authority thou doest these things? or who is he that gave thee this authority?" (Luke xx. 2.) and the propriety of it, our Lord himself admitted, declaring, that if he had not by his doctrine and works, proved the divinity of his character, it would have been no sin to disbelieve, or reject him. John xv. 24.

Upon the same principle, if a primacy, importing superiority in power, command, or jurisdiction, had been really given to St. Peter, it would have been highly necessary to produce clear credentials of such a gift, not only to warrant and enforce the obedience of the apostles, but to make the same duty incumbent upon us, that in all cases of doubt or controversy, in the church, we might have recourse to an infallible judge, for a final decision of the matter. It is natural to suppose, that if Christ had thought it expedient to appoint such a speaking authority, in the christian church, he would have conveyed the intentions of his mind, in expressions, by

Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and they that exercise authority upon them, are called benefactors, but ye shall not be so, but he that is greatest among you, let him be as

which his meaning could not have been mistaken, and that the apostles would have mentioned this appointment, before all the articles of faith, because all disputes might have been quickly decided, and settled by this tribunal. In civil causes, judges are regularly appointed, in whose decision and awards we readily acquiesce, because we know they are judges, and no man can doubt their authority. But when the matter at issue respects conscience, religion, salvation, eternity, happiness or misery, there is no unerring judge, but God himself, who has given us a full revelation of his will, in the holy Scriptures. If there be any other judge, then he only is to be acknowledged as such, to whom God hath expressly, and in the most unequivocal manner, committed that right.

To a superficial observer, it may appear plausible, that there should be in the church, some infallible judge of religious controversies, in order to preserve the unity of the faith; but let the catholics name one controversy, that hath been ended in their church, merely by the pope's decree, so that the opposite party hath declared that they believed contrary, to what they believed before, on account of the pope's definition.

Do they say the scripture can be no mean of unity, because of the various senses which have been put upon it? And are there no ways to evade the pope's decisions?

« PreviousContinue »