St. Paul, having been converted, and raised to the apostleship in a miraculous manner, thought it necessary to go up to Jerusalem to see Peter, where he abode with him fifteen days. Galat. i. 18. St. Ignatius, who was a disciple of the apostles, and next successor, after Evodius, of St. Peter in the See of Antioch, addresses his most celebrated epistle to the church, which he says, "PRESIDES in the country of the Romans."* About the same time, dissensions taking place in the church of Corinth, the case was referred to the church of Rome, to which the Holy Pope Clement, whose name is written in the book of life, Philip. iv. 3, returned an apostolical answer of exhortation and instruction.t In the second century, St. Irenæus who had been instructed by St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John the Evangelist, referring to the tradition of the apostles, preserved in the church of Rome calls it "the greatest, most ancient, and most universally known, as having been founded by St. Peter and St. Paul; to which (he says) every church is bound to conform, by reason of its superior authority." Tertullian, a priest of the Roman church, who flourished near the same time, calls St. Peter, "the rock of the church," and says, that "the church was built upon him." Speaking of the bishop of Rome, he terms him in different places," the blessed Pope, the high priest, the apostolic prelate, &c." I must add, that, at this early period, Pope Victor exerted his superior authority, by threatening the bishops of Asia with excommunication for their irregularity in celebrating Easter, and the other moveable feasts, from which rigorous measure he was deterred, chiefly by St. Irenæus. In the third century, we hear Origen and St. Cyprian repeatedly affirming, that the church was "founded on Peter," that he "fixed his chair at Rome," that this is "the mother church," and "the root of Catholicity." The latter expresses great indignation that certain African schismatics should dare to approach "the See of Peter, the head church and source of ecclesiastical unity." It is true, this father afterwards had a dispute with Pope Stephen, about rebaptizing converts from heresy; but this proves nothing more than that he did not think the Pope's authority superior to general tradition, which, through mistake, he supposed to be on his side. To what degree, however, he * Coteler. Пporaonra, Epist. Ignat. Cotelero. "Ad hanc ecclesiam convenire necesse est omnem ecclesiam." Contra Hæres. 1. iii. c. 3. Prescrip. 1. i. c. 22. De Monogam. !! Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1. v. c. 24. Hom. 5 in Exod Hom. 17 in Luc. Ep. ad Cornel. Ep. ad Anton. De Unit. &c. tt Ep. ad Cornel, 55, did admit this authority, appears by his advising this same Pope, to depose Marcian, a schismatical bishop of Gaul, and to appoint another bishop in his place. At the beginning of the fourth century we have the learned Greek historian, Eusebius, explaining in clear terms, the ground of the Roman pontiff's claim to superior authority, which he derives from St. Peter ;f we have also the great champion of orthodoxy and the patriarch of the second See in the world, St. Athanasius, appealing to the bishop of Rome, which See he terms "the mother and the head of all other churches." In fact, the Pope reversed the sentence of deposition, pronounced by the saint's enemies, and restored him to his patriarchal chair.§ Soon after this, the council of Sardica confirmed the bishop of Rome, in his right of receiving appeals from all the churches in the world. Even the Pagan historian, Ammianus, about the same time, bears testimony to the superior authority of the Roman Pontiff¶ In the same century, St. Basil, St. Hilary, St. Epiphanius, St. Ambrose, and other fathers and doctors, teach the same thing. Let it suffice to say, that the first named of these scruples not to advise, that the Pope should send visiters to the eastern churches, to correct the disorders, which the Arians had caused in them,** and that the last mentioned represents communion with the bishop of Rome, as communion with the Catholic church. I must add, that the great St. Chrysostom, having been, soon after, unjustly deposed from his seat in the Eastern Metropolis, was restored to it by the authority of Pope Innocent; that Pope. Leo termed his church "the head of the world, because its spiritual power, as he alleged, extended farther than the temporal power of Rome had ever extended."‡‡ Finally, the learned St. Jerom, being distracted with the disputes among three parties, which divided the church of Antioch, to which church he was then subject, wrote for directions, on this head, to Pope Damasus, as follows: "I, who am but a sheep, apply to my shepherd for succour. I am united with your holiness, that is to say, with the chair of Peter, in communion. I know that the church is built upon that rock. He who eats the Paschal Lamb out of that house, is profane. Whoever is not in Noah's Ark will perish by the deluge. I * Ep. 29. + Euseb. Chron. An. 44. § Socrat. Hist. 1. ii. c. 2. Zozom. Rerum Gest. 1. xv. ** Epist. 52. Epist. ad Marc, + Orat. in Obit. Satyr. # Serm. de Nat Apos. This sentiment, another father of the church, in the following century, St. Prosper, expressed in these lines: "Sedes Roma Petri, quæ pastoralis honoris; Facta caput mundo, quidquid non possidet armis; Religione tenet." : know nothing of Vitalis, I reject Melitius, I am ignorant of Paulinus he who does not gather with thee, scatters," &c. It were useless, after this, to cite the numerous testimonies to the Pope's supremacy, which St. Augustin, and all the fathers, doc tors, and church historians, and all the general councils bear, down to the present time. However, as the authority of our apostle, Pope Gregory the Great, is claimed by most Protestant divines on their side, and is alluded to by Bp.† Porteus, merely for having censured the pride of John, patriarch of C. P. in assuming to himself the title of Echumenical or universal bishop; it is proper to show, that this Pope, like all the others who went before him, and came after him, did claim and exercise the power of supreme pastor, throughout the church. Speaking of this very attempt of John, he says, "The care of the whole church was committed to Peter, and yet he is not called the universal apostle." With respect to the See of C. P. he says, "Who doubts but it is subject to the apostolic See ;" and again, "When bishops commit a fault, I know not what bishop is not subject to it," (the See of Rome.) As no Pope was ever more vigilant, in discharging the duties of his exalted station, than St. Gregory, so none of them, perhaps, exercised more numerous or widely extended acts of the supremacy, than he did. It is sufficient to cite here his directions to St. Austin of Canterbury, whom he had sent into this island, for the conversion of our Saxon ancestors, and who had consulted him, by letter, how he was to act with respect to the French bishops, and the bishops of this island, namely, the British prelates in Wales, and the Pictish and Scotch in the northern parts. To this question Pope Gregory returns an answer in the following words: "We give you no jurisdiction over the bishops of Gaul, because, from ancient times, my predecessors have conferred the Pallium (the ensign of legatine authority) on the bishop of Arles, whom we ought not to deprive of the authority he has received. But we commit all the bishops of Britain to your care, that the ignorant among them may be instructed, the weak strengthened, and the perverse corrected by your authority." After this is it possible to believe that Bp. Porteus and his fellow writers ever read Venerable Bede's History of the English nation? But if they could even succeed in proving that Christ had not built his church upon St. Peter and his successors, and had not given them, the keys of the kingdom of heaven; it would still remain * Ep. ad Damas. + P. 78. Ep. Greg. 1. v. 20. § L. ix. 59. for them to prove, that he had founded any part of it on Henry VIII, Edward VI, and their successors, or that he had given the mystical keys to Elizabeth and her successors. I have shown, in a former letter, that these sovereigns exercised a more despotic power over all the ecclesiastical and spiritual affairs of this realm, than any Pope ever did, even in the city of Rome, and that the changes in religion, which took place in their reigns, were effected by them and their agents, not by the bishops or any clergy whatever; and yet no one will pretend to show from Scripture, tradition, or reason, that these princes had received any greater power from Christ over the doctrine and discipline of his church, than he conferred upon Tiberius, Pilate, or Herod, or than he has given at the present day, to the great Turk or the Lama of Thibet, in their respective dominions. Before I close this letter I think it right to state the sentiments of a few eminent Protestants respecting the Pope's supremacy. I have already mentioned, that Luther acknowledged it, and submissively bowed to it, during the three first years of his dogmatizing about justification; and till his doctrine was condemned at Rome. In like manner, our Henry VIII. asserted it, and wrote a book in defence of it, in reward of which the Pope conferred upon him and his successors the new title of Defender of the Faith. Such was his doctrine; till, becoming amorous of his queen's maid of honour, Ann Bullen, and finding the Pope conscientiously inflexible in refusing to grant him a divorce from the former, and to sanction an adulterous connexion with the latter, he set himself up, as supreme head of the church of England, and maintained his claim by the arguments of halters, knives, and axes. James I, in his first speech in parliament, termed Rome "the mother church," and in his writings allowed the Pope to be "The patriarch of the West." The late archbishop Wake, after all his bitter writings against the Pope and the Catholic church, coming to discuss the terms of a proposed union between this church and that of England, expressed himself willing to allow a eertain superiority to the Roman pontiff. Bishop Bramhall had expressed the same sentiment, sensible as he was, that no peace or order could subsist in the Christian church, any more than in a political state, without a supreme authority. Of the truth of this maxim, two others, among the greatest men whom Protestantism has to boast of, the Lutheran Melancthon, and the Calvinist Hugo "Suo Gaudeat qualicunque Primatu." See Maclain's Third Appendix to Mosheim's Eccl. Hist. vol. v. † Answer to Militiere. Grotius, were deeply persuaded. The former had written to prove the Pope to be Antichrist; but seeing the animosities, the divisions, the errors, and the impieties of the pretended reformers, with whom he was connected, and the utter impossibility of putting a stop to these evils, without returning to the ancient system, he wrote thus to Francis I, of France: " We acknowledge, in the first place, that ecclesiastical government is a thing holy and salutary: namely, that there should be certain bishops to govern the pastors of several churches, and that THE ROMAN PONTIFF should be above all the bishops. For the church stands in need of governors, to examine and ordain those who are called to the ministry, and to watch over their doctrine; so that, if there were no bishops, they ought to be created."* The latter great man, Grotius, was learned, wise, and always consistent. In proof of this he wrote as follows, to the minister, Rivet: "All who are acquainted with Grotius, know how earnestly he has wished to see Christians united together in one body. This he once thought might have been accomplished by a union among Protestants, but afterwards, he saw that this is impossible. Because, not to mention the aversion of Calvinists to every sort of union, Protestants are not bound by any ecclesiastical government, so that they can neither be united at present, nor prevented from splitting into fresh divisions. Therefore Grotius now is fully convinced, as many others are also, that Protestants never can be united among themselves, unless they join those who adhere to the Roman See; without which there never can be any general church government. Hence he wishes that the revolt and the causes of may be removed, among which causes, the primacy of the bishop of Rome was not one, as Melancthon confessed who also thought that primacy necessary to restore union."+ LETTER XLVII. I am, &c. J. M. To JAMES BROWN, Jun. Esq. ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE LITURGY AND ON READING THE DEAR SIR, HOLY SCRIPTURES. I AGREE with your worthy father, that the departure of the Rev. Mr. Clayton, to a foreign country, is a loss to your Salopian *D'Argentre, Collect. Jud. t. i. p. 2.-Bercastel and Feller relate, that Melancthon's mother, who was a Catholic, having consulted him about her religion, he persuaded her to continue in it. † Apol. ad Rivet. |