图书图片
PDF
ePub

Luke xxiv. 47. And till after the Vifion of the Sheet to St. Peter, Acts x. No Gentile was admitted, as it is faid, Acts xi. 19. They tra velled Preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. So that the Jewish Chriftian Church was the only Church for fome time, and the it was who Converted the Gentile Na tions, and therefore was the Mother Church to them all. N

[ocr errors]

And Rome was not the firft Gentile Church, for the Difciples were called Chriftians first in Antioch, Acts xi. 26. And the Greek Church was before the Latin, the New Teftament was wrote in Greek for their Ufe, therefore the Greek Church could not be the Daughter of the Latin Church, which was born after her.

(2.) L. But St. Peter having been Bishop of Rome, and Chrift having Conftituted him to be the Head of the Catholick Church throughout the whole World, the fame must defcend to his Succeffors the Bifhops of Rome.

G. This will not make her the Mother Church, You may call her Supreme, Abfolute, Univerfal, or what you pleafe, any thing but the Mother Church, to which it is impoffible fhe fhould have any Title.

In the Converfion of the Gentiles to Chriftianity one Man and one Nation, muft receive the Faith before another, they were not all Converted on a Day. And as when one Man Converts another, fo it is of Churches and

Nations,

Nations, it gives the one no Superiority over the other, except that of Gratitude and Efteem, but nothing of Authority.

[ocr errors]

But whatever the Privilege of the Mother Church may be, if it can be Translated from the Mother to the Daughter, from one Church to another, from Jerufalem to Antioch, and thence to Rome, as you must be obliged to fay; then it may be Tranflated from Rome alfo to fome other Church, unless fome pofitive Command of Chrift can be produced, firft to fix it at Rome, and then a Promife that it fhall never thence be removed. But the Church of Rome is not once named in all the New Teftament, unless the is meant by the Church at Babylon,

Pet. v. 13. Nor is there any Promise whatfoever made to her, or any the leaft Intimation of her being the Head of the Churches, the Standard and Center of Unity to them all. Strange! if that be the Summa rei Chriftiana, as Bellarmin calls it (in the Preface to his Book de Romano Pontifice) the Summ and Founda tion of the Chriftian Religion.

[ocr errors]

And as filent are the Scriptures concerning the fuppofed Universal Supremacy of St. Peter, or that he ever was at Rome, or Bifhop of Rome. Some after Writers have mentioned it; but that is far from fuch an Univerfal Tra dition as is fufficient for the mighty Superftructure which is raifed upon it. But let it be granted it fignifies nothing, becaufe all is founded upon fome Words faid to St. Peter, fuch as, Thou Thou art Peter Feed my Sheep

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

&c, Which cannot be ftrained to fuch an Univerfal Supremacy as the Popes have claimed, nor were founderstood in the Primitive Church. For which I refer your Lordship to a Book I know you value, and favoured me with the Perufal of it, the Learned Monfieur du Pin his Traité de la Puiffance Ecclefiaftique & Temporelle. Printed at Paris, 1707. where p. 495. to p. 501. and p. 754. to p. 765. you will find all these Texts urged for the Supremacy of St. Peter, anfwered in the fame manner as is done by the Proteftant Writers, and it is fhewed how very Foreign they are from the Purpose intended.

And that the Rock upon which Matth.xvi. 18. Chrift faid he would build His

Church was not Peter, but the Faith which Peter then Confeffed, your Lordship may fee the current Senfe of the Fathers, and confult at your leifure St. Augustine, de Verb. Dom. Ser. 13, Nazianzen de Vet. Teftam. St. Cyril, de Trin, lib. 4. St. Chryfoftom, Hom. 55. in Matth. St. Ambrofe, Com. in Ephef. 2. Hilary, de Trin, lib, 2, cap, 6, And there are many others.

But nothing that was faid of St. Peter is fo exprefs for an Univerfal Supremacy as what St. Paul faid of himself, 2 Cor. xi. 28. That the Care of all the Churches lay upon him. And again, 1 Cor. vii. 17. So Ordain I in all Churches. If fuch a Decretal could be produced of St. Peter's, I doubt not it would have been made ufe of towards proving his Univerfal Supremacy. in the Acts of the Apofiles it is told that St. Paul

1.

Poul was at Rome Preaching the Gospel for two whole Years together, As xxviii. 30, 31. But not a word of St. Pater's being there. And as St. PAUL planted the Gospel at Rome, fo he wrote to the Church there as his particular Charge, for fays he, Rom. xi. 13. Ifpeak to you Gentiles, in as much as I am the Apostle ・of the Gentiles, I magnify mine Office. But St. Peter was the Apoftle of the Jews, they were his particular Charge; and he himself allowed that the Gospel of the Uncircumcifion was com mitted to Paul, as the Gospel of the Circumcifion was to bimfelf, Gal. ii. 7, 8, 9. And accordingly he directed his Epiftle to the Jews of the Difperfion who were Strangers fcattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afia,and Bithynia. But he wrote not to the Gentiles, particularly not to Rome, which would feem trange if he had been Bishop of Rome, and that had been his Chief and Principal Charge. And St. Paul's both withstanding him to the Face before the whole Church of Antioch, in behalf of the Gentiles whom he had mifled, fearing them who were of the Circumcifion, thews the Care St. Paul took of thofe who were more particularly his Charge, and feems a Behaviour not very fuitable to the Supreme Head of the Church both Jews and Gentiles, if St. Paul had known any thing of St. Peter's being fo Conftituted by Chrift.

[ocr errors]

And as little had it become the other Apoftles to fend their Soveraign upon Bufinefs, as they Lent Peter to Samaria, Ads. viii. 14.

But

But if, as fome fay, St. Peter was Bishop of the Jewish Converts at Rome, and St. Paul of the Gentiles there, St. Paul would have had a much greater Flock than St. Peter, and the Succeffors of St. Paul, and not of St. Peter) must have been Bishops there, because the Church of Rome is now, and has long been all of the Gentiles.

But the fureft way to find out the Truth is by Fact, and not ftraining Expreffions, which may have feveral Meanings. The Eaftern Monarchs have ufed to give themselves mighty Titles, as Son of the Sun, and Brother of the Stars, and King of all the Kings of the Earth, &c. But will any believe that any of them was the Univerfal Monarch for all this, contrary to plain Fact?

[ocr errors]

Pray, My Lord, let me afk you, do you think one could Write the History of a King, fuppofe of King Charles the ad, and in all the History neither call him King, mention his Reftoration, Coronation, or tell of one Regal Act ever he did, as calling a Parliament, or Prefiding in it, Sending or Receiving an Ambaffador, or Granting a Commiffion, &c. And fo of a Pope, could his Hiftory be wrote without calling him Pope, or telling of one Papal Act of his ?

L. No, it is impoffible, For fuch an Hiftory could not be called the Hiftory of a King, or of a Pope..

G. Now, my Lord, let me apply this. We have the Hiftory of the As of the Apo

« 上一页继续 »