With regard to Peter being bishop of Rome, the Scrip tures are equally silent: nay, it is not so much as probable he was ever there: therefore his primacy over the other apostles, and his being bishop of Rome, are mere fictions. St. Cyprian affirms, "The other apostles are the same as St. Peter was, endowed with an equal fellowship of honour and power." a

b

But admitting, though not granting, both these to have been true, how does it affect the bishops of Rome? They pretend to be his successors, and, consequently, to have the same pre-eminence and authority. If the Pope succeed Peter, it must be either in his extraordinary character of an apostle, or as he was bishop of Rome, or as he was head of the church; but he cannot succeed him as an apostle, for that office ceased with the only persons who ever enjoyed it, the apostles not constituting apostles, but only bishops, pastors, &c. Nor could he succeed him as bishop of Rome, or head of the church, because Peter himself was never either the one or the other.

A man cannot, with any propriety, be said to succeed another in an office, which such other person never occupied, or had any right to; therefore, it follows, that the Pope is not the successor of Peter.

It is true that the Papists quote those words of Christ to Peter, as in point, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Though the Church of Rome owns Christ as a foundation of salvation, yet, she denies him to be the only one; from this passage she builds upon Peter, and upon her own merits. The Romanists

b The word POPE is derived from the Latin word Papa, father, from which the Roman Catholics are called Papists, and their religion popery.

say, that the church is not founded upon Christ, but upon Peter, and the Popes as his successors: and that unless we build upon these, we cannot be saved.

Now, this assertion of the Romanists, that Peter, and the Popes as his successors, are the true foundation of the church, is contradicted in the Sacred Writings. The promised Messiah is called a stone. "The stone which the builders refused is become the head-stone of the corner." He is also called a foundation; "Thus saith the Lord God, I lay in Zion [the church] for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation." And that Christ is the only foundation, is evident from the words of St. Paul, "Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." To the Christians at Ephesus, who formed a part of the spiritual edifice then raised on that basis, he says, "Ye are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord in whom ye also are builded together for an holy habitation of God through the Spirit." Here is no mention made of a Pope, nor of a Peter, as the foundation; for that apostle was only one of the builders in this sacred structure, who himself tells us, was, with the other Christians, built upon this foundation. Therefore, Jesus Christ did not say, On thee, Peter, but (as a learned Commentator observes) changes immediately the expresssion, saying, "upon that rock," EL TAUTY IN HETpa, to show, that he neither addressed Peter, nor any other of the apostles. So that this Scripture neither proves the supremacy of Peter, nor the infallibility of the Church of Rome. The supposition of Peter and the Popes being the foundation of the church

of Christ, is one of the greatest extremes of ignorance, folly, and absurdity. The Romanists would persuade people to believe, that a mere man, and he sometimes a master of wickedness, is the foundation and head of the Church!

The pope, calling himself Peter's successor, makes pretensions to things concerning which Peter never gave the least intimation. Peter did not possess any privilege which exempted him from subjection to the rest of his brethren, before whom he pleaded a certain cause, and by whom he was sent as a messenger; Acts viii. 14. xi. 13. Nor had he any superiority that rendered him incapable of error, or prevented him from being withstood to the face; Gal. ii. 11. But the pope claims a right to govern the whole church at his pleasure, and as her only authorised head, boasts that she is infallible. The doctrines concerning his supremacy, and the privileges it is fancied belong to him, even in the highest temporal matters, are such as the deposing of princes, the giving away their dominions, and absolving their subjects from their allegiance and the spiritual powers which he and other ecclesiastical persons have pretended to possess, are, of shutting and opening the kingdom of Heaven, of binding and loosing, of retaining and remitting sins authoritatively. These doctrines, according to their true meaning, amount to nothing less than putting men into a state of salvation or damnation just as they please.

In confirmation of these bold pretences, Cardinal Zabar, speaking of the popes, affirms, that they might do all things they please, even things unlawful, and so could do more than God himself. a Dominus noster Deus Papa, "Our Lord God the Pope," is the frequent compliment of

a De Schism. Int. Gerim. Script. p. 704.

the canonists. The same title is given him by the Council of Lateran, Sess. 4. So Gratian asserts, that all mortals are to be judged by the pope, but the pope by no body at all. Massonus, in the Life of pope John IX. says, that the bishops of Rome cannot commit sins without praise. "

a

With regard to this succession, admitting, but not granting, that the first bishop of Rome received his authority from Peter, and Peter from Christ, yet, what is that to latter popes, who are selected and put into the pontifical chair, by cardinals? And whence had the cardinals that power? If from God, let them produce their licence: if from men, let them say from whom,

b

and by what authority. Meantime, let us reflect on this succession. A succession from that heretic John XXII. who denied the immortality of the soul: from John XXIII. Gregory XII. and Benedict XIII. who were all popes at once, and cashiered by the Council of Constance as illegitimate: from Eugenius, whom the Council of Basil convicted both of schism and heresy: from Marcellimus, who sacrificed to idols: from Liberius, who turned Arian: from Anastatius, whom the Roman clergy excommunicated for being an heretic: from Silvester II. who sacrificed to the devil: from Formosus, who got the chair by perjury: from Sergius III. who caused the body of another pope to be digged out of the grave, and the head to be cut off and flung into the Tiber: from Boniface, who imprisoned his infallible predecessor, and

a Lib. 3.

If it is necessary to salvation to be subject to the pope, it is necessary to know who is the true one; but that point the world has often been divided about, when there were sometimes three, and for about forty years together two popes.-Vid. Theod. Niem. de Schism. Univers.

plucked out his eyes!

How unlike is this Peter the

pope, to Peter the Apostle! a

If we admit, that the Roman Catholics do not hold an opinion that the pope himself is infallible; but only affirm, that he and the rest of the bishops, in general council assembled, to settle points of doctrine, or branches of church discipline, have always been preserved from error; yet what shall we say concerning the infallibility of popes and councils, when we reflect, that these have not always been agreed and said the same thing? If they had always been led by the Holy Spirit, and decided under the immediate influence of his teaching and direction, they would have been harmonious, and neither jarring of sentiment nor opposition in conduct would have appeared among them. But there are many instances of popes and councils being contradictory one of the other. Julius I. decreed, that none of either sex should marry within the seventh degree of consanguinity. Innocent III. decreed, that the prohibition should not exceed the fourth degree of consanguinity and affinity. The Council of Trent condemned polygamy, and cursed those who maintain that it is lawful for Christians to have more than one wife at the same time. Gregory III. allowed, in case of the wife's infirmity, the husband to

a Several of the above thoughts have been taken from a short History of Popery, published in the year 1678.

Raphael Urbim, when charged by the then pope for laying too much colour on the faces of Peter and Paul, replied, he did it on purpose to prevent them blushing in heaven, on seeing what successors they had on earth.

66

Thomas Aquinas, when approaching Innocent IV. whom he found surrounded with heaps of gold, "Lo, Thomas!" said the pope, the Church cannot now, as of old, say, Silver and gold have I none.” “No,” replied the grave doctor, nor can she say to the lame, Arise, and

walk."

66