>> 
 u 
 c 
 
 Q> 
 
 B 
 ctf 
 
 •tH 
 
 00 -rH 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 in C 
 0) 
 
 X 73 
 
 PQ O 
 
 o 
 
 0? 
 
 CO <u 
 00 Q> 
 
 [Sion 
 
4 - 
 
I 
 
 # 
 
THE 
 
 TRUE CATHOLIC 
 
 NO 
 
 ROMANIST. 
 
The Holy Catholic Church. 
 
 "Mother of cities ! o'er thy head 
 Bright peace, with healing wings outspread, 
 
 For evermore shall dwell : 
 Let me, blest seat; niy name behold 
 Among thy citizens enroH'd, 
 And bid the world farewell." 
 
 Prayer Book, Hymn 28, v. 5. 
 
THE TRUE CATHOLIC NO ROMIMST : 
 
 A 
 
 VINDICATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 APOSTOLICITY AND IXDEPENDEXCE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH 
 
 ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES. 
 B Y 
 
 REV. WM. H. ODENHEIMER, A. M. 
 Rector of St. Peter's Church, Philadelphia, 
 Author of ihe Origin and Compilation of the Prayer Book. 
 
 " I Believe in The Holy Catholic 
 
 Chubch, the Communion of Saints." 
 
 The Creed. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 
 n. S. H. GEORGE, 26 SOUTH FIFTH ST. 
 1843. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the 
 year 1843, by R. S. H. George, in the Clerk's Office 
 of the District Court of the Eastern District of Penn- 
 Bylvania. 
 
 KING AND BAIRD, PBINTEBS, 
 
 No. 9 George Street. 
 
T O 
 
 THE CAUSE OF CATHOLIC TRUTH 
 AS MAINTAINED 
 
 IN 
 
 THE ONE HOLY AND APOSTOLIC 
 CHURCH OF CHRIST 
 
 IN 
 
 THE UNITED STATES; 
 
 XaiS TIXDICATIOX 
 BY 
 
 ONE WHO MINISTERS AS 
 
 A PRIEST AT HER ALTARS 
 
 IS 
 
 MOST HUMBLY 
 
" I love thy kingdom, Lord, 
 The house of thine abode, 
 The Church our blest Redeemer saved 
 With his own precious blood. 
 
 I love thy Church, O God! 
 
 Her walls before thee stand, 
 Dear as the apple of thine eye, 
 
 And graven on thy hand. 
 
 If e'er my heart forget 
 
 Her welfare, or her wo. 
 Let every joy this heart forsake, 
 
 And every grief o'erflow. 
 
 For her my tears shall fall ; 
 
 For her my prayers ascend ; 
 To her my cares and toils be given, 
 
 Till toils and cares shall end." 
 
 Pbaver Book, Hymn 29. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The reader who has thought the following 
 pages worthy of perusal, is informed that many 
 of the facts contained in them, were published 
 in the columns of one of our religious periodi- 
 cals,* over the signature " Diaconus CathoU- 
 cus." Having attained the object for which 
 they were then published, and the author hav- 
 ing been urged by several for whose judgment 
 he has high respect, is induced to set them 
 forth in a more permanent and extended form, 
 that they may still advance in some degree, the 
 cause of truth in regard to our holy Church. 
 
 A farther inducement to undertake the work, 
 was found in the interest which his fellow 
 
 * The Banner of the Cross. 
 
viii 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Churchmen, and several not of that number, 
 have manifested in the second section of the 
 second chapter of the author's former work on 
 *'The Origin and Compilation of the Prayer 
 Book.'' The section, containing only about 
 forty pages, and embracing a rapid sketch of 
 the ancient history of Christ's Holy Church in 
 Britain, our spiritual mother, has received a 
 degree of attention, which has invited a farther 
 illustration of this interesting and import- 
 ant subject, What was there rapidly sketched 
 in outline, and subordinately, will now appear 
 in detail, and as the prominent feature of this 
 work. For years, the members of the Holy 
 Catholic Church in the United States have 
 borne in comparative silence, the unrighteous 
 misrepresentation of the Romish sect ; know- 
 ing, (as St. Paul, the original founder of their 
 Church has said,) that of faith, hope, and 
 charity, "the greatest of these is charity." 
 And although now in various quarters the 
 Priests of the Church have been forced to 
 publish defences of the faith, and exposures 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 ix 
 
 of the misrepresentations of their erring Romish 
 brethren, yet it is hoped, there will never ap- 
 pear a forgetfulness of this Apostolic grace of 
 charity. 
 
 In the following pages, it is respectfully pre- 
 mised, there will be discovered by equitable 
 and competent judges, no want of charity. 
 That there will be found a plain, and right 
 earnest defence of the Church, and as plain 
 and right honest exposure of the misrepresen- 
 tations of the Romish sect, there is no doubt. 
 But in this, there can be no want of Evangeli- 
 cal charity, which we are taught in holy Scrip- 
 ture to believe " rejoiceth not in iniquity but 
 rejoiceth in the truth."* 
 
 At the very threshold of this book, the au- 
 thor professes what in his heart he feels, cor- 
 dial respect for the persons of Romanists. 
 Their official anathemas and private denuncia- 
 tions against the Church, have not availed to 
 make him respect their persons less ; he and 
 
 ♦ 1 Corinth, xiii. 6. 
 
X 
 
 PREFACE, 
 
 all the membeis of Christ's Holy Church in 
 this land, are taught in their solemn Litany to 
 use the following supplication : 
 
 " That it may please thee to forgive our 
 
 EXEMIES, PERSECUTORS* and SLANDERERS, 
 
 and to turn their hearts ; 
 
 We beseech thee to hear us, good Lord." 
 
 But for the peculiar doctrines of Romanists, 
 neither the author nor any member of the 
 Church bears the least love, for in the same 
 solemn Litany they are taught to supplicate : 
 From all false doctrine, heresy and schism, 
 Good Lord deliver us." 
 
 The distinction between persons and doc- 
 trines is one which approves itself to every 
 reflecting mind ; it is one which in ordinary 
 matters is acted upon by all men. Doubtless 
 there are many who read these words who love 
 the persons of those, whose principles they 
 love not. And our blessed Master loved even 
 
 * Persequar et impugnabo. 
 
 Romish Episcopal Oath. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 xi 
 
 unto death, the death of the Cross, the persons 
 of the Jews, whilst he exposed and preach- 
 ed against their erroneous doctrines and prin- 
 ciples. 
 
 That many of the more violent of the Rom- 
 ish sect, who have been zealous in their attacks 
 upon the Church, will give the author credit 
 for the possession of the above sentiments, is 
 not to be expected. The credit or the discredit, 
 however, which comes from such a source will 
 hardly enter into his consideration. 
 
 It were an easy and much more agreeable 
 task, to have republished some of the vindica- 
 tions of our Church, which the learned Bish- 
 ops of England's noble Church have in times 
 past set forth, but the prospect of being able to 
 adapt facts to present circumstances, has led the 
 author to employ according to his own arrange- 
 ment, the ample materials collected by the indus- 
 try and learning of those " masters of Israel." 
 No credit for originality is asked, or desired, if 
 the facts presented shall suit the present times, 
 
xii 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 and lead the members of Christ's Holy Church, 
 to see the Scriptural, Apostolic and divine char- 
 acter of their Church, and the misrepresenta- 
 tion, as well as erroneous claims of the Romish 
 sect ; if the book shall lead those into whose 
 hands it shall fall, to cleave with every energy 
 of their souls to *' the Catholic faith once de- 
 livered to the Saints," and to reject with the 
 same energy the modern additions and novel 
 innovations of Romanism, and all other 
 schisms, then shall the author have gained all 
 he desired. 
 
 The Holy Catholic Church and Faith of 
 Christ are worthy of our best energies,— on that 
 rock " Christ and His Church" let us plant our- 
 selves, and strive, by God's grace, to commend 
 the faith we profess, not only with our lips but 
 in our lives, by giving up ouiselves to our Mas- 
 ter's service, and by walking before Him in 
 holiness and righteousness all our days. 
 
 W. H. O. 
 
 Philadelphia, 
 Lent, 1843. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Preface, vii. 
 
 Chapter I. 1 
 
 The introduction of Christianity into Britain 
 —St. Paul the founder of the British Church. 
 
 Chapter IT. 21 
 
 The true character of the Holy Catholic 
 Church in England, and the United States. — 
 Her Apostolical Succession through St. Paul 
 and St. Peter. 
 
 Chapter III. 33 
 
 The Double Line of Apostolical Succession, 
 possessed by the Holy Catholic Church in En- 
 gland and the United States. 
 
xiv 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Chapter IV. 47 
 
 The Holy Catholic Church in England and 
 the United States, distinguished from the Ro- 
 man Catholic Church. 
 
 Chapter V. 60 
 
 Tne Ecclesiastical Settlement of the Holy 
 Catholic Church in Primitive Times and the 
 usurpation of the Roman Branch. 
 
 Chapter VI. 73 
 
 The Unity of the Holy Catholic Church dis- 
 turbed by the anti-scriptural and novel doc- 
 trine of the Pope's Supremacy. 
 
 Chapter VII. 86 
 
 The Pope's Supremacy, a new and anti- 
 scriptural doctrine. 
 
 Chapter VIII. 98 
 
 The origin of the new anti-scriptural doc- 
 trine of the Pope's Supremacy. 
 
 Chapter IX. 107 
 
 The progress of the new and anti-scriptura. 
 doctrine of the Pope's Supremacy. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 XV 
 
 Chapter X. 122 
 
 The establishment of the new and anti-scrip- 
 tural doctrine of the Pope's Supremacy. 
 
 Chapter XI. 133 
 
 The palitical character of the Pope's Su- 
 premacy. 
 
 Chapter XII. 150 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
"O Almighty God, who hast built 
 thy Church upon the foundation of 
 the apostles and prophets, Jesus 
 Christ himself being the head cor- 
 ner stone; grsftit us so to be joined 
 together in Unity of Spirit by their 
 doctrine, that we may be made a holy 
 temple acceptable unto thee, through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord." — imen. 
 
 Prayer Book, 
 St. Simon and St. Jude, Apostles. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE INTRODUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY INTO 
 BRITAIN ; ST. PAUL THE FOUNDER OF 
 THE BRITISH CHURCH. 
 
 The subject of the following chapter is of 
 great importance to every Churchman. I 
 shall be intent on facts^ and aim to be per- 
 spicuous : this will account fo^ the arrange- 
 ment of the chapter, and the unadorned 
 character of its statements. My readers 
 may rely upon the historical information, 
 since, it has been compiled with care, from 
 writers of deep erudition and unimpeacha- 
 ble authority. 
 
2 
 
 I. 
 
 Reason for attending to tlie following 
 subject. 
 
 The higher the man, the greater his au- 
 thority. I give the reason in the words of 
 the Bishop of St. David's,* who is styled by 
 " Chevalier," and endorsed by the present 
 Bishop of Maryland,-}- as " a learned and 
 zealous advocate." Just praise from a com- 
 petent source ! 
 
 " St. Paul was not only the founder of the 
 Church of Rome, but of the Church in 
 Britain. Of St. Paul's journey to Britain, 
 a point of great importance in the history of 
 the Gospel, and of the Protestant church, 
 we fortunately possess as substantial evidence 
 as any historical fact can require. 
 
 Some of our most valuable historians 
 have no scruple in acceding to the general 
 testimony of the fathers, that the gospel was 
 
 * Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of St. David's, 
 t Notes to Epist. Clem. Roman. Note A. 
 
3 
 
 preached in Britain by some of the apostles, 
 soon after the middle of the first century, 
 bat shrink from the particular evidences of 
 
 time and person, and in this, it 
 
 is certainly much to be regretted, that ihey 
 have given some advantage to the advocates of 
 popery and injideliiy ; to the former b}^ the 
 suppression of evidences, which disprove 
 the right of supremacy in the church of 
 Rome; and to the latter, by withdrawing 
 some strong and tangible proofs of the truth 
 of Christianity." 
 
 II. 
 
 Cliief cause of tlxe mistakes in refer- 
 ence to tlie early testimonies on tliis 
 subject, and of tl: ant of interest on 
 tlie part of modern charclimen. 
 
 The cause is founded in a most inexcusa- 
 ble ignorance of the importance of Britain 
 in a civil point of view, its well known lo- 
 cality, and its intimate connexion with the 
 imperial city. Some modern writers, espe- 
 
4 
 
 cially of the Romish sect, talk of Britain 
 in early times, as if it were some place in 
 the moon a kind of bombastic expression, 
 like our " far west," the which, the traveller 
 is paradoxically supposed to be receding 
 from, the nearer he approaches. 
 
 And many modern churchmen appear to 
 have no very definite idea of ancient Bri- 
 tain ; save that it was a land of chariots with 
 iron scythes in the wheels, half naked sa- 
 vages, man eaters, and Druids ; and are 
 disposed to give in, to the Romanists con- 
 venient talk, about the early fathers speaking 
 bombastically; and to neglect the investi- 
 gation of this noble argument, which (among 
 many others,) proclaims the wide spread of 
 the gospel, and the apostolical character of 
 the holy Catholic church to which they 
 belong. 
 
5 
 
 III. 
 
 The state of Britain in primitive days, 
 wliicli suljstaijtiates tlie fact of its 
 ■being well known, and of liigh impor- 
 tance. 
 
 After the success of Claudius, (about 
 20 years before Nero, during whose reign 
 St. Paul was martyred) New Settlements 
 were daily made by the Romans. There 
 were Roman colonies, Magistrates, Cities 
 and Ways. 
 
 " There were cities of trade : and Roman 
 merchants were very busy in furnishing 
 necessaries and even superfluities.''^ There 
 was a constant intercourse with Rome ; and 
 in Nero's time, Dio* tells us that one man, 
 and he a philosopher, (Seneca) had 300,000/. 
 at one time, in Britain. Britain was the 
 scene of many notable warlike actions, 
 the occasion of Emperors additional titles 
 and triumphs, the residence of Roman lieu- 
 
 * Xiphil in Neron. 
 
6 
 
 tenants and legions; so that long before 
 the time of Eusebius, the earliest ecclesias- 
 tical historian of note, the British Islands 
 were well known all over the Roman em- 
 pire, and in his time, they were " the talk 
 of the world." Here Constantius died : and 
 here Constantine was declared emperor by 
 the army. So that from the beginning, 
 Britain was a well known, and well de- 
 fined locality.* 
 
 Now with these facts, which the civil, 
 not the religious historians, of earlier days, 
 afford, it is quite absurd to hear the term 
 bombastic^ applied to the language of divers 
 early fathers, when they allude to Britain. 
 Why they knew just as well the situation 
 of Britain, as an intelligent American does 
 that of the West Indies. 
 
 And Clemens Romanus, Eusebius, and 
 their brother writers, would have felt it no 
 
 * See Stilling: Orig. Brit: and Camden's Britan- 
 nia, for farther particulars. 
 
7 
 
 more a compliment, to have been told that 
 they did not know what country was at the 
 " extreme west,'''' than any of my readers 
 would, to be told that they did not know 
 what ocean bounded America on the west. 
 
 IV. 
 
 Certain Romisli opinions concerning 
 Cliristianity in Britain. 
 
 The opinion concerning St. Paul, which 
 some of the ablest divines have maintained, 
 seems to afford rare sport, to a few of the 
 Romish writers, as if nothing could be more 
 chimerical ; I will give a specimen of Romish 
 opinions on the subject of the introduction 
 of Christianity into Britain. 
 
 There is a manuscript in the Vatican Li- 
 brary, (so one* of their historians tells us) 
 which affirms, that Joseph of Jlrimathea 
 came over into Britain to preach the Gos- 
 pel ! — and what is more, he came across the 
 
 * Baionius, A. D. 35, n 5. 
 
8 
 
 Mediterranean sea in " a ship without 
 oars /" and what is better still, he had the 
 good company, as far as Marseilles, of Laz- 
 arusy Mary Magdalen, Martha ! §rc. 
 
 A valuable manuscript that! To which 
 by the way I add the authority of another 
 Romish historian who gives us the informa- 
 tion, that Lazarus was bishop of Mar- 
 seilles.* 
 
 V. 
 
 A brief abstract of tlie testimonies of tlie 
 Fatlicrs of tlie first six centuries to tlie 
 trutli of tliis matter. 
 
 The limits of this work will not allow of 
 the transcript of the original text of the au- 
 thorities quoted below; nor even of a full 
 translation of the context; — a "brief ab- 
 stract" is all that is designed. 
 
 * Bosquet's Ilisl. Eccle : Gallic, lib. I. c. 3. 
 
9 
 
 FIRST CENTURY. 
 
 Clemens Romanus, the friend and fel- 
 low labourer of St. Paul, says, St. Paul 
 went to " the utmost bounds of the west." 
 
 I Not to the moon, but to the "utmost 
 [ bounds of the west:" — the first would be 
 j bombastic, the last, Britain; according to 
 I the ideas of a resident at Rome, as Clement 
 was. 
 
 SECOND CENTURY. 
 
 Iren^us* says " Christianity was propa- 
 gated by the Apostles and their disciples to 
 the utmost bounds of the earth, especially in 
 Spain, and the Celtick nations^'' (viz Germans, 
 
 Gauls, AND BpiTAINS.f ) 
 
 THIRD CENTURY. 
 
 Tertullian:^ says, " Some countries of 
 
 ♦ L. 1. c. 2 and 3. 
 
 f Cluverii Introd. Geog. L. II. c. 5. 
 X Adv. JudcE c. 7. 
 
1« 
 
 10 
 
 the Britons, which proved inaccessible to 
 the Romans, are subject to Christ:* and 
 0 RIG EN confirms ihe general point as to 
 the early extension of Christianity in Britain. 
 
 FOURTH CENTURY. 
 
 EusEBius| says that some of the Apostles 
 passed over the ocean to the British Isles. 
 
 Jerome:|: says that St. Paul having been 
 in Spain, went from ocean to ocean and 
 " preached the Gospel in the western parts 
 including the Britons in this expression, 
 as is evident from other portions of his 
 works. 
 
 Chrysostom,§ witnesses to the great 
 spread of Christianity in Britain. 
 
 FIFTH CENTURY. 
 
 Theodoret says, " Our Fishermen and 
 * In Ezek. 
 
 t Demon. Evan. L. 3. c. 7. 
 
 X Ep. ad, Marcellam, Op. Vol. 1. p. 128, Ed. Lugd. 
 $ Tom. vi. p. 635. 
 
11 
 
 Publicans, and he who was a tent-maker, 
 carried the evang-elical precepts to all na- 
 tions — Scythians, Hunns, Britons. 
 
 He also affirms, that St. Paul "brought 
 salvation to the Islands that lie in the 
 ocean:"* or British Islands, as is evident 
 from Nicephorusj" and again from Chrysos- 
 tom.:|: 
 
 Gildas witnesses to the early introduction 
 of Christianity. § 
 
 SIXTH CENTURY. 
 
 Venantius (A. D. 560-600) says of St. 
 Paul, that he went to Britain. This writer 
 is supposed to speak fiction^ because he 
 speaks in poetry : which is no better com- 
 pliment to the Poets, than the charge of 
 Bombast is to the ancient Fathers. 
 
 * 2 Ep. ad. Tim. iv. 17. 
 t Hist. L. 11. c. 40. 
 t Orat. Tom. I. p. 575. 
 } Op. p, 10. 
 
12 
 
 VI. 
 
 Tlie testimony of two of tliese ancient 
 Fathers, examined in connexion witli 
 attendant circumstances. 
 
 Take for example Clement of Rome, and 
 Eusebius. 
 
 (A.) Clement says " St. Paul preached 
 Righteousness through the whole world, 
 and in so doing he went to the utmost 
 bounds of the west.''^ 
 
 Now this phrase means Britain for five 
 reasons. 
 
 (1.) Britain was in point of fact the ut- 
 most bounds of the west. 
 
 (2.) Clement knew what he was writing 
 about. 
 
 (3.) There are other writers showing 
 that this expression about "/Ae tc-es/'^ -refers to 
 Britain. 
 
 Plutarch calls the British Channel, the 
 Western Ocean. 
 Herodotus says. 'J'lie Celtae are the most 
 
13 
 
 " western of all Europeans :" and the Britons 
 are the most western of the Celtae. 
 
 Horace calls the Britons "ultimos orbis 
 Britanos." 
 
 Catullus calls Britain " ultimam Occiden- 
 tis Insulam."* 
 
 (4.) The fourth reason is one of the 
 strongest, Launoy,"j" a learned Romish writer, 
 rejects the Epistle of Clement, because he 
 says, if it will hold good for St. Paul's going 
 to Gaul, it will hold good for his going to 
 Britain : 
 
 (5.) L. Capellus, another and learned 
 Romanist, rejects the truth about St. Paul, 
 by confessing " that he rejects the common 
 and received opinion of all the Fathers. 
 
 (B.) EusEBius says that the Apostles 
 preached among the Romans, Persians, Ar- 
 menians, &c., and that some passed over 
 
 * Vide Eusebius. Theod. and Arnob. in Ps. 147. 
 t De loc. Sulp. Sev. $ 20. 
 
14 
 
 the ocean to those which are called the Bri- 
 tish Isles. 
 
 1 have three reasons for the high authority 
 and literal truth of this writer. 
 
 (1.) He knew what he was writing 
 about, and therefore spake according to lite- 
 ral geographical truth. 
 
 (2.) His thorough acquaintance with 
 Britain ; being a favourite with the Emperor 
 who was born there : and being acquainted 
 with the Bishops at the Council of Nice, 
 who coming from the west, as well as other 
 parts, could give him information. 
 
 (3.) His desire for accuracy; and the op- 
 portunity for his being accurate, afforded 
 by the favourable circumstances under which 
 he compiled his Ecclesiastical History. 
 
 VII. 
 
 St. Paul liad tlie TIME to goto Britain. 
 
 He was sent prisoner to Rome near the 
 beginning of the reign of Nero, and behead- 
 
15 
 
 ed in the I4tb year of Nero;* hence it was 
 eight years,-\ or more,:j: from his release 
 from his first imprisonment till his death, 
 during which time it has been shown that 
 he went to Britain. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 St. Panl having the time, had the ZE AI*. 
 
 This might be taken for granted ; but re- 
 fer to some of his other journies. 
 
 (1.) His first journey in Asia Minor^ 
 (Acts 13: 14,) lead him from Antioch to 
 Seleucia, Cyprus, Perga, Iconium, Lystra, 
 and Derbe, and back again : The whole jour- 
 ney took three years according- to the Romish 
 Baronius. 
 
 (2.) His second journey, (Acts 15: &:c.,) 
 lead him from Antioch, through Syria and 
 Cilicia, to Derbe, and Lystra, through 
 
 * Euseb. in Chron. Hierom. in Catal. 
 t Godeau vie de St. Paul, 1. ii. p. 2S6. 
 t Baron. A. D. 61. No. 2. and Historia Magdeburg. 
 
16 
 
 Phrygia and Galatia and Mysia, over the 
 sea from Troas to Macedonia, to Thessa- 
 lonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, and then 
 after eighteen months spent in Corinth, 
 back to Syria. All of which took up three 
 years. * 
 
 (3.) His third journey led him from Anti- 
 och over all Galatia and Phrygia in one 
 year. 
 
 IX. 
 
 St. Paul liaving leisure and zeal, liad 
 E:]VC0URAG£M£:NT to go to Britain. 
 
 Because, 
 
 (1.) Of the importance of the place, there 
 being an "infinite number of people,"f and 
 so many Roman settlements, civil, military, 
 and trading. 
 
 (2.) The wife of A. Plautius, the Roman 
 Lieutenant under Claudius in Britain, was 
 
 * Baron, A. D. 51. n. 56. 
 t Cassar, lib. 5. 
 
17 
 
 a Christian,* and probably converted by 
 St. Paiil,-[- also Claudia, the daughter of 
 Caractacus, the celebrated British Chieftan 
 was a Christian, so says Moncaeius a Romish 
 writer.:^ These might inform St. Paul of 
 many reasons for his going to Britain and 
 urge him to go.§ 
 
 X. 
 
 St. Paul h.a'viug' time, zeal, and eucou- 
 ragemeiit, was tlie MOST LlKELiY of 
 all tbe Apostles to go to Britain* 
 
 Because, 
 
 (1.) There is no competition between 
 any of the Apostles, save between St. Paul 
 and St. Peter. !i 
 
 * Tacit Annal 13. c. 32. compared with Piin. Ep. 
 lib. 10. Ep. 98. 
 t Philip. 4. 22. 
 T De Incan. Reg. Ecc. Chr. 
 
 $ Bp. Burgess, p. 323. and 339. and Stillingfleet 
 Or. Br. p. 44. 
 I; The traditions about St. James, Simon Zelotes, 
 B 
 
18 
 
 (2.) St. Peter's visit rests on the autho- 
 rity of a writer of the tenth century,* Si- 
 meon Metaphrastes, and other legendary 
 writers of later date. 
 
 (3.) It was not St. Peter's ^/ace to go to 
 Britain, he being the Apostle of the circum- 
 cision, or of the Jews: as witnessed by 
 Holy Scripture, ancient Fathers, and 
 Romish writers,! especially Baronius4 
 Perhaps the Romish student, on referring 
 to Haronius, may be a little surprised to 
 find him giving his testimony in favour of 
 St. Peter being in Britain, when he has 
 been here quoted for the contrary; but it 
 must cause no surprise, since the only au- 
 thority which he quotes is Simeon Meta- 
 
 and St. Philip, are destitute of any ancient testi- 
 mony. 
 * Burgess p' 840. 
 
 f Gal. 2: 7. Hiero. en loc. Epiph. Hasr. 27. n. 6. 
 Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. c. 1. Petrus de Marca de Con- 
 cord, 1,6. c. 1. n. 4. 
 
 t Baronius A. D. 61. 916. 26— 2g. 
 
19 
 
 phrastes! about whom, in another portion of 
 his works, (A. D. 44, n. 38,) he says " he is 
 of no authority in these matters.^^ 
 
 This is rather contradictory, but Baronius 
 was right in telling the truth of this Simeon, 
 and Linguard,* the Romish Historian, will 
 tell him so, for he calls Simeon, " a treache- 
 rous authority." 
 
 XI. 
 
 Tbe opinions of many of the most 
 learned, and deeply- read Theologians 
 of modern days, agree with the truth 
 of this matter as now presented. 
 
 The language of Camden, is, " the Gospel 
 was preached in Britain in the time of the 
 Apostles, and St. Paul himself was the 
 preacher of it."f 
 
 With this agree Archbishop Parker, 
 Archbishop Usher, Bishops Gibson, Stil- 
 
 * Angl. Sax. Ch.— vol. 1. p. 3. 
 t Brit. Intr. p. 86. 
 
20 
 
 lingfleet, Burgess, Doctors Cave, CoUyer, 
 Nelson, Townsend, &c. 
 
 And 1 beg my readers to notice, that the 
 most learned of those, who will not venture 
 to single out St. Paul as the founder of the 
 British Church, (though admitting that some 
 of the Apostles did found it,) will not posi- 
 tively deny that St. Paul was the founder. 
 Such are Drs. Hales, Fuller, Southey, Che- 
 vallier. Blunt, Bloomfield, Burton, &c. 
 
 Wherefore we conclude, (and amid such 
 a goodly host of Fathers and learned Doc- 
 tors, need not be ashamed of our conclusion, 
 or afraid to maintain it,) that the Gospel of 
 Jesus Christ was preached in Britain, not 
 only by some of the apostles, but by St. 
 Paul, (whose boast it was that the Gospel 
 had been preached " to every nation under 
 heaven:'^'') — and thatbyA/s Apostolic hands, 
 was the Holy Catholic Church established 
 on the shores of our mother land, and thence 
 derived to these United States of America. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE TRUE CHARACTER OF THE HOLY CATHO- 
 LIC CHURCH IN ENGLAND, AND IN THE 
 UNITED STATES. HER APOSTOLIC SUC- 
 CESSION THROUGH ST. PAUL AND ST. 
 PETER. 
 
 I. 
 
 What the Protestant Episcopal Church 
 is not. 
 
 Whatever may be the phraseology some- 
 times used by her members, or those dis- 
 senting from her, the Church is not one of 
 the various sects or denominations which 
 exist around her. It involves no want of 
 charity to assert this, neither does it ar^ie 
 Ijigotry to maintain it. Charity has nothing 
 lo do with the bare statement of a fact, and 
 
22 
 
 bigotry may be seen just as plainly in him 
 who contends for all men being right, as 
 in him who contends that some are right 
 and some wrong. 
 
 With the most unfeigned charity towards 
 the Romish schismatics on the one hand, 
 and the Protestant schismatics on the other: 
 with a free admission of their zeal, sincerity, 
 learning, piety, and salvability, the Protest- 
 ant Episcopal Church has never identified 
 herself with them. She is no sect. 
 
 II. 
 
 What tlie Protestant Episcopal 
 Cliurch. is. 
 
 She is a pure and legitimate branch of 
 "the Holy Catholic Church" of the Apostles' 
 creed, — of " the one Catholic and Apostolic 
 Church," of the Nicene Creed. She is a 
 Protestant Church, because she contends for 
 " the faith once delivered to the saints," and 
 protests, in so doing, against the corrupt 
 
23 
 
 novelties and innovations of the Romish, and 
 all other sects. She is a Catholic Church, 
 because she holds to the doctrine, discipline, 
 and worship, which bind her to that body, 
 universal as to permanency and place, which 
 Christ established as " the pillar and ground 
 of the truth;" and from which they have 
 separated themselves, who reject the Apos- 
 tolic succession of the INIinistry and Doctrine. 
 The "title page" of the Prayer Book tells 
 what the Protestant Episcopal Church is. 
 " The Book of Common Prayer^ and admin- 
 istration of the Sacraments^ and other Rites 
 and Ceremonies of the church according to 
 the use,^^ ^ c. ^c. 
 
 III. 
 
 Tlie Position of the Protestant Spisco- 
 . pal Cliurcli misnnderstoocl* 
 
 With the Romanist there appears a slight 
 
 tincture of design in the misunderstanding : 
 
 with the Protestant dissenter, a want of cor* 
 
 rect information. 
 
24 
 
 Rome wants to be "mother and mistress," 
 and so pretends not to know her elder sister.* 
 
 And so, on the other hand, with the Pro- 
 testant Dissenter : That seems ignorance, 
 (not malice,) which identifying the rise and 
 establishment of the several denominations, 
 with the origin of the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church, thinks we are all one in age, and 
 rightful organization, as well as in bro- 
 therly kindness, and the hope of the Gospel. 
 
 But there need be no misunderstanding : 
 because the Church in England, and in these 
 United States, has ever occupied but one 
 position, high though it be. She points to 
 and condemns those innovations which con- 
 stitute "Romanism" or "Dissent," as the 
 case may be. 
 
 She calls no one "mistress;" she is 
 
 * The British Church, was founded nine years 
 before the Roman Church, as learned Romanists 
 themselves acknowledgp.-Suarez Dcf : Fid. Cath. 1 i. 
 Baronius de MSS. Vat. 
 
25 
 
 OLDER THAN RoME OR GeNEVA ; AND IN- 
 STEAD OF HAVING LEFT ANY OTHER BRANCH 
 
 OF THE Holy Catholic Church, has in 
 England and the United States, been 
 
 LEFT BY those DENOMINATIONS OR SECTS 
 WHICH ARE AROUND HER. 
 
 IV. 
 
 How th.e Churcli in tliese United States 
 maintains HER claims. 
 
 By an appeal to history^ not to opinion ; 
 
 by going to facts rather than to abstract 
 
 argument ; by tracing her succession both in 
 
 her ministry and doctrines, first to the 
 
 Church in England, and then, through that 
 
 Church, to Jesus Christ the chief corner 
 
 stone. 
 
 V. 
 
 How the Cliurtli in England maintains 
 HKR claims. 
 
 By the same appeal to Ecclesiastical His- 
 tory. The existence of a branch of the 
 Holy Catholic Church in England, from the 
 
26 
 
 present time, back to the days of the Apos- 
 ties, is a matter of fact, capable of testimony, 
 which testimony she possesses and adduces, 
 and by it proves beyond all possibility of 
 contradiction, that the present Church in 
 England, is the true, legal, and canonical 
 branch of the Holy Catholic Church, and 
 has been such since the days of the Apostles. 
 
 VI. 
 
 The connexion whicli binds the Churcli 
 in England, (and so in tlie United 
 States) to tlie Apostles. 
 
 This connexion, is Apostolical Succes- 
 sion. And Apostolical Succession, may be 
 considered in reference to the ministry^ or 
 doctrines of a Church. A Church which 
 has the Apostolical Succession of the Mi- 
 nistry, is a true Church as to its ecclesias- 
 tical organization, but if it have not the 
 Apostolical Succession of Doctrine^ there 
 is a radical and essential defect. And in 
 this situation is the Church of Rome. Her 
 
27 
 
 orders may be admitted to be valid, but her 
 doctrines are not the faith once delivered 
 " to the saints," but, to that faith, super- 
 added novelties, which have caused trouble 
 to herself and her sister Churches. 
 
 Now the Holy Catholic Church in Eng- 
 land and in the United States, has the Apos- 
 tolical Succession, ministerial and doctrinal. 
 Her ministry traces back its commission to 
 the Apostles Paul and Peter, and her doc- 
 trines as set forth in her authoritative docu- 
 ments, are " the faith once delivered to the 
 saints," as all admit, who "have diligently 
 read Holy Scripture and ancient authors." 
 
 YTI. 
 
 A sketcli of tlie Apostolical Succession 
 of Ixer Ministry. 
 
 This succession is twofold. One link 
 binds her to the Apostles through St. Paul, 
 the other link binds her to the Apostles 
 through St. Peter. 
 
 (1.) St. Paul went to the British Islands 
 
28 
 
 during his travels in the West. The Church 
 which he founded continued in vigour and 
 comparative purity till the sixth century, 
 when the Saxon invasion rendered necessary 
 the assistance of the neighbouring Irish and 
 Scotch churches, which was freelj^ given, 
 and by their labours the Saxons were mainly 
 converted.* 
 
 This British Church, (strictly so called,) 
 though depressed for a time, was never 
 completely destroyed; and the learned de- 
 fenders of the present Church in England, 
 trace their Apostolical Succession through 
 her, as will be shown under a following 
 section. 
 
 (2.) St, Peter founded the Church at 
 Rome, (say the Romanists, and as this mat- 
 ter chiefly concerns them, we take them on 
 their own ground ;) from St. Peter, there- 
 
 * See the Author's work on " the Origin and Com- 
 pilation of the Prayer Book." 
 
29 
 
 fore, by Apostolical Succession, the Romish 
 Ministry has descended. Now some of 
 these Romish Bishops came into Great Bri- 
 tain in the 6th century, to assist the British 
 Church in converting the Saxpns, just as the 
 Irish and Scotch did. But this assistance, 
 became a curse, since it was the first step 
 towards subjecting the independent and 
 Apostolic Church in Britain, to the unscrip- 
 tural and uncanonical jurisdiction of the 
 Bishop of Rome. During the period of this 
 unrighteous usurpation over the British 
 Church, the Romish line of Apostolic Suc- 
 cession was introduced and continued. 
 British men were led to believe that their 
 allegiance was due to Rome ; they received 
 her innovations for truth, they became min- 
 isters, were ordained Bishops by Rome, and 
 so the Succession of Rome was transmitted 
 down through British men, and in British 
 Churches, to the sixteenth century, to Arch- 
 bishop Craimier. 
 
30 
 
 All these ordinations were valid though 
 uncanonical. Apostolical succession is not 
 affected by the moral character of the Or- 
 dainer or the Ordained. And when British 
 Churchmen were imbued with the errors of 
 Rome, and ministered to, by men whose 
 orders were Romish ; when they knew not 
 the truth, but supposed they were doing 
 right, in receiving the abominable practices 
 of the erring Italian Church, they still were 
 enjoying the blessings of an Apostolic Suc- 
 cession. That succession through Rome, 
 up to St. Peter, has continued since the Pope 
 placed his pall upon the shoulders of the first 
 English Archbishop, down to his present 
 venerable successor. And when Cranmer 
 and the British Church, cast out the doc- 
 trinal errors of Rome, which had been forced 
 upon her in her weakness, and retained in 
 her ignorance, they did not invalidate the 
 Apostolical Succession, for the simple rea- 
 son they could not. Cranmer, once a Bish- 
 
31 
 
 op, (like every one who has received conse- 
 cration) was a/ways a Bishop. The Bishop 
 of Rome, or the Bishop of Pennsylvania, 
 can give, but he cannot take away. The 
 hands of a Bishop once laid upon the head, 
 and the Holy Ghost, received for the work 
 of the ministry, and that Bishop may issue 
 his bulls, his anathemas, he may curse and 
 excoromunicate, — but it is all in vain, the 
 act is done, the Apostolic Succession has 
 gone on, and it is beyond the reach of an- 
 gels, men, or devils, to take away the sacred 
 depositum. 
 
 And thus from St. Peter, through the 
 Romish Succession, as from St. Paul, 
 through the British Succession, the Church 
 in England, and her daughter in these 
 United States, is bound to Jesus Christ, our 
 Lord and our God. 
 
 The Romanist asks with a smile — who 
 ordained Cranmerl And the Churchman re- 
 plies with equal good humour, who ? And 
 
32 
 
 when with an ominous shake of his head, 
 our brother points with his finger, and says, 
 " Rome !" — he is met by a good humoured 
 Catholic smile, which proclaims that the 
 Churchman has no objection to Rome's old 
 Orders, though he has to Rome's neio doc- 
 trines, and feels happy in having the Roman- 
 ist's acknowledgment of the Church's Suc- 
 cession from St. Peter, as well as the 
 acknowledgment of British Churchmen of 
 the Church's Succession from St. Paul. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE DOUBLE LINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCES- 
 SION, POSSESSED BY THE HOLY CATHOLIC 
 CHURCH IN ENGLAND AND THE UNITED 
 STATES. 
 
 Having in the last chapter stated one or 
 two facts connected with the Holy Catholic 
 Church in England and the United States, 
 I beg of my readers to continue their atten- 
 tion, whilst presenting a few of the testimo- 
 nies of the learned men in our Mother 
 Church, to the subject of Apostolical Suc- 
 cession. 
 
 Tlie Protestant Episcopal CImrcli 
 traces back lier^ miuistry to St. PAUIj 
 and St.jPETER.; 
 
 The American Churchman, whose own 
 independent studies, may have led him to 
 3 
 
34 
 
 see how eminently he is blessed, in being 
 united to the Church of the living God, by 
 Apostolical Succession through two chan- 
 nels, will never refuse to receive such conjir- 
 mation of the truth, as comes from men so 
 eminently versed in Ecclesiastical antiqui- 
 ties, as those herewith quoted. And I 
 would venture to direct to ihis double channel 
 of Apostolical Succession, those Church- 
 men who seem to think more lightly than 
 is meet, of that original and only legitimate 
 branch of the Holy Catholic Church in 
 England, the British Churchy specifically so 
 called. 
 
 (1.) Doctor Stanlev, of St. Asaph, in 
 his able exposure of Romish errors, uses the 
 following language: "we have a clergy as 
 properly and truly of Christ's sending, as 
 any church in the world; against whose 
 ordination and mission nothing can be ob- 
 jected ; we dfti'iving the succession of our 
 bishops, not only from their own Augustine, 
 
35 
 
 BUT FROM THE BRITISH BISHOPS BEFORE HIS 
 TIME."* 
 
 (2.) Bishop Burgess of St. David's, 
 who has most satisfactorily vindicated the 
 claims of " Christ, and not St. Peter to be 
 the rock of the Christian Church," sets 
 forth the connexion of the present with the 
 ancient religion of Britain in the following 
 words : " a religion (that of the present holy 
 Catholic Church in England,) endeared to 
 Britain by its high apostolical antiquity, 
 and an inheritance of almost eighteen 
 CENTURIES, in comparison with which the 
 Popery of Britain established for a few cen- 
 turies after the Norman conquest, was a mo- 
 dern usurpation,''^ -\ 
 
 (3.) Dr. Pusey of Oxford, in his letter 
 to the Lord Bishop, gives the following tes- 
 timony, which is to be looked upon as the 
 
 * Enchirdion Theologicum, p. 105. 
 t Church Armd. II. 349. 
 
36 
 
 result of the thoughtful studies of a most 
 learned, well read and withal gentle-church- 
 man. 
 
 " The Apostolical succession then is not 
 an abstract argument but a tangible fact, the 
 value of which any plain man can feel. 
 Any one can understand that our Lord pro- 
 mised to be with the Apostles and with their 
 successors to the end of the world ; nor do 
 any other even claim to be the successors 
 
 OF THE ORIGINAL BlSHOPS OF OUR ChURCH, 
 WHO WERE ORDAINED BY ApOSTLES OR APOS- 
 
 TOLic MEN, except those who now Jill the sees, 
 the Bishops of the Anglo- Catholic Church,''''* 
 {or the present English Church.") 
 
 (4.) Doctor Hook, Chaplain to Queen 
 Victoria, adds his testimony in the fol- 
 lowing w^ords : 
 
 " The present Church of England is the 
 old Catholic Church of England, reformed 
 
 * Letter p. 117. 
 
37 
 
 in the reigns of Henry, Edward, and Eliza- 
 beth, of certain superstitious errors, it is the 
 same church which came down from our Bri- 
 tish AND Saxon ancestors.'^''* 
 
 Listen again to this noble son of Eng- 
 land's noble Church, and remember he ap- 
 peals to Records and Documents ; — there is 
 no fancy or imagination about this : 
 
 " The founders or planters of the Church 
 of England, both Britons and Saxons, 
 were Bishops ordained by other Bishops, 
 precisely as is the case at the present time; 
 the catalogue has been carefully and provi- 
 dentially preserved from the beginning. And 
 the Bishops who ordained them had been 
 ordained by other Bishops, and go back to 
 the apostles who ordained the first Bishops, 
 being themselves ordained by Christ."]- 
 
 (5.) Ingram, the motto of whose work 
 
 * " Hear the Church," p. 14. 
 t " Hear the Church," pp. 15, 16, 
 
38 
 
 shows the taste of the man, thus witnesses 
 to the present subject.* 
 
 " From the time of Augustine to the Re- 
 formation, there is no difficulty in tracing 
 the Episcopal Succession, not only through 
 the Anglo Saxon Churchy but also through 
 
 THE NATIVE BRITISH ANdIrISH CHURCHES."f 
 
 (6.) Palmer in his " Origines Liturgi- 
 cse," is not at all less decided in his testi- 
 mony, and to those who know his thorough 
 acquaintance with Ecclesiastical History, 
 the following will be perfectly satisfactory : 
 
 " The ancient British Bishops^ who sat in 
 the councils of Aries and Nice, in the 4th 
 century, were followed by a long line of suc- 
 cessors, who governed dioceses in Britain ; 
 
 * "Id verius quod prius, id prius quod et ab initio^ 
 id ab initio quod ab Apostolis." That is the truer 
 which is first, that is first which is from the begin- 
 ning, that is from the beginning which is from the 
 Apostles. 
 
 I True Char, of Ch. Eng. p. 57. 
 
39 
 
 so were those prelates from Ireland, who in 
 the seventh century, converted a great por- 
 tion of the pagan invaders of Britain ; and 
 so also was Augustine, Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, who was sent by Gregory of Rome 
 about the same time, and who preached to 
 another portion of the Anglo-Saxons. The 
 Churches deriving their m'igin from these 
 THREE SOURCES, Were governed hy prelates^ 
 who all filled distinct dioceses; and these dioceses 
 have been occupied by a regular series of 
 Bishops, canonically ordained, from the be- 
 ginning down to the present day.^^ 
 
 Hear again this true Catholic: 
 
 " We stand on the ground of prescriptive 
 and immemorial possession, not merely from 
 the times of Patrick and Augustine, but from 
 
 THOSE more remote AGES, WHEN THE BISH- 
 OPS AND PRIESTS THAT WERE OUR PREDECES- 
 SORS ATTENDED THE COUNCILS OF ArLES AND 
 
 Nice, when Tertullian and Origenbore wit- 
 
40 
 
 ness that the fame of our Christianity had 
 extended to Africa and the East." 
 
 (7.) I will only quote one more testimo- 
 ny, but it is a testimony which will do good 
 to the hearts of our zealous, (pity they force 
 me to add schismatical) Romish brethren •* 
 inasmuch as their very learned and generous 
 Fathers, met in solemn conclave, and passed 
 a vote of thanks, and sent a letter of thanks, 
 for the erudition which had been displayed 
 by the following Bishop, in his defence of 
 the doctrir\e of the Holy Trinity. 
 
 Bishop Bull is the man ; and by way of 
 introducing his testimony to the present sub- 
 ject, let me give, for the benefit of both Holy 
 Catholics and Roman Catholics, the testi- 
 mony of the Romish Clergy of France, with 
 the Bishop of Meaux at their head. I quote 
 the words of the Bishop of Meaux's letter to 
 Robert Nelson, dated St. Germain en Laye, 
 July 24, 1700. 
 
 " As to Dr. Bull's performance — it is ad- 
 
41 
 
 mirable, and the matter he treats could not 
 be explained with greater learning and 
 greater judgment. This is what I desire 
 you would be pleased to acquaint him with, 
 and, at the same iime, with the unfeigned 
 ongratuJatiom of all the clergy of 
 France, assembled in this place ^ for the ser- 
 vice, &c. &:c. 
 
 What think you, now, does this Doctor of 
 " great learning and great judgment" say 
 about the early British Church, and the infu- 
 sion of Romanism in after days 1 Let him 
 speak for himself. 
 
 " And to come nearer home, it is affirmed 
 by some learned men of the Roman Church, 
 that our Britain received the Gospel before 
 Rome." 
 
 " Our Church of Britain was never under 
 the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, for 
 the first six hundred years : this being the 
 ancienV privilege of the British Church, we 
 have an undoubted right of exemption from 
 
42 
 
 the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, by 
 the ancient Canons : — we did indeed yield 
 ourselves to the Roman usurpation^ but it 
 was because we could not help it ; we were 
 at first forced, awed and affrighted into this 
 submission : — indeed we have very great 
 reason to resume our primitive right and 
 privilege of exemption from the jurisdiction 
 of the Bishop of Rome." 
 
 Now, Churchmen, these are testimonies 
 not to be laughed down, nor to be 'passed by 
 with affected contempt by apv. '-pholar. And 
 what I pray you, is, keep int ^ese v» ' ■ - 
 nesses to the historical tr?-> ^^o\ir 
 Church's origin and succession, v.n'less''yor. 
 can find better; especially remember Bishop 
 Bull, and if your erring brother of-Ronv 
 should ever venture to bring up ^k' obie 
 tions a hundred times refuted, and strive 
 wrest your birth right away, why, treat hmi 
 gently, for he is your brother; treat him 
 kindly, for the sake of " the Bishop of Meaux 
 
43 
 
 and all the clerofy of France," who met toge- 
 ther to praise the learning and judgment of 
 Doctor Bull : But give him right plainly 
 the testimony of this Doctor, (in common 
 with all the others,) to the British Church 
 being established before that of Rome : to its 
 (as well as the Romish Church,) having 
 brought down to us, through the Church in 
 England, the holy and life sustaining prin- 
 ciple of Apostolical Succession. Do not be 
 talked out of the high and glorious privi- 
 leges which ^-^long to you, as members of 
 <it)4t Chr inst which the gates of hell 
 
 sh"^^ vail. 
 
 1 x'he Church, I say, which as American 
 Ohristians ought to be as dear to every 
 ^hurc'^man as that country itself. For as I 
 -^rite ilte*:^ lines the merry peals of old Christ 
 iirch bells linger on my ear ; they have 
 l)een welcoming the birth day of our beloved 
 Washington.* And George Washington 
 * Written on the 22d day of February. 
 
44 
 
 was a Protestant Episcopalian, a member of 
 the holy Catholic Church in these United 
 States. 
 
 Here is a claim which the Church has upon 
 us as Americans which ought not to be forgot- 
 ten. In her orgainzation, she corresponds 
 most happily with the organization of our 
 country. Sprung as she has from the same 
 source whence we derive our national origin, 
 for as Churchmen and as Americans we look 
 back to old England ; Founded as the Church 
 was by the same hands that laid the comer- 
 stone of our Republic; Boasting as she does 
 that her best loved Bishop was the chaplain 
 of our Congress; that the leader of the 
 American army was a communicant at her 
 altar ; — these things considered, we do well 
 to think and speak of them, and to feel an 
 honourable pride both in the thought and 
 speech. 
 
 When, then, you hear the members of the 
 Romish sect boasting of their Carroll of 
 
45 
 
 Carrollton, hear them patiently, for a right 
 honourable patriot he was, and does honour 
 to the name of Romanist which he bore 
 but let these friends of ours, be instructed, 
 that to the Church of Lee, and Rutledge, and 
 Middleton, and Jay, and Hamilton,and Madi- 
 son, and Marshall, and Morris, of Bishop 
 White and George Washington, it belongs 
 to claim the gratitude of this American peo- 
 ple. 
 
 Long, then, may old Christ Church bells 
 ring their merry chime, to welcome the birth 
 day of George Washington, a communicant 
 of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Old 
 bells, ye have the right, for your music is 
 the music of ancient days : ye can chaunt 
 the natal song of all the denominations about 
 you, and may ye remain to sound the glorious 
 requiem, which shall tell of Romish and 
 dissenting brothers, dead to their violations 
 of the Church's unity, and bom again to 
 
46 
 
 the privileges of that Apostolic bravicii of the 
 holy Catholic Church, the American Protest- 
 ant Episcopal Church. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE HOLV CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ENGLAND 
 AND THE UNITED STATES, DISTINGUISHED 
 FROM THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 
 
 There are some farther points connected 
 with the subject which the last chapter 
 touched on, to which the attention of Church- 
 men ought to be turned. Without farther 
 preliminaries, I shall attempt to point them 
 out. 
 
 I. 
 
 What the HOLY Catholic Church is 
 NOT, and what the ROMAN Catholic 
 Clxurch IS. 
 
 Inasmuch as the subject herewith pre- 
 sented, is a little confused by our Romish 
 brethren, let us look into the matter, with 
 special reference to them. The Holy Catho- 
 
48 
 
 lie Church is not any one branch of it; 
 though it be proper to speak of the Holy 
 Catholic Church in this or that country, 
 meaning the true and legitimate branch of 
 it, which God has planted in said country. 
 Now, this seems a self-evident truth, inas- 
 much as a part cannot be equal to the whole. 
 But self-evident truths are passed over 
 by some persons, so that it will not do, to 
 take any thing for granted. 
 
 The Holy Catholic Church, in its ex- 
 tended meaning, is not therefore any indivi- 
 dual branch, whether it be the Syrian Catho- 
 lic, Grecian Catholic, African Catholic, 
 Roman Catholic, English Catholic, or Ame- 
 rican Catholic. It is just as absurd to talk 
 of the Holy Catholic Church, and mean 
 the Roman Catholic Church, as if you were to 
 talk of the world, and mean the city of Rome. 
 In Italy, or within the limits of the ancient 
 western Patriarchate, the Romish Church 
 may be regarded as a legitimate though im- 
 
49 
 
 pure branch of the Holy Catholic Church. 
 But in England and these United States, the 
 Romish Church is a sed^ being in a state of 
 Ecclesiastical (as well as Doctrinal) Schism, 
 with that branch of the Holy Catholic 
 Church in these United States, which is 
 known under the name of " The Protestant 
 Episcopal Church." 
 
 H. 
 
 Romanists in England and tbe United 
 States are SCHISMATICS. 
 
 I In Italy, the Church of Rome, having 
 1 never separated from an older Church, is 
 
 not schismatical, though her grievous cor- 
 I ruptions in doctrine, discipline and worship, 
 I show how far from Catholic puritj' she has 
 
 departed. 
 
 But in England and the United States the 
 case of the Romanists is materially differ- 
 ent. They are not only corrupt in doctrine, 
 discipline and worship, but are Schismatical, 
 4 
 
50 
 
 having separated from the English Church 
 in the eleventh year of Queen Elizabeth. 
 This whole matter shall be given in the lan- 
 guage of the learned Mr. Palmer. 
 
 " When certain individuals, in obedience 
 to the exhortations of papal emissaries, or to 
 directions of Roman Pontiffs, went out and 
 separated themselves from the Communion 
 of the Catholic Church of their country, 
 when they established rival altars, a rival 
 priesthood, and endeavoured to withdraw 
 the faithful from obedience to their legitimate 
 pastors ; then it is plain that such men were 
 guilty of that aggravated sin which the Se- 
 cond (Ecumenical Council calls heresy; and 
 that they were altogether cut off from the 
 unity of the Church. Such was the conduct 
 of the Romish or popish party in England 
 and Ireland. It is certain that during the 
 reigns of Henry VIII., and successors, until 
 the eleventh year of Queen Elizabeth's 
 reign, there were not two separate commu- 
 
51 
 
 nions and worships. All the people were 
 subject to the same pastors, attended the 
 same Churches, and received the same sa- 
 craments. It was only about the year 1570 
 that the popish party, at the instigation of 
 foreign emissaries, separated itself and fell 
 from the Catholic Church of England. 
 
 " Schismatics do not cease to be so by a 
 mere change of country : therefore the Pa- 
 pists who went from this country (Great 
 Britain and Ireland) to establish themselves 
 in the United States of North America, were 
 schismatics when they arrived there; and 
 always remaining separated from that branch 
 of the Catholic Apostolic Church which 
 was established there, they only perpetuated 
 their schism. In fine, when America re- 
 ceived Bishops from our Churches, the 
 schismatics constituted a rival Episcopacy,* 
 
 * The Church of the United States received the 
 Episcopacy from Scotland in 1784, and from England 
 in 1787. 
 
52 
 
 and so remain to this day separated from 
 the true Church/' 
 
 III. 
 
 What the BRITISH CHURCH is. 
 
 It is well to attend to even the different 
 names by which the same things are called. 
 By the British Church is meant, nothing 
 more nor less than the legitimate and canon- 
 ical branch of the Holy Catholic Church in 
 the ancient " Western Islands," or England, 
 Scotland and Ireland. The term " British 
 Church," is also used to denote specially 
 the Holy Catholic Church in England, 
 which existed from the 1st to the 7th cen- 
 tury, without any mixture of Romanism. 
 The terms " Anglo-Saxon," " Anglo-Ro- 
 man" and "English Church," are only 
 other names for the British Church under 
 
 The Roman Pontifl" having erected the rival Bish- 
 opric of Ballimore, its Hrst Bishop was consecrated in 
 1790, and headed the Ilomiin schism in America. 
 
53 
 
 different phases, as shall be shown in the 
 following section. 
 
 IV. 
 
 The various NAMES by Tvliichi tlie Holy 
 Catholic Cliiircli in England and the 
 United States has been known. 
 
 It is of the highest importance, in order to 
 clearness of apprehension, to bear in mind the 
 truth that names do not alter things. And yet 
 it has been through a forgetfulness or inatten- 
 tion to this one point, as much as any thing 
 else, that there are indistinct notions of 
 the existence of the Holy Catholic Church 
 in Great Britain. 
 
 The Church was established in Britain 
 by St. Paul and Apostolic men, and it has 
 existed there since that time down to the 
 present hour ; and from that Church we are 
 descended. It is very true, that owing to 
 circumstances her name has changed, but 
 the Church has not changed. Now, in look- 
 
54 
 
 ing at the Holy Catholic Church in England, 
 (and in the United States,) with respect to 
 the gradual encroachments of the Romish 
 Church, we may say, that from the time of 
 St. Paul down to the present day, the Church 
 has assumed five names. 
 
 (1.) From the 1st to the 7th century, she 
 may be called " The British Church," and 
 was without the shadow of Romish influ- 
 ence. 
 
 (2.) From the 7th to the 11th century, 
 she may be called "The Anglo-Saxon 
 Church." This was not a new Church, 
 but the British Church, with a comparative- 
 ly mild infusion of Romanism. 
 
 (3.) From the Uth to the 16th century, 
 she may be called "The Anglo-Roman 
 Church." This was the same Holy Catho- 
 lic British Church, with a virulent infusion 
 of Romanism. 
 
 (4.) From the 16th to the 19th century, 
 she may be called " The English Church," 
 
55 
 
 which, like each of the other names, does 
 not indicate a new Church, but only a new 
 state, viz. the state in which ancient British 
 privileges had been resumed, by a thorough 
 expulsion of Romanism in any form, mild 
 or virulent. 
 
 (5.) In the United States, the same Holy 
 Catholic Church goes by the name of the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church. 
 
 From Apostolic times, therefore, down to 
 this day, the Holy Catholic Church in Eng- 
 land has existed, at first pure, then infected, 
 then thoroughly diseased, and then healed, 
 and restored to her primitive purity. 
 
 Now there are some, especially among 
 our Romish brethren, who carmot see all 
 this, but think that there must be somewhat 
 of magic^ in preserving continuity amid such 
 strange vicissitudes. But really, if they can 
 believe that the present Romish Church, is 
 the same as that which St. Peter founded ; 
 or their present faith, that which St. Paul 
 
56 
 
 preached when he " dwelt at Rome in his 
 own hired house," they ought not to pre- 
 tend any difficulty in this matter.* 
 
 It is just as easy for us to see how the 
 Holy Catholic Church in England, should 
 have passed through the several stages of 
 British, Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Roman, and 
 English, and yet pieserveher Holy Catholic 
 identity, as it is for us to see how the same 
 human being can pass through the several 
 stages of infancy, childhood, youth, matu- 
 rity, and old age ; or again, how the same 
 man can be well at one time, indisposed at 
 a second, deadly sick at a third, and quite 
 restored at a fourth time. 
 
 Bearing this truth in mind, you will see 
 how ridiculous is the lament of Italian 
 
 * For an admirable exposure of the difterence be- 
 tween the Catholic and Romish faith, see a little 
 treatise entitled " Roman Fallacies and Catholic 
 Truths," published by the New York Tract Society, 
 as Tract No. 163. 
 
57 
 
 Churchmen for their possessions in England, 
 as will be noticed in the next section. 
 
 V. 
 
 The Lament of tlie ROMISH CHURCH, 
 for lier possessions in Euglaud. 
 
 You often hear the adherents of the Ita- 
 lian Church, talking of the injustice of 
 the Reformation in taking away their Cathe- 
 drals, their endowments, etc. etc., so that 
 one who listens to them would suppose 
 that the Romanists had both civil and 
 Ecclesiastical possession of Great Bri- 
 tain since Apostolic days. No, say they, 
 but we ought to have possession since Aii- 
 gustin's days. Just as if the Saxon inva- 
 ders, (a small part of whom Augustin 
 preached to,) having eaten up bodily the 
 poor Britons, and swallowed the ground, 
 and timber, and stone, Augustin had brought 
 an importation of Italian soil, and timber, 
 and stone, and men, to reconstruct and esta- 
 
58 
 
 blish the Ocean Isles. Their possessions in 
 England! Why, who but English Churchmen 
 gave the church endowments, and in what but 
 the sweat of English brows were the old Ca- 
 thedrals of our mother land reared ? From 
 what but English quarries were the stones 
 dug, and whence but from her ancient 
 forests were the beams and rafters of the 
 noble minsters hewn 1 It is true, that often- 
 times Italians stood as taskmasters over 
 Englishmen, and even Englishmen them- 
 selves, through ignorance, were ordained to 
 the same office, deceived as they were into 
 the belief that the Roman usurper had the 
 right to do this thing. But the Holy Ca- 
 tholic Church in England, even with its 
 worst infusion of Romanism, was the Eng- 
 lish Church Deformed, just as now the 
 Church in England is the English Church 
 Reformed. 
 
 And for Italian, or Romish Churchmen, 
 to lament over the loss of their endowments 
 
59 
 
 in Great Britain, is as ludicrous as if the 
 Pope were to issue a Bull against the sun 
 I shining, or the rain falling upon our Mother 
 ! land, and then with his followers, set up a 
 lugubrious lamentation for his failure. 
 
 If advice were of use, we should tell our 
 Romish brethren, to dry their tears, and put 
 jj a good face on the loss of their endowments, 
 " Cathedrals, etc., because, if the noble Ca- 
 thedral was built through their influence, 
 why, it was built on English soil, from Eng- 
 lish quanies, and by English men, and their 
 influence or superintendence, is only the 
 Ground Rent which the Holy Catholic 
 Church in England, charged her Sister in 
 Italy, for her long and intrusive influence in 
 England. 
 
 It was the triumph of Holy Catholic prin- 
 ciple over English indignation, when our 
 Mother Church expelled in so kind and legal 
 a way, the intruding and blighting influence 
 of the Roman Pontiff. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE ECCLESIASTICAL SETTLEMENT OF THE 
 HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IN PRIMITIVE 
 TIMES, AND THE USURPATION OF THE RO- 
 MAN BRANCH. 
 
 Having now given an outline of the more 
 important facts tending to show the true 
 character of the English and American 
 branches of the Church of Christ, I proceed 
 to a more general but equally important mat- 
 ter, viz. the organization of the Church Ca- 
 tholic in primitive days, and the great cause 
 of division and trouble which the Roman 
 branch has created. 
 
61 
 
 I. 
 
 A GKNERAJL. Sketcli of Early Cliurcli 
 Arrangements. 
 
 The Divine organization of the Ministry, 
 as "is evident unto all men, diligently read- 
 ing Holy Scriptures and ancient authors," is 
 Episcopal, according to the three orders, 
 Bishops, Priests and Deacons. The first 
 order only having the right or the power to 
 ordain, and all Bishops being equal in spiri- 
 tual supremacy. But in the process of time, 
 and for the sake of aonvenieme^ the Bishops 
 of a given Province, permitted the Bishop of 
 the chief city to have priority in various 
 matters, and called him Metropolitan or 
 Archbishop. For the same reason, the vari- 
 ous Metropolitans or Primates of the differ- 
 ent Provinces, permitted one to be first 
 among ihem^ (just as each Metropolitan was 
 first apiong his Bishops,) and called him 
 Patriarch. 
 
62 
 
 But be it remembered, that Patriarchs or 
 Metropolitans, were — in original spiritual 
 power — nothing more than Bishops. It did 
 not make a man more than a Bishop, in so 
 far as original spiritual supremacy was con- 
 cerned, for his brother Bishops to allow him 
 priority for the sake of convenience, and give 
 him the name of Metropolitan ; nor again, 
 when Metropolitans were multiplied, to se- 
 lect one of their number, and call him Pa- 
 triarch. It is well not to be misled by 
 names : neither to be confused as to original 
 and essential equality among Bishops, be- 
 cause of certain inequalities in minor matters, 
 adopted for the sake of convenience. 
 
 Patriarch, Primate, Metropolitan, Arch- 
 bishop, Pope and Cardinal, are only other 
 names for that plain thing " Bishop." There 
 is not a jot more of original, essential, spi- 
 ritual supremacy in the Patriarch of Con- 
 stantinople, the Pope of Rome, or the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, than there is in that 
 
63 
 
 venerable man, who justly bears the plain 
 but honoured title of Bishop of Pennsylva- 
 nia. 
 
 In so far as essential spiritual power goes, 
 there is no manner of difference ; in so far as 
 Ecclesiastical arrangement founded on con- 
 venience goes, there is a difference. 
 
 II. 
 
 A more PARTICULAR gketch of tlic 
 MATURE ariaugemeuts of tlie Early 
 Cliurcli. 
 
 It was a convenience, and perhaps a pride, 
 in early times, to have the polity of the 
 Church modeled, to a very great extent, after 
 the arrangements of the civil government. 
 Keeping this fact in view, this whole matter 
 will become comparatively clear. 
 
 (1.) The most mature form into which the 
 government of the Roman Empire was cast, 
 in the time of Constantine, was into Praefec- 
 tures, Dioceses, and Provinces. There were 
 
64 
 
 four Praefectures, thirteen Dioceses, and one 
 hundred and eighteen Provinces. Each Prae- 
 fecture contained several Dioceses ; each 
 Diocese several Provinces ; each Province a 
 Metropolis, and cities and towns. 
 
 (2.) Remembering this gradation of Prae- 
 fecture. Diocese, Province, Metropolis, Ci- 
 ties and towns ; it will give an idea, suffi- 
 ciently accurate, if we regard a Patriarch as 
 answering to the Praefed who has jurisdic- 
 tion over a Praefecture; a Primate as an- 
 swering to the Exarch who had jurisdiction 
 over a Diocese ; a Metropolitan as answering 
 to a Proconsul who has jurisdiction over a 
 Province ; a Bishop as answering to the 
 Judge who had jurisdiction over the City 
 and its adjoining towns. There were, how- 
 ever many Bishops who had no Metropoli- 
 tans, and were hence called independent." 
 
 Among the most important of those Bish- 
 ops, who according to the Conventional 
 arrangement possessed a priority of order, 
 
65 
 
 and bore the name of Patriarchs, were the 
 Patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Alexan- 
 dria, Antioch, and Jerusalem.* 
 
 III. 
 
 The limits of the Patriarchates of COX- 
 STANTlNOPIiE, AliEXANDRIA, AN- 
 TIOCH, and JERUSALEM. 
 
 (1.) The Patriarch of Constantinople 
 (who was in essential spiritual power only a 
 Bishop^) had a primacy of order, over the 
 three Dioceses of Asiana, Pontica and 
 Thrace, containing twenty- five provinces, 
 
 (2.) The Patriarch of Alexandria, (a 
 mere Bishop^) had a like primacy over Egypt, 
 
 ♦ For more specific information, reference may be 
 had to 
 
 Bingham Antiq. b. ix. 
 Basnage Hist, de I'Eglise, tome 1. 
 Mosheim's Ecc. Hist. I. 282. 
 Ludov. Thomas's Discip. Ecc. Vet. 
 Pagi Critica in Barronii Annal. I. 29. 
 Cave's Essay on Anc. Ch. Gov. 
 
 5 
 
66 
 
 Libya and Pentapolis, which embraced the 
 Civil Diocese of Egypt and extended into 
 Abyssinia. 
 
 (3.) The Patriarch of Antioch (a mere 
 Bishop,) had a like primacy over one por- 
 tion of the Civil Diocese of the East: the 
 number of Metropolitans, &c. under him is 
 too numerous to be detailed. 
 
 (4.) The Patriarch of Jerusalem (a mere 
 Bishop,) had a like primacy over the other 
 portion of the Eastern Diocese, embracing 
 the three Palestines, to Mount Sinai and the 
 borders of the East. 
 
 IV. 
 
 The limit of tlie PATRIARCH or POPE 
 of ROME'S jiirisdiction. 
 
 We have reserved the limits of the Bishop 
 of Rome's jurisdiction for a notice in the last 
 place, because this bishop has forgot the mo- 
 desty of a bishop ; transgressed ancient 
 canons by gradually usurping authority 
 over independent Metropolitans and their 
 
67 
 
 churches ; and violated the intention of 
 Christ and the unity of the Holy Catholic 
 Church by the novel claim of the Papacy. 
 
 Now so far was the Bishop of Rome's ju- 
 risdiction from extending over the whole 
 world, or the western provinces, that it did 
 not extend to the whole of Italy and Sicily. 
 
 His jurisdiction was over Campania, 
 Tuscia, Umbria, Scilia, Apulia, Calabria, 
 Lucania, Samnium, Sardinia, Corsica, Va- 
 leria. 
 
 The Bishop (called Patriarch or Pope) of 
 Rome had no authority even over his near 
 neighbour the Bishop (or Metropolitan) of 
 Milan. The proofs of this are so plain, that 
 the learned Romanists of other days fairly 
 give it up.* 
 
 The same independence was possessed 
 and exercised by the Church of Aquileia; 
 and Gregory the Great felt the influence of 
 
 * De Marca, with facts given by Cave, p. 206-9. 
 
68 
 
 the indignant and independent Church of 
 Aquileia. 
 
 And so again, any student of history may 
 discover the modest limits, (modest in com- 
 parison with his after innovations and usur- 
 pations,) of the Bishop of Rome's jurisdic- 
 tion, in the case of the independent Church 
 of Ravenna. 
 
 But let us pass on in another section, to 
 another important point. 
 
 V. 
 
 How far the Bisliop or Pope of Rome's 
 jurisdiction DID JVOT extend. 
 
 It may seem almost needless to say any 
 thing farther on this point, after having seen 
 that the Bishop of Rome had no jurisdiction 
 over even his next door neighbour. But we 
 make a distinct section, in order to recapitu- 
 late the principle of this whole matter, and 
 to bring out the independence of one church 
 in particular. 
 
69 
 
 This primacy of honour, then, or ecclesi- 
 astical arrangement, whereby one Bishop 
 was suffered to have a convenient priority 
 among his equals^ gave not one jot of essen- 
 tial spiritual supremacy to the Bishop, Pa- 
 triarch, or Pope of Rome, over and above 
 I that which every Bishop, Patriarch or Pope, 
 j (for this formidable name Pope is quite a 
 i harmless and common title,) possessed. 
 
 All the Councils which have ever con- 
 vened in the Universal Church of God, 
 could not give that which Jesus Christ alone 
 can give, viz: — an increase of original, es- 
 ^seniial, spiritual power. 
 
 The power which Christ c?ic? give, he gave 
 to a// his Apostles, and hence to all their suc- 
 cessors, the Bishops. That power they 
 always possessed, they now possess, and 
 always will possess. Any difference in pri- 
 
 Iority, is only a difference of honor, or re- 
 spect, no matter how far it extends, or whe- 
 ther arising from conventional agreement, 
 
70 
 
 or claimed by usurpation, and maintained 
 by fraud and force. 
 
 Now this primacy or priority of honor, 
 which his brother bishops condescended to 
 grant to the Bishop of Rome, (call him Me- 
 tropolitan, Primate, Patriarch, or Pope, as 
 you please,) was just such a priority as was 
 possessed by the Bishops or Patriarchs of 
 Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and 
 Jerusalem ; and did not extend, of course, 
 to any part of the Eastern Church, nor to 
 Africa ; not even to the whole of Italy, nor 
 to fi!7iy part of Spain, France, Britain, or 
 Ireland. These churches had either their 
 own Patriarchs, or their independent Metro- 
 politans or Bishops, 
 
 Hence the Holy Catholic Church in Eng- 
 land, Scotland and Ireland, in other words 
 the British Church, was entirely indepen- 
 dent of the Bishop of Rome, even as it re- 
 gards the conventional arrangement of patri- 
 archal jurisdiction. Love, respect, and honor 
 
71 
 
 for Rome, the sister churches always paid, 
 and ancient Rome in return always repaid 
 this Catholic feeling. And when Romanists 
 pretend to quote as authorities for an admis- 
 sion of the " Pope's Supremacy," the high 
 expressions of respect from certain churches, 
 the visits paid to Rome by their members, 
 and much more of this kind of evidence, 
 their logic is about as bad as their historical 
 knowledge.* But these, and some kindred 
 points of interest will be made clearer here- 
 after. For, fellow Churchmen, it becomes 
 somewhat a matter of gratitude to repay the 
 labors of our good Romish brethren, who 
 have investigated (pity so inaccurately and 
 unsatisfactorily) the origin of our bishops 
 and the Holy Catholic Church, whose mem- 
 bers we are, by investigating the origin of 
 their Bishops, who, under the name of 
 Popes, liave gradually invaded the indepen- 
 
 * Consult 3 Cau. Counc. Constant: 9 and 28 can. 
 Counc. Chalced: 36 can. Counc. in Trullo. 
 
72 
 
 dence of sister churches, till they have rent 
 the Universal Church of God with grievous 
 wounds; and despite of rebukes, specially 
 that of our Mother Church of England, still 
 continue to disturb the peace of Christen- 
 dom, and give cause to the enemies of the 
 faith to blaspheme. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE UNITY OF THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH 
 DISTURBED BY THE ANTI-SCRIPTURAL AND 
 NOVEL DOCTRINE OF THE POPe's SUPRE- 
 MACY. 
 
 The grand and essential doctrine among 
 the novelties* held by the Romish dissen- 
 ters, one, too, which is the chief cause of 
 their schism, is the supremacy of the Pope. 
 A doctrine, however, which is easy of settle- 
 ment, and which has been most triumphantly 
 refuted on the ground of Holy Scripture and 
 antiquity. If any of my readers would see this 
 
 * For an excellent and brief exposure of the novel- 
 ties of Romanism, see a Sermon by Dr. W. F. Hook, 
 entitled "The Novelties of Romanism, or Popery 
 refuted by Tradition." New York ed. 1843. 
 
74 
 
 unrighteous novelty completely disposed of, 
 let them study " Barrow on the Pope's Su- 
 premacy," a book unanswered and unan- 
 swerable. 
 
 Now, fellow Churchmen, you often hear 
 yourselves called schismatics and heretics, 
 and your Church, which apostles and mar- 
 tyrs planted, Jesus Christ himself being 
 the chief Corner Stone, branded as a sect, 
 and this by a portion of your erring brethren, 
 who themselves are the cause of all the trou- 
 ble, who themselves have violated the unity 
 of the Holy Catholic Church, by the intro- 
 duction of doctrines and practices repugnant 
 to the mind of the Holy Ghost as brought 
 down to us by the Holy Scripture, and the 
 universal Church. 
 
 It becomes us, then, to confirm ourselves 
 in " the faith once delivered to the saints," 
 by examining the novel and unholy addi- 
 tions to that faith which the Romish sect has 
 made, especially that great source of their 
 schism, the supremacy of the Pope. 
 
75 
 
 We are forced to make this examination 
 by way of self-defence^ because they con- 
 stantly obtrude this novelty upon us, and 
 deny salvation to such as do not hold it. 
 This last assertion shall be the first subject 
 for proof. 
 
 I. 
 
 A O SALVATION to sncli as reject tlie 
 " Pope's Supremacy." 
 
 We are perfectly aware how strange this 
 doctrine may appear to many modern Ro- 
 manists, especially those here in the United 
 States. But modern Romanists in the United 
 States are far more Protesiant than their an- 
 cestors, and if they feel ashamed of the doc- 
 trines of their Church, as given by their old 
 and reputable doctors, that is their own busi- 
 ness. For myself, I hold such learned Ro- 
 manists as shall be quoted in this and the 
 following section, to be better expounders of 
 the doctrines of their iifallihle Church, than 
 any living Romanist. — " There were giants 
 
76 
 
 in those days^ Let us see now what these 
 ancient true Romanists say as to the salva- 
 tion of such as reject the Pope's supremacy. 
 
 Be.llarmine* says, " No man can, though 
 he would, be subject to Christ, and commu- 
 nicate with the Celestial Church, that is not 
 subject to the Pope.'^'' 
 
 Fisher\ says, " One fundamental error of 
 the Protestants is their denying the primacy 
 of St. Peter and his successors, the founda- 
 tion which Christ laid of his Church, neces- 
 sary for the perpetual government of it," 
 and " He that forsakes the Church, puts 
 himself into a dead and damnable state, and 
 may have all things except salvation and 
 eternal life." 
 
 Leo X.X says, "It is of necessity to sal- 
 vation that all the faithful of Christ be sub- 
 ject to the Pope of Rome." 
 
 * De Eccles. 1. 3, c. 5. 
 t Ans. to K. James I. 
 1 17 Lateran. Alvy Prag. Sarict. Bull. 
 
77 
 
 Pius II.* approves of the following doc- 
 trine : " He cannot be saved that holdeth not 
 the unity of the Holy Church of Rome; and 
 all those virtues are maimed to him that re- 
 fuseth to obey the Pope of Rome, though 
 he lie in sackcloth and ashes, and fast and 
 pray both day and night, and seem in all 
 other things to fulfil the law of God." 
 
 Rodericus] says, " None are subject to 
 Christ that are not subject to his Vicar, (the 
 Pope of Rome,") 
 
 Here, fellow Churchmen, you have some 
 of the Popes and Doctors of the Romish 
 Church expounding this matter, and if any 
 farther authority be needed, you have it in 
 the Creed of Pope Pius IV., which modern 
 Romanists ought to maintain without fear, 
 and without attempting to abate its force. 
 One of the articles of this creed is the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 * Bull Retract in Binius, vol. 4, p. 514. 
 i Roderic liter, p. 323. 
 
78 
 
 " 1 acknowledge the Holy Catholic, Apos- 
 tolic, Roman Church for the Mother and 
 Mistress of all Churches ; and / promise 
 true obedience to the Bishop of Rome, succes- 
 sor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and 
 Vicar of Jesus Christ." 
 
 Now, the close of this modern creed has 
 this expression : " I — sincerely hold this true 
 Catholic faith, without which no man canbe 
 saved.'''' Wherefore, " no man can be saved" 
 who does not, among other pernicious novel- 
 ties, " promise true obedience to the Bishop 
 of Rome," as " Successor to St. Peter, 
 Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus 
 Christ." 
 
 II. 
 
 The OLD and COMPLETE meaning of 
 tlie " Pope's Supremacy. 
 
 On this point, though it be the funda- 
 mental doctrine of Romanism, the united 
 Church is very much divided. But the 
 
79 
 
 strongest interpretation of the Pope's su- 
 premacy ought to please churchmen the best, 
 it is definite, distinct, untrammeled with lim- 
 itations. If modern Romanists differ from 
 the following authorities, why, as these au- 
 thorities are taken from their own infallible 
 Church, they must settle the matter among 
 themselves. 
 
 Look, now, at a few Romish authorities 
 as to the full power of the Bishop of Rome, 
 involved in the doctrine of the Pope's su- 
 premacy." 
 
 Bellarmine says, " It is held by many 
 (such as Angus, Triumphus, Alvarus, Pa- 
 normitan, &c.) that the Pope halh^ by divine 
 rights a most full power over the whole world, 
 both Ecclesiastical AND Civil. 
 
 Cornelius 31ussus* says, "I would give 
 greater credit to one Pope, in those things 
 which teach the mysteries of faith, than to 
 
 * In Rom. XIV. This man was promoted to a 
 Bishopric by Paul III. 
 
80 
 
 a thousand Hieroms, Austins, Gregories, to 
 say nothing of Richards, Scotuses, Szc.^for 
 1 believe and know that the Pope cannot err 
 in matters of faith. 
 
 Mosconius* says, the Pope can dispense, 
 above law and against law and right,^^ 
 " for the Pope's tribunal and God's tribunal 
 is but one ; and, therefore, every reasonable 
 creature is subject to the Pope's empire." 
 ^ Henry, -\ the master of the Roman Palace, 
 says, " The Pope can change the Gospel, and 
 according to place and time give it another 
 sense, insomuch that if any man should not 
 believe Christ to be true God and man, if 
 the Pope thought so too, he should not be 
 damned."/' 
 
 Bellarmine (quoted above) also says, " If 
 the Pope should err by commanding sin, or 
 
 * Lib. I. de Sum. Pontif. vide etiamJacobum de 
 Terano, et Ravis de Concil de Trent. 
 
 t Ad Legates Bohemicos Sub. felice Papa, A. D. 
 1447. 
 
81 
 
 forbidding virtues, yet the Church is bound 
 to believe that the vices are good and the 
 virtues evil, unless she would sin against 
 her own conscience."* 
 
 Cassarueusj says, The Pope hath power 
 in all things, through all things, and over all 
 things.^' " The sublimity and immensit}' 
 of the Supreme Bishop is so great that no 
 mortal man can express it, no man can 
 think it." 
 
 And if any be not satisfied with this view 
 of the Pope's supremacy of power, he may 
 add the testimony of divers learned Romish 
 doctors, who directly assert and maintain 
 that the Pope can not only make new creeds, 
 but new articles of faith ; that he can make 
 that of necessity to be believed which be- 
 fore was never necessarj' ; that the C anon 
 law is the Divine law ; that whatever law 
 the Pope promulges, God, whose vicar he 
 
 *De Rom. Pont. 1. 4, c. 5. 
 t In Tayl. Diss. p. 133. 
 
 6 
 
82 
 
 is, is understood to be the* promulger ; and 
 thai in his arbitration religion does consist.* 
 Here is something like a fearless exposi- 
 tion of that novelty in the Church of Christ, 
 the Pope's supremacy ; but take any expo- 
 sition of the doctrine which even the most 
 timid Romanist will give, and the novelty of 
 this schismatical doctrine may still be proved. 
 But, Churchmen, I pray you see what man- 
 ner of use is the pretended infallihility of 
 those who dare to brand you as violators of 
 the unity of the Holy Catholic Church. If 
 the authorities above quoted be rejected by 
 modern Romanists, then their infallibility is 
 no better than our own. The fact is, that 
 there is afar greater want of unity, far more 
 decisive evidence oi fallibility in the Romish 
 
 * Turrecremata Sum. de Eccl. 1. 2, c. 203. 
 Augus. Triumph de Anac. q. 59, art. 1, 2. 
 Peirus de Ancorano. In Cap. Cum. Chris, de 
 Hffiret. n. 2. 
 
 Hostinensis Super 2. Decret. de Jurej. n. 1, &c. 
 
83 
 
 Church than you can find in the Protestant 
 Episcopal Church. 
 
 There is scarcely one single doctrine of 
 *heir Church on which you cannot quote 
 conflicting opinions ; conflicts not only be- 
 tween one private learned man and an- 
 other, but between Pope and Pope ; council 
 and council ; nay, even pope and council 
 against pope and council. 
 
 When then they talk to you of the fal- 
 lihility of your Church, and point to dif- 
 ferences of opinion as proof, you may and 
 ought to return the compliment, and give 
 twice as strong proof of their fallibility. If 
 they change their ground, and say that their 
 articles of faith, their standards, never con- 
 flict, they never change, then you may rest 
 contented ; because with far more truth may 
 you affirm that your creed has never chang- 
 ed, your standards do not conflict, in other 
 words, that your Church is infallible. 
 
 Your Roman Catholic brother is not half 
 
84 
 
 so certain of his faith as you are of yours. 
 For if he says that his Church is infallible, 
 grant him that it is so; and then let him 
 tell you if the Church being- infallible makes 
 this or that particular clergyman of the 
 Church infallible when expounding the doc- 
 trines of his Church 1 If so, how comes it 
 that different clergymen in the Romish 
 Church hold different expositions of the 
 Pope's supremacy, the cardinal doctrine of 
 Romanism % If it is replies . there is no dif- 
 ference of opinion, then the doctrine above 
 given by Bellarmine, Fisher, Leo X., Pius 
 II., Rodericus, Pius IV., Mosconius, Hen- 
 ry, Cassenaeus, &c., must be the true and 
 only'doctrine. One point will then be clearly 
 settled, viz.: What is the Pope's supre- 
 macy ? 
 
 We reserve for future chapters, the refu- 
 tation of all Scriptural arguments attempted 
 to be offered for this novelty which has so 
 marred the unity of the Holy Catholic 
 
85 
 
 Church; and a statement of the cause by 
 which the Bishop of Rome, (who was 
 originally in claims, as he is now in essen- 
 tial power, no more than the Bishop of Con- 
 stantinople, of York, of Canterbury, or of 
 Pennsylvania,) has usurped the liberties of 
 independent Churches, and possesses, as 
 Alvarus, Panorraitan, and others say, (even 
 if modern Romanists are afraid to say,) " a 
 most full power over the whole world, hotJi 
 ecclesiastical and civilJ'"' 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE pope's supremacy, A NEW AND ANTI- 
 SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE. 
 
 In carrying forward our defence of the 
 Church, by investigating among other mat- 
 ters, the fiction of the Pope's supremacy, 
 (for the rejection of which, the Romish sect 
 has dared to anathematize the Holy Catho- 
 lic Church,) 1 shall give the result to which 
 the unprejudiced investigation of Holy 
 Scripture and Ecclesiastical history will in- 
 evitably lead. 
 
 I. 
 
 Nothing about the Pope's supremacy in 
 Holy Scripture. 
 
 This point is one, of which every reader 
 of the Bible is a competent judge ; for he 
 
87 
 
 can say whether from Genesis to the Reve- 
 lation he has ever met with one word about 
 the Pope's Supremacy, or any superior 
 power or advantages to the bishops of 
 Rome. Now St. Peterh Supremacy, and 
 the Supremacy of St. Peter's successors, 
 called Popes, are two very different and 
 distinct matters. We shall take up St. 
 Peter's Supremacy in another section ; the 
 point before us here is the supremacy of St. 
 Peter's successors, called Popes. About 
 the supremacy of these there is not one 
 word : not the remotest allusion to be found 
 in the Bible : there has never been one pas- 
 sage ever adduced by Romanists ; all that 
 they adduce having relation to St. Peter, not 
 to his successors. If you prove from the 
 Bible that Christ made St. Peter supreme 
 among his brother Apostles, you are just as 
 far as ever from proving that the Bishops of 
 Rome must be similarly supreme among 
 their brother bishops. There are three 
 
88 
 
 essential points to be settled before such a 
 conclusion can follow. 
 
 1st. That Christ by gifting St. Peter 
 with supremacy (admitting now, that such 
 is the fact,) designed this supremacy to de- 
 scend to St. Peter's successors. 
 
 2d. That the Bishops of Rome are. St. 
 Peter's successors. 
 
 3d, That the Bishops of Rome are the 
 only successors of St. Peter. 
 
 Here are three matters to be jarouecZ before 
 any of the texts which Romanists pretend to 
 quote from the New Testament in favour of 
 Si. Peter can apply to St. Peter's succes- 
 sors. 
 
 Now this is a plain view of the subject, 
 and I beg my fellow churchmen to keep it 
 in mind. You have no need (unless you 
 choose) to enter into a long examination 
 whether this or that text of Scripture ap- 
 plies to St. Peter, and involves his suprem- 
 acy ; and that for the plain reason, that it is 
 
89 
 
 nothing to the point in dispute. Suppose 
 St. Peter was supreme " in civil as well as 
 ecclesiastical matters ;" suppose he was 
 appointed the vicar of Jesus Christ and 
 Prince of the Apostles, what has that to do 
 with his successors ? 
 
 Suppose that the celebrated text in St. 
 Matthew, 16th ch. 18th verse, where Christ, 
 speaking to St. Peter concerning this 
 Apostle's declaration of his master's high 
 character, says, " Thou art Peter, and upon 
 this rock I will build my Church, and the 
 gates of hell shall not prevail against it, 
 &c." Suppose, I say, that this means all 
 that the most fearless and enthusiastic Ro- 
 manist desires to claim, what has this to do 
 with St. Peter's successors ? It has nothing 
 to do with ihem, and for the common sense 
 reason, that it says nothing about this 
 power descending to them. To take this 
 for granted is to assume the very point to be 
 proved, and as your Romish friend talks 
 
90 
 
 of sticking to the letter of wScripture when 
 he pleads for Transubstantiation, so to the 
 letter we will keep him when he pleads for 
 that unscriptural notion of the Pope's su- 
 premacy. 
 
 This celebrated passage in order to bene- 
 fit St. Peter's successors, should have read 
 thus : 
 
 " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, 
 namely, yourself and your successors in the 
 Ste of Rome, I will build my Church," &c. 
 
 But Christ neither said nor meant any 
 such thing, therefore even supposing (what 
 is not true) that this passage gave St. Peter 
 a supremacy, it has no more to do with 
 making any of his successors supreme than it 
 has in making the Bishop of Pennsylvania 
 supreme. And here, by the way, is a point 
 connected with the successors of St. Peter, 
 which is so frequently forgotten, that I 
 shall make another section of it, in order 
 to bring it out prominently. 
 
91 
 
 11. 
 
 WHO are tlie Successors of St. Peter I 
 
 In answer to this question, the Romanist 
 will boldly answer you, (and many church- 
 men will not care to question an answer 
 made so boldly,) St. Peter's successors are 
 of course the Bishops of Rome called the 
 Popes. 
 
 But be not deceived, — a bold affirmation 
 is no sign of truth, and the word " of 
 course," is more convenient than conclu- 
 sive. But admit the Bishops of Rome are 
 St. Peter's successors, then with far more 
 reason must we admit that the Bishops of 
 Antioch are his successors, because all, 
 (Romanists among the rest,) know that St. 
 Peter actually resided at Antioch several 
 years. 
 
 The Bishops of Antioch, therefore, where 
 
92 
 
 there is no doubt St. Peter resided several 
 years, have a far more legitimate claim to be 
 the successors of St. Peter than the Bishops 
 of Rome. But let the foregoing point be 
 again suggested, that unless you have clear 
 and undoubted Scriptural authority for the 
 powers given to St. Peter, (be those powers 
 what they may,) descending to his succes- 
 sors, there is not the shadow of advance 
 made toward the supremacy of the Bishops 
 of Rome or of Antioch. And as a complete 
 settling of this whole matter concerning such 
 succession, in addition to the conclusive 
 proof that no such thing is alluded to in the 
 Bible, I present the fact that the learned 
 Romanists themselves give it up, so far as 
 Scripture is concerned. 
 
 The celebrated Romish writer Bellar- 
 MiNE, finding no authority in the word of 
 God, whereon to build the notion of" Pon- 
 tifical Succession," and so of applying the 
 promises to St. Peter (be they what they 
 
93 
 
 may) to St. Peter's supposed successors, 
 the Bishops or Popes of Rome, confesses 
 that this matter has no foundation in Scrip' 
 lure.* This same writerj says that Christ 
 commanded St. Peter to fix the Apostolical 
 seat at Rome ; but unfortunately for him 
 and his church, he can give no authority for 
 such command from the word of God, and 
 therefore resorts to a passage out of an 
 Apocryphal Epistle of Pope Marcellus, " long 
 since discarded as the most notorious cheat 
 and imposture that was ever put upon the 
 Christian Church," but which if true, is 
 nothing to his purpose, and if it were to his 
 purpose, would weigh but little with an in- 
 telligent Churchman. 
 
 * De Rom. Pontiff, L. 2 c. 12. 1. 4. c. 4. 
 + De Rom. Pontiff, L. 2. c. 1. Col. 599. c. 12. Col. 
 628. 1. 4. c. 4. Col. 803. 
 
94 
 
 III. 
 
 Holy Scripture gives no Supremacy to 
 ST. PETER. 
 
 Having cleared the way, let us glance for 
 a moment at the fiction of St. Peter having 
 a supremacy (using this word in the Romish 
 sense,) among his brother Apostles. 
 
 And where now is any Scriptural author- 
 ity for St. Peter's supremacy ? 
 
 The Romanist is ready with an answer, 
 viz. in the 16th chapter of St. Matthew and 
 18th verse. 
 
 *' Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I 
 will build my Church ; and the gates of hell 
 shall not prevail against it." In this pas- 
 sage the Romanist supposes that Christ 
 meant St. Peter when he said "upon this 
 rock," and then supposes, that by this say- 
 ing, he gave him the supremacy ; and then 
 zgmn supposes that in giving it to him, he like- 
 
95 
 
 wise gave it to liis successors ; and then 
 ag^in supposes that the Bishops of Rome are 
 St. Peter's successors ; and then again sup- 
 poses that the Bishops of Rome are his only 
 successors. Here is a pretty array of mere 
 suppositions, and yet, fellow Churchmen, 
 these Dissenters, taking for granted all 
 these points, have the face to turn round 
 and anathematize you, for not believing 
 what — if the blindness of prejudice and 
 education were not present, would be reject- 
 ed by the lowest of their number as the 
 
 1 grossest fallacy in logic ; and as the most 
 direct contradiction of primitive antiquity 
 
 j and the Holy Fathers. 
 
 The text above quoted, does not bear 
 upon the face of it any such notion of suprem- 
 acy to St. Peter, since the rock on which 
 Christ built his Church, was the declaration 
 of St. Peter " Thou art the Christ, the Son 
 of the living God," and this, not only be- 
 
 ! cause the original Greek favours it : but be- 
 
96 
 
 cause " other foundation can no man lay than 
 that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ;" 
 and also because Justin Martyr,* (who 
 lived about the middle of the 2nd century,) 
 the earliest father who quotes and explains 
 this text, expressly asserts that the rock was 
 St. Peter's confession of ihe Divinity of 
 Christ. With Justin Martyr, agree Chry- 
 sostom, Athanasius, Cyril, Jerome, and 
 Augustine. f In short, thirty-six Fathers 
 and Doctors of the Church of all ages and 
 nations in the East and the West, including 
 TEN Popes, interpret the rock to be the true 
 Faith. 
 
 This will be conclusive with the Church- 
 man, in showing how baseless is the fig- 
 ment of the Pope's supremacy, which in 
 
 * Dial. Cum Tryph. p. 255. Sylb. 1593. 
 
 fChrys. Horn. 69. Ser.de Pentec. Oper. i. and vi. 
 Athan. ununi e.sse Chr. Cyril Catech. vi. p. 54. 
 Hieron. Comm. of Matt. xvi. 18. Aug. Exp. Tract 
 124. 
 
97 
 
 order to be elicited from this, their grand 
 proof text, involves 1st, no less than 
 dye suppositions, (incapable of proof;) 2d, 
 a flat contradiction to other Scripture ; 3d, 
 a rejection of the interpretation of the most 
 ancient Father who quotes and explains the 
 text. 
 
 A very fair example, among other things, 
 of the hypocritical respect which the Romish 
 sect pretends to pay to the early Fathers; 
 and enough to show that if this, the grand 
 proof text to St. Peter's supremacy is thus 
 inconclusive, we may dispense with farther 
 examination, and believe that the notion of 
 supremacy of power even as it regards St. 
 Peter is false. Which notion, however, if 
 it were true could be of no more benefit to 
 the Bishop of Rome than to the Bishop of 
 Pennsylvania. For the last is just as much 
 St. Peter's successor (so far as spiritual 
 Apostolic power goes,) as the first. 
 7 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF THE NEW ANTI-SCRIPTURAL 
 rOCTRlNE OF THE POPe's SUPREMACY. 
 
 It must ever be a source of thankfulness 
 to God, that the members of the Holy 
 Catholic Church, possess in the monuments 
 of early ecclesiastical history, the means of 
 detecting the rise and progress of every her- 
 etical or minor error which has ever disturb- 
 ed the unity of the body of Christ, and 
 thereby of confirming the testimony of the 
 word of God. So that when we are com- 
 pelled to defend ourselves, from the attempt 
 to force these errors upon us, we have a 
 satisfactory and easy mode of exposing the 
 error, by appealing primarily to the inspired 
 Word of God, and then to the evidence of 
 
99 
 
 primitive, universal tradition. By this me- 
 thod, therefore, the members of the Holy 
 Catholic Church can triumphantly repel 
 the attacks made upon them by all schis- 
 matics, but especially by those of the 
 Romish sect, when attempting to force upon 
 us, that fruitful cause of their schism, the 
 novel doctrine of the Pope's supremacy. 
 
 My readers will remember that we have 
 settled two important points, viz : " What is 
 ihe Pope's supremacy and, " That there is 
 not the shadow of proof to the novelty in Holy 
 Scripture.''^ We come now in the present 
 and a future chapter, to the notice of several 
 kindred interesting matters, a portion of 
 which, derived from early ecclesiastical 
 history, will enable the Churchman to give 
 a very satisfactory history of the origin and 
 progress of this novelty, for the rejection of 
 which by the Holy Catholic Church, the 
 Romish Sect has employed itself, and 
 
100 
 
 amused the world, in uttering loud, but 
 harmless bulls, curses, and anathemas. 
 
 I. 
 
 Holy Scripture gives EQUAL Spiritual 
 Power to ALL OF THE APOSTLES. 
 
 The only inducement to deny this matter, 
 which is most abundantly proved by the 
 express affirmations of our blessed Lord, 
 and of the Apostles themselves, has arisen 
 from the desire to make St. Peter supreme. 
 For if St. Peter is made supreme, the 
 Romanist has a faint hope, that he may 
 silently take for granted that the Bishops of 
 Rome are St. Peter's only successors, and 
 hence that they have an equal right to 
 supremacy. But this faint hope is a forlorn 
 hope, for the grand proof text to St. Peter's 
 supremacy, which is supposed to be found in 
 the 16th chapter of St. Matthew and 18th 
 verse, is no proof at all ; and if it were 
 
101 
 
 proof to St. Peter's supremacy, proves no- 
 thing as to St. Peter's successors^ even ad- 
 mitting (ivkat is fake) that the Bishops of 
 Rome are any more St. Peter's successors 
 than the Bishops of Antioch, or any other 
 Bishops. 
 
 But now, on the other hand, there is a 
 vast variety of plain declarations, which, to 
 the honest and unprejudiced mind, will be 
 conclusive ; in which equality of spiritual 
 power is given to all the Apostles. Some 
 of these passages are herewith given: (1) 
 St. John XX. 21—23 : "As my Father hath 
 sent me, even so send I ?/ou." "Whose 
 soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto 
 them ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they 
 are retained." (2) St. Matthew xxviii, 
 18 — 20: "All power is given to me in 
 heaven and in earth, go ye, therefore," &c. 
 " And lo 1 am with you always, even unto 
 the end of the world." (3) St. Matthew 
 XX. 25 — 27 : " Ye know that the princes of 
 
102 
 
 the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, 
 and they that are great exercise authority 
 over them. But it shall not be so among 
 you,^^ &c. (4) Revelations xxi. 14 ; " And 
 the wall of the city had twelve foundations 
 and in them the names of the Twelve Apos- 
 tles of the Lamb." 
 
 This last text shows the equality of the 
 Apostles, and that in the same sense that 
 St. Peter can be called the rock or founda- 
 tion of the Church, all the Apostles can be 
 so called. 
 
 These texts (and many others*) suffi- 
 ciently proclaim the intention of Christ as to 
 the spiritual equality of his Apostles, and 
 so of their successors, all Bishops ; since it 
 was to the twelve Apostles (not to St. Peter 
 only) that he promised, " lo, I am with you 
 {all of you) even unto the end of the 
 world." " 
 
 ♦ St. Matt. I. 14, 15 ; xix. 28. John xiv. 6. 1 Cor. 
 xii. 18. Gal. ii. 7, 9. 1 Peter v. 1—3. 
 
103 
 
 11. 
 
 Tlie same Equality affirmed by tlie 
 AXCIE.VT FATHERS. 
 
 In exact accordance with Holy Scripture, 
 do we find the voice of the early fathers, 
 and other learned doctors, whilst giving St. 
 Peter a certain kind of priority, (jnst as we 
 are willing to give him.) they still clearly 
 and decidedly affirm the equality of the 
 xVpostles in the point now under considera- 
 tion. 
 
 TertulHan* says, " We have the Jpo&Ues 
 of Christ for our authors." (Xot St. Peter 
 alone, but " the Jpostles.''') 
 
 Cyprian szys, " Certainly the other Apos- 
 tles were what St. Peter was, endowed with 
 an equal plerdilude hnih of honour and 
 power.^^f 
 
 * De Praescrip. adv. Hcres. 
 t De Unit. Eccl. 
 
104 
 
 Ambrose* says, " St. Peter takes the pre- 
 cedence in confession, not in honour the 
 precedence in faith, not in order. What is 
 said to St. Peter, is said to the rest of the 
 Apostles.'^'* 
 
 Chrysoslom] says, " Tlie Apostles, all in 
 common^ are entrusted with the care of the 
 whole world." 
 
 Victor of CarthageX says, " The Blessed 
 Apostles were endued with equal fellowship 
 of honour and powers 
 
 Isadore Hispalensis§ says, " The other 
 Apostles received an equal fellowship of 
 power and honour with St. Peter." 
 
 Nicholas de Cusa ]| says, " We know that 
 Peter received from Christ no more power 
 
 ♦ Lib. Incar. c. iv. t. ii. p. 710; et in Psalm xxxviii. 
 t. i. p. 858. 
 t Oper. p. 17, ed. Ben. 
 X Epist. ad Theodor. Pap. 
 J De Officiis, lib. ii. c. 5. 
 II De Cone. Cath. lib. ii. c. 13. 
 
105 
 
 than the other Apostles ; for nothing was said 
 to Peter that was not also said to the others. 
 Therefore we say rightly, that all the Apos- 
 tles were equal in power with Peter." 
 
 III. 
 
 PRIORITY not SUPREMACY. 
 
 Every intelligent man, who has the least 
 acquaintance with the Gospels, knows that 
 St. Peter was, by natural temperament and 
 by his age, the " spokesman general'' for 
 the Apostles ; but this priority, or any other 
 priority, is a vastly different matter from 
 " spiritual supremacy." But whether St. 
 Peter's priority was at all enviable, each one 
 will judge for himself. One thing is clear, 
 it led him to be first in erroi-, as well as 
 in speaking the truth. For it was the same 
 Peter who confessed, " Thou art the Christ," 
 and received the approval of Christ; and 
 who afterwards ignorantly dared to rebuke 
 
106 
 
 Christ, and received the reproof, " Get thee 
 behind me, Satan." It was the same Peter, 
 who was first to declare, " Though I should 
 die with thee, yet will I not deny thee;" and 
 who afterwards, just as boldlj'^, affirmed with 
 an oath, " I do not know the man." 
 
 It was the same Peter who, at one time, 
 could openly " eat with the Gentiles ;" and 
 then, at another time, withdraw himself 
 through fear, and dissemble so grossly, that 
 his equal in the Apostleship, his superior in 
 firmness, St. Paul, " withstood him to the 
 face, because he was to be blamed." 
 
 A certain kind of priority, therefore, the 
 members of the Holy Catholic Church are 
 free to concede to St. Peter, though not even 
 this to any of his successors, much less to 
 his pretended exclusive successors, the Bish- 
 ops of Rome. The Early Fathers had their 
 different opinions on this priority of St. Pe- 
 ter: (1) Some* suppose that Christ ad- 
 
 ♦ St. Augustine and St. Cyril. 
 
107 
 
 dressed him particularly on several occa- 
 sions, as the representative of the other 
 Apostles. (2) Others-}- thought he had a 
 certain sort of priority on account of his age. 
 (3) Others:^: ascribed it to his being first 
 called. (4) Others* thought he had a pri- 
 ority, on occount of his public confession of 
 Christ. 
 
 Thus they had their several opinions as to 
 the reasons for a mere personal or honorary 
 priority, which both they and we admit; but 
 neither the Ancient Fathers, (any more than 
 the word of God, or the Holy Catholic 
 Church now-a-days,) believed such a base- 
 less dogma as St. Peter's or the Pope's 
 " Supremacy .^^ 
 
 In closing this section, I would simply 
 call the attention of Churchmen to the fact, 
 that in the celebrated 1 6th chapter of St. 
 
 ♦ Jerome, Chrysostom, Cassianus. 
 
 + Epiphanius, Cyprian, Hilary, Basil, Greg. Max. 
 
 t Greg. Naz. Basil, Epiphan. Optatus, Amb. 
 
108 
 
 Matthew, from which the Romanist so stre- 
 nuously urges, that St. Peter is supreme, and 
 hence that his swccessors are so, — in this same 
 chapter, and just three verses after the pas- 
 sage on which such reliance is placed, comes 
 the equally remarkable declaration of Christ 
 to St. Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan ; 
 thou art an offence unto me : for thou sa- 
 vorest not the things that be of God, but 
 those that be of men." 
 
 We reserve for another chapter the history 
 of the causes which gradually led to the as- 
 sertion and exercise of "The Supremacy" 
 by the Bishops of Rome, and their conse- 
 quent violation of the design of Christ in 
 the establishment of His Church, and thus 
 of the unity of that holy body itself. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE PROGRESS OF THE NEW AND ANTI- 
 SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE POPe'S 
 SUPREMACY. 
 
 Next to the inspired word of God, early 
 Ecclesiastical History opens before the 
 Churchman a fruitful and gratifying field 
 for investigation. To its illustrative and 
 confirming testimony he may most confi- 
 dently appeal, in defence of his claim to be 
 a member of that Divine organization, esta- 
 blished by the great author of the world's 
 Redemption, as "the Church of the Living 
 God— the Pillar and Ground of the truth." 
 By the aid of such primitive monuments as 
 remain, and those morp copious records of 
 later times, he can trace the progress of the 
 Universal Church of Christ, through all its 
 
no 
 
 vicissitudes of persecution and triumph, pu- 
 rity and error. He can discover its original 
 organization and faith ; the universality of 
 its diffusion ; and the equality of the various 
 branches ; the rise and progress of false doc- 
 trine, heresy and schism : and can fix with 
 unerring certainty upon the causes and 
 authors of that lamentable violation of unity 
 which exists at the present day among 
 " those who profess and call themselves 
 Christians." 
 
 Among other plain matters of historical 
 fact, which Ecclesiastical history presents, 
 and in relation to which, the attacks of the 
 Romish sect upon the Church, have rendered 
 necessary for Churchmen to refresh their 
 minds, is that anti- scriptural and novel doc- 
 trine, the Papal Supremacy. 
 
 The grand matters of fact which it be- 
 hooves every Churchman to keep distinctly 
 before him, are, that the Holy Catholic 
 Church, established in Great Britain by St. 
 
Ill 
 
 Paul, in the first century, is the only legiti- 
 mate Church in those islands ; — that the 
 rights of this Church, when depressed in the 
 sixth century, were invaded by the Romish 
 Church, in the person of the monk Augus- 
 tin : — that with a gradually increasing 
 amount of Romish corruption, the Church 
 in Britain continued till the sixteenth cen- 
 tury ; — that in that century, at the Reforma- 
 tion, she cast out the errors of the usurping 
 and schismatical Roman Church; — that 
 from this British Church, the Holy Catho- 
 lic Church in the United States, called the 
 Protestant Episcopal Church, has descend- 
 ed; — that the present adherents to Rome, 
 whether in England or the United States, 
 are therefore schismatical (not to speak of 
 their errors in faith) in not uniting with the 
 Dnly legitimate branch of the Church Uni- 
 .•ersa], in these several countries. 
 
 In the course of our defence of the Inde- 
 'endence of the Church of England, among 
 
112 
 
 other matters, we have been examining the 
 anti-scriptural character of that novelty, 
 " The Pope's supremacy," the maintenance 
 of which has led the Romish Church to at- 
 tempt to play the mistress over her equals, 
 and thus place herself in the light of a mere 
 sect, in schism with the Church in England 
 and the United States ; and a violator of the 
 unity of the Holy Church throughout all 
 the world.* 
 
 Having, in the last two chapters, seen 
 that this novelty contradicts Holy Scripture, 
 and the records of the primitive Church, we 
 advance, in the present chapter, to a very 
 interesting citation of historical facts, by 
 which each Churchman may have the satis- 
 faction of being able to trace the whole pe- 
 digree of that doctrine, which claims power 
 
 * By the Anathemas of the Council of Trent, the 
 Church of Rome has made herself schismatical in 
 relation to the Holy Catholic Church throughout all 
 the world. 
 
113 
 
 ''^ over the whole tvorld, hath Ecclesiastieal and 
 civil:' 
 
 I. 
 
 Reasons for tlie Superior Influence of 
 tlie Bisliops of Rome. 
 
 Now if one were to believe all that 
 Romish writers insinuate about ancient 
 Rome, we should be led to think that it was 
 one of the most marvellous and impossible 
 \ things imaginable, that the Bishops of the 
 t city of Rome should obtain any priority or 
 I primacy over the Bishops of other cities ; 
 ! whereas the truth is, that in this city of 
 I Rome, was centered an unequalled combina- 
 ' tion of influences, favourable to the creation 
 of an ambitious spirit. Not to enumerate 
 that which it claimed in common with sister 
 (- churches, " Apostolical origin"* and " Pu- 
 i rity of faith,"! bring out prominently, 
 
 * Irenasus adv. Heres, lib, iii. c. 3. Sozomen. Hist. 
 ;} Eccl. lib. iii. c 8. 
 
 15 f IrensBUs, ibid. St. Augus. Epist. 162. col. 728. 
 
Hi 
 
 the following polent influences, which con- 
 tributed to make all the Bishops of Rome 
 *♦ considerably bigger (as Cave has it) than 
 the rest of their Brethren." 
 
 (1) Rome was the Imperial City.-* "a 
 place that seemed born for Empire, — that 
 had long since conquered, and at that time 
 governed the greatest part of the world : a 
 city that was the centre of all nations, and 
 the seat of majesty and magnificence, where 
 all great affairs were transacted ; which could 
 not but reflect a more than ordinary lustre 
 upon those Bishops that sat at the upper end 
 of the world. And by reason of the gene- 
 ral confluence of all nations to Rome, ena- 
 bled them, in a little time to draw the cog- 
 nizance of ecclesiastical causes from all parts 
 thither. After the Emperors became 
 Christians, the Roman Church was espe- 
 
 * Athanas. Ep. ad Solit. p, 614. Dionys. de Script 
 oib. V. 355 p. 8. 
 
115 
 
 cially enriched by them with vast honours 
 and privileges, accounting that the greatness 
 of that Church would not a little contribute 
 to the splendour and magnificence of the 
 Empire.* " 
 
 Now some Romish writers attempt to 
 avoid this plain truth, by actually affirming 
 that the grandeur and greatness of the Im- 
 perial City, brought the Bishops of Rome 
 into greater dangers than any others, and 
 therefore tended to depress and impoverish 
 that Church. Tn refutation of this violation 
 of historic truth, let the following facts 
 (which are also inJluenUal causes) be at- 
 tended to. 
 
 (2) The Romish Church abounded in 
 wealth and pomp. We know her wealth 
 even from her char Hies : for from the earliest 
 times, the relief which Rome was able to, 
 and actually did extend to other churches is 
 
 * Cave. An. Ch. Gov. pp. 20, 70. 
 
116 
 
 notorious,* so that in the words of Diony- 
 sius Alexandrinus, "all Syria and Arabia 
 received supplies from Rome."| 
 
 Again, in proof of the wealth of the 
 Romish Church, her vast revenues are wit- 
 nesses, for, as an old writer testifies, besides 
 their standing rents and revenues, their gains 
 by collections and oblations, were so great, 
 that by them alone, in the time of Damasus^ 
 " they were enabled to live in a state of 
 grandeur like that of Temporal Princes.^^^ 
 
 And if any farther proof be needed of the 
 pomp and wealth of the Romish Church, 
 we have it in the testimony of Praetextatus, 
 a gentile, who said to Damasus, " Make me 
 but Bishop of Borne, and 1 will become a 
 Christian."''^ 
 
 * Eusebius Hist. Eccl. lib. iv. c. 23. Ammianua 
 Marcellinus, lib. 27. 
 t Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. vii. c. 4. 
 J Aram Marc, ut ante. 
 ^ Hieron. ad Pammach. avd. Orror, p. 165. 
 
117 
 
 We give another reason for the influence 
 of the Church of Rome, viz. : 
 
 (3) The Church of Rome had a multitude 
 of Clergy and members. " Even in the 
 time of the severest persecution under De- 
 cius, Pope Cornelius wrote to Fabius, 
 Bishop of Antioch, that " by the Providence 
 of God, it had a rich and plentiful number 
 of Clergy, ^ith a great and innumerable 
 people,"! so that he reckons 152 clergy of 
 various degrees, and 1500 widows and alms- 
 people."! 
 
 Another writer (Cyprian) tells us in his 
 epistle to Cornelius, Bishop of Rome, that 
 " he (Cornelius) had a most flourishing 
 clergy, and most holy and numerous peo- 
 1 ple."^ 
 
 j These various circumstances, then, as 
 1 Palmer justly remarks, united and centering 
 
 * Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. vi. c. 43. 
 + Palm. Hist. Ch. vol. ii. p. 499. 
 t Epist. 52, conip. Theodoret. Epist. 113, ad Leon. 
 
118 
 
 in Rome alone, gave that Church, from the 
 beginning, a pre-eminence. 
 
 II. 
 
 The pride of tlie' Bisliops of Rome, and 
 tlicir lirst attempts to albuse tlielr in- 
 fluence. 
 
 Having settled the fact that the Bisliops 
 of Rome did anciently (and so far justly) 
 possess a superior influence, owing to their 
 being placed in the imperial city, we shall 
 advance another step in examining the rise 
 of " the Supremacy,^'' (a very different mat- 
 ter from a proper influence) by noticing the 
 following facts. 
 
 (1.) A. D. 196. Victor, Bishop of Rome, 
 dared to excommunicate the Eastern Chris- 
 tians, because they observed Easter differ- 
 ently from the Roman custom. The Eastern 
 Church regarded Victor about as much as 
 the Protestant Episcopal Church would re- 
 gard the present Pope Gregory XVI. Whilst 
 Irenseus rebuked Victor with just as much 
 
119 
 
 freedom and sharpness as any independent 
 Churchman would rebuke a violator of the 
 unity of the Church. 
 
 (2.) A. D. 240. Stephen, Bishop of Rome, 
 forgot both his temper and charity, on the 
 occasion of the African Bishops re-baptizing 
 heretics, and not only ventured to excom- 
 municate Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, but 
 actually denied certain African Bishops who 
 came to Rome, "the common offices of 
 humanity and charity."* 
 
 But Stephen had met with his equal, not 
 only in Episcopal authority, but in bold and 
 determined bearing ; and received such an 
 answer from Cyprian as taught him the 
 pride and impertinence of his conduct. Of 
 course the African churches only pitied, 
 without regarding the indiscretion into which 
 their hasty brother of Rome had fallen. 
 
 (3.) Another evidence of the rebuke 
 
 * Firmil. Ep. ad. Cypr. inter Cyp. Ep. p. 150. 
 
120 
 
 which Roman pride met with may be found 
 in Basil's Epistle to Gregory,* where he 
 complains of "the Pride of the West," 
 as he calls it, and again (as the Romish 
 BaroniuSjf gives us the authority) expresses 
 a very passionate resentment, and that he 
 hated the pride of that (the Roman) Church. 
 
 (4.) A very good authority, farther to 
 show that in early times, all the influence 
 which the Bishops of Rome possessed, did 
 not amount to anything like " Supremacy," 
 is one of the Romish Popes himself. 
 
 Pius the Second, when Cardinal, says, 
 that "before the time of the Nicene Coun- 
 cil, very little regard was had to the See of 
 Rome.":|: In attestation of which, it is only 
 necessary to know, that at the synod of 
 
 * Ep. 74, ad Pomp, per tot. p. 129. Synod Carth. 
 apud Cyp., p. 282. 
 t Ep. 10, p. 54. 
 t Ad. An. 372, T. 4, p. 322. 
 H Epist. 282, p. 802. 
 
121 
 
 Aries, (about eleven years before the Nicene 
 Council,) the Bishop of Rome subscribed 
 his name, not in the first place, but in the 
 fifths a pretty good proof that Pope Pius 
 had some grounds for his Ante-Nicene esti- 
 mation of the See of Rome. 
 
 But notwithstanding these ancient re- 
 bukes, through the influence of wealth and 
 ambition on the one hand, and an unguarded 
 yielding up of Catholic^] rights on the other 
 hand, the early influence of Rome gradually 
 increased, till we find the Papacy, or Papal 
 Supremacy claimed and exercised ; some 
 interesting facts connected with which are 
 reserved for the following chapter. 
 
CHAPTER 
 THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE new and 
 
 ANTI-SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF THE POPE's 
 SUPREMACY.- 
 
 The constant attacks, which in public and 
 private, from the pulpit and in books, both 
 officially and personally, have been made 
 upon the Church, by the Romish sect, afford 
 substantial reasons for Churchmen to refresh 
 their minds by examining the venerable 
 foundation of holy Scripture and Catholic 
 antiquity on which the Church of the living 
 God rests, and so by consequence, the un- 
 scriptural and sandy foundation upon which, 
 from time to time, the various notions of 
 Romanism have b»en erected. 
 
 There is not the least necessity for the 
 
123 
 
 Churchman's travelling out of his way to 
 meet the attacks of the Romanists by counter 
 attacks, but there is necessity that he should 
 meet them by confirming himself in his 
 own true faith. As for controversy^^'' let 
 him avoid it, if possible, but at all risks he 
 must maintain his faith, and repel the attacks 
 of the assailing schismatic, as long as the 
 love of Christ is in his heart, or the recollec- 
 tion of Rome's usurpation^ and the bloody 
 price we paid for our Reformation lives in 
 his mind. 
 
 As for Romanists personally, they claim 
 and receive, as they ever have received, our 
 Christian charity, but as for Romanism (that 
 system which comprehends the novel addi- 
 tions made to the old Holy Catholic faith) 
 it cannot be regarded with favour by any 
 true Catholic Churchman. 
 
 We have, just above, made use of the 
 word " usM77?a/torj," now it has been a 
 chief object of the present work to give an 
 
124 
 
 extended proof of this fact from plain his- 
 torical evidence, so far as the Holy Catholic 
 Church in England and the United States 
 is concerned. 
 
 In having adduced the testimony of credi- 
 ble and early ecclesiastical writers, to the 
 apostolic origin of the British Church,w^e have 
 settled the Apostolical, original and divinely 
 established Independence of the Church in 
 England. Whilst the records of fact, and the 
 admissions of learned Romanists, show that, 
 in so far as the particular Church of Italy is 
 concerned, we are older than Rome. 
 
 We have also pointed out the plain truth 
 — attempted to be rendered obscure — that a 
 change of name is not a change of being, 
 and hence that the Church in England has 
 been the same from the apostles' times to 
 the present hour, though from several po- 
 litical and religious causes, she has borne 
 the name of British, Anglo-Saxon, Anglo- 
 Romish, English, and Protestant Episcopal. 
 
125 
 
 It has farther been pointed out, how utter- 
 ly unscriptural and novel is the notion of the 
 universal supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, 
 which is the only show of argument to be 
 offered why, if Britain was independent, 
 she ought not so to have been. We have 
 traced this last point up through Holy Scrip- 
 ture and ancient authors, till it only remains 
 to exhibit the means by which the Papal 
 supremacy arose, and also to present some 
 interesting historical facts farther tending to 
 confirm its novelty. 
 
 I. 
 
 Tlie 3IEA.XS by wliicli tlie mflaence of 
 tlie Bishops of Rome iucreased to tlie 
 aurighteous claim of " supremacy." 
 
 We have heretofore exhibited the high 
 estimation in which the Bishops of Rome 
 were held by their brother Bishops and 
 equals, on account of the several circum- 
 stances centring in this great metropolis. 
 
126 
 
 It was the abuse of this influence, which 
 gradually brought in the absurd and even 
 ridiculous notion of the Bishop of Rome 
 having authority " over the whole world, 
 both ecclesiastical and civil." We shall 
 specify some of these abuses ; and, ^rs/, 
 
 It was very natural and proper when in- 
 justice had been done to a Bishop by a pro- 
 vincial Synod, for said Bishop to seek the 
 influence of some fellow Bishop toward 
 being righted. The more influential the 
 Bishop, provided he was ready to take the 
 trouble, the better chance had the dissatisfied 
 Bishop of having justice done him. Now, 
 the Bishop of Rome, being in the chief city, 
 with a wealthy church and numerous clergy, 
 and withal, in early times, being sound in 
 the faith, and ready to befriend a brother, 
 would of course be the one to whom many 
 would resort. Such was the case. Early 
 ecclesiastical history gives us examples of 
 such " appeals," so called to Rome, and 
 
127 
 
 also similar appeals to other Bishops. The 
 same history likewise informs us, that there 
 was " no supremacy" either claimed by 
 Rome or thought of by the appealing bishops. 
 
 This matter of "appeals" is as plain, 
 natural, and common sense a matter as any 
 other in the world, and yet you hear the 
 Romanist boasting of it as though it proved 
 his favourite notion of " Papal suprema- 
 cy." But, in the coarse of time, Roman 
 pride — which was shown in the last chap- 
 ter — and the increasin., desire for power, 
 led the Bishops of Rome to claim as a 
 matter of righi^ what was entrusted to them 
 //) common with others — as a matter of cour- 
 tesy and convenience. Though at first this 
 usurpation was resisted, still, in the course 
 of time, ambition, and wealth, and influence 
 triumphed. 
 
 Besides the above example of " appeals," 
 — by which we see how the very natural 
 custom of asking the influence of the brother 
 
128 
 
 Bishop of Rome, was ^adually claimed as 
 a right, and thus made a snare to enslave 
 the free Churches of Christ; — we give a 
 second means, by which the supremacy was 
 established. In difficult cases, it was early 
 the custom of bishops to consult with bish- 
 ops of a neighbouring see, and receive their 
 opinion. For just the same reason that ap- 
 peals were often carried to Rome, so was 
 the opinion of the Bishop of Rome frequent- 
 ly solicited. This simple custom is capable, 
 any one may perceive, of being abused. An 
 ambitious man, who at first gives his advice 
 gratuitously, and without notion of his hav- 
 ing an abstract right to do so, may gradually 
 be led (particularly if he be much courted and 
 frequently consulted) to demand that he 
 arbitrate in difficult matters, and that his 
 opinion be received as authority. Exactly 
 so was it with Rome. We have lying be- 
 fore us, historical records of first the proper 
 behaviour of Rome, then of her evident pride 
 
129 
 
 in claiming authority, the resistance of these 
 claims, and finally of the triumph of this 
 ambitious and powerful Church, over the 
 Catholic rights of her equals. The noto- 
 rious forgery of a body of laws, purporting 
 to be the authoritative decrees of ancient 
 popes, known as " The Decretal Epistles," 
 was one of the ungodly but successful means 
 of furthering the Papal supremacy. 
 
 third means, which was powerful in 
 creating and establishing " the supremacy," 
 was tlie power of " deputing persons to 
 execute those laws and decisions, which 
 Rome had given in all parts of the Church. 
 This power, says the learned Palmer,* 
 
 * If any one feels inclined to pursue this matter, 
 he will find sufficient information in Palmer's His- 
 tory of the Church, vol. ii. part vii. chap. viii. Pal- 
 mer has satisfactorily- abridged some of the standard 
 authorities on these matters. See also Barrow on 
 the Pope's Supremacy. Du Pin, de Antiq. Eccl. 
 Discip. Fleury, Discours sur I'Hist. Eccl. Jus Ca- 
 nonicum, Thomassen Vet. et Nov. Eccl. Discip. De 
 Hontheim, Febronius, Koch. Van Espen, &c. 
 9 
 
130 
 
 arose gradually. It is not till the latter part 
 of the fourth century that we read of vicars 
 or legates of the Roman see." But the de- 
 sire of metropolitans to have the influence 
 of the powerful and wealthy Bishops of 
 Rome, led them to receive the authority of 
 the Roman see in confirmation of their own 
 authority. 
 
 " In this manner the pontiffs rendered the 
 chief bishops of each country in the West 
 subservient to them ; and as the temper of 
 the times admitted, they increased their 
 powers, or encouraged them to make inroads 
 on the liberties of Churches." 
 
 Thus again, we have a powerful agent 
 exhibited, which tended, along with the 
 other influences, to establish and confirm 
 that monstrous abuse — of what were at first 
 natural and proper customs — which is now 
 called "The Supremacy," and 'claimed as 
 a matter of divine right. Aye, even so far 
 has this last influence gone, that men claim- 
 
131 
 
 ing to be bishops, independent bishops, as 
 they ought to be, the divinely appointed 
 governors of the Church, equal in spiritual 
 power to any Pope — even these have con- 
 sented to be degraded to an inferior position, 
 and the chief bishop of a country to be 
 called " The Pope's Vicar," in sign of his 
 acknowledgment of the supremacy of the 
 Pope. 
 
 A blessed thing, for the members of our 
 branch of the Church, to feel that such de- 
 gradation has never yet been seen among 
 their "chief shepherds." No true Catholic 
 Bishop has ever yet proved so recreant to 
 Jesus Christ and his holy Church, as to be 
 called the Vicar of any man. Our bishops 
 are the Vicars of Jesus Christ, " ambassa- 
 dors for Christ," and hence the equals of the 
 Pope, and superiors of the Popeh Bishops. 
 
 If now to the above mentioned influences, 
 the Churchman adds, " the temporal power 
 of the Bishops of Rome," and the energetic 
 
132 
 
 efforts of "the monastic system," he will 
 have a complete array of influence, enough 
 to make any bishop a " Pope," full enough 
 to increase just episcopal primacy to "Papal 
 Supremacy." 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 the political character of the 
 pope's supremacy. 
 
 Having, in the foregoing chapters, suffi- 
 ciently vindicated our Church from misre- 
 presentation, and especially from the charge 
 of schism, in rejecting and protesting against 
 the anti-scriptural and novel dogma of the 
 Pope's supremacy, there is one farther point 
 of interest to which the present chapter is 
 devoted. The subject referred to is the Po- 
 litical character of the Pope's supremacy. 
 In the discussion of this point a collection 
 of facts and authorities shall be brought, 
 which may be useful even to our erring bro- 
 thers of the Romish sect ; it will certainly 
 be of importance to every true Catholic 
 Churchman. 
 
134 
 
 I. 
 
 The Political cliaracter of tlie " Pope's 
 Supremacy" proved from ROMISH 
 WRITERS. 
 
 (1.) The celebrated Thomas, styled " the 
 Anglican Doctor,'*'' says, " The Pope is the 
 top of BOTH powers,"* (civil and religious,) 
 and " when any one is denounced excom- 
 municate for apostacy, his subjects are im- 
 mediately freed from his dominion, and their 
 oath of allegiance to 
 
 (2.) The author of "The Rule of 
 Princes:|: also affirms, "The Pope, as Su- 
 preme King of all the world, may impose 
 taxes ON ALL Christians, and destroy towns 
 and castles for the preservation of Chris- 
 tianity." 
 
 * " In papa esse apicum utriusque potestatis." In 
 fine Secun. Sent. 
 
 t — et juramento fidelitatis ejus liberati sunt." ii. 
 Sec. q. 12, art. 2. 
 
 t " — et civitates ac castra destruere"— de Regira 
 Princ. c. 10, 19. 
 
135 
 
 (3.) In the Lateran Council, the ad- 
 dress to Leo X. was as follows : — " Snatch 
 up, therefore, the two-edged sword of divine 
 power, committed to thee : and enjom, com- 
 mand^ and charge that an universal peace 
 and alliance be made among Christians for 
 at least ten years ; and to that biiid kings in 
 the fetters of the great King, and constrain 
 nobles by the iron manacles of censures for 
 to thee is given all power in heaven and in 
 earth:'* 
 
 (4.) Baronius makes the following un- 
 equivocal affirmation : " There can be no 
 
 doubt of it, BUT THAT THE CIVIL PRINCI- 
 PALITY is SUBJECT TO THE SACERDOTAL."f 
 
 Again,:^: " God hath made the political 
 
 * — quoniam tibi data est omnis potestas in coelo 
 et tn terra. Episc. Tatrac. sess. x. p. 133. 
 
 f "Politicum principatum sacerdotali esse subjec- 
 tum nulla potest esse dubitatio."— Ann. 58, $ 23. 
 
 t Politicum imperium subjecit, spiritualia ecclesia 
 domino. lb. $ 53. 
 
136 
 
 GOVERNMENT SUBJECT to the dominion of the 
 
 SPIRITUAL CHURCH." 
 
 (5.) Bellarmine* says, "The Pope 
 hath a supreme power of disposing the 
 TEMPORAL things of ALL CHRISTIANS in Or- 
 der to a spiritual good." 
 
 Again, this high authority says, 
 
 " The Ecclesiastical republic can com- 
 mand and COMPEL the temporal, which is 
 indeed its subject, to change the administra- 
 tion, and to depose princes, and to appoint 
 others when it cannot otherwise defend the 
 spiritual good.f 
 
 (6.) SuAREz says, "The power of the 
 Pope extends itself to the coercion of kings 
 with TEMPORAL punishments, and depriving 
 them of their kingdoms when necessity re- 
 quires i nay, this power is more necessary 
 over princes than over subjects.":|: 
 
 * De Sum. Pontif. 1. 5. c. 6. 
 t De Sum. Pontif. 1. 5. c. 7. ' 
 X Defens. Fid. Cath. lib. 2, c. 23, sect. 10, 18, 20. 
 
137 
 
 (7.) Father Creswell* says, " It is the 
 sentence of all (Roman) Catholics that sab, 
 jects are bound to expel heretical princes if 
 I key have slren^thenough^ and to this they 
 are tied by the commandment of God, the 
 most strict tie of conscience, and the ex- 
 treme danger of their souls." 
 
 (8.) AcGus, Triumphus, Panobmitan, 
 Alvarus, and many others, (so speaks Bel- 
 larmine,) say — 
 
 " The Pope hath, by divine right, a most 
 full power over the whole world, both eccle- 
 siastical and civiW^ 
 
 (9.) AzoRius, and Santarel say, " The 
 Pope hath a supreme and absolute authority : 
 
 'th the spiritual and the temporal power 
 ^ in the Pope."f 
 
 (10.) Weston,:J: Rector of the College 
 
 ♦ In Fhilopat.sect. 2, n. 160, et. 152. 
 H Tayl. Diss. Pop., p. 132-3. 
 
 X Sanctuar. Jur. Pontificii qu. 15, sec. 5, qu. 17, sec. 
 
 6, qu. 27, sect. 7, Catal. Glor, Mundi. par. 4, consid. 
 
 7, Ex Zoderico. 
 
138 
 
 at Doway, says, " The Church hath . the 
 right of a superior lord over the rights of 
 princes and their temporalities ; and by her 
 jurisdiction she disposes of temporals ui de 
 suopeculio, as of her own proper goods." 
 
 It is not true that the above doctrines are 
 " individual opinions," for besides the fact 
 that such a vast body of Romish doctors 
 thus speak, Father Ores well* expressly says 
 of this doctrine, 
 
 ^^Jtis the sentence of all {^Roman) Catholics^''^ 
 whilst Father Rosweydj- pronounces those 
 who do not admit these doctrines 
 
 " Half Christians^ harking Royalists^ and 
 
 A NEW SECT OF (RoMAN) CaTHOLICS," 
 
 whilst again, 
 
 BellarmineiJ: vouches for the common 
 opinion of the Romanists to be, 
 
 * In Philopat. sect. 2, n. 160, 162. 
 t Lib. de Fide Hsret. Scroanda. 
 + " Sententia media caf/ioiicorum comfftimis." Bell. 
 V. i. 
 
139 
 
 " That by reason of the spiritual power, 
 the Pope, at least indirectly, hath a supreme 
 power even in temporal matters.''^ 
 
 But we have a more conclusive array of 
 proof yet to be offered, viz: — the Bulls and 
 Decrees of the Popes themselves j which will 
 demonstrate the essential political character 
 of the anti-scriptural doctrine of the Pope's 
 supremacy. 
 
 II. 
 
 Proof from the Papal Bulls and Decrees* 
 
 We shall commence with the Popes of 
 the sixteenth century. 
 
 (1.) A. D. 1585. Pope Sixtus V. issued 
 a Bull against Henry King of Navarre, and 
 the Prince of Conde. It thus begins : 
 
 " The authority given to St. Peter and 
 his successors, by the immense power of 
 the Eternal King, excels all the powers of 
 earthly kings and princes. It passes un- 
 controllable sentence upon them all. And 
 
140 
 
 if it find any of them resisting God's ordi- 
 nance, it takes more severe vengeance of 
 them, casting them down from their thrones, 
 though never so puissant, and tumbling 
 them down to the lowest parts of the earth, 
 as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer."* 
 
 (2.) A. D. 1570. Bull of Pope Pius V. 
 against Elizabeth, Queen of England. 
 
 " He that reigneth on high, to whom is 
 given all power in heaven and in earth, hath 
 committed the one holy Catholic and Apos- 
 tolic Church, out of which there is no sal- 
 vation, to one alone on earth, namely, to 
 Peter, prince of apostles, and to the Roman 
 Pontiff, to be governed with a plenitude of 
 power : this one he hath constituted prince 
 over all nations and all kingdoms, thai he 
 might pluck up, destroy, dissipate, ruinate, 
 plant, and build."-f 
 
 * Ab iinmensa fsterni Reges poteiitia, &c.— Bulla » 
 
 Six. V. contr. &c. | 
 
 t Rdgnans in excelsis, cui data est, &c.— F. Pius | 
 
 V. in Bull, contr. R. Eiiz. | 
 
141 
 
 (3.) A. D. 1294. Pope Boniface VIII. 
 made a decree, which was confirmed by the 
 Lateran Council, in the Bull of Pope Leo 
 X.* 
 
 " One sword must be under another, and 
 the temporal authority must be subject to 
 the spiritual power ; whence, if the earthly 
 p«wer doth go astray, it must be judged by 
 the spiritual power." f 
 
 Baronius:^ says of Boniface's decree, 
 *^All do assent to it^ so that none dissenteih 
 who doth not by discord fall from the Church.^'' 
 
 (4.) Pope Innocent III. uses the follow- 
 ing language : 
 
 " The pontifical power so much exceeds 
 the royal power, as the sun doth the moon." 
 
 ♦ Council Lateran, Sess. xi. p. 153: "Innovamus 
 n approbamus." 
 
 f Oportet gladium esse sub gladi, &c. Extrav. com. 
 . i. tit. 8, c. i, 
 
 t Haec. Bonifacius, cui assentiuntur omnes, &c. 
 Vnn. 1053, $ 14. 
 
142 
 
 In proof of which he quotes Jeremiah i. 10, 
 " See, I have set thee over the nations and 
 over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull 
 down, and to destroy,"* &c. 
 
 (5.) A. D. 1088. Pope Urban II. set 
 forth the following doctrine : 
 
 " Subjects are hy no authority constrained 
 to pay the fidelity which they have sworn to a 
 Christian prince, who opposeth God and his 
 saints, or violateth their precepts."-|' 
 
 (6.) Pope Gregory VII. Hildebrand, sets 
 forth the political character of the papal 
 power, in his epistles,:}: and in the councils 
 under him. For example, these are his 
 words in reference to King Henry: 
 
 " I absolve all Christians subject to the 
 empire, from that oath, whereby they were 
 
 * Ut quanta est inter solem et lunam, tanta, &c. 
 In Decret. Greg. lib. i. tit. 33, cap. 6. 
 
 1 " Fidelitatem nulla cohibentur auctoritate 
 
 persolvere." Caus. xv. qu. 7, cap. 5. 
 
 X Ep. 55.— Ep. 4: 2.-8: 21.— 1: 58.-2: 5, &c. &c. 
 
143 
 
 wont to plight their faith unto true kings ; 
 for it is right that he should be deprived of 
 dignity, who doth erideavour to diminish the 
 majesty of the Churchy* 
 
 But there yet remains a third source of 
 proof, which is still more direct, pertinent, 
 and conclusive. 
 
 III. 
 
 Proof from Historical Facts. 
 
 We shall commence with some facts of 
 the sixteenth century, and then adduce in- 
 stances from former ages. 
 
 (1.) Pope SixTus V. interfered with the 
 King of Navarre, and the Prince of Conde, 
 deposing them, and absolving their subjects 
 from their oath of allegiance. These are 
 his very words : 
 
 " We deprive them and their posterity for 
 
 * Et Christianos omnes imperio subjectos, jnra- 
 mento illo absolve, &c. Plat, in Greg. VIII. et torn 
 7. Cone. Rom. iii. apud Bin. p. 484. 
 
144 
 
 ever of their dominions and kingdoms." — 
 " By the authority of these presents, we do 
 absolve and set free all persons, as well 
 jointly as severally, from any such oath, 
 and from all duty whatsoever in regard of 
 dominion, fealty, and obedience ; and do 
 charge and forbid all and every of them, 
 that they do not dare to obey them, or any of 
 their admonitions, laws, and commands."* 
 (2.) Pope Pius V. interfered with the 
 civil rights of our mother country, and dared 
 to depose Queen Elizabeth, and absolve the 
 English nation from their svjorn allegiance. 
 Now this is an instance which Americans 
 can feel — it took place in 1570 — only two 
 hundred and seventy-three years ago. Listen 
 to the very words of this " Spiritual anti- 
 Political,! and meek successor of the Fish- 
 erman."!!!t 
 
 * A juramento hujusmodi, ac omne, «fec.— Bulla 
 Sixti V. &c. 
 
 f "Ipsam prcEtensi regni jure dignitate privi- 
 
 legioque privamus." P. Pius V. in Bull, &c. 
 
145 
 
 We thereby deprive the queen of her 
 pretended right to the kingdom, and of all 
 dominion, dignity, and privilege whatso- 
 ever; and absolve all the nobleSI subjects, 
 and people of the kingdom, and whoever 
 else have sworn to her, from their oath, and 
 all duty whatsoever, in regard of dominion, 
 fidelity, and obedience." 
 
 (3.) Pope Clement VI. deposed the 
 Emperor Lewis IV. 
 
 (4.) Pope LvNOCEXT III. deposed the 
 Emperor Frederick II., using the words, 
 
 "We do — accordingly by sentence, de- 
 prive ; absolving all who are held bound by 
 oath of allegiance from such oath for ever ; 
 by apostolical authority firmly prohibiting, 
 that no man henceforth do obey or regard 
 him as emperor or king."* 
 
 (5.) Pope Innocent III. deposed the 
 Emperor Otho IV. 
 
 * p. Innoc IV. in Lone. Lus'l, 
 
 10 
 
146 
 
 (6.) Pope Paschal II. deprived Henry 
 IV. 
 
 (7.) Pope Gregory II. withdrew sub- 
 jection from the Eastern Emperor, and re- 
 belled against his authority, of which the 
 celebrated Romish Baronius says, " He did 
 leave to posterity a worthy example, thai 
 heretical princes should not he suffered to reign 
 in the Church of Christ, if, being warned, 
 they were found pertinacious in error 
 
 The above historical facts are abundantly 
 sufficient to show the exercise of the right 
 which the Romish doctors and popes claim, 
 of the papal power interfering with the poli- 
 tics of nations. It is needless to add far- 
 ther proof, or we might adduce at full length 
 the case of Chilperick, King of France, de- 
 posed by the Pope ; — of Albert, King of the 
 Romans, put in the throne of Philip the 
 Fair; — of Henry IV., against whom the 
 
 * Sic dignum posteris reliquit exemplum. Ann 
 730, $ 4. 
 
147 
 
 Pope armed Henry's son, and the unnatural 
 scene was presented, of a son fighting against 
 his own father, taking him prisoner, thrust- 
 ing him into a monastery, where he died 
 with grief and hunger; — of Dandalus, Duke 
 of Venice, whom the Pope bound with 
 chains, and fed as dogs are fed, with bones 
 and scraps under his table ; — of Henry XI., 
 and John of England. 
 
 If the Romish sect " 7i€rer cAange.s," then 
 the principles of St. Thomas, Baronius, Bel- 
 larmine, Suarez, Creswell, Triumphus, Pa- 
 normitan, Alvarus, Cassenaeus, Zodericus, 
 Petrus de Monte, Bozi\is, and other learned 
 teachers of Romanism, must be (or ought to 
 be) the principles of modem Romanists. If 
 the Romish sect " never changes,'''' then the 
 principles of Popes Sixtus V., Pius V., 
 Boniface VIII., Innocent III., Urban II., 
 Gregory VIL, must be {or ought to be) the 
 joinciples of modern Romanists. 
 
 If the Romish sect " never cftxinges,'*'' then 
 
148 
 
 the principles which prompted the political 
 interference of Popes Sixtus V., Pius V., 
 Clement VI., Innocent IV., Innocent III., 
 Paschal II., and Gregory II., must be (or 
 ought to he) the principles of modern Ro- 
 manists. 
 
 I have but one more word to add, and that 
 is — if the modern Romanists do deny the 
 political power of the Roman Pontiflf over 
 all the nations of the earth, as well as over 
 the " Roman States," they are so classed 
 among " heretics.'''^ For thus saith Bellar- 
 MiNE, " There is a sort of heretics lurking 
 in the bosom of the Church all about Chris- 
 tendom, and in some places, stalking with 
 open face, w^ho restrain the Pope's authority 
 so far, as not to allow him any power over 
 sovereign princes in temporal affairs ; much 
 less any power of depriving them of their 
 kingdoms and principalities."* 
 
 * Nullam habere temporalem pofcslatem, net- 
 posse ullo mode.&c. Bell. V. i. 
 
149 
 
 Whilst again, thus saith Baronius, 
 " They are all branded for heretics, who 
 take from the Church of Rome and See of 
 Peter, one of the two swords, and allow 
 unly the spiritual 
 
 * Hffiresis errore notantur omnes, &c. Ann. 1053, 
 $ 14. "Hasresis Politicorum." Ann. 1073, 13. $ 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Conclusion. 
 
 There has now been presented a brief 
 sketch of the more prominent facts, afforded 
 by the faithful records of history, by the aid 
 of which, at least the younger members of 
 the Holy Catholic Church in England and 
 the United States, may see the true position 
 of their Church, aud refute the incessant 
 misrepresentations which are heaped upon 
 her. 
 
 We have seen that the Church of the 
 living God was planted in Great Britain by 
 apostolic hands, and from the testimony of 
 credible writers planted by the great Apostle 
 of the Gentiles, St. Paul. 
 
151 
 
 We have traced this one true Church in 
 its various stages of prosperity and adver- 
 sity, till blighted with the increasing cor- 
 ruptions which her connection with Rome 
 introduced, and trammeled by the spiritual 
 tyranny which the novel dogma of the 
 Pope's Supremacy created, — the period of 
 her release, the Reformation, arrived, and 
 she restored herself to original purity and 
 independence. 
 
 We have examined the rise, progress and 
 character of that anti- scriptural and novel 
 dogma, the Pope's Supremacy, the source of 
 much doctrinal error, and the active cause'of 
 schism, wherever the Romish Church ex- 
 tends her influence. 
 
 We have seen that though in Italy the 
 Romish Church is a legitimate branch of the 
 Church Catholic, having never separated 
 from an older Church in that country, still 
 she errs in doctrine, and needs reformation; 
 whilst in England and the United States 
 
X 
 
 152 
 
 Romanists are a mere schismatical body, a 
 sect, which separated from the Church of 
 England in the reign of Elizabeth. 
 
 And now, after this examination, it will 
 not be a difficult point for any one to per- 
 ceive, that the true Catholic is no Romanist; 
 that whilst entertaining kindness for the per- 
 sons of Romanists, he entertains no affinity 
 for their errors. 
 
 The creed of the Holy Catholic Church- 
 man is the Apostles or Nicene Creed, which 
 has been received always, everywhere, and 
 by all the Church. The Creed of the Ro- 
 manist is the Creed of Pope Pius IV., 
 which adds twelve new articles to the old 
 Creed. 
 
 All that the Romanist has which is 
 " Catholic," " Orthodox," and Scriptural, 
 we have, in greater perfection. 
 ' What, then, is our duty, as members of 
 the Holy Catholic Church in these United 
 States ] What, but that we should stand to 
 
153 
 
 our posts, every one of us, be he priest or 
 layman, and, by the help of God, pray, 
 labor, live, and if needs be, die for the main- 
 tenance of the interests of our spiritual 
 mother. 
 
 Let the younger members of the Church, 
 more especially, remember they have not 
 been baptized into a sed^ which cannot date 
 its origin farther back than the reformation, 
 but that they have been placed in the bosom 
 of the Church of the living God, w^hich has 
 been perpetuated by apostolical succession, 
 amid all the vicissitudes of civil and reli- 
 gious change, from Jesus Christ himself, the 
 original source of authority. 
 
 Let them strive to know more of the his- 
 tory, doctrines, and evangelical spirituality 
 of their Church, and to show by their un- 
 flinching adherence to her interests, that 
 they feel as well as know their privilege. 
 
 There is no weapon formed against the 
 Church in this land which can prosper, if 
 
154 
 
 we, fellow-Churchmen, old and young, are 
 true to our duty. Let us join, then, heart 
 and hand, in the Spirit of Christ, to extend 
 the faith of Christ committed to us, among 
 all who know it not, or who know it, yet 
 misrepresent it. 
 
 In the name of God, let us understand 
 whether we be the members of a sect, or 
 whether we be members of the Holy Catho- 
 lic Church. If we believe ourselves to be- 
 long to no sect, then let us not lead others 
 to think we do, and that we regard schism 
 as no sin : — let us stand forth in meekness, 
 yet without compromise, protesting against 
 a// perversions of the original faith, refusing 
 to identify ourselves with any error, be it 
 Romanism or Puritanism ; let us prove by 
 our prayers and deeds of benevolence that 
 we love the persons of those whose errors^ 
 great or small, we cannot love; judging 
 harshly of none, but maintaining the truth 
 in the presence of all. Let us not be care- 
 
155 
 
 tul for results^ knowing they are in the hands 
 of that God who saith to the raging sea, 
 " Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further : 
 and here shall thy proud waves be stayed."* 
 
 * Job xxxviii, 11. 
 
"If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand 
 forget her cunning. 
 
 If I do not remember thee, lei my tongue cleave 
 to the roof of my mouth, If I prefer not Jerusalem 
 above my chief joy."— rs. cxxxvii. 
 
hi 
 
f 
 
p 
 
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1012 01017 0068