before the Holy Person in whom this amazing privilege resides, is not only an homage due to clared he would build his church (a); next, because so important a grant of power is mentioned only by St. Matthew, the rest of the apostles being silent upon this subject; and lastly, because the general doctrine contained in that same gospel, as in all the others, is at variance with any such pretension; and because there is not the slightest evidence that the apostles, either before or after the death of Our Saviour, ever in any way acknowledged it. In this, gospel of St. Matthew (b), chap. xx. ver. 26, it is stated, "Whosoever will be great amongst you, let him be your "minister; and whosoever will be chief amongst you, let "him be your servant." Chap. xxiii. ver. 8: "But be not "called Rabbi, for one is your master, even Christ, and "all of ye are brethren." St. Mark, chap. ix. ver. 34: "But they held their peace; for by the way they had disputed 66 among themselves who should be the greatest. And he "sat down and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If 66 66 any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, "and servant of all." Chap. x. ver. 42: But "Jesus called (a) This doctrine is maintained by the Council of Ephesus, Conc. vol. iii. p. 135; by St. Ambrose in his work, De Incor. chap. 5; by St. Cyril of Alexandria, Dial. 4. de Trin.; by St. Augustin in his Serm. 270, in Die Pent. & 76 de Verb. Dom. n. 2, &c. &c. (b) According to the Catholic history of the Popes, St. Mark was commissioned by St. Peter, while at Rome, to write his Gospel. It is therefore a very singular circumstance that he should not mention those words of Our Saviour, by which his patron is supposed to be nominated as the head of the Christian church. Eusebius states that the Gospel of St. Mark was at first surreptitiously taken from the preaching of St. Peter, but the apostle having discovered it, he sanctioned it. If this was the case, there could not be a stronger proof that St. Peter himself did not teach that he was the rock on which the church of Christ was built, since in St. Mark's Gospel these words are never mentioned. him, but if any greater could be invented, it still would be inferior to what, in justice, should be "them to him and saith unto them, Ye know that they "which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles, exercise "lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you; but "whosoever will be great among you shall be your minis"ter; and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be "the servant of all." St. Luke, chap. xxii. ver. 24: “ And "there was also a strife among them, which of them should "be accounted the greatest. And he said unto them, The "kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them, are called bene"factors. But ye shall not be so; but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is "chief, as he that doth serve." St. John, chap. xvii. ver. 11 : "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the "world, and I come to thee; Holy Father, keep through "thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. And for their sakes I sanctify "myself, that they also might be sanctified through the "truth. That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in "me and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that "the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And "the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that "they may be one, even as we are." The whole of these passages are directly opposed to the supposition, that Our Saviour intended that any one of the apostles should be considered as superior to the rest, or that there should be any other unity in his church, but in himself and with the Father. In the first council which was held in the Christian church at Jerusalem, as recorded in the 15th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, the opi required. To what a height is such a person raised above us! to what adoration is he not entitled! In the meekness and humility, however, nion, which was declared by St. Peter, came not as from the infallible representative of Our Saviour; on the contrary, the doctrine, which was sent forth from that council as adopted by the apostles, the elders, and the whole church, was proposed by the apostle James, and was distinct from that which had been recommended by St. Peter; and in the letters which were written to the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch, in Syria, and in Cilicia, and which conveyed to them the decisions of the council, no mention is made of St. Peter, nor is there the slightest evidence that he there exercised any sort of spiritual superiority. In the 21st chapter of St. John, verse 15, the injunction to St. Peter," feed my flock," cannot be tortured into a belief, that he alone was to feed that flock; for, as it is stated by St. Paul, in his second Epistle to the Galatians,"The preaching the gospel of the uncircumcision was con fided to me, and that of the circumcision to St. Peter." St. Paul, therefore, had no hesitation in withstanding St. Peter to his face in a doctrine on which he conceived he was wrong. There followed from this no schism of the church; no bull of excommunication from St. Peter; no cessation of that unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, which was never interrupted amongst the apostles, because (like the various churches of Christians of the present day) they had in truth one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. But that one Lord was not Peter, but Christ; that one faith was in the revelations of Our Saviour; that one baptism the one he had ordained. him, but if any "them to him "which are ar "the serv "there v "be ac "king "the "fa "a 3 of the successors of St. Peter, they have at difderent times acknowledged a certain assent, on the art of the members of the Catholic Church, made their decisions; yer as this is in no way to be necessary to establish the infallibility of mention of in the words of the Apostle, it must her be considered as a concession, than a right been asserted and contested in many of the vaaberent in the Church; and although it has Fyes and the Catholic Clergy, yet it appears res conflicts which have arisen between the possible fairly to establish against the Pope Roman Catholic is justly called upon in his any claim of such a nature. In this sense, the the Roman Bishop, the successor of St. Peter, creed to promise and swear true obedience to Christ; and although he is called upon in the the Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus councils, which, under the authority of the Popes, same document to obey the decisions of certain have at various times been held, and to assent established by them, yet his direct and to the dogmas of his religion which have been obedience is only required, as if due to the Vicar of our Saviour on earth. It is true, that considerable bodies of Catholics, alarmed at the preposterous power thus assumed upon these premises by the Popes, have resisted it, and have cited as the rule of their faith, the Canon personal 66 of the 10th Session of the Council of Florence, which defined, that full power was delegated "to the Bishop of Rome, in the person of "St. Peter, to feed, regulate, and govern the "Universal Church, as expressed in the general "Councils." But it must not be forgotten, that to render these canons lawful, the sanction of the Pope is necessary; that it is no way compulsory upon him; and, therefore, that their existence as the infallible regulations of the Church, is dependent on his judgment and decision. But will it be asserted, that when a general council is not assembled, there is no infallible authority governing the Church? If so, this is a Catholic doctrine totally at variance with that which is professed in the Vatican; and, although the want of orthodoxy may be allowed to go unpunished, in consideration of the friendly views in which these sentiments are set forth; although, like the rights of the Gallican and other churches, they may be tolerated from necessity, yet these principles will not the less have incurred the secret condemnation of that court. That they may not be remarked upon, will be owing to the wisdom with which the Court of Rome is guided at the present moment. It is not now a time to enter upon discussions on the extent of its authority; while several thousand Italian, Spanish, and Portu |