Linus was the first diocesan Bishop of Rome, just as the Apostle James was the first diocesan Bishop of Jerusalem. The hebrew Bishops of Jerusalem, therefore, might plausibly have claimed to be heirs of all the prerogatives of James the first diocesan Bishop: but the gentile Bishops of Rome can set up no such claim in regard to Peter, because Peter was never the diocesan Bishop of the Roman Church'.

(4.) It may be asked: What, then, are we to understand by the more potent principality, on account of which, in the language of Irenèus, every Church should resort to the Church of Rome?

Now, whatever we are to understand by that expression, it is quite clear, that we cannot understand by it any dominant Supremacy derived to the Roman Pontiffs from the alleged first Roman Bishop Peter: because Peter himself never per

'The Council of Trent, without a shadow of authority or rather in direct contradiction to all history, strangely defines the Church of Rome to be the Mother of all Churches. Sess. vii. de Baptism. can. iii. p. 87. It were well, if the Tridentine Fathers had explained to us, how the Roman Church can be the Mother of those more ancient Churches which existed before itself was founded. Another Ecumenical Council, that of Constantinople, which at least in this respect bids more fair to be infallible than its successor at Trent, rightly and sensibly defines the undoubtedly oldest Church of Jerusalem to be the Mother of all Churches. Τῆς δέ γε μητρὸς ἁπασῶν τῶν Ἐκκλησιῶν τῆς ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις. Epist. Synod. Concil. Constant. ad Damas. apud Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. lib. v. cap. 9. To the same purpose speaks Jerome. Sed et in Hierusalem primum fundata Ecclesia totius orbis Ecclesias seminavit. Hieron. Comment. in Esai. ii. 3. Oper. vol. iv. P. 7.

sonally occupied the diocesan Roman Episcopate. But I trust, that we shall find no great difficulty in giving a quite satisfactory account of the phraseology employed by Ireneus.

To serve the purpose of his party with the greater effectiveness, Mr. Berington has thought fit to express the phrase of Irenèus by the english words Its supreme headship; thus compelling the venerable Father, in his anglican masquerading habit, to ascribe to the Roman Church an universal dominant Supremacy: and, in order that the context may fitly correspond with this somewhat ample rendering, he teaches that context to say, that every other Church, that is, the faithful of all countries, must have recourse to the Roman Church'.

But good Irenèus himself gives us no such remarkable information, as that which has been extracted from him by Mr. Berington. He simply speaks, in manner following.

To this Church, on account of the more potent principality, it is necessary, that every Church should resort: that is to say, those faithful individuals,

1 The latin version of Irenèus is: Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam, propter potentiorem principalitatem, necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam; hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles: in qua semper, ab his qui sunt undique, conservata est ea quæ est ab Apostolis traditio.

Mr. Berington's very free translation runs: For to this Church, on account of its superior headship, every other must have recourse, that is, the faithful of all countries; in which Church has been preserved the doctrine delivered by the Apostles.

who are on every side of it. In which Church, by those who are on every side of it, the tradition, which is from the Apostles, has always been preserved.

The drift of the passage is abundantly evident : particularly, when it is explained by the parallel passage in Tertullian, which I have cited at full length; though, as I am sorry to remark, Mr. Berington, in his garbled citation of it, has carefully suppressed all notion of its tendency1.

In contentions with heretics, the subject alike discussed by Irenèus and Tertullian, disputes might arise, as to the precise definition of particular doctrines or as to the strict import of particular passages in Scripture: for the heretics of the day were very apt, either to start new doctrines, or to pervert old doctrines, or to distort various places of Holy Writ from their true sense in order that God's word might thus be constrained to favour their own idle speculations.

Now, in this emergency, the rational advice, given by Ireneus and Tertullian, is: that application should be made to the apostolical or mother Church of the province, where the dispute occurred; because there, on account of the more potent principality with reference to the rural suffragan Churches situated round about each chief apostolically-founded Church, the true doctrine of the apostolic founder, whose identical

See above, book i. chap. 3. § I. 1. (2.) and Berington's Faith of Cathol. p. 169.

authentic letters were there preserved, sounding forth in a manner his very voice, and representing in a manner his very face, might be learned with the greatest prospect of absolute moral certainty.

Thus, if the dispute occurred in Achaia; recourse might be had to the apostolical MotherChurch of Corinth: if, in Macedonia; to Philippi or Thessalonica: if, in proconsular Asia; to Ephesus: if, in Italy or in Africa; to Rome.

All these several apostolically-founded MotherChurches, in relation to their dependent ecclesiastical daughters which were seated around them, possessed a more potent principality; being, what was technically denominated, Metropolitan Churches and to them, according both to primitive discipline and to right reason, every Church, that is (as Ireneus carefully explains himself, when speaking of the Metropolitan Province of Rome in particular) every Church of faithful individuals who were on all sides of an apostolically-founded Mother-Church, was bound to resort; because, as he adds, in such a Mother-Church as that of Rome, the apostolic tradition of sound doctrine had always been carefully preserved.

Ireneus and Tertullian, in short, are alike speaking, not of any dominant universal Supremacy possessed by the Roman Church in particular, but simply of the best mode of resolving disputes with heretics and this, when we recollect the very early times in which they flourished, they most rationally determine to be by an application to that

particular Apostolic See or Chair, which might happen to be nearest to the place of controversy. Accordingly, Irenèus, speaking from the valuable knowledge which he possessed through his successive residence in Asia and in Gaul, states, on his own personal intimacy, that the same doctrines might be learned at Ephesus by professed traduction from John, as those which might be learned at Rome by similarly professed traduction from Paul and from Peter. Thus, in disputes with innovating heretics, whether recourse was had to Rome or to Ephesus, the answer, in either case, would be precisely the same'. This, says the excellent Bishop of Lyons, himself the disciple of Polycarp the scholar of St. John: This is a most full demonstration, that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which, in the Church, has been preserved and handed down in truth, from the Apostles even to the present time-For the Church at Ephesus, founded indeed originally by Paul, but having John permanently residing among its members even so late as the days of Trajan, is a true witness of that which was delivered by the Apostles".

(5.) The language of Tertullian will serve also

1 See Iren. adv. hær. lib. iii. c. 3.

2 Et est plenissima hæc ostensio, unam et eandem vivificatricem fidem esse, quæ in Ecclesia ab Apostolis usque nunc sit conservata et tradita in veritate.-Sed et quæ est Ephesi Ecclesia a Paulo quidem fundata, Ioanne autem permanente apud eos usque ad Trajani tempora, testis est verus Apostolorum traditionis. Iren. adv. hær. lib. iii. c. 3. p. 171,

13

172.