bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." Where, under the figure of" the keys of the kingdom of heaven," our Lord ensureth to Peter the chief authority in his Church; as when a king gives to one of his officers the keys of a city, he thereby declares that he makes him governor of that city.

3dly, From Luke xii. 31, 32, "The Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not, and when thou art converted strengthen thy brethren." In which text our Lord not only declared his particular concern for Peter, in praying for him that his faith might not fail; but also committed to him the care of his brethren the other apostles, in charging him to confirm or strengthen

them.

4thly, From John xxi. 15, &c." Jesus said to Simon Peter, Simon son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, FEED MY LAMBS. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, FEED MY SHEEP. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he said unto him the third time, lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things, thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, FEED MY SHEEP." In which texts our Lord, in a most solemn manner, thrice committed to Peter the care of his whole flock, of all his sheep without exception, that is, of his whole Church.

How do you prove, that this commission given to Peter descends to the Pope or Bishop of Rome?

Because, by the unanimous consent of the Fathers, and the tradition of the Church in all ages, the Bishops of Rome are the succes sors of St. Peter, who translated his chair from Antioch to Rome, and died Bishop of Rome. Hence the See of Rome, in all ages, is called The See of Peter, the Chair of Peter, and absolutely the See Apostolic and in that quality has from the beginning exercised jurisdiction over all other Churches, as appears from the best records of ancient history.

Besides, supposing the supremacy of St. Peter, which we have proved above from plain Scripture; it must consequently be allowed that this supremacy which Christ established for the better government of his Church, and maintaining of unity; was not to die with Peter, no more than the Church, which he promised should stand for ever. For how can any christian imagine, that Christ should appoint a head for the government of his Church, and maintaining of unity during the apostles' time; and design another government for succeeding ages, when there was like to be so much more need of a head. Therefore we must grant that St. Peter's supremacy was by

* succession to descend to somebody. Now, I would willingly know, who has half so fair a title to this succession as the Bishop of Rome ? Why do you call the Roman church the Mother and Mistress of tall Churches?

7:

Because, as we have already seen, her bishop is St. Peter's successor, and Christ's vicar upon earth; and, consequently, the father and pastor of all the faithful: and therefore the Church, as being St. Peter's See, is the mother of all churches.

That the supremacy of the Pope is the doctrine of Popery, we readily admit; but that it is opposed to CHRISTIANITY WE are about to add further proof. Christ called Simon Cephas, but the Pope might have thought it a task of supererogation to have informed the world that its Redeemer "does nothing without reason;" yet this undisputed fact among Christians is no reason why his divine expressions should be tortured by interested and ambitious men, into meanings which the whole object of his human life most unequivocally shows they were never intended to convey. When our Saviour said to Peter, "Upon this rock I will build my Church," Popery would have it understood, that its whole weight was to rest upon the shoulders of St. Peter; yet, as we have already shown, in the same chapter, Christ, on another occasion, tells him he was an offence to him as savouring too much of the things of men. The rock on which he said he would build his Church, is the rock whereon it still rests, and is so firmly established that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"-The ROCK OF FAITH-the faith which the Apostles evinced when Peter answered for them ALL, "Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God." If Roman Catholics doubt this, let them read the whole chapter referred to, where they will find that (ver. 13) when Jesus came into the coasts of Cesarea Philippi, he asked-not Peter only, but all—his disciples, saying, "Whom do men say that I, the son of man, am?”—To this question they replied variously, as they had heard different presons assert their belief (ver. 14), “ And they said, some say that thou art John the Baptist, some Elias, and others Jeremiah, or one of the Prophets." Thus each of the disciples

related the reports he had heard; and when (ver. 15) Christ said unto them," But whom say ye that I am?"-we appeal to common sense, and every-day experience, if any twelve men, of the same opinion, were to be asked a question by their king or director on a subject upon which they were most unanimously agreed, if all the twelve would answer at once, or one of them reply in the name of the rest? It was Peter who answered, and Christ blessed him; by which he was saved; since, when Judas had betrayed his Lord, and all the other Apostles forsook him (Matt. xxvi. 56, 72, 74), Peter it was who not only denied his divine master, but who also forswore him. The promise of Christ, "I will give unto thee the keys," &c. was (as we suppose it will be admitted) perfected, when he did give them; and, if so, to whom was it, we aşk, were they confided-to the peculiar custody of Peter? No such thing; we learn the direct contrary in the text referred to (John xx.) in this very chapter, wherein we are informed by "the disciple whom Jesus loved," that it was to eleven of the Apostles (Thomas Didymus not being then present) that the power of remitting sins was given. Our Saviour did not say, as on the former occasion to Peter, "I will give thee," &c., but-" Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted," &c. We think the Pope somewhat too hasty in his simile of a king giving one of his officers the keys of a city; he should first have shown that Peter had been that individual officer who had been invested with the particular charge of it. We are now merely showing the unwarrantable construction which Popery, for her own worldly purposes, has put upon the text before us; we will show presently that such a supremacy as she would attach to St. Peter is expressly forbidden by Christ, and actually written against by St. Peter himself.

"3dly, from Luke xii." it is said—(the extract given is from chap. xxii.; and although these "Grounds of Faith" are not generally perused, yet Dr, Challoner should have paid a

little more attention to correctness, even though he might deny his own flock the opportunity of detecting their errors)———

3dly, From Luke," &c. is a curious proof of supremacy, as stated by the Pope. Peter, at the time alluded to, being the most weak in faith of the eleven, the Lord prayed that his faith might not fail; and bade him, when he was converted, to strengthen his brethren. Yet the Pope's version of our Saviour's expressions is, that they implied that the whole charge of the brethren was to be committed to Peter! Did the Pope and Doctor imagine, that Christ did not know that the faith of Peter's brethren was stronger than his own? The conversation took place, when Peter confidently said, Lord, I am ready to go with thee both into prison and to death; and when Jesus told him, he would thrice deny him! Such are Popish arguments!

σε

When our Lord thrice asked Peter if he loved him, and the latter averred that he did, each time he was told (to prove the love he professed) to feed the flock of his master. «Ín which texts," says Pius, "our Lord, in a most solemn manner, thrice committed to Peter THE CARE of HIS WHOLE flock, of ALL his sheep, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, that is, OF HIS WHOLE CHURCH!" Without wasting a second observation upon so palpable a misinterpretation of so plain a text, wé will merely observe, that the Pope's flock must be sheepish indeed, who reject the Gospel for his interpretations of it.

Popery having, in her own way, endeavoured to establish the supremacy of St. Peter, next insists upon her own. Here, however, she, of course, is left without a scriptural line to support herself, yet stands, unabashed in all the naked'ness of her own deformity! We have usually given her the full benefit of all the merits she has attributed to herself where she could not find any texts of Scripture to misapply to her purposes; and upon these occasions (as in the present instance) it cannot be denied that she always finds the most to say. We will bestow a passing word or two upon her

remarks on her own supremacy, and then adduce our proofs of its fallaciousness. First her "unanimous consent of the Fathers" is erroneous: who, of the Fathers, "consented" to any such thing as Papal supremacy, until Boniface III. (as we have already related) engaged Phocas to murder the Emperor Mauritius, and to confer the title of oecumenical Bishop (or Bishop of all the world!) upon himself, in the seventh century? We could fill our pages with the names of ancient Fathers (did we not rely upon the Scriptures alone for our proofs of Christianity) who, when the invention of supremacy first commenced, wrote against it. Who of the Christian writers are to be preferred to the inspired Apostles and Evangelists? But as Popery is opposed to their benign tenets, she naturally turns to those of her "Fathers" who supported her Antichristian pretensions after she had made herself supreme. "The See of Peter" is not the language " of all ages;" but men who allow themselves, in the canons of their church, to be called our Lord God the Pope-(Dominus noster Deus papa-Coun. of Lat. Sess. 4) †, would not surely be very punctilious in calling anything else by whatever name they chose !

The Pope then proceeds, as he says, "supposing the supremacy of St. Peter," and asks, "how can any Christian imagine that Christ" should make such an appointment, and design another establishment of his Church; concluding with a" therefore we must grant that St. Peter's supremacy was, by succession, to descend to somebody;" and winds up his proofs and arguments by declaring that none has so good a title to it as himself-the Bishop of Rome.

.

Those Christians who read and believe the Gospel of Christ, do not 66 suppose" the supremacy of St. Peter, nor that our

"We find," says Mosheim, " in the most authentic accounts of the transactions of this century, that not only Emperors and Princes, but also whole nations opposed the ambitious views of the Bishops of Rome."

The fourth is called the great Council of Lateran, or the true General Council. Bellarmin (de Concil. I. i. c. 6.) gives a list of these General Councils, which are to be rejected.-Concilia Generalia reprobata, &c,