reference to such a thing, the doctrine, that "whosoever contradicts the judgments and constitution (in matters of faith) of the apostolic seat, is plainly to incur the mark of heretical depravity." (P. 64)

Now which shall we believe;-him who modestly styles himself" the least of the apostles," (1 Cor. xv. 9,) though afterwards acknowledging that "he was through the grace of God not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles," (2 Cor. xi. 5;) or him who assumes that he is the successor of the prince of the apostles, who was only a mystical representer or type of this pontiff, the true vicar of Christ upon earth? Which, I say, shall we believe, St. Paul or the Pope of Rome? If we believe the former it is very clear that we cannot receive the definition of the latter. If St. Paul's definition in the Epistle be a true definition, it is certain that that Church is not the Church which the Roman pontiff calls Catholic, and what many people also most absurdly call Roman Catholic. If, therefore, we allow this, which we must do, if we would not deny the Scriptures altogether, it follows, that in separating ourselves from the Church of Rome, and in denying the authority of, and in refusing allegiance to this unscriptural vicar of Christ upon earth, we are not guilty of heresy, nor are we, in contradicting the judgments and constitutions of this pontiff, incurring the brand of heretical depravity. Let it then, thus proved by reference to the Scriptures, and by the use of common sense, be once and for ever understood, that the heresy of which the Scriptures elsewhere speak, and the unity of which our text speaks, are not the heresy of separation from, nor the unity of junction with, the Church of

Rome.

What, then, is the unity which is here spoken of? Having shewn in what it does not consist, let us now point out in what it does.

It may be supposed, perhaps, by some, that in the preceding observations on the Church of Rome I have denied the unity, and catholicism, and apostolicity, and holiness, of any Church, in direct contradiction to what we profess to believe, and have oft confessed to believe in, viz. the holy Catholic Church. But whilst the foregoing observations tend to shew, that the Church of Rome is not in itself the holy Catholic Church, nay, is only so far a branch of it, as it holds the doctrines which characterise the true Catholic Church, it may be as well to define accurately what we are justly to consider as the holy Catholic Church; in doing which we shall more expressly be led to understand what is the unity of which it consists, and of which the text makes mention.

The word Catholic means general or universal. Roman Catholic means therefore Roman universal; or, since Rome is limited in position, part universal, which being not to consider that "the whole is equal to all its parts together," but that "one part of a body is equal to the whole of that body," is, in point of fact, complete nonsense. The word Catholic, however, may be correctly applied to any Church, but in a different way, as for instance the Catholic Church of Rome; which it once was, when it held the doctrine of Christ pure and unmixed with the traditions of men, but which it is no longer, since it has lost its character of Catholicity in corrupting and adding to the Scriptures, which the primitive Church received alone. So we say the Catholic Church of

England and Ireland; the Catholic Church of Germany; the Catholic Church of Switzerland; but we cannot say the English Catholic Church, or the German Catholic Church, or the Swiss Catholic Church, without breaking up the unity, or increasing the number of Catholic Churches. For the word Catholic does not apply to the locality, but to the doctrine of any church, and it is the former of these applications which the Romanists receive, and the latter which Protestants defend. It has been well observed,* that the word Catholic is so applicable to doctrine, that we might say, the catholic resurrection, the catholic baptism, the catholic confession, merely implying thereby the doctrine of the resurrection and baptism professed by all the members of Christ's Church, and the confession made by them of those and all other christian doctrines. That such an application of the word is correct may be proved from the fact, that the will of Gregory Nazianzen (who died A.D. 389, to say nothing of other examples,) is commenced thus: "Gregory, Bishop of the Catholic Church in Constantinople, bequeaths his substance to the Catholic Church in Nazianzen." And this will is subscribed by the following witnesses: Amphilochius, Bishop of the Catholic Church in Iconium; Optimus, Bishop of the Catholic Church at Antioch; Theodosius, Bishop of the Catholic Church in Hyde; Theodoulus, Bishop of the holy Catholic Church at Apameia; Themistios, Bishop of the Catholic Church at Adrianople. Now, unless we are prepared to assert that this will proves that there were many Catholic Churches, in which Rome might be one, we must confess that Rome has no right to claim to herself a title which we see about three hundred and fifty years after our Saviour's death was shared by every other branch of his holy Church. The inference is, that any church which retains true doctrine and pure rites, is the Catholic Church of the place where it is situated; and all the churches together which so retain true doctrine and pure rites, make up the Catholic, or universal Church of Christ at large: it also follows, that whatever church corrupts either doctrine or rites, ceases, whilst such corruption lasts, to be a Catholic Church. But allowing that Rome is, what we assert she is not, a pure church, no ground is thereby gained upon which to build her superstructure of supremacy. For though our Lord did commit to St. Peter the keys of heaven, viz. the power to preach the doctrines by which heaven is opened to believers; and though he did build his Church upon him, when his preaching was the channel of conversion to three thousand souls, (Acts ii. 41;) or upon his doctrine, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," (Matt. xvi. 16,) as upon a rock; still we must ascend much higher than the time when the Church at Rome received its consistency, for it was at Jerusalem that Peter was the means of building up the primitive Church, as it was at Antioch that men were first called Christians, (Acts xi. 26,) and not at Rome, whither the gospel was not carried till some years afterwards. And even before that period Christ himself commenced the foundation of the Church, when he commissioned all the apostles to preach the gospel, (Matt. x.) giving them all equal" power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness, and all manner of disease," (ver. 1;) * Vide Pearson on the Creed, p. 346, &c.

upon whom all and not upon one only was the Church built up. "Now," says St. Paul, "ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone," (Eph. iv. 19, 20,) i. e. the chief corner-stone of that foundation in which all the apostles and all the prophets were equally with Peter stones of foundation. The power which Peter had, he had to show the unity of the Church, whilst the same power showed by all showed its catholicity. And this is the interpretation and opinion of the fathers of the first ages.* The Church of Rome, therefore, when in a state of purity, could only be one church, not all the churches,-only a branch, not the whole body,—and therefore catholic as a branch of the Catholic Church; and since Catholicism depends on doctrine and not on locality, when she became impure and apostate, she ceased to be catholic altogether, although she still continued at Rome. The members of that Church may have a unity amongst themselves, but they have not "the unity of the Spirit" which actuated the first christian assembly, of which it is said, (Acts ii. 42,)" they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers;" the description given of the Church established at Jerusalem, and not at Rome, through the preaching of Peter. If, then, we would inquire what is the unity spoken of in our text, and whether we possess it or not, we have no necessity to take Rome at all into our consideration, for unity with Rome may not be, and is not, this unity; and to be in unity with Rome may imply, and does imply, disunion from the Catholic Church at large. The Roman pontiff did not exist when Peter preached at Jerusalem; and the blessing given to the Church, that "the gates of hell should not prevail against it," was not given to the branch founded by one apostle only, but to all the branches; and the authority given to Peter to bind and loose,-" Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," (Matt. xvi. 19,)—was given in the same words to all the disciples: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," (Matt. xviii. 18.) Be assured then that the assertion of the Church of Rome, that authority was given to the Roman pontiff, in the person of Peter, the prince of the apostles, is not only an assumption unjustified by any statement in the Scriptures, but also contradictory to the very unity which those Scriptures teach obtained amongst the apostles, to whom it was expressly declared by their Master, as if in prophecy of what would one day be stated about "the prince of the apostles," "Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you;" (now Peter was one of them, and if the Church of Rome received any thing "in Peter," it received this admonition as well as every thing else ;)" but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be

Tertullian, quoted by Pearson, says, "Itaque tot et tantæ ecclesiæ una est illa ab Apostolis, prima ex qua omnes.”—De Præst. Hær. cap. 20.

your servant: even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many," (Matt. xx. 25-28.) And this, remember, was said in direct reference to a claim made by the sons of Zebedee to exaltation above their brethren.

Having thus settled the claims of the Church of Rome to our allegiance, on the ground of antiquity, to be unfounded and unscriptural, let us see whether she possesses, or whether we possess, the unity which the true Catholic Church possesses.

"There is one body." This is the first character of the Church. Respecting the unity of the body, or rather the Catholicism of the body of Christ's Church, it has been distinctly stated in what has gone before, that such a body does exist wherever the Scriptures are received and acted on; and we may safely borrow from the definition given of the Church by the Romanist author quoted above, that "by the name of the Church is understood an assembly of baptized men, united amongst each other by the profession of the same faith, and the communion of the same sacraments;" but we cannot quote more of this definition. In this "one body" of the text we profess to believe, whenever we say, "I believe in the holy Catholic Church;" and this body is known by the characteristics which are attached to it in the words before us. "There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling," (ver. 4.) The object of the apostle in enumerating the particulars in which christian unity consists was not, however, to establish them as matters of doctrine, because they were already acknowledged by his disciples, but to urge them as so many grounds of analogy in persuading his children to unity of conduct. We may therefore briefly pass over this verse, in illustrating what is said in it of the comprehensiveness of the Church, and the influence of a dominant and inspiring spirit, by a reference to what he elsewhere says to the Corinthians: "As the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free, and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many,” (1 Cor. xii. 12--14.) "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit," (ver. 4 ;) and he goes on to illustrate these gifts, summing them up in that comprehensive sentence, “But all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will," (ver. 11.) Our faith then must be, that Christ established a universal Church, over the different members of which, i. e. the different communities of it, that Holy Spirit who enabled the apostles to work miracles in the primitive age, still watches, in which he still works, enabling the different members of every such community who are truly in communion with it, to perform their christian duties acceptably to God, in fulfilment of the promise made by Christ: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth," (John xvi. 13.) From which we may infer for our own guidance, and without uncharitableness as far as regards others, that as there is but one body, actuated and guided by one Spirit, the Spirit of truth; whensoever we see a church, or a member of a church, holding doctrines that contradict, or set aside, or are not found in the "Scriptures of truth," that church, that member, is

apostate, or is not in unity with the true Catholic Church of Christ. But not only is there a universality in the Church, and a sole dominant and inspiring distributer of spiritual gifts, according to the requirements of the age, whether extraordinary, as at the first, or ordinary, as now; but the Church is characterised by a unity of hope in all its members, whether collective or individual: 66 even as ye are called in one hope of your calling." This hope is expressed by the apostle elsewhere, as dependent upon the great doctrine of the gospel-the doctrine of grace: "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Christ is become of none effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith," (Gal. v. 1, 4, 5.) Another sign of the true Catholic Church is, that all its members build their hope of eternal salvation, not upon any merits of their own, but solely upon acceptance with God through faith in Christ producing righteousness. They, therefore, who look to their good works as meritorious, and as capable of deserving salvation, are not members of the true Catholic Church of Christ. But we read further, 66 one Lord, one faith, one baptism." These words standing together are also connected together; for as the one body can have but one head, they who are baptized into the faith of that Lord who is the head of the body, his Church must of necessity all partake of the same baptism, and by that baptism exhibit the same faith. Now it is clear that they who acknowledge any other authority than the Lord Jesus Christ, i. e. who do not receive him entirely as their sole and only Lord, under all the characters in which he is represented in the Scriptures, as intercessor, advocate, mediator, prince, king, do not acknowledge that there is "one Lord," but many; and as this contradicts the unity of headship, so they who so contradict it prove that they do not belong to the true Catholic Church of Christ. Again, the one faith into which Christians are baptized is not what the Romanists assert, that faith which they profess in their own traditions, not an adherence to those superstitions which they are pleased to consider necessary to salvation, but the faith which all the apostles equally expressed in those doctrines which they all equally declared; and to agree in that confession which they made in their lives and by their deaths; to receive what they all taught; and to be built upon them all as foundation stones of that superstructure, of which Christ is the chief corner-stone; is to belong to that Catholic Church, the individual members of which, extending through all time and over all lands, have but one faith, one trust, one belief, one principle of obedience, renouncing merit, working by love to Christ," for the great love wherewith he loved us." They, therefore, who build upon one apostle and not all, who do not renounce human merits, and who look to any other cause than the free grace of God, which all the apostles teach, or whose belief does not produce corresponding practice, which all likewise enjoin, do not hold the unity of faith, and therefore belong not to the true Catholic Church of Christ on earth.

Thirdly, they who belong to the true Catholic Church of Christ on earth, hold the unity of the sacraments, of which baptism is one, and of which the Lord's Supper, the renewal of baptism, is the other. Now Christ commanded all nations to be baptized in the name of the Father,