Page images
PDF
EPUB

the Apoftles, or because of his free Confeffion of our Saviour, or for whatever other Caufe, was to have a Primacy of Order amongst them, which we are willing to allow him; but which will by no means answer your Claim of an univerfal Su premacy, or a fupream Authority over the whole Church of Chrift; fo that you may easily perceive how grofly you was miftaken in afferting St. Cyprian to have positively own'd the Supremacy of St Peter, Whereas in reality he only teaches that St. Peter was call'd first to be an Apostle, and tho perhaps he had a Primacy of Order in the Apoftolical Colledge, yet this is more than St. Cyprian afferts, and if he had afferted it as he does not, it would by no means infer the Supremacy your Church fo zealously contends for. In a Word, this Father is of no ufe to you in owning S. Peter; was called firf, but is plainly against you in fay ing he did not infolently and arrogantly affume any thing to himself, as if he had a Superiority over the rest, or in your own Words, if you can make any advantage of them, fo as to Jay be bad the Primacy, and that he ought to be obeyed by the recenteft and last Apostles

R. C. The Deacon's Words are alfo falfified, Ibid

C. E. I hope no more than St. Cyprian's, and then we are fafe enough.

R. C. He only fays St. Paul knew himself to be equal in the Affurance of his Election; that is, chofen by Chrift as infallibly to the Apoftleship as any of the Twelve,

C. E. This is great News to me, for I thought fciens fe non imparem, had denoted St. Paul's full Affurance that he was truly equal to St. Peter, and confequently was invefed with an equality of Power. And if fo, pray where is the Falfification you fo much complain of?

L 2

R. C.

R. C. Do you make nothing then of thefe words, Fiducid electionis fuæ, in affurande of his Election?

C. E. I fee you make a great deal of them, or elfe you would not complain fo of Mif-transla tion; but I doubt you will not get much by them. For all I can understand by them is, that St Paul in the affurance of his Election to the Apoftolate, that is to fay, being fully affured that he was elected to be an Apoftle, as certainly as any of the reft, hereby knew that he was not inferiour to St. Peters This I take to be the Deacon's undoubted Meaning, and you may try either to prove it is not, or to fhew it does not directly make against

you.

2

R. C. Dr. Barrow it feems is against you, for he renders the Words thus, Who dar'd refift Peter the first Apoftle, to whom our Lord did give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, but such an one, who in affurance of his Election knowing himfelf not to be unequal to him, might constantly disprove what he bad unadvifedly done?

[ocr errors]

4

C. E. Though I cannot but think the Doctor would render improbaret, difapprove, rather than difprove; yet the reft of the Tranflation I am ready to take upon Content; for I cannot find it in the 78th Page of my Edition. And now let us fee what you will get by it. There is no dif ference fo much as pretended between the Dr, and the Vindicator, in any part of the Sentence, fave only in thefe words. Qui fiducid Electionis Suce fciens (e non imparem, which you take to mean no more than that St. Paul knew himself to be chofen by Chrift as infallibly to the Apostleship, as any of the twelve. But does Dr. Barrow fay fo too? By no means. He only fays of that Apoftle, who in affurance of his Election, knowing himself to be not unequal to bim, &c. as much as to fay, who being fully

[ocr errors]

fully affur'd of his Election to the Apoftolate, knew himself to be not unequal to St. Peter. This I look upon as the propereft meaning of the Doctor's Words, as it is alfo of the Vindicator's';" and I cannot poffibly fee therefore wherein the Falfification lies, unlefs on your own fide; or why the Vindicator does not ftill entirely retain his right to the Title of Philalethes,

[ocr errors]

R. C. Mr. L. fays, it little became the other Apofiles, to fend their Sovereign upon Business, as they fent Peter to Samaria, A. 8. 14. whereas in publick Concerns it is not an unufual thing, for the whole Body to depute their Superior, p. 49.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

C. E. Suppofing the Superior offer himfelf to go and intercede for them, or any way to treat in their behalf, it is not to be fuppos'd his Inferiors fhould refufe to accept of his Kindness, and publickly to teftify their Concurrence with him. But this is not properly to fend him. And this I take to be all that was in the Cafe of Ishmael's and his Companions Expedition to Nero in behalf of the Jews, as Jofephus relates it, Antiq. 1. 20. c. 7. And yet I dare undertake you cannot give an inftance of a Pope's being ever thus fent by thofe under his Charge. And is it not exceeding ftrange then, that St. Peter from whom the Popes profefs to derive all their Power, fhould have been fent in fuch a manner by his known Inferiors and Sub jects? Nothing can be faid for it, but only that you and your Friends are refolved it fhall be fo.

R. C. Mr. L. argues; do you think one could write the Hiftory of King Charles the IId, and neither call him King, nor tell of any regal Act be ever did; and then tells us, in the History which we have of the Acts of the Apostles, there is no evident instance of St. Peter's Supremacy, p. 49.

"

C. E.

C. E. Upon this you take occafion to enlarge for three or four Pages together; where yet you offer nothing but what is easily anfwer'd, but there being nothing in them that relates to the Vindicator, I pafs them over as not to my prefent purpose, nor fuiting with my intended Brevity.

R. C. Mr. L. puts us next in mind of the Coun cil at Ferufalem related, Act. 15. where he fays both of them were prefent, and there is not a tittle of any Superiority of St. Peter over St. Paul, adding moreover very confidently, that St. James the Bifhop there, did, as Prefident, refume what had been faid by St. Peter and others, and gave his definitive Sentence upon the whole and the Decree was drawn up in bis Words, p. 53.

C. E. From hence you feek to impofe upon the Reader, with an imaginary Pretence of the Jewish Chriftians accufing St. Paul as a Deceiver, who taught falfe Doctrine at Antioch, and an Agreement hereupon on both fides to refer the Cafe to the Church of Jerufalem, not to a Synod of the Apoftles, and not as Judges impower'd by our Saviour to iffue out Orders in Cafes of this nature, but only as Arbitrators chofen by the Perfons concern'd, and who refer'd their Cause to them; which I call an imaginary Pretence, because we find nothing of it in St. Luke's Rela tion of this Synod. Nor could the Reftater pick any thing out of it; for (a) he readily owns it to have been an Apoftolical Council, and pleads though to little purpose, (as the Vindicator (b) has plainly fhewn, and you have not attempted to anfwer him, that St. Peter prefided in it. The Vindicator has added befides, a Question which you will not quickly anfwer. (c) What Promife

(a) Cafe Reftated, p. 18, 19. fated, p. 36. 37, 38, 39, 40

A

(b) Cafe truly

(c) 40, 41.

bave you, that whosoever should prefide in that Council, fhould be fupream Paftor of the whole Church? Or what other Title to this Supremacy can you plead, from what was faid or acted therein? It is matter of Fact, that you will not allow St. James fuch a fuperemi ment Furifdiction, though fays he, I have prov'd hims to have prefided there. And it is too much to expect st to be yielded to St. Peter, whom I have provid to have been, and acted there, only as as Fellow Apoftle. This he said in anfwer to the Reftater, who would needs have this Council prove the Supremacy of St. Peter, againft which he argu'd as in the Words but now cited. And you neither own him to have been mistaken, though by your manner of proceeding you must be of Opinion that he was fo; nor do you undertake to fupport his Plea. But to make amends for this Defect, you have brought a heavy Charge againft the Vindicator.

[ocr errors]

R. C. The Vindicator bere in one Sentence gives us a double Caft of this Art, P. 59.

C. E. Then you have difcover'd him to be grown a notable Man at Trick and Artifice, that he fhould give you a double Experiment of it in one Breath; and no doubt in fome matter of mighty Confequence, becaufe otherwife it were not worth his while to run the Hazard of expofing himself fo fhamefully.

R. C. ft, Instead of he [meaning James the Bishop of Jerufalem] he puts this Apoftle, Ibid.

C. E. A wonderful Caft of his Art! Being the very fame thing that St. Paul, I hope without any Caft of Art, fays, Gal. 1. 19. in these words, other of the Apostles faw I none, Jave James the Lord's Brother. I humbly conceive St. Paul may have the favour of being excufed for calling St. James an Apoftle; but for the poor Vindicator, it was certainly a Caft of his Art, and not to be forgiven. Non quod dissimilis res eft, fed quod qui

facit.

« PreviousContinue »