Imágenes de páginas
[ocr errors]

you only cite the Words of the Pope's Legates against him, as if this were enough to out-weigh all the Multitude of Evidences he has brought on the other side. But to come to our proper Business, as to St. Peter's being the Rock or Foundation, Stone of the Church, p. 27.

R. C. The Words are clearly on our side. C. E. The 'Reftater had refer'd to St. Cyprian, St. Bafil, St. Chryfoftom, St. Jerome and St. Auguline, for his sense of the words before us. Whereupon the Vindicator having shewn, that not one of these Fathers answer'd the Design propos'd, and having produced some others of them in direct Opposition to him, instead of attempting to answer these Testimonies, you now very fairly give them all up, and tell us, If any of the Fathers understood the Rock here spoken of, either of Christ, or of St. Peter's Faith, they did not understand it in the literal Sense, but either applied it to

mystical or causal Sense, or mistook the literal, What you mean by this mystical or causal. Sense, you don't pretend to give us any Information, which makes me suspect you most inclin’d to stick co the latter Charge, that they were mistaken. But take them in whether of these Senses you please, it is evident you yield them to be against you, and so have noching to say for them.

R. C. Because the words of our Saviour are plain against them, almost to a Demonstration, p 29. For when our Saviour said to S. Peter, Thou art Peter, &c. ( a ) it was the same thing, as if he had Said in our Language, Thou art a Rock, and


this Rock I will build my Church, p. 28. C. E. Where then is the Faithfulness of

your infallible Vulgar Translation, that as plainly diftinguishes between Petrus, Peter, and Petra, the Rock, as ours, or any other does According to



your own Bible, the words are not the same

; and how then will you build upon them as though they were ?

R. C. I cannot deny but our Version after all the Care that has been taken about it, and the Authority by which it has been published, is, at least, as Authentick, as the Syriack, or any other.

C. E. I remember, that in a Conference had not very long since, the Priest, who maintained your Cause, even the General of the Jesuites, if I be not misinformed, (this I inay say, fince being dead it can now do him no hurt) preferred it before the Greek. Now, if your own Bibles, thus highly preferred by those of your own Party, be against you, I am apt to think there is an end of your Demonstration.

Ř. C. Who ever said, the House was built upon the Mafon? This cannot be the Literal Sense of the Words. The Mr. L's Vindicator Seems willing his Reader should think so, in spite of common Sense, p. 29,

C. E. If you please to think again, you will soon perceive, that the Vindicator supposes the words to be spoken in a Figurative, not in a Literal Sense. And if it were otherwise, you would be as hard put to it to maintain your ground, as He. For if it be an Absurdity to say the House is built upon the Mason; is it not as much so, to say the City of London is built upon the Lord Mayor, the Church of England upon the Archbishop of Canterbury, or that of Rome upon the Pope? Is it not every whit as far, or rather farther, from a strictly Literal Expression, to say the Church, or any sort of Body Corporate, is buile upon its chief Governor, as to say, it is built upon its first Founder . Yet, this latter you are willing your Reader should Juppole, whether in spite of common Sense, I leave yourfelf to judge.

R. C.

R. C.

If Christ promised to build bis whole Church upon S. Peter, we must either say, be did not keep bis Word, which is Blasphemy, or that the Apostles were not part of his Church, which is little better; or that they were built upon S. Peter, p. 30.

c. E. But what if you say, Christ promised to build his Church upon S. Peter, all of it, I mean, that was then io be built?. I presume, there is neither Blasphemy, nor Absurdity in this? I mean all that was to be built after the Foundation was first laid; as it was in the other Apostles as well as S. Peter. S. Paul exprelly tells the Ephesians, Chap. 2. 20. that, they were all Foundation-stones in the Spiritual Building, as the Prophets also had in a less degree been before them; and our Blessed Lord himself was in a far more eminent; and by consequence, S. Pea ter was not the only Foundation of the Church. And are buile upon the foundation of the opostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ bimself being the chief Corner, ftone. Hence the Vindicator, had observed (a) that the other Apoftles were Foundation-ftones in this Ecclefiaftical Building, and not S. Peter alone. As Mr. L. also had done before him ; Who had moreover made à like Observation from Rev. 21. 14.

R. C. And I have told him there Observations will do bim little Service, p. 31.

C. E. But I am of opinion, you had no good reason for saying it.

R. C. As to the former of these places, I say, S. John there describes the Glory of the Saints; with reference to thoje Virtues in this Life,' by which it is obtained, p. 32.

C. E. But you give neither Reason, nor Au. thority for saying so, and cannot expect to be believed without either of them. (4) Cafe truly Bated, p. 19.


R, C.


R. C. I add farther, that S. Peter has no Supremacy in Heaven. Ibid.

Ć. È. This I am fure is no Proof, that he has any upon Earth. And so I need say no more as to this Text. Be pleased therefore to let us know, what you have to say to the Passage to the Ephefians, and whether you can bring your self off there, any better than you have done here.

R. C. The literal and most natural Sense of the Words, seems to be, that the Foundation here intended is the Godhead, or Divine Revelation, upon which the Prophets and Apostles were grounded as well as we. Ibid. **. c. E. This is such a Literal and Natural Sense of the Words, as, for ought I know, never came into any one's Head before your own. And if it be so natural an Interpretation, it is very strange it should not have been known fooner. That it was not, is a ftrong ground of Suspicion that it is not right. · And I am sure it has been thought, that the Words have another more truly Literal and Natural Sense than this. Buén ☺ di 'AZOSOROI i ór Hregoñized, says (a) S. Chryfoftom; The Apostles and Prophets are the Foundation. And are built upon tbe. Apoftles and Prophets, says S. Ambrose, (b) Jefus Christ himself being the chief Corner Stone. Hoc eft super novum & vetus Teftamentum collocati. Quod enim Apoftoli prædicaverunt, Prophetæ futurum dixerunt, &c. That is, are settled upon the New and Old Testament. For what the Apofitles preached, the Prophets had foretold should be. And though the Apostle tells the Corinthians, God placed in the Church first Apostles, and Prophets in the second place, these are another Jort of Prophets. For there be disputes about 'the Ordering of the Church,

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

but here concerning the Foundation of it. For the Prophets put things in order, but the a) Apostles laid the

Foundations. Wbence the Lord says to Peter, Upon this Rock I will build my Church; that is, upon this Confession of the Catholick Faith, I will eftablish the Faithful unto Life. Where you see, that not only S. Peter's Confession of the true Faith is said to be the Rock, on which the Church was to be built; buc moreover, that the Apostles, in general, laid the Foundation of it, by preaching che fame Do&rine to the World. Fundamentum aliud nemo poteft ponere præter id quod pofitum eft, quod eft Christus Jefus : Deinde ipfi Apoftoli do Propbetæ, says S. Angustin (b) Other Foundation can no Man lay, iban what is laid ; which is Christ Jesus; and after him the Apostles and Propbets. @tunc Sróxeu Tell & Nespñ terus sy "Azósonar, says Oecumenius (c) The Prophets and Apostles are laid as a Foundation. And indeed I have never met with any one, that has hic upon this new and groundlels Conftru&ion before you.

R. C. Take it then in your own Sense, and so it proves S. Peter's Supremacy. Ibid.

c. E. It is very furprizing, that so plain a Proof against the Supremacy contended for, should at length be found to prove it)

R. C. Since the other Apoftles were Doctors, no less infallible iban S. Peter, they could not depend on bim as a Doctor, teaching them the Mysteries of: Christian Faith; the Truth whereof they both knew and taughi, as well as be. Ibid. :: C. E. Very true.

R. C. Therefore the continual Dependence signified, S. Matt. 16. 18. muft necesarily regard bis Jurisdi&tion. Ibid.

(a) Apostoli fundamenta jeceruut. (6) In Psalm 81. (c) Com. in ep. ad Ephes. cap. 2.

I 2

C, E,

« AnteriorContinuar »