were St. Peter's peculiar Charge, feem'd to know nothing of the Gofpel. And elsewhere, he names a few whom he faith, (a)" Were his only Fellow Workers there: " And complains, that, (b) "At his firft Anfwer, when "fummoned before Nero, no Man ftood with him, but "all Men forfook him,” all which sure cou'd not have happened, if St. Peter had been at Rome.

3dly, The Papifts Stories do not agree in the Time of St. Peter's coming to Rome, and concerning that of his Death, contradict the Truth apparent from Scripture and approv'd Hiftory; therefore it is unreasonable to impofe upon us fo dubious a Matter. Befides, if St. Peter was Bishop of Rome, and that the Pope is his Succeffor, there is no Reason that his Supremacy fhou'd be made an Article of Faith: Becaufe we ought not to make any Thing an Article of our Faith, but that which can be proved by Scripture; now, the Pope's Supremacy cannot be proved by Scripture, and of Confequence ought not to be received as an Article of Faith.

4thly, But allowing St. Peter to have been at Rome, If the Pope fucceeded Peter, it must be in his extraordinary Quality as an Apoftle, or as he was Bishop of Rome, or as he was Head of the Church; but he cannot fucceed him as an Apoftle, for that Office ceafed with the Perfons, the Apostles not conftituting Apoftles to fucceed them, but only Bifhops, Paftors, &c. Nor cou'd he fucceed him as Bishop of Rome, or head of the Church, because Peter him feit was neither of them; and a Man cannot be faid to fucceed another in that, which fuch other Perfon had never any Poffeffion of, or Right to, therefore it follows, the Pope fucceeds not at all St. Peter.

5thly, St. Peter's Primacy (if he had any) did not exempt him from paying Tribute, even to (c)" An

(a) Coloff. 4. 11. (b) 2 Tim.4. 16, (c) Matt. 17.27.

"Heathen."

"Heathen." His Epiftle has many urgent Precepts of Obedience to Princes. as, (a)" Submit to every Ordi

nance of Man, whether it be to the King as Supreme," pray mark, "Or to Governors, &c." But the Pope not only denies all Obedience to the Emperor, his rightful Sovereign, and other Kings and Princes, but plays the Tyrant over them, and pretends a Right to dispose of their Crowns, and over-rule them in their own Dominions at his Pleafure. Therefore the Pope can never affume this Infolence from St. Peter.

6thly, St. Peter's Primacy (if we fhou'd allow him to have had any) did not priviledge him from Subjection to the Reft of his Brethren, (b) "Before whom he plead "ed his Cause," and by whom "He was fent as a "Meffenger: " Nor did it free him from (c) "Error, er "from being withstood to the Face." But the Pope claims a Right to domineer over the whole Church at his Pleafure, and boasts himself infallible: Infomuch that the Council of Lateran moft compliantly tells him, (d) "To thee is given all Manner of Power, as well of "Heaven, as of Earth: " He that faith all, excepteth nothing. These vaft Prerogatives which are the brighteft Jewels of the Triple-Crown, we are fure were never Part of Peter's Inheritance.

Laftly, Were the Popish Pretenfions true, we muft conclude the Fathers extremely negligent, not to fay defective, that they have not left exprefly let down in any of their Works, this most important Point, that Chrift made Peter and his Succeffor's Head of the Church and endued them with Infallibility. And farther, the fame Fathers muft have troubled themselves and their Flocks very impertinently, in toiling to compofe tedious Confutations of Hereticks, if they might have had pre

(a) 1 Pet. 2. 13. (b) Acts 8. 14. Ch. 11. 2, 3, 4. c. (c) Gal. 2. 11. (d) Sub. Leon. 10. Seff. 10. fent

Tent Recourfe to a vifible, unerring Authority in Decifion of Controverfies; fince if their Oppofers had refufed to acquiefce in his Determination, their main Work had been not fo much to confute their Opinions, as to convince them of their Duty to obey fuch fupreme Judge. But they making Ule of no fuch Medium, we may confidently conclude, they never had any Thought of fuch a Power delegated to any on Earth.

Platina, who writes the Lives of the Popes, dedicated to Pope Sextus the Fourth, whofe Secretary he was, in the Life of St. Peter, tells us this formal Story; That Peter fometime before his Death confecrated Clement, and committed to him the Chair, and the Church of God, his Verbis, in thefe Words," The fame Power of binding and loofing I deliver to thee which Chrift left me, do then, contemning and defpifing all outward "Things, promote by Pray'r and Preaching the Salva"tion of Men, as becomes a good Paftor." Sure we are, modern Popes, tho' they talk much of the Former, have very little Regard to the latter Part of his Charge.

But how comes it to pafs, after this exact and formal Story fo gravely told, that the fame Author fets down the Life not of the faid Clement as Succeffor to Peter, but of one Linus, who he fays enjoy'd the Seat eleven Years, three Months and twelve Days? And after him one Clitus, who Poped it for twelve Years, one Month, and eleven Days, and then after this Nap of twenty four Years, comes this honeft Father, Clement, into the Chair, and held it nine Years, two Months and ten Days. So that it seems their Succeffion got a knock in the Cradle; for by this reckoning, Clement, lamentably neglected his Charge for above twenty Years, and the two next Bishops that followed Peter, were Ufurpers. This inconfiftency makes the Tale (mell rank efpecially if we confider,

ift, That if Peter did so ordain, either Clement or Linus, or any other Head of the Church, then he either divefted himfelf of that Authority and became as well as others under fuch new Head; or elfe from that Time

till

till his Death, the Church had two vifible Heads; both which are abfurd.

2dly, If Clement, Linus, or any other fucceeded Peter in the Primacy and was Head of the Church, then James, and John, and other Apostles who furvived Peter, were under, and muft obey Clement, &c. But 'tis unreafonable to think, that thofe who were of the Chief of the Apostles called by Christ, and (a) who were equal'd with, if not preferr'd before Peter himself fhou'd become Inferiors and obey an ordinary Bishop called by Man. And to fatisfy us that there was no fuch Thing on foot in that Age, we may obferve, that the Writings of James and John are by the Church owned in the Canon of the holy Scriptures, whereas those of Clement (tho' fome are extant in his Name) are rejected as not Canonical.

Lastly, Suppofe what they say, that Chrift ordained Peter his Succeffor, and Peter, Clement, or Linus, yet it is nothing to the latter Popes, because they are neither called immediately as Peter by Chrift, nor from the Pope foregoing, as Clement by St. Peter, but by the Cardinals. And whence had the Cardinals that Power? If from God, let them produce their Warrant, if from Men who were they, and by what Authority?

But wou'd you know indeed whofe Succeffor the Pope is, we may fafely affirm, rather of Simon Magus, than of Simon Peter; for Pride, Ambition and Covetousness prompted them to ufurp fuch Titles and Power. Now, pray let us reflect, on what a horrid Succeffion they boast of: A Succeffion from that Heretick, John the 22d. who deny'd the immortality of the Soul; from John the 23d. Gregory the 12th. and Benedict the 13th. who were all Popes at once, and all cashier'd by the Council of Conftance as illegitimate; from Pope Eugenius, whom the Council of Bafil convicted both of Schifm and Heresy;

(a) Gal. 2

from

from Pope Marcellinus, who facrific'd to Idols; from Pope Liberius, who turn'd Arian; from Pope Anaftafius, whom the Roman Clergy excommunicated for being an Heretick; from Pope Silvester the 2d. who facrific'd to the Devil; from Pope Formofus, who got the Chair by Perjury; from Pope Sergius the 3d. who caus'd another Pope's Body to be dug out of the Grave, and his Head to be cut off and flung into the Tyber; from Pope Boniface, who imprifon'd his infallible Predeceffor, and plucked out his Eyes; from Pope Hildebrand, who threw the Sacrament into the Fire; in a Word, from fuch a fulfom Pack, that Heathen Rome with her Nero's, and Domitians, and all other Pefts of Mankind, cou'd not match them. How unlike are the fe Popes to St. Peter? fhou'd the good od Man revive, how wou'd he wonder at fuch Succeffors? It is reported of Raphael D' Urbin, the famous Painter, when he drew the Portraitures of St. Peter, and St. Paul, that the then Pope taxed him with laying too much Colour on their Faces; he reply'd, that he did it on purpose, to represent them blushing in Heaven, to fee what Succeffors they had got upon Earth. So Thomas Aquinas coming to Pope Innocent the 4th. whom he found furrounded with great Heaps of Gold; Lo Thomas! faid the Pope, the Church cannot now fay, as of old; "Silver and Gold have I none:" No, fays the furly Doctor, nor can fhe fay to the Lame," Arife and " Walk."

Having fhewn you how far the Pope is St. Peter's Suc ceffor, we shall now proceed to give you a brief Hiftory, after what Manner, and at what time, his Holinefs affum'd to himself the Title of univerfal Bishop, and fupreme Head of the Church.

Among the Caufes preparatory and co-operating towards bringing the intolerable Roman Yoke on the Necks of our Forefathers, we may reckon this among many fubfequent Revolutions, which are too tedious to enumerate; that is to fay, the Removal of the Imperial Seat to Conftantinople: On which Occafion, neither the Emperors, nor fo much as their Exarchs or Viceroys refiding at Rome, it came to pafs, that the Splendor of the Imperial Majefty, being far removed from the Eyes

με