CHAPTER II.

RESPECTING THE LATIN OBJECTIONS TO THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN GENERAL, AND TO THE ORDERS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN PARTICULAR, p. 240.

The bishop of Aire's historical account of the establishment of the reformed church of England, p. 240. .

I. His objection to the church of England in general rests upon the character and conduct of two of our princes, 240.

1. The objection deduced from the character of King Henry VIII., p. 240.

2. The objection deduced from the conduct of Queen Elizabeth, p. 241.

II. His objection to the orders of the church of England in particular rests upon the allegation, that the chain of apostolical succession has been broken, p. 244.

CHAPTER III.

RESPECTING THE ALLEGED SCHISM OF THE REFORMED CHURCH OF

ENGLAND, p. 247.

The English church is charged with schism, on the ground, that Peter, as the primate of the apostolic college, and the line of the Roman bishops, as his successors, in place and prerogative, are the divinely-appointed centre of ecclesiastical unity. Whence it follows, that any separation from Rome is unjustifiable schism, p. 247.

I. An examination of the alleged fact, which forms the basis of the argument, p. 249.

1. Nothing, which is recorded in Scripture, demonstrates
the imaginary primacy of Peter, p. 249.
(1.) First scriptural testimony, p. 250.
(2.) Second scriptural testimony, p. 251.
(3.) Third scriptural testimony, p. 251.
(4.) Fourth scriptural testimony, p. 252.
(5.) Fifth scriptural testimony, p. 252.
(6.) Sixth scriptural testimony, p. 253.
(7.) Seventh scriptural testimony, p. 253.

2. Nothing, which is recorded in Scripture demonstrates the imaginary primacy of the see of Rome, p. 254. II. The argument, built on Mat. xvi. 13-19, rests on the two main positions: that Peter was the first bishop of Rome; and that Christ, by declaring Peter to be the rock upon which he would build his entire church, conferred upon that apostle and his Roman successors the divine right of an universally-controlling primacy, p. 255.

1. There is no evidence from antiquity, that Peter was the first bishop of Rome: on the contrary, the evidence is directly against any such supposition, p. 257.

2. There is no evidence from antiquity, that Peter and his alleged successors in the see of Rome were supposed by the early christians to be conjointly the rock on which Christ promised to found his church: on the contrary, we find, that the primitive ecclesiastical writers never interpreted the text as it is now interpreted by the modern Latin church, p. 261. III. The perfect independence of the church of England on the church of Rome, according to the principles of primitive order, p. 263.

1. Even if the church of England perfectly agreed in doctrine with the church of Rome, still that circumstance would give the latter no right of authoritative domination over the former, p. 264.

2. Neither is any right of authoritative domination given to the church of Rome by the circumstance, that, in point of ecclesiastical derivation, the Anglican church is her daughter, p. 264.

3. The argument for the independence of the English church is complete, even abstractedly from the allegation of idolatry against the church of Romé, p.

265.

CHAPTER IV.

RESPECTING THE PRACTICABILITY OF AN UNION OF THE CHURCH OF

ROME AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, p. 267.

The bishop of Aire strongly recommends an union of the churches of Rome and England, p. 267.

I. The scheme of union, proposed by the bishop, is, that England must adopt implicitly the whole doctrinal system of Rome: and Rome, in return, will indulge her in the matter of discipline, p. 267.

II. Remarks on the bishop's scheme of union, p. 269.

1. The bishop requires, that the whole matter of con-
cession shall be entirely on the side of the Anglican
church: for he demands an unconditional doctrinal
submission to the behests of the church of Rome,
on the ground that the religious principles of Rome
are immutable, p. 269.
2. Such a submission, unattended by real conviction,
would be nothing better than base hypocrisy. To
effect any creditable and beneficial submission, there-
fore, the bishop must first demonstrate the indubi-
table truth of the Roman system of doctrine, p. 270.
3. Singular inconsistency of the bishop in regard to the
alleged invalidation of the Anglican orders by the
marriages of Scory and Barlow and Coverdale, p. 271.
4. According to the bishop, the lamentable ignorance of

the English reformers was the true cause, which separated the church of England from the church of Rome, p. 272.

5. According to the bishop, the no less lamentable ignorance of the present English clergy keeps their deluded church still in a state of schismatical separation, p. 275.

CHAPTER V.

RESPECTING THE BISHOP OF aire's censure of the REFORMATION, HIS APOLOGY FOR THE INQUISITION, AND HIS PROTEST AGAINST FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP, p. 276.

The principles, advocated even by such a man as the bishop of Aire, serve in themselves to show the lamentable corruption of the Roman system of doctrine, p. 276.

I. The bishop's censure of the Reformation, p. 276.
II. The bishop's apology for the Inquisition, p. 279.

1. Respecting the ground taken by the bishop, that any
unjustifiable acts, perpetrated by the Inquisition,
ought not to be charged upon the inquisition itself,
but upon its officers, p. 279.

2. Respecting the ground taken by the bishop, that the number of innocent victims has been greatly exaggerated, p. 280.

3. Respecting the ground implicatively taken by the bishop, that the Inquisition is justified in the slaughter of those whom the church of Rome deems guilty victims, p. 281.

III. The bishop's protest against freedom of religious worship, p. 283.

1. The freedom of religious worship, allowed by the
Anglican church, is openly reprobated, by a prelate
of the Roman church, as a dangerous and mischiev-
ous policy, which must end in the downfal of the
Anglican church, and which, therefore, no wise
ecclesiastical governors would tolerate, p. 283.
2. The future destiny of the church of England no man
can with certainty prognosticate: yet, if the church
of Rome should be re-edified upon her ruins, it may
be doubted, whether the protestant dissenters will
experience any real benefit from the exchange,
p. 284.
3. The error of those modern protestants, who imagine
that the church of Rome has essentially changed
from her former self, is corrected by the express
declaration of the bishop, that her principles, once
defined, are irrevocable, p. 285.

4. The bishop's tempting proposal to the parochial cler-

gy of England, on the part of the episcopal bench

of Rome, p. 285.

CHAPTER VI.

CONCLUSION.

The Author's parting valediction to the worthy and exemplary,

though, as he apprehends, lamentably mistaken, bishop of

Aire, p. 287.

APPENDIX.

RESPECTING THE AUTHENTIC LETTERS OF THE APOSTLES

MENTIONED BY TERTULLIAN, p. 289.

BOOK I.

THE DIFFICULTIES ATTENDANT UPON THE CHURCH OF ROME, IN REGARD TO HER PECULIAR

DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.

Certe sacramenta quæ sumimus, corporis et sanguinis-Domini, divina res est; propter quod et per eadem divinæ efficimur consortes naturæ. Et tamen esse non desinit substantia vel natura panis et vini et certe imago et similitudo corporis et sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebrantur.-Papa Gelas. de Duab. Christ. Natur. cont. Nestor. et Eutych. in Biblioth. Patr. vol. iv. p.

422.

Spiritaliter intelligite quod locutus sum. Non hoc corpus, quod videtis, mandicaturi estis; nec bibituri illum sanguinem, quem fusuri sunt qui me crucifigent. Sacramentum aliquod vobis commendavi: spiritaliter intellectum vivificabit vos.-August. Enarr. in Psalm. xcviii. Oper. vol. viii. p. 397. Colon. 1616.