day of Pentecost. That it is altogether improbable that St. Peter either founded or governed that church, has been shewn by an acute and copious train of reasoning. That the church of Rome has had a succession of bishops since the age of its foundation cannot be reasonably doubted, however difficult she, like other churches, may find it to display the precise order of succession ;† and many of them were in the truest sense successors of the apostles, for they were preachers, confessors, and martyrs. How comparatively circumscribed, however, was the benefit of a succession of pastors, when, forsaking the pure doctrines that their ancestors derived from the Apostles, they substituted the inventions of men for the commandments of God! The church of Rome has done this; and having taught doctrines that the apostles never taught-tradition, for instance, though opposed to the scriptures,t-transubstantiation, though a tenet unknown to the first christians,§-and image-worship,|| though expressly forbidden by the Divine Law, she has forfeited her claim to the rank of a church that has preserved the unadulterated doctrines of pp. 58-72. 192-194. + P. 71. pp. 281-284. 360, 361. § pp. 158-162. 311-313. || pp. 191. 285–291. 395–397. 402—435. the apostles. She still retains creeds replete with apostolic truth, and prayers worthy of the apostolic age; but obscured as they are by a mixture of erroneous tenets, unauthorized forms of worship, and superstitious ceremonies, her members are deprived of the full benefit they might otherwise expect in her communion, and even incur the danger of disregarding the truths most essential to their salvation. (2.) Sanctity has been laid down as a second characteristic. Is the church of Rome conspicuous for this attribute? An invisible head of the church of God, other churches equally acknowledge with the church of Rome in the person of the immaculate Redeemer. A visible head in the person of the pope other churches disclaim. If the early bishops of Rome were ornaments to the christian church, too many of their successors have been far otherwise than eminent for their virtues. Holiness," has become the very title of the popes; but a title in too many instances not merited. Ambition, cruelty, and other evil passions have been too prominent to escape the notice of their contemporaries, and the condemnation of posterity.* * pp. 53-55. 75-88. 177-179. 182-185. 194– 197. 279-281. 371-373. 376-378. That her members in ancient days have not been distinguished for superior sanctity, the very annalists and councils of the church of Rome attest.* That her members in modern days surpass other christians in virtue, no impartial observer of manners, who has marked with a discerning eye the moral features of the inhabitants of the different kingdoms of Europe, will venture to affirm. That so far from being holy and pure, the faith of the church of Rome has been corrupted, her laws and decrees stamped with fraud and oppression, and her sacraments abused,† painful and convincing evidence exists; whilst the very wars to which those decrees gave birth,— falsely denominated "Holy Wars,"―originated in fanaticism, were prosecuted from motives of hatred, avarice, and ambition, and terminated in cruelty and licentiousness. (3.) Unity is another attribute to which the church of Rome lays claim;-but it is a claim that she cannot substantiate. Perfect unity did not exist in the primitive christian church, since particular churches differed from each other on various occasions, bishops contended with pp. 324–329. † pp. 113. 152-155. 280. 382–390. ‡ pp. 186–192. 198, 388. bishops, councils opposed councils.* The church of Rome equally fails to establish her title to this characteristic:-for the faith and the sacraments of that church in an early age, have been different from those of a subsequent period; contention often prevailed within her precincts, between even the most strenuous of her supporters; and whilst Dominicans attacked the tenets of the Franciscans, and Jansenists combated those of the Jesuits, one pope remained like his predecessors at Rome, whilst another, elected by cardinals, made Avignon his residence.† (4.) Another distinctive mark claimed by the church of Rome is universality. By a very strange anomaly, and perversion of terms, a particular church professes that she is the catholic church;-in other words, asserts that a part is the whole! If general extension were a proof of divine origin, islamism could perhaps on this point adduce stronger evidence than christianity, and paganism than either. The church was not less a true church, however, when it consisted of Noah's family in the ark, or when * pp. 242-246. 350-358. 361. 362. 370–372. 380. 381. 392-395. † pp. 158-162. 199. 200. 315–319. the disciples met at Jerusalem in " an upper room-the number of the names together about one hundred and twenty,"-than when her 318 bishops, convened by the first christian emperor, met for deliberation at the first council of Nice. The assumption that the church of Rome has established her dominion in all nations, is as groundless as that she has been entitled to it in all ages.* That she has attempted to extend her religious influence to distant nations, her missions in China, in Abyssinia, and other parts of the globe, amply attest. Those efforts, if they proceeded at any time from motives of avarice and ambition were unjustifiable; if from those of piety and benevolence, laudable. Such efforts cannot, however, authorize her usurpation of the title-" the catholic church;" since other churches no less zealously propagate christianity amongst heathen nations. 2. Can it be shewn that those christians,— who, under different names, but chiefly the denomination of Waldenses, for many centuries before the Reformation bore testimony against the reigning errors of the church of Rome;-possess the marks of a true church? CAN THE ATTRIBUTES CLAIMED BY THE CHURCH of rome, |