because with him it carrieth a religious sense, and that importeth adoration. Again, princes, because they are called gods, do not arrogate to themselves a freedom from reprehension, or of being judged by any man, as the Pope doth in the Canon Statis, dist. 96, the words whereof are these: It is evidently shewed that the pope can neither be bound nor unbound by any secular power; because we know he hath been called God by that religious prince Constantine before mentioned, and God cannot be judged by man.' He excludeth princes from the title of gods, to reserve it to himself; and approving Constantine's calling him god, he inferreth therefrom that the pope cannot be judged of any man.' But let us note by the way that Constantine said in the council of Nice, speaking to all the Bishops there present, You are gods;' but he never spake this particularly to the bishop of Rome. In consequence of this title, the pope calleth his decrees and canons oracles: oracle signifieth the answer of God, Rom. iii. 2, and xi. 4. With like modesty, he termeth his decretal epistles canonical scriptures, Dist. 19 in the canon, In canonicis, the inscription whereof is this, " Inter canonicas Scripturas Decretales Epistolæ connumerantur"-The Decretal Epistles are numbered among the canonical Scriptures. He boasteth himself to have all power in heaven and upon earth, in the last council of Lateran, Sess. 9, and 10, and attributeth it unto himself in his book of Sacred Ceremonies, sect. 7, cap. 6; according to which power Innocent the Third, in his bull Ad liberandam, which is at the end of the second council of Lateran, giveth unto pilgrims that come from beyond the seas, an increase of glory above the rest. Among all these titles which he taketh, none is so odious as his assuming to be The Spouse of the universal church, which belongeth particularly to Jesus Christ, as St. Paul saith, "For I have espoused you unto one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ," 2 Cor. i. 2. And yet this is the quality which the pope taketh to himself in more than thirty places in his decrees and decretals, and in the last council of Lateran. And to the end you may know his books, in what sense he is called the spouse of the Church, Bellarmine, who wrote at Rome, 1. i. de Rom. Pont. c. 9, saith, that the pope is the spouse of the Church, etiam Christo excluso, Christ being excluded. And if Christ were not excluded, yet in matters of marriage, we are not accustomed to accept a deputy. Whoever would heap up places in which both the pope and his flatterers set him above all law and right, and say that he may dispense against the Apostles, nay against the gospel itself; that he hath power likewise to dispense with oaths made unto God, and a thousand things of the like nature, whereby he setteth himself above God, might easily of these things compose a great volume, and grieve the heart of the godly reader, who is touched with a zeal for God's house; but this shall suffice to shew that Coeffeteau wrongeth the pope much in saying, that he is called God only in that sense that princes are, that is, for civil considerations for in all that is above said, there is not one thing said of civil respect, all is built upon consideration of religion,-I should have said against religion. And as little grace hath he in defending the pope's triple crown, when he is driven to say, that the title of Majesty is very fit to be given to holy things. For certainly St. Peter was far more holy than the pope, and consequently ought to have had the greater majesty: and yet neither Peter, nor any other prelate after him for many ages, did ever wear three crowns, or adorn their heads with diamonds. This lustre well becometh worldly majesty, but not spiritual holiness, which ought to shine in virtues and not in precious stones; and to appear rather in martyrdom than pomp, and to edify men's hearts instead of dazzling their eyes. Yet all the majesty of kings was never comparable to this worldly splendour of popes; for never did any of them think fit to wear three crowns. The very name of this head-tire teacheth us what to think; for in Italy it is called The kingdom,' and the book of Holy Ceremonies ordinarily calleth it so, to shew that the pope weareth that crown as a king, and not as a bishop or pastor of the church. The mark of the bishoprick in the church of Rome is the pastoral staff, which they call the Crosier. But the pope carrieth none such, as Innocent the Third teacheth in the first book of the Mysteries of the Mass, cap. 42: Because,' saith he, St. Peter sent his Crosier to Eucharius, bishop of Trevers, which is there kept for a relic.' The first author of this fable is unknown, but it was devised to persuade the people that St. Peter having laid aside his Crosier, wore the triple crown as monarch of earth, hell, and heaven; or as governor of Asia, Africa, and Europe. "Now it is not without cause that this crown is called the kingdom, because the pope qualifieth himself with the titles of kings and monarchs. The last council of Lateran, Sess. 10, speaketh thus to the pope, The empire of your Holiness' and Sess. 9, Regale Romanorum Pontificum genus,' The Royal race of the Roman Bishops: and in the third Sess. The Pope is Priest and King: and in the first Sess. he is called, Princeps totius orbis, Prince of the whole world: and therefore he preacheth no more. Sometimes he saith mass on some solemn day, but in that mass he causeth himself at sundry times to be adored. If any king be present he must hold the napkin, but it must be upon his knee, as did king Charles the Eighth to pope Alexander the Sixth. As for his better reading the missal, he hath a cardinal that pointeth to the letters with his fingers, as men teach young children; he then changeth his hose and shoes many times, and VOL. XLII. MARCH, 1819. sucketh the chalice with a reed. At his going away he swelleth and puffeth up his cheeks, and giveth the benediction by blowing upon them, as though he gave the Holy Ghost. As touching the titles of Head of the Faith, and Supreme Judge of all Controversies, which his Majesty of England upbraideth the pope. with; Coeffeteau passeth it over without a word, as thinking it. not to be maintained; and he disclaimeth that title of Monarch of the World, and thus condemneth the council of Lateran before alleged, which called him King and Prince of the whole world. And we have before produced certain theses lately disputed of at Naples, and dedicated to the pope now reigning, wherein he is called Vice-God, Monarch of the Christian world. Having examined those passages from the fathers, from which the Romanists vainly attempt to prove the pope's pretended succession to St. Peter, Du Moulin observes with respect to this point, that, "It is diligently to be noted, that those among the ancient fathers who affirm, that the bishop of Rome is successor to Peter, do thereby understand that he is successor in the charge of the bishop of Rome, but not in the apostleship. After this sort also the bishops of Ephesus were successors to St. John and St. Paul; the bishops of Jerusalem successors to St. James, so far as these apostles were bishops of Ephesus and Jerusalem; but they never were successors to the apostleship, and to the government of the church universal. Nor is there any reason why the bishop of Rome should be successor to Peter in his apostleship, and the bishop of Jerusalem successor to James only in his bishoprick. Besides, the bishop of Antioch, more ancient than the bishop of Rome, hath always been called the successor of St. Peter; and why should he not be as well in the apostleship and government of the universal church? If you say that Peter took away the prerogative and pre-eminence from Antioch, and transferred it to Rome, we utterly deny it, and no proof thereof worthy of reception can be brought. If they further say that Peter died at Rome, I will also say that Jesus Christ died at Jerusalem; and why should not Christ's death at Jerusalem have in it more power and virtue to make the bishop of Jerusalem chief of the church, than the death of Peter at Rome to confer this great dignity upon the bishop of Rome? I leave it likewise with the reader to judge who, after the death of Peter, ought of right to be the chief of the universal church. For St. James lived yet at Jerusalem after St. Peter was dead. And the apostle St. John outlived him 32 years, according to the account of Eusebius and Irenæus. Is it a thing to be believed that St. John, the disciple whom Jesus loved-who leaned on his breast-unto whom he recommended his mother at his death-whose writings are Divine oracles, as the Revelations in the Apocalypse prove-that he should be inferior to Linus the disciple of St. Paul; and indeed our adversaries themselves have inserted into the first tome of their councils, certain epistles, which they say were Clement's, bishop of Rome, among which there is one to St. James, bishop of Jerusalem, which begins thus, "Clemens to James, brother to the Lord, bishop of bishops, governing the holy church of the Hebrews which is in Jerusalem, yea all the churches which are founded every where by the Providence of God." And a little after he calleth him his Lord; words which witness that Clement acknowledged James for his superior, and chief of all the bishops of the world. "We grant then willingly, that the ancient bishops of Rome, before the corruption of doctrine, and usurpation of monarchy in the church, were successors of Peter in the bishoprick of Rome only, even as the bishop of Corinth was successor to St. Paul. But withal we add this, that through the corruption of doctrine which hath by little and little crept into the church of Rome, (every age having added and contributed thereto) he is now wholly and justly fallen from that succession. For he may not in any wise be called Peter's successor, who opposeth the doctrine preached by St. Peter, and who in the chair of verity doth establish a lie. The Turk cannot be called successor to the emperor of Greece, though seated in his place, seeing that he is rather his subverter. Let some show me that Peter preached another purgatory than the blood of Christ, or another satisfaction to the justice of God than his obedience, or any sacrifice propitiatory but his death; that ever he gave pardons for 100,000 years, or drew souls out of purgatory by bulls and indulgencies; that he ever degraded emperors; that he took away from the people the reading of the Holy Scriptures, or the communion of the cup; or that he commanded the worshipping of images, and public service to be said in an unknown tongue; or that he ever constrained other bishops to take from him letters of investiture, and pay to him annats; or that ever St. Peter was called God on earth, the spouse of the Church, and caused himself to be worshipped; or that ever he sung mass, or commanded the host to be adored; or that ever he left off preaching the gospel, or quitted the crosier staff to take upon him a triple diadem. If, I say, they can shew me that St. Peter ever did these things; then, though the pope were bishop but of one village, I will willingly acknowledge him for St. Peter's successor, but still in the bishopric only, and not in the apostleship, which ended in his person, and is not derived to his successors in particular churches." After all, the pope, by some Protestants, so called, is considered as the only channel of ministerial sanctity to those who live in the nineteenth century! O that prejudice were done away! THE WORKS OF GOD DISPLAYED. To the Editor of the Methodist Magazine. DEAR SIR, FROM the vast storchouse of the visible creation, and the grand repository of Nature, are compiled a few remarks, expressive of the wisdom which planned, the power that executed, and the exuberant goodness which appears throughout this magnificent and harmonious system. When you have a page to spare in that most interesting department of your Miscellany, "The Works of God displayed," their insertion will oblige, Kettering. Dear Sir, your's, &c. The Utility, Magnificence, and Harmony of the Works of God, as displayed in the visible creation. -VIRG. Jovis omnia plena."- "And yet was every faltering tongue of man, Thy works themselves would raise a general voice, By human foot untrod, proclaim thy power, And to the quire celestial THEE resound, The eternal cause, support, and end of all!” A partial consideration of the universe is ever apt to dishonour its great Author; but a judicious survey of all the parts, as forming one grand whole, strikingly exhibits a system useful, magnificent, and harmonious. The stamp of an all-wise Being is impressed in the most legible characters on all his works. The good of all his creatures is an end worthy the best, as well as the wisest of all Beings. The various parts of the creation of God are subservient one to the other. The immense chain of being has a vast number of links, each one depending upon the other, and the whole massy chain fastened to the throne of God. Hence in the grand scale of being and existence, there is nothing deficient, nothing redundant. Let not any then pretend to arraign infinite Wisdom, or prescribe limits for the track of Omnipotence. The savage beast we dread, the domestic animal that obeys our will, and the lamb we feed upon, jointly and equally promote the same great end. A Divine power and skill was requisite to the formation of the insect, whose minuteness escapes our notice, as well as in the huge structure of the stupendous and half-reasoning" elephant. The smallest reptile which we tread upon, answers the purpose for which its existence is designed, as well as the enormous bulk of the whale, which requires a sea to sport in, and yields "rivers of oil." The same creative power that formed the magnificent and reaplendent plumage of the peacock, gave the bat its form, and |