« PreviousContinue »
Elders, TORNAIVELVTNU Erranolov, to tend over the Church ; 20. Acts, 28; and he himself exercised, that function of Church government, when he prescribed ordinances in all Churches, I. Cor. 7, 17.
St. Paul not only called St. Peter's conduct in question, on the occasion mentioned in the opposite column ; but " withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed.” 2. Gal. 11.
my shoep ;"-iving him a triple charge, answerable, perhaps, to his triple denial of his master. Twice our Lord used the word βοσκε, and once ποιμαινε. The latter word certainly means to tend, to rule, to govern ; but, as Beza observes, Christ does not give him the charge of all the sheep; he neither says Tarta Ta apula, nor Aarta Ta Tobata, 21. John, 15.
St. Peter gave an account of himself to the first Christians, when “they of the Circumcision contended with him," 11. Acts, 2, 4; contrary to the Pope's as: sumed Prerogative, to judge all men, and not to be judged by any one-"' cunctos ipse judicaturus; a nemine est judicandus." Peter, who was intimidated, “ dissembled, and walked not uprighily ac. cording to the truth of the Gospel," 2. Gal. 12, 13, 14.-Infallible as the Popes may claim to be, Peter was neither perfect por infallible; but had he been even impeccable and infallible, and had be been seated at Rome by Divine Authority, - there is not a word in Scripture about Peter's successors.
lain, Mr. Editor,
Yours, &c. .
October 14, 1912.
Remarks on an Imporidnt Passage (viz. Matt. xvi, 18.) which has
long been perverted by the Church of Rome, in Support of her vain and baneful Pretensions to a Superiority, or Supreme Dominion, over all other Episcopal Churches. By Granville Sharp. --J. Il'hite and Co. 1812,
Happy are we to recognize Mr. Granville Sharp amongst those who expose the scriptural perversions, and resist the baneful pretensions, of the Romish Church. Protestant principles well become the grandson of Archbishop Sharp, who so eminently distinguished himself in the days of James II. by his learning, his firmness, and his eloquence. Mr. Sharp is an hereditary defender of the protestant faith. Nor has he signalized himself against the errors of Popery only, but against those which have been propagated by those self-willed men who derogate from the Deity of the Son of God. Setting aside all the arguments deducible from the general tenor of Scripture, his philological “Remarks on the Uses of the definitive Article in the Greek text of the New Testament,” have settled the question, and have rendered all the attempts of the Sociņians to impose their audacious dogmata on the world, perfectly nugatory. - In the tract now before us, he applies his intimate acquaintance with the original languages of the Old and New Testament, to shew the futility of the specious interpretations of the Romish Church, which founds its claim of Papal Supremacy on Matt. xvi. 18; " And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” The word Ilerga, translated a Rock, has not the same meaning with the word Ilsegos, Peter; although it bears such a relation to it as to justify the paronomasia, that turn of speech, which our Lord adopted when he uttered the words in question. Our Saviour referred to the declaration of Peter " thou art Christ, the Son of the living God,"-as the Rock on which he should build his Church. İletgos signifies a stone, a little piece of a Rock-Ilerpa, a Rock, means something of superior dignity and importance. The first word lletpos being a masculine noun signifies merely a Stone ; but the second Iletpa, cannot mean any thing of less magnitude and importance than a Rock. We
Vol. I. (Prot. Adv. Dec. 1812.] S
shall here print the note which occurs p. 4, on this subject. “ letgos, 8, è, lapis, saxum (a stone). See the Greek Lexicons of Scapula, Schrevelius, Dawson, Parkhurst, &c.; and the learned Dr. Adam Littleton has placed, in bis Dictionary of Proper Names, as follows: 'Petrus Iletpos ATO TNS Tetpas, a petrá noinên accepit, j. e. CHRISTO, super quem fundata est ecclesia." Though this was an additional name, surname, or cognomen ; yet as it was given to Simon, the son of Jonas, by our Lord himself, it may surely be deemed his proper name, the characteristical meaning of which was declared on the first introduction of Peter (by his brother Andrew), into the presence of his Lord. The true meaning of the name was at first declared by our Lord to be Cephas, a stone; and a learned commentator, Edward Leigh, Esq. asserts, that netpos doth always signify a STONE, never a Rock. Critica Sacra, p. 325."—We shall not quote any more from so short, though so decisive, a work,-only 27 pages, small 8vo.—but we can with confidence refer our readers to it for such information as cannot but satisfy any mind open to conviction. We shall take an early opportunity of noticing Mr. Sharp's remarks on the Roman Catholic Catechism for Ireland; published 1810.----We mean likewise to reprint one or two short Papers from the Works of Archbishop Sharp. . .
An Appeal against the Roman Catholic Claims.--Slockdale, 1812,
This is a well-timed tract, by the Editor of Bishop Porteus's “ Reasons against emancipating the Roman Catholics,"_" Dr. Robertson's Rise of the Reformation," &c." An Awful Warning, or the Massacre of St. Bartholomew,” noticed by Mr. Canning, &c. &c. It is dedicated, with great propriety to Lord Kenyon, who has so successfully distinguished himself by his Remarks on the Roman Catholic Question, (see Prot. Adv. p. 30) and it contains several very just observations. We thank the author for the handsome epithets which he bestows on our own work ; but we sincerely declare that although his Publisher is also our's, we know not his name.-We respect his zeal, and to show him · how much we esteem his good sense, and estimate the quantum of information which he possesses, we shall avail ourselves of his
cbservations in calling the attention of our readers to the work noticed in the succeeding article. Respecting a passage in this gentleman's pampblet, we liere print a letter from an eminent scholar, to whom the cultivators of polite literature, general criticism, and useful knowledge, are under great obligation, as well as the students of theology, and the friends of true religion. This gentleman, whose approbation is fame, has assured us of his friendly support, and occasional co-operation ; and he thus addresses our Editor ;
Sir-At the end of a Publication entitled " An Appeal against the Catholic Claims," is the following very striking passage. .
“ I have heard and read, that some of our Princes declare themselves favorable to the demands of the Roman Catholics! To me, who live far retired from Princely Mansions this seems incompatible with reason, and utterly inconsistent with the circumstances in which our beloved Sovereign's children stand. To my simple understanding it seems that, if the report be well founded, they must have been made the dupes of designing traitors, one of whose objects is to introduce a new succession and set the PROTESTANT LINE aside ; for I cannot conceal, however uncourtierlike I may be in disclosing the unpleasant truth, that, if the Roman Catholics are admitted to their desired participation of privileges, a Pretender may appear and set up his right to the British Crown, on the plea of being nearer in succession than the reigning family,—and no longer excluded by his professing the Tenets of the Roman Church. This may be improbable at the present moment; but is it impossible? Will it even be improbable when the Romish Church, ever grasping and inordinately ambitious, acquires new vigour and full power in this kingdom? In short, by admitting the Catholic Claims, I foresee civil war making Tapid strides in Ireland, whence it would very soon be imparted to Great Britaiu. Against the Protestants being a willing party to it-against so flagrant, so weak, and so impious an act of political, civil and religious SUICIDE, I thus solemnly appeal.” · Now, please to observe, Sir, that the supposition of this able writer is no singular or unprecedented chimera of his own head, as is clear ;-if you recollect, that not long ago, that great King-Deposer and KingMaker, Buonaparle, suggested the very same idea, with a wish, no doubt, that his suggestion shonld be instantly adopted, and vigorously acted upon. In the MONITEUR he pointed out LORD MOIRA as being descended from the antient dyoasty of the English kings, and having of course, a far better title to the Crown than the House of Hanover. These rights of Lord Moira were stated and blazoned in the Moniteur, with the evident intention to excite disaffection to the reigning Family, for not granting the Catholics all they asked, and with a design of kindling the flames of a new rebellion in Ireland.
I am your well wisher,
Y. E. D. October 2017, 1812:
Declaration and Protestation of the Roman Catholics of England,
to which is added the Correspondence of their Committees, and an Encyclical Letter from their l'icurs Apostolic.- Stockdale,
1812. . These very curious documents call for the attention of every man who would understand the temper of the Romanists, and would duly appreciate the power of the Romish Hierarchy. In the year 1789 we well remember the pleasure with which we hailed the dawn, as we then esteemed it, of reason and true religion, about to enlighten those who, in these realms, sat in the darkness of bigotry, and under the baleful shadow of Popery. Alas! it was only a transient gleam which passed over Britain ; it roused our hopes only to mock our expectations. We here print the important instrument to which the other parts of this pamphlet are appendages. The Declaration and Protestation signed by the English Catholic Dissenters
in 1789 ; with the Names of those who signed it. We, whose Names are hereunto subscribed, Catholics of England, do
freely, voluntarily, and of our own Accord, make the following solemn Declaration and Protestation.
WHEREAS sentiments unfavorable to es, as citizens and subjects, have been entertained by English Profestants, on account of principles which are asserted to be maintained by us and other Catholics, and which principles are dangerous to society, and totally repugnant to political and civil liberty ;-it is a duty that we, the Englislı Catholics, uwe to our country as well as to ourselves, to protest, in a formal and solemn manner, against doctrines that we condemn, and that constitute no part whatever of our principles, religion, or belief.
We are the more anxious to free ourselves from such imputation, because