Daily national Republican. (Washington City [D.C.]) 1870-1872, 1870-01-29

sltyt Ahoulo DC removed LILO. Epitt, llli 10 |
ad 5tsphGnum.l II Pope stephen had not
superior Authofity over other bishops, how
could Cyprian mako such requesti
The rsmaining Fathers quoted BY me 10 dc. |
and sth osntullss, when The Church enjoyed
peace and liberty Of aotlon. Several ecu. |
menioal and provincial councils were held in |
oVor ~ ~ isss,ss Of hs POp we're ol
their binding authority from his conarma.
soTy sentence; New 10 o9troborstion Of the
the Aforementioned Fathers ili ST. James, Of
NisihlSI Gregory, Of NyssaI -. Uytil, Of Jeru.
ellen! 81. Hilary, Of Poietlegsi 81; Gregory
remark that they were all, with one exoop-
uon, present At one or more Of these councils,
and sSesoriesd 70 their DEGREES. One word in
regard 70 each Of these aynods. The hrst Gem
etai Council Of Nice against AIlaniam was held
In the year a2s, and consisted Of Sis bishops,
sTEss iss pIs;,ds1Sy Of ls5s,O, sent ~ PGPo
2, Oh, Q. Photlus, De septem synodIs.l 81.
james, OF Nlhibia, one Of my witnesses, was
nlIed the supreme authority OF the Pope.
II was deoreed at this council that Easter
should be celebrated on the Sunday after the
18th day Of the March moon, and thAtthe
Church OF Alexandria should every year make
tho lunar computation, and forward II to
Rome that the apostolic authority Of the lat. |
IS to he day on which Easter vas 10 Be- Pos
lively observed, We learn this fact from st.
Cyril Of Alexandra, cited by Buoheriui 10
doubted sentiment OF the council In regard to
the primary Of the Roman see,
Tbs second General Council was held 10 the
domains, who denied the divinity OF the Holy
Ghost, II numbered $50 bishops, all from the
East, and the Fathers addressed letter to
Pope Damascus requesting him TO confirm
their deoreen. This he did, and by this papal
sanction the council acquired the name and
authority Of an eeumenical or general Coun.
thus, CD. cit. ...
Now, So Gregory, Of Nysss, and st. oyrIl, Of
Jerusalem. two Of my Witnesses, assisted at
bishops acknowledged the primary OF Peter IN
his successor, the Bishop Of Rome. By the
action OF this council also, st. Gregory Mar
lanzon, another witness, was oonhrmed 40
Bishop OF Constantinopie, and therefore 40.
corded with the sentiment Of the other pre-
iates IN regard to the pIimacy. In the year
ism, and eonsisted OF 800 bishops Of the West.
Az this council st. Hilary, OF Poiotlers, with
two other legates Of Pope Llberlus, presided,
the Bishop Of Rome, who then claimed and
exercised ptimaoy OF Jurisdiction. tAaa-
The tSiPa a'i General is%, oouucil wa. held at
EpheiuS In tsl against Nestorlanism,. and
numbered over 2oo bishops. st. Cyril, Of
AleSandria, and two other legateH Of Pope
Addressed the assembly, ave thank you for
the AoolamAtlona We have heard, and the
rave T ss,d ~ ssSS hSsSs az S
all AGss that the holy and most blessed Peter,
the prince and head Of the apoatles, the pillar
o. ialth, and the ioundatl0n o. the osthells
the Saviour and lRedeemer OF mankind, the
keys Of the kingdom, and to him was given
M PoWet 70 oina and loose sins, Sao hsS' snd
present time, and will do so alwAySp IAot.
cone. Ephea. hpud Liable, vol. Ill There
ADD hence the decree OF the Fathers, condemn,
| tnE NeatoriuE, began with these words; "Oom.
PEELED BY the sacred eanona and By the sRl::,Is
Ses %c' S hS t y ne Church Of Rome We
proceed TO pronounce sentenoe.n tIbid.l
SoE u SS ND Ffsst 81 ss; M. 10
oesuorst The same exercise Of the supremacy
attaohed to st, Peters chair, was called forth
denned in the Council Of Ohaieedon, in the
year ISL. Nearly six hundred bishops assisted
At this synod, where Pope Leo the Great pre-
Pope 10 the council was read, the bishops ex-
| claimed, with one voice, "This 10 the faith OF
the Fathers this is the faith Of the Apostleb
| All OF Us have this bellef--the orthodox be-
lieve THU, Peter hGt GpokfH by the mouth Of
| Leo tAet, conc. ChAlo, Apud. Labbe, vol
81 But the sane SIX hundred bishops also
inSu. 'Oyer US, as the head over the mem
| befa, you have presided In the person OF those
holding your place. We entreat you, there
fore, 10 honor our decision with your sane
tioh, and 80 we have agreed with the head,
let your superior authority complete what IL
desirable for your ehildren.n tIbid., col. s32
and s3T Did the Fathers OF ChAlcedon TecOg.
n.Ie the primary OF Peter, or did they not
Let US now examine whether st. Augustine,
another witness, who Atylel Peter the hrst Of
the apostles, the fret aud principal Ia the
apostolic order, holding the primary OF the
Apostleship, and tells us that the pfineed N
OF the apostolic chair always a ourished 10 the
Church OF Rome, [Epist. l. 3, alias c. IL, ad
qlorium ct Eieullum, j will offer any evidence
plainly conhrmatory OF his belief In Peters
supremacy and that Of his successors. wilt
NaaW - - ~ ~ ..Il
Of Mllevis, lAnno llO, he baysi "Sinee II has
pleased God 10 his special grace to place you
10 the apostolic chair, we do beseeeh you Ia
exercise your PASTORAL solioitude In looking
after. the infirm members OF Christ, For !
new heTesy has been preached. but we hope
by the mercy Of our Lord, who helps you 10
prayers, that the SbsttoTs 81 this psrnlSioSs
doctrine will submit TO the authority OF your
holiness, dsriredl from the authority oJhs DiBinl
In injunction with ave African bishops, st
AuguAtln wrote another letter to the same
Poatin, urging the adoption Of eifeeluAl msa
sures against the errors Of PelaEius. The con
nrmAtofy decree OF the Pope having reached
AfrlcA, st. Augusta thus alluded TO II, In ad
dressing his flock "Already have the deei
sect the answers have reached US; he cause u
deeidsdj may the error also be now at an end
serm9 III, alias 2, de verbs apostou The
client TO show that the Witnesses whom 1 ad.
dueed In vinuioAtion Of the primary Of Peter
far ron sSn1Tsdosiins tfhss%lssiys' On the con
afforded add tional evidence in support o.
their declaration, that Peter is the rock, the
1Sundation on which Christ built HI. Church
that my opponents have not attempted 10 an
swer the argument derived from the common
snsSS sna Prso'iSS o. mankhnd, 10 behsn o.
Church that their Interpretation OF the
Scripture against II amounts simply to thail
that the testinony Of tradition, as furnished
by the Catholic Church, IL the only reliable
and possible Wltneaa OF the New Testament,
meAninEJ that there Is no Scripture that doel
not harmontIe with the Catholic view NJ Pc
of,ss nrInl Ne az F i,nSssiy' ,hst the ,ea!inony
q iavalidating, on the contrary eorfoboTAtC
the Catholic belief on this Important subject
and BY Legitimate deduction, that the nodes
phrases, "monstrouS dogma OF assumption,'
and greatest fallAoy ever Imposed upon III,
mind q man" as applied by our opponents Il
eeslofs, md their proper illustration ralhel
In the futile reasoning Of their authors.
10 former discourse quoted several dis
tinKui9hed commentators OF the New TeAta
meat from the ranks Of Prote1tantlHm, who
Interpret the worda, Thou art Peter, aud ou
this rpek will build my Church. in the SAINT
was only to show the literal and obyiouI
sense OF this scriptural passage that quoted
their teltinony, aud DR.. Sunderland admits
that so far their testimony holds goods whence
u follows that these witnesses are still In our
favor. i did not produce them for the purpose
Of testifying In behalf OF the primaoy OF Peter
or HIS successors, but merely to confirm the
literal sense Of the text In question. II they
do not infer from this that primary OF juriI
dietion was conferred upon Peter and passed
to his successors In the See OF Rome, II Ia only
one among the many evidences OF the great
ineonbinteDcy OF those who, while they pro
Tess to admit nothing but the bible as a rule OF
faith, ropudtate Its statements whenever they
md them opposed to their pfeeoneeIyed opin.
ions. II one admita that Peter WAG the rock
on which Qhrist built his Church, then he
ought to take the consequences, and not con.
tend that Peter was moi the rock or foundAtio n
Of the Church.
I, Twin also remark that the pAtriatio author.
itlea which have cited In this address aud on
previous occasion, all suppose that Peter
was at Rome and died there, and that the
primary claimed and exercised by the bishops
OF Rome, was based upon the fact OF his having
established In that city his apostolic see. But,
as pr. Sunderland has published q sermon in
which he lAbors to myGtify this question,
taking the ground that Peter never was at
| Rome, shall offer some remarks In FefutAtlOn
OF his assertion. This assertion indeed falls
upon our car, not so much like the serious
Affirmation Of an educated man, as an an.
nouneoment from fairy land. It reminds me
foreibly OF pamphlet published some years
| ago, the author OF which gFAVely oontended