The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1872-03-27
Debate at = ple.


of Popery and Of Proteatant..m and in the city Of
Rome! And more than this ne question discussed
with good order and courtsy was, not directly,
whether the Apostle Peter was the first Bishop of
Rome, but ,ohether he eper cas- at Rome at ALL
Protestants know there is ne a particle of proof
that he ever was and it is apimmense point gained
when they have had such a. opportunity for pre-
senting their views in suchsn imposing manner
right at the headquarters OF the. Man of Sin. y
Now read the account below.
A debate has occurred al Rome, WHICH for i'm
porance and dramatic interest does not yield to
any on record. The debaes of Luther at the
opening of the Reformatioa, with Papal legates
and divnes, related to doctrines that, however I'M
pOrtant, We're not fundamental to the very exls-
ence of the Papacy But in this debate the very
existence of the rapal power is involved.
The debate resulted from challenge OF Pro
testant 5Iergymen to discuss the alleged fact OF
Peter coming to Rome.
Sciarelli, who opened the debate, thus laid down
his position The Roman theologians maintain
that st. Peter was in Rome in A. D. AZ, in the
second year of the Emperor Claudius; that he
there held ponti6cate for twenty-five years; and
that he died in the year &C. under the Emperor
Nero" Thus the fact OF Peter coming to Rome
aud acting there as Pope, is fundamental to the
Papal claim With respect to this, Sciarelli said,
81 shall prove that ut this time St. Peter did not
conc u ..ome, and with that will fall all the Cath
Ole edtce."
He then went on, and by the history Of the Acts
of the Apostles and by the historical references OF
the Epistles. proved that Peter could not have
been at Rome during the first seventeen years OF
the twenty five assigned to his papacy, because he
can be proved to have been elsewhere. After this
Paul went to Rome and Peter was not there, as
Paul's epistles to Timothy Sow. Rome was not
Peters field, but Babylon, where the Jews we're,
and where he dates his first epistle.
The force of the argument was so great that
Fabiani, the Papal champion in his reply gave up
the twenty-five years of Ponti6cate, and only
to Rome La Cdpitdle daily liberal paper at
Rome, from which these facts are taken, thus
puts it:
Il give up the first part" said Fabiani. "We
shall not speak of the date of Peters coming to
Rome, nor OF the time that he remained there.
Great laughter. 1T was confessng himself
beaten on the most nlportent points. He aban-
doned point blank the twenty-five years OF the
pontifcate of st. Peter, and that is the main
point All the Roman edifce was overturned yes
terday evening in the hall Of the Academia Ii
bernia with great crash" As to the fact that
Peter was at Rome at all, he said, For us, gen
tlemen, it will be sufficient for us to prove that st.
Peter was in Rome one day only, and then we
shall have conquered" "Such a confession,
says La Cdpitale which was equivalent to aban-
doning all that the Catholic Church has always as
serted, created the most profound sensation All
expected that Fabiana would at least give some
proof that st, Peter was in Rome, even for one
dav {"
But the proof was not given. All that he could
alege was ecclesiastical tradition of much later
date.
To him Signor Ribetti replied, and was followed
by the priest Cipolla on the Papal side.
On account of the ateness Of the hour, Gavazzi
did not speak, but the meeting was adjourned till
the next evening. Owing to the general and in
tense interest in the debate, the room was crowded
both evenings, and many could not gain admission.
On the second evening. GaVazzi spoke in manner
that excited the admiration of all, and in a truly
Christian spirit and so completely annihilated the
Papal argument that the Protestants professed a
perfect readiness to close the debate without any
further reply. To him the priest Guid made a
reply, aud the discussion closed
La CdptaLe says, 1.-THE sittings closed with the
greatest order, and with much satSlaction>On the
part Of the liberal audience In fact, truth and
progress you'd not have obtained more splendid
triumph. The clergy yesterday abandoned the
Z s.;sst; sr9e2 t--spty' 77t u n6eato- ~
ST Peter, aod could even prove hat he had
been one single day at Ecme.
The feeling of the popular journals is that Of
satisfaction at the defeat of the champions of the
Papal cause. La Cdpitdle remarks as to the moral
influence of this great debate:
This public dispute, this struggle of different
principles, the acceptance on the part of the Vati
can of this battle, which liberty of thought had
offered to the Papacy is great event. All I'M
ierstood that the discussion took place with the
consent of Plus * There can be no doubt about
this The Catholic clergy could not have taken a
step so daring, so dangerous, of such moment,
without not only being authorized, but being com
manded to do so. The public was struck with i'm
mense surprise at seeing the Papacy at last coming
out into the field of free discussion, which for it is
the field OF DEATH"
The most remarkable fact is that the Pope
should have sanctioned the discussion. Probably
he had never thoroughly Investigated the question,
and received the Papal dogma by faith. But his
faith cannot endure thorough historical discussion.
The Gdzett1 di Roma says
1t is known for certain that the Pope speak
ing to person Of position, expressed his displeas-
uTe at the discussion, not for its having taken
place, but because of the poverty of the arguments
adduced by the defenders of the Catholic position
SO that the doubts that have hitherto been felt in
the question will only be increased
The correspondent of the London Times also
says, THAT priests would not have entered the
arena of public controversy on a subject of this
nature without leave and license from the Vatican"
He notices also the great appreciation the courtesy
and moderation with which both sides advanced
their arguments, seeming to prove that even In
Rome intolerance is on the decline. The debate
has been reported on the Papal side by the report
ers Of the Gcumenical Council, and on the Pro
testant side by the parliamentary stenographers
The presiding officers were Prince Mario Chigi
and Advocate De Dominicis Tosti for the CathO
lies, and Messrs. Phillips and Pigott for the Pro-
testauts 1t is natural that Gavazzi should exult
in this triumph Of free discussion in Rome indie
pendently of the issue OF the arguments, and in
this view he says, writing to friend in Dublin.
1t is here considered the greatest event of the
century, even more than the material entrance Of
our army by the breach of Porta PA. 1t is the
entrance, after fourteen centuries of mental en-
savenent, of the freedom of thought, of exami-
nation, Of choice. Moreover, it is an admission
that the doctrines Of Rome are subject to contro
versy, and can be refuted and denied. This cir
cumstance alone contributed complete revolution
IN the Rome system of blind obedience and COM
pulson. Moreover STILL it is explicit confession
OF our rights, because till then to the present time
they tried to treat us as apostates, heretcs almost
like brigsnds, and yet they are now obliged to
recognize us as true bligerents and their equal
compeers in the field of discussion Under these
circumstances, the fact of our controversy took the
!dlSoot PtOpoFtIouS, anu us uppeInoSu Importance
was well understood by all classes here, especially
Tor its ineaculabe consequences. We have to be
glad Of the result. OF course no decision was ar
rived at, and both parties amicably left the people
to Judge for themselves on the proofs we advanced"
For most our facts we are indebted to the PRINT
the Methodist and the NoacOnornsiSt, though 9th
er statements have been consulted.
Women's Dress Association.-A number of
excellent ladies in London have organized I" A
Won,an'S Dress Association'' the object Of which
to stop all extfavagant dressing. Among these