The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1907-01-25

man recognized no supremacy III tht
Roman Bishop as is plain from the fol-
lowing: IF you look for authority the
whole world is greater than the city
(of Romeo Whether n bishop is at
Rome or Mt Gubbio, at Constantinople
or at Reggie, Alexandria or at Tanis.
he Is OF the same dignity and the same
priesthood-all are the successors OF the
Apostles" (To Evangelus).
st. Gregory the Great (504-60f. ]
will not again quote the same sem
fences given in a former letter, ] Will
give his opinion OF any one claiming
tlat which Popes now claim: This
title universal Is profane, superstiti-
Gus, naughty and invented by the first
Apostate." Again, II confidently affirm
that who calls himself or wishes to
call himself univeral priest is in his
pride the forerunner OF Antichrist."
(Epist. V. and VIII
stand, my dear Father Beissel, with
the four great doctors OF the Latin
Church. 1 am quite aware that you
ctr explain these passage to your own
satisfaction, but you cannot explain
them to the satisfaction of unbiased
seekers after truth and for these
write.
As to the matter OF the keys, you
are aware our Lord gave the very
same powers OF binding and loosing
to all the apostles and not to St. Peter
alone. Matt. xviii. 49,
In regard to Feed my sheep" to
construe a gentle rebuke of our Lord
for having thrice denied Him, into the
giving of such powers as the Popes
claim does not require the serious at
tentinn of Intelligent peODle,
1 If as have shown in my letters that
no supremacy was given to st. Peter;
if as I have shown st. Peter never
claimed or exercised any such supre-
macy; IL the great doctors even of the
Latin Church deny that the words
Thou art Peter, etc." confer any
power upon st. Peter; II as / have
shown that the bishops Of Rome never
for centuries at the first exercised any
such powers and supremacy as now
claimed; IL as have shown that when
the bishops of Rome began to claim
any such powers they were resisted by
bishops and synods; If as late as the
sixth century Bishop of Rome de-
ncunced as Antichrist any one who
should assume to have such universal
powers: IL as any reader may ascer-
tain there Is not a shred of evidence of
the existence of any such supremacy
for century after century in the primi-
tive church; then by inevitable con-
clusion the papal claims as set forth
in later days must be set down by the
logical mind as an innovation, as con-
trary to true Catholic doctrines and
use. The only escape Is that which
Newman took when pressed In this
way and that Is his saying. 1.-THE APP
peal to history Is treason to the
church" II history is appealed to your
foundation goes and all that Is built
upon it falls into ruins.
/ could trace step by step the growth
of the papal claims, originating as they
did in the commanding position of the
| city of Rome and the consequent i'm
portance OF its bishop. l could trace
each step with the growth OF papal
/ power and the beginning OF the use of
| texts to support that power. I could
trace each step Of its progress and the
resistance offered by bishops and
syrods and how this resistance was
overcome. / could give the forger!es,
set forth in an uncritical and unlearn-
ed age, forgeries acknowledged now to
be so by the most learned Roman Ca
tholic historians: but these forgeries
served their purpose in assisting to
foist the papacy upon the Western
Church. l could show how the great
Eastern or Greek Church has always
denied these claims but was the only
one for a time in position to resist
| them. l could show how at last 1t
reached such n point that the Pope
claimed to be the lord and master of
the whole world: things as well as per-
sons and that all rulers were only his
delegates. And / could show how at
last this system was cast off by the
great Germanic Nations Of Northern
Europe, repudiated later by England
and Scotland and held today in France,
Spain, Italy and South America and
tottering in many OF these.
But If 1 did this / am quite we'll
aware you would satisfy your own
mind by that way of begging the ques-
ton and then making another assump-
ton, which course you persistently fol-
low.
In reference to Anglican Orders you
brought forward the doctrine of inten-
ton. / will only say that IL I were to
press this you would be in a bad way.
l do not wish to rehearse the sad and
evil days when there We're two and
tNtl iiNoi hopts III" thV
Councils OF Basel and Constance in the
fifteenth century deposed them Zone
by the way for heresy). All this is too
sad story of sin and unbelief for me
in any way to desire to parade 1t. But
IL were to go into the subject of in
tention 1 should be obliged to bring
these things up. l would simply say
that when you refer to the sins OF
Luther or of Henry VIII. you should
remember that II an antagonist wished
to do so. he might rehearse some of the
charges brought against the Popes in
the councils mentioned above. They
are too awful to contemplate. You
must know of these things.
Father Wyman has been referred TO
in the past few weeks as convert to
Rome. You say that he was astonishedt to
hear from his professor that primacy of
the Pope was universally acknowledge
ed in the fifth century. Even if that
We're granted, you omit to state that
n primacy is not n supremacy. The
Archbishop of Canterbury is the Prim-
ate of England but he has no SUI
premacy in the Anglican Communion.
The Church OF England never objected
to a primacy OF the Bishop OF Rome in
the Western Church properly exercised.
That to which II did and does object
was the papal supremacy with its eN-