CHAPTER IX.

THE NATURE, MULTIPLICITY, AND FORCE OF PROOF FOR S. PETER'S PRIMACY.

Different sorts of proof.--1. The principal here used, and the subsidiary.--Their joint force 246

Hence, I. The nature of the answer required to it.--2. The proof, if unanswered, demonstrates the Primacy to be revealed 247

3. Enquiry into the _certitude_ of the proof used 248

I. Force of the proof _in itself_ and _absolutely_.--Two conditions requisite, and here found, authenticity of the documents, and clearness of their evidence.--Number and harmony of scriptural testimonies to the Primacy 249

The parallel of Julius Cæsar 250

Collateral proof, supporting that of the holy Scriptures, so that the whole consists in the harmony of these four:--1. Scriptural documents.--2. Ancient witnesses.--3. Analogy.--4. Facts of Christian history, in fourteen distinct classes 251

Prodigious force of this compound proof 256

No counter religious system producible by Greek, Anglican, or pure Protestant, but mere negation and objection 257

II. Force of the proof _comparatively_ with other doctrines: comparison with the texts on which Anglicans, Lutherans, and Calvinists severally rely 259

Retort that all but Catholics are opposed to our interpretation; answer, that from Catholics alone we are to gather the truth 260

Yet all protestants not agreed in opposing our interpretation and reasons why their opposition is of little moment 261

Compare, likewise, opposition to the Church in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries 264

And again the conduct of Lutherans and Anglicans in maintaining their own distinctive texts.--But what, then, are the true criteria of documentary evidence? They are four:--

Internal {and immediate {4. Verbal. { {2. Real. {and remote 3. Analogical. External 4. Agreement of witnesses 265

1. Comparison carried through _verbal_ criterion, between the texts alleged by us, and those of Lutherans, Anglicans, and Calvinists 266

2. And through the _real_ criterion, or that of the subject matter, greater in the proofs for Peter's prerogatives than in those for the real presence, or the Divinity of Christ, on account of the difficulty of grasping the object in the latter cases 267

As to the superiority of bishops over presbyters, the proof severed from that of the Primacy sinks into nothing: considered with it, it is of the same character, but weaker 268

Accordingly, the criterion from the subject matter is stronger for Peter's Primacy, than for the superiority of bishops over presbyters, for the real presence, and for the Divinity of Christ.--Sum of both these criteria, verbal and real, in favour of Peter's Primacy, over these three doctrines 270

Appeal hence arising to Lutherans, Anglicans, and Calvinists.--Comparison with the inferior evidence for other received doctrines 271

3. The third _criterion_ of analogy: force of this in favour of Peter's Primacy from three heads:--1. The divine institution of bishops.--2. The unity of the Church.--3. The Catholicity of the Church 272

4. Fourth criterion of witnesses.--Immense force of this criterion, both as stated by the fathers, and shewn by Protestants in their own conduct 274

Witnesses unanimous in favour of the Primacy 277

ST. PETER,

HIS NAME AND HIS OFFICE,

AS SET FORTH

In Holy Scripture.

* * * * *