6

with her. Roman Catholic!' The phrase, as far as meaning is concerned, is just as rational as it would be to talk of the English universe.' But enough of this-let us endeavour to find something more nearly approaching the form of an argument. Dr. Milner proceeds as follows:

'At the first promulgation of the gospel, its followers were distinguished from the Jews by the name of Christians, as we learn from scripture. Acts xi. 26. Hence the title of Catholic did not occur in the primitive edition of the Apostles' Creed; but no sooner did heresies and schisms arise, to disturb the peace of the church, than there was found to be a necessity of discriminating the main stock of her faithful children, to whom the promises of Christ belonged, from those self-willed choosers of their articles of belief, as the word heretic signifies, and from those disobedient separatists, as the word schismatic means. For this purpose the title of CATHOLIC, or universal, was adopted, and applied to the true church aud her children. Accordingly, we find it used by the immediate disciples of the apostles, as a distinguishing mark of the true church. One of these was the illustrious martyr St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who, writing to the church of Smyrna, expressly says, that Christ is, where the Catholic church is.' In like manner, the same church of Smyrna, giving a relation of the martyrdom of that holy bishop, St. Polycarp, who was equally a disciple of the apostles, addressed it to the Catholic churches.' This characteristic title of the true church continued to be pointed out by the succeeding fathers in their writings, and the acts of their councils. St. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, in the fourth century, gives the following direc

tion to his pupils: 'If you go into any city, do not ask merely; Where is the church, or house of God? because the heretics pretend to have this: but ask, Which is the Catholic church? because this title belongs alone to our holy mother.' 'We,' says a father of the fifth century, are called Catholic Christians.' His contemporary, St. Pacian, describes himself as follows: Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname: by the former I am called, by the latter I am distinguished. By the name of Catholic, our society is distinguished from all heretics.' But there is not one of the fathers or doctors of antiquity who enlarges so copiously or so pointedly on this title of the true church, as the great St. Augustine, who died in the early part of the fifth century. Many things,' he says, 'detain me in the bosom of the Catholic church -the very name of CATHOLIC detains me in it, which she has so happily preserved amidst the different heretics; that whereas they are all desirous of being called Catholics, yet, if any stranger were to ask them, Which is the assembly of the Catholics? none of them would dare to point out his own place of worship.' To the same purpose, he says elsewhere: We must hold fast the communion of that church which is called Catholic, not only by her own children, but also by all her enemies. For heretics and schismatics, whether they will or not, when they are speaking of the Catholic church with strangers, or with their own people, call her by the name of Catholic; inasmuch as they would not be understood, if they did not call her by the name by which all the world calls her.' In proportion to their affection for the glorious name of Catholic, is the aversion of these primitive doctors, to every ecclesiastical name or title derived from par

D

ticular persons, countries, or opinions. 'What new heresy,' says St. Vincent of Lerius, in the sixth century, ‘ever sprouted up, without bearing the name of its founder, the date of its origin,' &c. St. Justin, the philosopher and martyr, had previously made the same remark in the second century, with respect to the Marcionite, Valentinian, and other heretics of his time. Finally, the nervous St. Jerome lays down the following rule on this subject: 'We must live and die in that church, which, having been founded by the apostles, continues down to the present day. If, then, you should hear of any Christians not deriving their name from Christ, but from some other founder, as the Marcionites, the Valentinians, &c. be persuaded that they are not of Christ's society, but of antichrist's.'

And are not these observations and arguments of the ancient fathers as strikingly true in this nineteenth century, as they were during the six first centuries, in which they wrote? Is there not among the rival churches, one exclusively known and distinguished by the name and title of THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, as well in England, Holland, and other countries, which protest against this church, as in those which adhere to it? Does not this effulgent mark of the true religion so incontestably belong to us, in spite of every effort to obscure it by the nicknames of Papist, Romanist, &c., that the rule of St. Cyril and St. Augustine is as good and certain now as it was in their times?"!

Such are the reasonings of Dr. Milner. But surely one of his closing arguments recoils with prodigious

1 End of Controversy, p. 279–282.

force upon himself. on which he dwells? It is this;-'In proportion to their affection for the glorious name of Catholic, is the aversion of these primitive doctors to every ecclesiastical name or title derived from particular persons, countries, or opinions.' And what, after all, is the main distinction of his own church, but that it is the church of Rome?

For what is the chief point

But the great fault of this argument of Dr. Milner's is, that there is a prodigious hiatus, or gap, in the very middle of it. The doctor shews, that the term the Catholic church,' was one commonly used in the first six centuries, and he quotes many expressions of the fathers in proof of the respect and veneration at that period attaching to it. He then comes down at once to the present day, and says, Here is that Catholic church, towards which the fathers expressed such respect and regard; do you now shew the same feelings, and pay the like respect.'

But the whole gist and weight of the question at issue lies at that very point of the controversy which Dr. Milner has chosen to pass over in perfect silence. There has been a change in words even; but there has been a far greater change in things. It is not true, although the Doctor would so represent it, that there is a Catholic church visibly discerned, and ordinarily known by that name, now, as there was in the days of Cyril, Augustine, or Jerome. That which now endeavours to palm itself upon us, in the place of the Catholic church of the early ages, is detected by its very name. Even in Dr. Milner's title-page it stares forth as the Roman Catholic church.' But that name is not lightly or unmean

6

ingly added: and it just makes this difference, that no one of those glowing expressions of allegiance or attachment which occur in the early fathers towards the Catholic church, will bear application to the church of Rome.

Dr. Milner is very unhappy in his choice of authorities on this point. He quotes Cyril and Augustine, and it is true that both these fathers speak with great warmth of the necessity of firm adherence to the Catholic church. In all their expressions we go with them. We, too, desire to belong to the Catholic church, and never to depart from her communion. But it does not follow that Cyril or Augustine felt themselves at all bound, or that we acknowledge any tie, to the church of Rome; and the fallacy lies in taking expressions which are intended for the one, and applying them to the other. We desire to remain in the communion of the Catholic church, but against the rule of the Romish church we protest. Cyril and Augustine, like us, adhered to the Catholic church, but disregarded the claims and pretensions of the see of Rome. The presidency of the third general council was taken by Cyril, then patriarch of Alexandria, which fact of itself proves how little he thought of any claim of the Bishop of Rome to be considered as the head of the church. I believe that the Cyril quoted by Dr. Milner is one of less note than the patriarch of Alexandria; but as he has introduced the name, I must be allowed to refer to that celebrated man. As to Augustine, in his time a synod of 225 bishops, at Carthage, absolutely forbade all appeals to Rome; and his signature is affixed to that identical decree! What, then, becomes of these two authorities, brought forward to