20 ANIMADVERSIONS ON A TREATISE
ligion might have been propagated at first from Rome into Britain, considering what in those days was the condition of the one place and the other : yet things were so ordered in the providence of tlie Lord, that it fell out otherwise; and the gospel was preached here in Eng- land probably before ever St Paul came to Rome, or St Peter either, if ever he came there. But yet, to prevent wrangling about Austin and the Saxons, let us suppose that Christian religion was first planted in these nations by persons coming from Rome, — if you will, men sent by the pope, before he was born, for that purpose; what then will follow ? " Was it the pope's religion they taught and preached ? Did the pope first find it out and declare it ? Did they baptize men in the name of the pope ? or declare that the pope was crucified for them?" You know whose arguings these are, to prove men should not lay weight upon, or contend about, the first ministerial revealers of the gospel, but rest all in him who is the author of it, — Christ Jesus. Did any come here and preach in the pope's name, — declare a religion of his revealing, or resting in him as the fountain and source of the whole business they had to do ? If you say so, you say some- thing which is near to your purpose, but certainly very wide from the truth. But because it is most certain that God had not promised originally to send the rod of Christ's strength out of Rome, I shall take leave to ask, Whence the gospel came thither ? or, to use the words made use of once and again by our author, " Came the gospel from them, or came it to them only ? " I suppose they will not say so, because they speak to men that have seen the Bible. If it came to them from others, what privilege had they at Rome, that they should not have the same respect for them from whom the gospel came to them, as they claim from those unto Avhom they plead that it came from themselves ? " The case is clear : St Peter coming to Rome, brought his chair along with him; after which time tliat was made the head, spring, and fountain of all religion; and no such thing could befall those places where the planters of the gospel had no chairs to settle." I think I have read this story in a hundred writers ; but they were all men of yesterday in comparison, who, whatever they pretend, know no more of this business than myself. St Peter speaks not one word of it in his writings, nor yet St Luke, nor St Paid, nor any one who by divine inspiration committed any thing to remembrance of the state of the church after the resurrection of Christ. And not only are they utterly silent of this matter, but also Clemens and Ignatius, and Justin Martyr and Tertullian, with the rest of knoMdng men in those days. I confess, in after ages, when some began to think it meet that the chiefest apostle should go to the then chiefest city in the world, divers began to speak of his going thither, and of his martyrdom there, though they agree not in their
ENTITLED FIAT LUX. 21
tales about it. But be it so ; as for my part, I will not contend in a matter so dark, uncertain, of no moment in religion. This I know, that being the apostle of the circumcision, if he did go to Rome,^ it was to convert the Jews that were there, and not to found that Gen- tile church Avhich in a short space got the start of the other. But yet neither do these writers talk of bringing his chair thither, much less is there in them one dust of that rope of sand which men of 'latter days have endeavoured to twist with inconsistent consequences and groundless presumptions, to draw out from thence the pope's prerogative. The case, then, is absolutely the same as to those, in respect of the Romans, who received the gospel from them, or by their means ; and of the Romans themselves in respect of those from whom they received it. If they would win worship to themselves from others, by pretending that the gospel came forth from them unto them, let them teach them by the example of their devotion towards those from whom they received it. I suppose they will not plead that they are not now " in rerum natura," knowing what will ensue to their disadvantage on that plea. For if that church is utterly failed and gone from whence they first received the gospel, that which others received it from may possibly be not in a much better condition. But I find myself, before I was aware, fallen into the borders of the second principle or presumption mentioned. I shall therefore shut up my consideration of this first pretence with this only, — that neither is it true that these nations first received Christianity from Rome, much less by any mission of the pope ; nor, if they had done so, in the exercise of a ministerial work and autho- rity, would this make any thing to what is pretended from it; nor will it ever be of any use to the present Romanists, unless they can prove that the pope was the first author of Christian religion, which as yet they have not attempted to do : and thence it is evident what is to be thought of the second principle before mentioned, namely, —