sate and authentically interpret ; and in virtue of the same he orders the resolutions of the provincial synods to be re-examined and approved by the Congregatio Concilii (Benedict XIV, De Synodo Liacesana, lib. xiii, cap. 3, No. 6).
(3.) The Highest Ecclesiastical Supervision. — Reports from all dioceses are regularly sent to the pope. The bishops, by the oath they have to take before their con- secration, are bound to appear in person (" Limina apos- tolorum singulis annis aut per me aut per certum nun- tium visitabo, nisi— absolvar") ; but the visi/atio limi- num can be replaced by a relatio status diaceseos, which must take place in conformity with an instruction of Ben- edict XIV (De Synodo Diaecesana, lib. xiii, cap. 7 sq.).
(4.) The Highest Ecclesiastical Administration (Regi- men Ecclcsia?). — It comprises the decision in the causce ardua ac majores. To these belong the causa; episco- porum— namely, the confirmation of elected, the admis- sion of postulated bishops; the consecration, permuta- tion, deposition; acceptation of resignations; appoint- ment of coadjutors; foundation, division, fusion of dio- ceses; collation of the pallium; confirmation and sup- pression of clerical orders and ecclesiastical institutions; beatification and canonization ; the acknowledgment of relics: the establishment and abrogation of general relig- ious feasts; the right of decision in reserved cases. In virtue of his supremacy, the pope has also a right, in case of insufficient, faulty administration of the clerical dig- nitaries, to take the government in his own hands, and do everywhere what is wanted. On the right of admin- istration is also founded the right of imposing ecclesias- tical taxes.
II. Primacy of Honor.— (1.) The pope has not only pre- eminence over the clerical dignitaries, but is tradition- ally recognised even by the worldly powers. The po- litical authorities, in their conventions with him, allow his name to stand first. (2.) The title and the qualifica- tions connected with it underwent some changes. The name of pope belongs, since Gregory VIFs time, exclu- sively to the bishop of Rome; likewise the designation of Summus Pontifex. Pontifex Maximus was only at a later period reserved for him. Gregory I declined the title of Patriarcha Universalis (see cap. 4, 5, dist, xcix), and preferred being called Servus Servorum Dei, a desig- nation which has since become official (comp. Thomas- sin, Vetus ac Nova Ecclesice Disciplina, lib. i, pt. i, cap. 4, 50, No. 14; Ferraris, Bibliotheca Canonica, s. v.; Papa, art. ii, No. 33-35 ; Phillips, /. c. v. 599 sq.). The qualification of sanctus is also, in early times, specially applied to the Roman bishops. In the Dictatus (iregorii VII, No. 23, we read, "Quod Romanus Pontifex, si ca- nonice fuerit ordinatus, meritis B. Petri indubitanter effi- citur sanctus, testante S. Ennodio Papiensi Episcopo, ei mnltis SS. Patribus faventibus. sicut in decretis B. Sym- machi P. continetur." Therefore the usual address is "sanctissime pater" (holy father). (For the homage formerly paid him and his pastoral ensigns, see the art. Pope; for the supremacy of the pope over councils, see Supremacy; for the relation of the papacy to temporal possessions, see Temporal Power of the Pope; see also Romanism.)
In answer to the Roman Catholic doctrine of the pri- macy we here subjoin the heads of Barrow's famous argument against it in his treatise On the Suprehiacy (Works [Lond. 1841], vol. iii). He says there may be "a primacy of worth or personal excellency; a pri- macy of reputation ; a primacy of order or bare dig- nity and precedence; a primacy of power and juris- diction. 1. The first — a primacy of worth — we may well grant to Peter, for probably he did exceed the rest of his brethren in personal endowments and ca- pacities. 2. A primacy of repute, which Paul means when he speaks of those^who had a special reputa- tion, of those who seemed to be pillars of the super- eminent apostles (Gal. ii, 6, 9; 2 Cor. xi. 5; xii, 11). [This advantage cannot be refused him. being a neces- sary consequence of those eminent qualities resplendent
I'KIMACY
590
PRIMATE
in him, and of the illustrious performances achieved by him beyond the rest. This maj be inferred from that renown which he has had from the beginning; and like- wise from his being bo constantly ranked in the first place before the resl of his brethren. ] 3. As to a pri- macy of order or bare dignity, importing that common- ly, in .'ill meetings and proceedings, the other apostles did yield him the precedence, it may be questioned; for this does nol seem suitable to the gravity of such per- sons, or their condition and circumstances, to stand upon ceremonies of respect ; for our Lord's rules Mem to ex- clude all semblance of ambition, all kind of inequality and distance between lii- apostles. | Bui yel this pri- macy may be granted as probable upon divers accounts of use and convenience; it might be useful to preserve order, and to promote expedition, or to prevent co illu- sion, distraction, and dilatory obstruction in the man- agement of things.] 4. As to a primacy importing a superiority in command, power, or jurisdiction, this we
have great reason to deny upon the following i sider-
ations: (1.) For such a power it was needful thai a com- mission from God, its founder, should be granted in ab- solute and perspicuous terms; but no such commission is extant in Scripture. (2.) If so illustrious an office was instituted by our Saviour, it is strange thai nowhere in the evangelical or apostolical history there should be any express mention of that institution. (3.) If Peter had been instituted sovereign of the apostolical senate, his office and state had been in nature and kind very distinct from the common office of the other apostles, as the office of a king from the office of any subject [and probably would have been dignified by some distinct name, as that of arch-apostle, arch-pastor, the vicar of Christ, or the like; but no such name or title was as- Bumed by him, or was by the rest attributed to him]. (4.) There was no office above thai of an apostle known to the apostles or primitive Church | Ephes. iv. 1 1 ; l Cor. xii, 28). (5.) Our Lord himself declared against this kind of primacy, prohibiting his apostles to affect, to seek, to assume, or admit, a superiority of power, one above another (Luke xxii, 14 21; Mark ix. 35). (6.) We do not find any peculiar administration committed to Peter, nor any privilege conferred on him which was not also -ranted to the other apostles (Matt xx, 23; Mark xvi. 15). (7.) When Peter wrote two catholic epistle-, i lure docs nol appear in either of them any in- timation or any pretence to this arch-apostolical power. (8.) In all relations which occur in Scripture about con- troversies incident to doctrine or practice, there is no ap- peal made to Peter's judgment or allegation of it as de- cisive, no argument is built on his .authority. (9.) Peter lew her.- appears intermeddling as a judge or governor paramount in such cases [yet where he does himself deal with heretics and disorderly persons, he proceeds nol as a pope, decreeing, but as an apostle, warning, ar- guing, and persuading against them |. | 10. | I he con- sideration of the apostles proceeding in the conversion of people, in the foundation of churches, and in admin- istration of their spiritual affairs will exclude any prob- ability of Peter's jurisdiction over them. [ They went