Wesley Corpus

15. All these practices, wholly unsupported by Scripture, the Church of Rome retains to this day; at the same time that she rejects and pronounces accursed all (whether practices or doctrines) that make against her, be they ever so plainly contained in, and grounded on, the word of God. Our Reformers seeing this, judged it needful to inquire whether it could be proved by holy writ that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of St. Peter; that he is Christ's Vicar upon earth, and the visible head of the Church; that he has a right of interpreting the word of God according to his own pleasure; to introduce and prohibit doctrines, besides and against the written word; to license things which the Scrip ture forbids; to exercise a spiritual, and in many cases a secular, power over all Christians,--Kings and Emperors not excepted; to anathematize all that oppose his will, depose Princes, and absolve subjects from their allegiance; to pronounce heretics, to curse, kill, torture, and burn alive, all who do not submit to him in every point. 16. Some of the reasons they had to doubt of these things were those which follow:-- That neither St. Peter, nor any of the ancient Bishops, had the same doctrine or manner of governing the Church which the Bishop of Rome now has, as is clear both from the Epistles of St. Peter, from the Acts of the Apostles, and the ancient ecclesiastical history; that Christ alone “is made of God Head over all things to the Church,” (Eph. i. 22; iv. 15; Col. i. 18,) who is “with them always, even to the end of the world;” that the kingdom of Christ, being not of this world, bears no resemblance to the hierarchy and monarchy of the Papal kingdom; that the possessing the See of Rome no more proves the Pope to be the successor of St.