[13a] See manuscript volume by the Honourable Archibald Campbell, a Nonjuring Bishop, first in Scotland, and afterwards in London. Also Bishop Horsley’s Sermons, vol. i. p. 293.
[13b] For a full exposition of this text, see Remarks by Granville Sharp, Esq., cited by Dr. Adam Clarke in his commentary.
[13c] See Dr. Isaac Barrow’s Treatise on the Pope’s Supremacy, and Rev. J. Fletcher’s Lectures on the Roman Catholic Religion, p. 94.
[13d] Eph. ii. 20.
[13e] 1 Cor. iii. 11.
[13f] 1 Cor. xii. 28.
[14a] Rev. xxi. 14.
[14b] “Seeing the Romanists themselves acknowledge, that he was Bishop of Antioch, before he was Bishop of Rome; we require them to show, why so great an inheritance as this, should descend to the younger rather than the elder, according to the ordinary manner of descents? Especially, seeing Rome hath little else to allege for this preferment, but only that St. Peter was crucified in it: which was a very slender reason to move the Apostle so to respect it.”—Extract from Archbishop Usher’s Speech in the Castle Chamber, Dublin, Nov. 22, 1622. See Dr. Parr’s Life of Usher, p. 23.
[14c] “What say you to the expunging the name of Felix, Bishop of Rome, out of the Diptychs of the Church by Acacius, the Patriarch of Constantinople? What say you to Hilary’s Anathema against Pope Liberius!”—Stillingfleet’s “Vindication,” p. 408.
[15a] St. Jerome affirms, that a Bishop, in whatever diocese, whether of Rome, of Eugabium, &c., is of the same power (ejusdem meriti) and of the same rank in the priesthood (ejusdem sacerdotii) with his Episcopal brethren. “For,” he adds, “they are all alike successors of the Apostles.” This admission from the Secretary of Pope Damasus is very remarkable.—Epist. ad Evag.