ther, any such limitation would have excluded a very large portion of the Patristic evidence, which, as will be seen, is to be derived, not merely from the three texts named in that Appeal, but from sources nearly, or quite, independent of them.

It is true that those texts are the sources of many statements, on the question, made by the Fathers, but they are by no means equally so. That of St. Matthew xvi. 13-20, is the most frequently quoted and commented on; because it was used for two great purposes; the first, as a proof of the divine institution and character of Christianity from the prophecy which it contains, that no hostile power, that the gates of hell should not prevail against it, contrasted with the fulfilment of that prophecy; and next, though less frequently, to point out the foundation on which the Church is built. More than thirty of the Fathers tell us that the rock or foundation on which Christ built His Church was Peter, and, till after the middle of the fourth century, no other view will be found set before us by any Catholic writer. The opposition to Christianity, and the errors which prevailed on our Lord's Divinity, will at once account for the frequency with which this text is quoted. As regards the second text, that of St. John xxi. 15-17, it is indeed often to be

met with in the writings of the Fathers, but most commonly in an applied or accommodated sense; referred, that is, to the pastoral and ministerial office generally, though in many places it will be found to have a very direct bearing on the special prerogatives of St. Peter, and at times also on those of St. Peter's successors. The text from St. Luke xxii. 31, 32, occurs comparatively seldom, and the reason does not seem far to seek. It is of a different class to that of the two preceding texts. It was hardly, if at all, called for to meet any controversy of the day, until the Pelagian heresy appeared, and then it may very often be met with; though in a way very much limited; to oppose, that is, the views of that party on the question of grace and the necessity of prayer. It may seem strange, but it is a fact, that, with one exception, if it really be one, no complete commentary on St. Luke's Gospel, written during the first five centuries, has come down to us, and in the fragmentary pieces of such commentaries that have been preserved, the interpretations of St. Luke xxii. have perished. Next to my surprise at the Appeal made by the learned Author, to whom I have alluded above as having given occasion to the publication of this work, is my amazement at his assertion regarding the

nature of the Patristic evidence on this text. Knowing his great learning, that statement of his has caused me to devote some time to examining the grounds of his position; for which, however, I not only cannot find any solid foundation, but have come to the very opposite conclusion; and have found no cause to modify in any way the impression which the passages quoted in these Treatises cannot fail to produce. So that the Work leaves my hands exactly as it was written about a year ago.

One further remark. It will be seen, in the Original Preface which follows this, that the two Treatises were to have been published separately, and at an interval of two months between the first and the second Part; and I can only repeat what is there stated, that should it be pointed out to me that any important passage has been omitted, or grave error committed, I will gladly take the earliest opportunity of supplying the omission, and correcting the error.

J. WATERWORTH.

Newark, May, 1871.

ORIGINAL PREFACE.

It has long seemed to the writer of this work, that it would be useful to him, and also to others, to have ready access to a complete Commentary, or Catena, of the Fathers, on some of the leading texts of Scripture,-on those texts, that is, on which the main controversies of the day turn, and in a measure depend. Thus, on Confession, the Holy Eucharist, as a sacrament and a sacrifice, the nature and the powers of the Episcopacy, the Infallibility of the Church, and other such debated questions, not to mention the Canon and Inspiration of the Scriptures, there are few who have not had occasion to wish for an easily accessible text-book, to illustrate and support their opinions, or to vindicate them when attacked.

No doubt there are learned works on all these subjects; but they are many of them of great length; often in Latin; the matters frequently scattered through various volumes; and, after all, when the stress of the Controversy comes, they