of his head or chiefe of the Church naming Iames and Iohn pillers of the Church as well as hee and not yelding to him any thing aboue him selfe In the seconde to the Corinthians 1. Cor. 11.5 Paul declareth that he thinketh himselfe nothing inferiour vnto the chiefest Apostles Peter in his Epistles he neuer challengeth any superioritie neither by title nor by doctrine he maketh Christ the electe precious and chiefe corner stone and all the faithfull liuing stones of the spirituall house a like hee claymeth not ciuill gouernement or that Kinges and Princes ought to bee subiect vnto him as the Pope doeth but commaundeth all Subiectes to bee obedient vnto their Princes and gouernours he termeth him selfe but compresbyterum a fellowe elder with the rest and exhorteth his fellow ministers not to be as Lordes ouer Gods heritage in his whole writing he doth not imperiously commaund but humbly exhorteth not to be ouerlong in this it cannot be thought that Paul and Peter and the rest of the Apostles hauing so fully and plentifully taught all thinges appertaining to the Church of God yea euen the least functions that they would in all their writings haue concealed so great weightie and necessarie point as this of Peters supremacie and one general head vnder Christ for the gouernment of his Church being suche as it is made of thē that whosoeuer acknowledgeth it not cannot be saued Now if this which I haue taughte by the opinion and iudgement of the Apostles shall appeare also by their practise and dealing towarde Peter what can be required further for the ouerthrow of their interpretation And for a perfect view hereof let vs but consider the whole order and manner of the firste councell holden of the Apostles in the 15. Actor 15.5 of the actes there it is mentioned that certaine variance and dissention falling oute by reason some of the sect of the Phariseis vrged the obseruation of circumcision and other ceremonies of the law as necessarye to saluation it was determined that Paule and Barnabas should go vp to the Apostles Elders at Ierusalem about this question At their cōming the matter being declared the Apostles Elders assēbled together to reason of the matter after much debating Peter arose and declared what God had reuealed vnto him cōcerning this point meaning at Cornelius conuersion After him arose Paul Barnabas who also tolde their opinion what God had opened vnto thē Thirdly ariseth Iames hee approueth the former iudgemēt confirmeth it by the scriptures and hauing done so giueth aduise to send their determination in writing concerning the questiō it was taken approued the Apostles and elders the whole congregatiō sent chosen men namely Barnabas paul with their letters First here is to be obserued that it is not mentioned that Peter sūmoned this Councel by his authoritie but it is done by the consent of the Apostles and elders contrary to that prerogatiue the Pope chalēgeth to himselfe Peter although he spake first alone yet followeth it not that he was therefore accounted the chéefest for neither spake he only and often times in great Councels the lowest and yongest begin first the eldest head of all speaketh last Secondly in the assemblye after Peter had opened his mind and al the rest had don last of al not Peter but Iames pronounced the sentence whiche belonged to the head and President of the Councell Thirdly the Legats embassadors which were sent were not appointed by Peter nor sent by his authoritie after the maner of the Pope but they were chosen by all the Apostles and Elders the whole congregation and sent by them Fourthly the stile of the letter doth argue they gaue no preheminence to Peter aboue other in this assemblie for thus it runneth The Apostles Elders and Brethren send greeting c. For as much as we haue heard c. It séemed good to vs when we were come together to send chosen men to you c. it séemed good to the holy ghost vnto vs to lay no more burthen c. Thus we sée how the whole action is made common to them all equallye none named or preferred before another in anye respecte farre diuerse from the Popes determination and stile of his letters the tenour of which runneth much otherwise Act. 8.24 Besides in the eight of the Acts when the Apostles heard that Samaria had receiued the Gospell the Apostles sent Peter and Iohn to confirme them whiche sending declareth plainelye that they did not acknowledge him as a superiour and in that he obeieth and followeth he declareth himselfe to bee but their fellow For be it that Eckius sayth true that oftentimes the chéefest of the company be sent in matters yet there is no Senate nor councell that will send their chéefe and gouernour And the same Apostle in the 11 Acts Act. 11.3 being reproued for going to Cornelius he excuseth and cleareth himself giuing a reason of that his doing And of Paul in the second to the Galathians Gal. 2.11 he was reprooued to his face for that he was worthye of rebuke wherefore to conclude if neither in planting of the church of God neither in deciding of controuersies in matters of religion neither in enioyning commaunding thinges to be done neither yet by any title dutie seruice or signification of dealing Peter either bare himselfe or the rest receiued him as their head and vniuersall Bishop but contrariwise both he vsed him selfe and they made themselues equall in all their doings vnto him I maye iustlye conclude that euen the opinion and practise of the Apostles and primitiue churche doth manifestly conuict the interpretation of the Papists in this place making Peter the rock foundation and heade of Gods Churche to bée most vntrue This point notwithstanding by this I haue already said it be sufficiently proued yet for diuers mens further contentation let vs sée howe the auntiente and learned Fathers haue expounded this place whether by this worde Petra they haue vnderstoode the person of Peter or him whom Peter confessed whiche was Christ Chrysostom in the 55 Chrys hom 55. in Mat. Homily vpon Mathew expoundeth Petra to be the faith and confession Super hanc Petram .i. in hac fide confessione aedificabo ecclesiam that is vppon this Fayth and Confession I will build my Church and vpon the 32 Psalm Statuit pedes nostros super petram id est super fidem c that is he hath set our féete vpon the rocke that is vpon Faith Chrys super Psal 52. for Fayth in Christ may well be called a Rocke which cannot be broken wherefore when Peter had declared and sayd thou art the sonne of the liuing God Christ immediatelye added thou art peter and vpon this rock I wil build my church Thus it is apparāt Chrysostom toke not the person of Peter to be that rock here mentioned but that which Peter reposed his beléefe in
authoritie he promised here vnto al equally in these wordes Peace be vnto you as my father sent me euen so sende I you when he had said that he breathed vpon them they receiued the holy Ghost adding Whose soeuer sinnes ye remit they are remitted vnto thē whose soeuer sinnes ye retain they are retained Here we sée he giueth his peace vnto them al he breatheth on them all they all receiue the holy ghost alike they are al endewed with the same power of forgiuing reteining sins Where is then Peters prerogatiue especially now when it should specially haue bin specified But what if any principall authoritie and power had béene giuen to Peter by Christ here what doth that belong to the Bishop of Rome where is Peters will and testament by which he hath bequeathed his keyes rather vnto him than vnto the Bishops of Ierusalem or Antioche by what Scripture can they proue that Christ hath made them rather Peters successours in this authoritie and commission then other Bishops If the keyes were promised giuen to Peter alone and to none of the other Apostles howe dare they giue them vnto the Bishops of Rome There is not one worde in the Scripture of their succession by inheritance Seing then that neither the course of the dialogue nor yet the authoritie and function is other that is here giuen then was giuen to all the Apostles of Christ himselfe afterwarde in like manner and that although some more speciall and excellent office was cōmitted to Peter then to any other Apostle yet that the B. of Rome cannot claim that more than any other Bishop it maketh nothing for the establishing of the supreme power ouer the vniuersall Church of God which the Pope arrogateth vnto himself But let vs sée what the auncient learned fathers thinke on this point That which Origen writeth is most plaine against them which think any speciall thing was giuen to Peter An soli Petro dantur claues regni coelorum c. Doest thou thinke that the keyes of the kingdom were only giuē to Peter and to no other neither any other should receiue them If these words were not common to all men as they are I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen how can al these sayings things which are applyed to Peter before be common to all men For Christ thus spake in common to them all Whome do ye saye that I am and Peter answered in the name of all Doeth he not vtter the same in plainer wordes in the 20. of Iohn saying to all the Apostles Ioan. 20. and breathing vpō them receiue the holie Ghost whose sinnes ye forgiue c. They were all of like authoritie with Peter Thus much Origen then which wordes what can be more plaine Cyprian Cyp. de simp praelat also in his booke de simplicitate Prelatorum against the Nouatians confirmeth this The Lord sayth he saith vnto Peter thou art Peter The Lord after his resurrection gaue vnto his Apostles like power yet to declare the vnitie he disposed the originall of vnitie beginneth at one The rest of the Apostles were euen the same that Peter was endewed with like fellowship both of honour and power but the beginning procéedeth of vnitie to declare one Church Basil Basil 23. cap. de vita solit also sayeth Christus Petrum post se suae Ecclesiae pastorem constituit c. Christ appointed Peter to be Pastor of his Church after and so consequently giueth the same power and authoritie to all Pastours and doctours a token whereof is this that all Pastours doe equally binde and lose as they list as well as he Augustine de Agone Christiano Cap. 32. Cum Petro dicitur pasce oues meas omnibus dicitur When it is sayde to Peter féede my shéepe Aust de Agon Christ cap. 31. cap. 32. it is saide to all And in the 31. Chapter Wretched men while in Peter they vnderstande not Christ which is the rocke and while they wil not beléeue that the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen are giuen vnto the Church not vnto Peter alone they haue lost the keyes out of their handes and in another place hee sayeth the Churche which is founded in Christ Aug. tract 124. saper hath taken the keyes of him so that not Peter onely but the whole Church receiued the keyes of him Beda Beda sayeth the power of bynding and loosing although it seeme to be giuen onely vnto Peter without doubt this is to bee knowen that it is giuen also vnto the other Apostles Haymo one of their owne doctors well weighing the text affirmeth contrarie vnto them Wee must not thinke sayeth hee that vnto blessed Peter alone this power was giuen but as hee for all aunswered Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God so in the person of one all heard whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth c. Cyrill Cyr. in Ioan. li. 3. cap. 20. Christ gaue full power vnto the Apostles and vnto others that succeeded them in the Churches To conclude then if by the testimonyes of the auncient and learned fathers Christ gaue full and like power to all his Apostles If the rest of the Apostles were the same that Peter was endewed all with like honour and power If Christes wordes were common to all the rest If all Pastours doe equally binde and loose as well as Peter then is there no speciall priuilege giuen vnto Peter aboue others by this place Wherefore I trust this first poynt is manifest by the circumstance of the place and opinion of ancient writers that there is no speciall prerogatiue or function giuen vnto Peter that was not committed to all that whatsoeuer was spoken by Christ here vnto Peter did not belong here vnto him only but to them al in common Now secondly haue wee to consider what was that power authoritie that was giuē vnto Peter here that was to haue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen the authoritie of binding loosing but herein haue wee to weigh what is meant contained in these words how farre they ought to stretch For the B. of Rome claimeth by right of succession inheritance whatsoeuer power iurisdiction was giuen vnto Peter therfore by the vertue of these wordes promise of Christ claimeth al power authoritie whatsoeuer may be contained included in these speaches Hereof hath he challenged to himselfe to be aboue kings Princes to haue the authoritie of consecrating deposing them to be aboue all general councels to haue fulnes of power to expound the scriptures to whose determination the Church of God must necessarily stand to haue authoritie to dispense with Gods worde to make that lawfull which before was vnlawfull to haue absolute frée power to decree whatsoeuer he liketh of and that of the church is to be obserued as an heauenly Oracle that he hath power to giue heauen to throwe downe into
A GODLYE SERMON Preached before the Queens most excellent Maiestie vpon the 17. 18. 19. verses of the 16. Chapter of S. Mathew VVherein is contained the conclusion of a Dialogue betweene Christ and his Disciples Shewing breefely that the authoritie which the Pope of Rome doth challenge to himselfe is vnlawfully vsurped Very necessarie for these perilous times wherein the simple may perceiue their intollerable impietie vsurping that office and action which euer appertayned vnto Christ only Published at the request of sundry godly and well disposed persons ¶ Imprinted at London by Iohn Windet for Iohn Perin and are to be sold at his shop in Paules churchyard at the sign of the Angel A godly Sermon preached before the Queenes most excellent Maiestie vpon the 17. 18. 19. verses of the 16. Chapter of S. Matthewe Matth. Chap. 16. vers 17. 17 And Iesus answered and said to him Blessed art thou Simon the sonne of Ionas for flesh and bloud hath not reueiled it vnto thee but my Father which is in heauē 18 And I say also vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not euercome it 19 And I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shal be loosed in heauen THese words which I haue read right honourable beloued in our Sauioure Christ containe the conclusion of a Dialogue betwéene Christ and his disciples For we read immediatly before in the thirtéenth verse of this sixtéenth Chapter that when Iesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi our Sauiour Christ partly to make tryall of the faith knowledge and profiting of his disciples hauing bene now so long taught by him and séene so great wonderfull miracles and partly to learn whether they conceiued any better of him than the common multitude as also to cause them to make a confession of their faith and beliefe in him in which he might strengthen and confirme them against al troubles and persecutions that were after to ensue he demaunded of them all this question whome do men say that I the sonne of man am Answere was made by them that some said he was Iohn Baptist Matth. 14.2 for so surmised the Herodians as apeareth in the 14. of this Gospel Where it is sayde that when Herod the Tetrarch who had beheaded Iohn Baptist heard of the fame of Iesus he said vnto his seruaunts this is Iohn Baptist that is risen againe from the dead and therefore great workes are wrought by him Some said he was Elias being deceiued partly by the Prophecie of Malachie misvnderstoode who had prophcied that Eliah the Prophet should be sent before the comming of the great and fearfull day of the Malach. 4.5 Lord partly by the like spirite they perceiued in Christ that was in Elias as the frée libertie of rebuking vices in the scribes and Pharisées the power of working miracles raising vp the dead to life againe as Elias did Some other thought him to be Hieremias because he bare a figure of Christ and for that it was saide of him Beholde this day haue I set thee ouer the nations and ouer the kingdomes Ierem. 1.9 to plucke vp and to roote out and to destroye and throw downe to build and to plant which was in verie déede truely to be perfourmed in Christ And they that thought him none of these yet because of his doctrine for he taught them as hauing authoritie Matth. 7.29 not as the Scribes and for his life and miracles they accounted him as one of the Prophets Christ hearing this to drawe out a more certaine and excellent confessiō out of his disciples than this was he further demaunded of them all but whome say ye that I am as though he should haue said whatsoeuer other men do thinke of mée or howsoeuer they be distract in opinions you who ought to haue better knewledge of mée whome do ye thinke me to be Then aunswered Simon Peter in the name of al the rest thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Christ reioycing at this true perfect and constant confession that Peter had made as it were in recompence and commendation therof he burst out into these words Blessed art thou Simon the sonne of Ionas for flesh and bloud hath not reueiled it vnto thee but my father which is in heauen c. Which wordes are euen the conclusion of that Dialogue betwéene Christ and his disciples and do containe the approbation and commendation of Peters confession In the which many things do offer them selues to our considerations but for this present time and occasion in these thrée verses thrée especiall pointes may be here obserued by vs. The first from whence Peter had this knowledge faith of Christ that he was the sonne of the liuing God Secondarily what is the foundation and rocke whereupon the Church of God was built Thirdly what the power authoritie commission was that is giuen vnto Peter in this place The first point is declared in the first verse of this text by two meanes first by remouing and denying those things which might séeme to be the cause yet are not as flesh and bloud Secondarily by expressing the true and perfect cause which was the reuelation of Almightie GOD. For the first by flesh and bloud is meant here the nature of man and all his giftes that he hath naturally as his wit vnderstanding and wil for so it is taken in sundrie other places of the holie Scriptures as in the first of Saint Iohns Gospell Ioan. 1.12 where he saith that such as receiued Christ they were borne not of bloud nor of the will of flesh nor of the will of man but of God And in the first to the Galathians Galath 1 1◠where he testifieth that when it pleased God to reueale his sonne in him that he shoulde preach him among the Gentiles he communicated not with flesh and bloud and in like manner in the sixth to the Ephesians Ephes 6.12 exhorting vs to put on all the armour of God that we might be able to stande against the assaultes of the diuell because we wrestle not against flesh bloud but against principalities and powers c. In which places as in diuerse others also by flesh and bloud is meant nothing but the nature of man and whatsoeuer is in him by his naturall birth and procreation so that this phrase and manner of spéech vsed of our Sauiour Christ here in this place doth signifie and declare vnto vs that this knowledge of Christ confession of faith which Peter made he had it not of himself neither by any meanes of man but from aboue by the manifestation and reuelatiō of God who had opened this great mysterie and giuen him this faith This doctrin ouerthroweth the iudgement and opinion of the
are not possible for man to vtter yet did he not therefore broche anye new reuelations or dreames but confirmed his doctrine by the testimonie of the law and the Prophets He exhorteth his scholer Timothie 1. Tim. 4.13 to giue attendance vnto reading to exhortation to doctrine to learning and to continue therein to saue himselfe and them that should heare him God reuealed vnto Peter and the rest of the Apostles that he was the sonne of the liuing God but by preaching so vnto Cleophas and the other Disciple going to Emaus Luc. 24.45 expounding the Law and the Prophets hée opened the doctrine of his passion God opened the heart of Lidia conuerted her vnto Christianitie but by Paules ministerie Wherefore although God reuealeth all thinges Act. 16.14 yet is not the spirite to be seuered from the word neither yet the word from the spirite God doth vse both these instruments ioyntly And thus much for the first part The second point I sayd we had to consider was what the foundation and rocke is wherevpon the Church of God is builte for that is expressed in the 18 verse Thou art Peter and vpon this rock I will builde my Church and the gates of hel shal not ouercome it Concerning the true meaning and sence of these wordes what it is that Christ appointeth to be that rock wherevpon he will build his Church there is no small variance betwéen vs and the church of Rome We according to the tenor of the rest of the scriptures and circumstance of the place affirme that Christ by this word Petra a Rocke meaneth that whiche Peter confessed whiche was Christe himselfe But the Popishe Cleargie to establishe the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome and his superioritie power and dominion ouer all other churches hath applied this saying of our Sauioure Christ vnto Peter alone making him that Rocke whereof Christ here speaketh against which the gates of Hell cannot preuaile affyrming that Christ in this place hath giuen by these wordes a certayne chiefetie and preheminence to Peter aboue all other Apostles and made him the foundation and heade of his church here in earth and his vicar generall for the gouernmente thereof enduing him with especiall power and authoritie aboue all others Whiche exposition as also Article of Religion to bee most vntrue being the mayne poste of their religion and suche an Article of fayth the whiche who beléeueth not as they saye cannot bée saued and this place being vsed of them all especiallye aboue all others as the cheefest for the confirmation of the Supremacye and authoritie of the Bishop of Rome it shall not bee amisse being apparante sithens this Progresse that howsoeuer this Doctrine hath bene heretofore beaten downe that notwithstanding it remayneth rooted in many mens mindes it shall be expedient to shew and declare this their interpretation to be erroneous and their collection vaine and friuolous Which I will doe first by the very words and circumstaunce of the place Secondly by that this their exposition is contrarye to the expresse wordes of the Scripture and rules of Fayth Thirdely by the opinion and practise of the Apostles And last of all by the iudgement and interpretation of the antient and learned Fathers and practise of their age Firste that euen the verye wordes of the Texte do argue that when Christ sayth vppon this Rocke I will builde my Church by this worde Petra a Rocke hée meaneth not the person of Peter the Apostle but that which Peter confessed which was Christe it maye appeare by this in that it pleased the holye Ghoste the Euangelist shoulde alter and chaunge the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when as hee mighte haue vsed the selfe same worde to expresse that their meaning to make Peter the Rock wherevpon he would build his church for although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe agrée in significatiō in that both of them by interpretatiō doth signifi a stone or rock yet the alteration chāge of the word in propriety of spéech termination in gender in construction of persō doth import that the holy ghost by these diuerse words would mean a diuers thing For the one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nomen atticum after the proprietie of the Attike tongue the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nomen communis linguae after the propriety of the vulgar tōgue the one word is the masculine gender the other the feminine the persō in cōtruction differeth for from the second person he goeth to the third he saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vpō thée Peter but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vpon this rock By this varietie and change it is plain the Euangelist ment to expresse some diuerse thing otherwise it néeded not to haue made any alteration at all there is no doubte therefore but the holye ghost vpon purpose did alter and chaunge the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen to auoyde that erroure that mighte bée gathered thereof if Christe woulde haue taughte vs in this place so weightye an Article of oure Fayth as that is as they make it that Peter muste bée the Heade of the Churche vppon whome excepte wée bée builte we cannot bée saued hée woulde not in declaration thereof so haue varied from his ordinarie name hée gaue him séeing it mighte so well haue serued the turne and by whiche hée mighte playnely haue declared this grounde of Fayth Wherefore by the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is meante not the Person of Peter but Christe whome Peter confessed and beléeued on For whiche cause Peter immediatelye before in the former verse was pronounced blessed by our sauioure Christe for that GOD had opened and reuealed vnto him that Christe was the sonne of the liuing GOD and further for the knowledge and beleefe hereof hée did not onely terme him blessed but hée also gaue him another name that whereas before hée was called Simon Bar Iona hée shoulde nowe bée named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a Rocke according as hée had promised in the firste of Iohn because hée knewe and beléeued in the Rocke vpon whiche not onlye hée but the whole Churche of GOD shoulde bee builte For hée was so named of Christ not because hée shoulde bée Petra the rock wherevppon the Congregation of God shoulde bée builded but hée was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because hee was builte vpon that Rocke whereon the Churche should be founded Petra whiche is the Rocke as Augustine August serm 21. de verbo domini sayth hath not his name of Peter but Peter of Petra the Rocke as Christ hath not his name of a Christian but a Christian of Christe Ierom in 8. Math. and Sainte Ierome affirmeth that Peter had his name of Petra whiche is Christ whiche name agréeth not onely to the person of Peter but vnto all Christians and faythfull people which beléeue
assigning Christ the head the husband of his bodie the church his spouse his wife in which thinges there can be no communion or fellowship Further this controuersie arising so often among his disciples who shoulde be the chiefest and our Sauiour Christ denying all superioritie at all times to any of them neither yet giuing any signification that Peter shoulde be their chiefe no not after his death and this their interpretation being such as causeth to giue that vnto man which is proper to GOD alone as faith and beliefe and to make diuerse bodies diuerse churches diuerse heades diuerse foundations when the holye Ghoste appointeth but one Church one head one foundation and last of all the Holye Ghoste assigning vnto Peter the ministerie of circumcision onely wée may iustly affirme the exposition of our Romish Cleargie to be contrarye to the expresse worde of GOD and rules of our faith I am not ignorant here of their blinde subtilties and distinctions whereby they would shift of the force of these reasons in making Christ natiuum reale fundamentum The naturall and substantiall foundation but Peter ministeriale fundamentum the ministeriall foundation here in earth that is that the ministerie and office of Peter is appoynted of GOD aboue the function of all the other Apostles to be that ministerie wherby he will builde his vniuersall Churche and gouerne it vppon whome and of whome all other Churches must hang and depende Which assertion to be most vntrue that any principall authoritie either for the buylding vp of the Church or gouernement thereof was by this place or any other committed vnto Peter aboue the other Apostles it may appeare by this that none of the Apostles either in their writings or doinges hath euer acknowledged any such thing but the contrarie accounting him but equall to others giuing him no preheminence aboue his fellowes For proofe hereof what can be more manifest than that Paul writeth to the Ephesians Ephes 2.19 where the Apostle of purpose speaking of the building of the Church and their Apostolicall function sayeth that nowe they were no more straungers and forrenners but citizens with the Saintes and of the housholde of GOD and that they were buylt vppon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the head corner stone By this worde foundation in this place he meaneth vndoubtedly the doctrine of the Apostles and wee see further that hee speaketh in generall of the Apostles in the plurall number not attributing any thing to any one of the Apostles as to a principall who shoulde be preferred in this buylding before others and besides he hath layde Christ the head corner stone vppon which the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets must worke vpon The same Apostle in the fourth Chapter of the same Epistle Ephe. 4.11.12 describinge what gyftes and functions GOD hath left to his Church for the building thereof hee sayeth Christ after his ascention gaue some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelistes some Pastours and teachers to the gathering together of the Saintes and buylding of the bodye of Christ but to haue appointed or giuen any generall and vniuersall Bishop or Pastour to that ende there is not one worde neither there nor in the first to the Corinthians where the Apostle declareth the diuersitie of giftes and functions GOD hath giuen to his Church 1. Cor. 12.28 Saint Iohn in the one and twentéeth of the Reuelation Apoc. 21.14 describing heauenly Hierusalem the Church of GOD buylt by the similitude of a Citie he maketh that the Wall of the citie had twelue foundations and in them the names of the lambes twelue Apostles Here wée see in this built citie of GOD nothing is giuen to Peter aboue the rest all are made equall the doctrine of all the Apostles is alike tearmed by the name of foundations and haue all share alike in the Walles of the Citie of GOD What cause is then why any prerogatiue should bee giuen to Peter more then to any other They shall eate and drinke at Gods table in his kingdome and sit and iudge the twelue Tribes of Israell alike as appeareth by Luke Luk. 22.30 which coulde not bee if principall power were giuen to Peter which they striue for ouer the whole Church And yet that this may appeare more manifest Let vs marke that Paul writeth in the 15. to the Romanes Rom. 15.20 where he sayth that hee enforceth himself to preach the Gospell where Christ had not beene preached and why least sayth hee I shoulde haue built vppon an other mans foundation 1. Cor. 3.10 And in the first to the Corinthians he testifieth that according to the grace of GOD giuen vnto him as a faithfull builder he had layde the foundation of the Church of Corinth If Paul in diuerse places did so preache the Gospell that he might not build vppon an other mans foundation if the Corinthians the buylding of GOD were founded by Paules ministerie then Peters ministerie is not necessarily the foundation of all Churches or else Paul challenged to himselfe more then he ought But if none of these testimonies were extant the Epistle to the Galathians were sufficient to conuince their assertion For it appeareth there that diuerse false Prophets and vaine glorious teachers went about to deface Paules doctrine and bring him out of credite and his disciples saying that Paul was not so excellent an Apostle as Peter and Iames were and the other Apostles that were conuersant with Christ while he liued here vppon earth that hee was since called to bee an Apostle therefore the other were rather to be followed and belieued than hee and so forth Paul vnderstanding and perceiuing this he goeth about to prooue that hee is no whit inferiour to Peter Iames or anye other the Apostles for that the Gospell hee taught hee receiued it not of man neither was hee taught it but by the reuelation of Iesus Christ Gal. 1. 2. Chap. After his calling hee went not of manye yeares to Ierusalem to learne any thing of the chiefe Apostles when hee came vp to Ierusalem it was to see Peter onely and to declare his consent and agreement in preaching of the Gospell because of sclaunders not to learne anye thinge of them that seemed to bee the chiefest Apostles Peter Iames and Iohn seeing the Gospell of vncircumcision was committed to him as the Gospell of circumcision was vnto Peter in that God which was mightie in the one was mighty also in the other they required no submission or obedience at Saint Paules handes or to doe any homage to any of them but they gaue vnto him the right hande of fellowship And further hee was so farre from acknowledging Peter his superiour or better That when he came to Antioche he withstoode him and rebuked him to his face for his dissimulation betweene the Iewes and Gentiles If this be well considered wee may well perceiue that Paul accounted not of Peter as
Augustine Aug. 21. de verbis Dom. in this place writeth thus Super hanc Petram quaÌ„ confessus es c. that is vpon this rock which thou hast confessed vpoÌ„ this Rock which thou hast acknowledged saying thou art the son of the liuing God I will build my congregation vpon my selfe I will build my church vpon my self I will build the not my self vpon thee for they that would haue meÌ„ build vpon meÌ„ said I hold of Paul another I hold of Apollo another I of Cephas which is Peter but other which would not be built vpon Peter but vpoÌ„ the rock said I hold of Christ Againe in another place Super hanc Petram quam confessus est aedificabo ecclesiam Idem in Ioan. tract 124. c that is vpon this rock which thou hast confessed I wil build my church for the rocke was Christ vpoÌ„ which fouÌ„datioÌ„ Peter himselfe was built for other foundation then that which is laid caÌ„ no maÌ„ lay which is Christ Iesus the church therfore that is founded on Christ hath takeÌ„ the keyes of the kingdome of heaueÌ„ of him I omit that which he writeth also in his booke against the Iewes Pagans Idem contra Iud. Pag. Arti. and Adrians where he also expoundeth this place after this maner By this it appeareth how he expouÌ„ded this rock here meÌ„tioned not to bee Peter but Christ himselfe Gregor missenus saith Tu es Petrus Greg. Misse in tesiimâ—nijs delectis ex veteri testamento c. Thou art Peter vpon this Rock I will build my Church he meaneth saith he the confession of Christ for he had sayd before thou art the sonne of the liuing God And Hilarius Hilar. lib. 4. de Trini Petra nihil aliud est quaÌ„ firma et inconcussa discipuli fides The rock is nothing else but the strong and assured faith of the Disciple What can be plainer then that which Origen writeth vpon this place If wée confesse sayth he Christe to bee the sonne of God the Father reuealing it vnto vs it shall be sayd to ech one of vs thou art Peter Orig. tract in Math. and vppon this Rocke will I build my Congregation euery maÌ„ is Petra that is a disciple of Christ vpoÌ„ such a rock all ecclesiastical learning is builte if thou thinke that the whole church is only builte vpon Peter what wilt thou saye of Iohn the sonne of thunder and of the other Apostles And further indéede it was spoken to Peter vpon this Rocke I will builde my Congregation Notwithstanding it is spoken in like maner of all the other Apostles and to all faithfull and perfite because they are all Peters and Rockes and vpon al them and the Prophets is Christs Church built and the gates of hell shal not preuayle agaynst any of them Wherefore if they will giue credit to Origen who was within 235 yeres after Christ that that which was sayd to Peter shall be sayde to euery Faithfull man making the like confession and that this which was spoken to Peter here was spoken to all the Apostles and to all Faithfull and perfite men in like maner Then is here nothing attributed more vnto Peter then vnto any of the other Apostles Gregorie Greg. lib. 4.33 Epist was himselfe Bishop of Rome and whome our Romish Cleargie woulde haue to chalenge this dignitie and prerogatiue they giue vnto Peter hée of this place and diuerse others which they vse as moste weightie to confirme Peters and the Popes Supremacie inferreth the quite contrary For he reasoneth thus to Peter it was sayde Louest thou me féede my shéepe Satan hath desired to sifte thée but I prayed that thy Faith may not faile thou being conuerted strengthen thy Brethren thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my church to thée I will giue the keyes of the kingdome of heaueÌ„ whatsoeuer c. and he concludeth in the ende notwithstanding Peter is not called Vniuersall Bishop This one man hath lefte sufficient witnesse behind him to condemn in Peter and in all Bishops of Rome both the name of that dignitie and superioritie and also the authoritie and iurisdiction which the Pope doth claime vnto himselfe by vertu of this place For first how sharply and bitterly writeth he against this that eyther Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople or any other Bishop shoulde clayme or tearm himself to be the vniuersall Bishop of the whole Church in his Epistles First in his fourth booke he tearmeth this Title and name a new a proude Greg. lib 4. Epist 32. Ep. 38. Ep. 39. a pompous name In his 38 Epistle of the same booke a rash foolish peruerse name a name of errour In the Epistle following a wicked name a name of vanitie a name of Hypocrisie a name of blasphemie Lib. 6. epi. 2. In his sixte booke and 2 Epistle a puffe of arrogancie and in the 24 Epistle of the same Booke a superstitious and vngodly name So farre then in his iudgement is it from being agréeable to Gods will for any Bishop to claime this name that he accounteth it a most vngodly and impious thing and not only the name of modesty and humility is thus disalowed of him as some woulde beare vs in hande but the very office authority iurisdiction that is claimed thereby for otherwise the reasons he vseth were of no force Lib. 4.38 for in the 38 Epistle of his 40 Booke hée reasoneth thus What answere wilt thou make vnto Christ at the trial of the last iudgement that goest about vnder the name of an Vniuersall Bishop to subdue all his members vnto thée Here he condemneth the name for that hee whiche desireth it goeth aboute to subdue all the members of Christe vnto him Whiche in verye déede is broughte to passe not by the verye name but by the power signifyed by the name His Comparison in the thirtith Epistle of the same Booke Li. 4.30 Epi. where he resembleth him to Lucifer that affecteth the name cannot condemne the name onlye but the thing also because it was not Lucifers desyre onelye to bee named God but also to sitte in his seate and execute his Dominion When as in that place hee sayeth that Iohn Bishop of Constantinople challenging that Title doeth Contra Euangelicam Doctrinam against the meaning of the Gospell against Saint Peter the Apostle agaynste the Ordinaunce of the Canons agaynst the faith agaynste all the Churches of GOD agaynst GOD himselfe and many other thinges more in anye mans iudgement that maye bée sufficiente by his authoritie to disallow the name and the office not onely in Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople but also in any other Bishop that shall clayme it For that some séeke to auoyde it in posting ouer this whole writing to bée against Iohn the B. of Constantinople as though Gregorie had misliked this name of vniuersal Bishop in him so ambitiously gréedily séeking for it not if it had ben
giuen to his own Sea of Rome this is but a méere shift For thus he sayth in 32 Epistle Nullus Romanorum Episcoporum hoc singularitatis nomeÌ„ sibi assumpsit Greg. Epi. 32 None of the Bishops of Rome euer receued this name of singularitie And againe Nullus predecessoruÌ„ meoruÌ„ hoc tam profano vocabulo vti consensit None of my Predecessours euer consented to vse this vngodlye name Nos hunc oblatum honorem nolâ—mus suscipere We will not take this honour offered vnto vs and in very déede no more he would for in his seueth Booke hee findeth fault with Eulogius the Patriarch of Constantinople Lib. 7.30 for terming him in the preface of his Epistle the vniuersall Pope and for saying as you commanded requiring him to doe so no more and not to vse any suche tearmes So that he disaloweth that name and authoritie to be giuen to himselfe as well as to the Bishop of Constantinople This that Gregorie did to disallow the authoritie of Vniuersall Bishop in anye was not onely done by him but also by diuers other learned and godly Bishops yea and by Councels First that is cleare which Cyprian that godlye man and martir of God writeth in his Oration he made in the Councell of Carthage concerning this poynt it remaineth saith Cyprian that euerye one speake of this thing what hée thinketh For there is none of vs that maketh himselfe Bishop of Bishops or that doth by tyrannicall feare driue his Fellowes to obey of necessitie seing euerye Bishop at his pleasure hath frée libertye and power of his owne will as if he could not be iudged of another neyther yet himselfe iudge any other let vs all waite for the iudgement of our sauiour Christ who only and alone hath power to make vs gouernours of his Church and iudge of oure doing Thus Cyprian denieth to anye to chalenge to himselfe to be Bishop of Bishops that is to bee vniuersall Bishop to haue power and authoritie ouer the rest to compell them to obay and to iudge of them he giueth frée libertie to all Bishops alike in that and giueth that preheminence to Christ alone whose of right it is Pela Ep. 99 That which Pelagius also writeth who was before Gregorie is playne Let none of the Patriarkes sayth he at any time vse this name of vniuersalitie because if one Patriarke be called vniuersall the name of Patriarch is thereby taken awaye from the other But let this be farre from the Faithfull The wordes of pelagius and Gregorie be so plaine that Edmundus Rufus writing agaynste Molinaeus the Lawyer cannot tell how to auoyde them he is driuen to interprete this worde vniuersalis singularis the vniuersall Bishop that is the singuler and only Bishop But God wot this poore shift will not serue the turne for the gréeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop of the whole habitable worlde quite ouerthroweth that for it cannot bee expounded the onelye Bishop The disliking of this preheminence and power which the Bishop of Rome nowe challengeth to himselfe was not only gaynsayde by their Bishops priuate opinions but euen by Councels â—onc Carth. â—an 26. For in the Councell of Carthage it was decréede that the Bishop of the firste Sea bee not called the chéefe of Priestes or the high Priest or by any other like name but onelye the Bishop of the first Sea by whiche name hee was tearmed not for any principalitie or power he had aboue the other Patriarkes but because the Romane Empire was the chéefe therefore the Bishop of that sea was tearmed by that name and tooke the place in Councels at that tyme and yet had no further authoritie then the Patriarche of Constantinople Alexandria or Antioche I omitte the Councell of Hippo Rhegius Conc. Hippo cap. 27. Conc. Africa cap. 92. and of Africa by which it appeareth too manifestlye what was the iudgemente of the Churche at those tymes concerning the geuing any principall power or prerogatiue to the Bishop of Rome aboue all others It is playne by the Historye of tymes that they neuer heald any suche Article that it was of the necessitie of saluation to beléeue the whole Churche of GOD must bée vnder one heade one generall of whome they must depende they would neuer yéelde or consent to any suche decrée or constitution It is well knowne how that Gregory the first Bishop of Rome of that name called Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople the forerunner of Anti-Christ for ambitiouslye desyring to be supreme heade Greg. lib. 2 Cap. 194. and to bee called the vniuersall Bishop of the World that was habitable Halfe a score yeare after or little more Boniface the third of that name obtayned through the helpe of Phocas the Emperoure whome hée had helped vnto the Empire by killing Mauritius the former Emperour his wife his brother and his sonne with many other to bee named or ordeined Pope or summus Pontifex the high Bishop which authoritie encreased afterward more more vntill it came to the highest pride So that apparant it is that the Churches of God for the space of foure hundred yeares and more after the death of our Sauiour Christ neuer taught or receiued any such doctrine either out of this place of Mathew or anye other that Christ hath left after his ascension an head of his vniuersal church here in earth or appointed an vniuersall Pastor of the whole congregation vnder him Ecclesiasticall ambition begate this office first and mans constitutions and Traditions hath only confirmed the same This I trust I haue sufficiently declared according as I promised both by the interpretatioÌ„s of the antient and learned Fathers of this place of Mathew and by their generall opinion concerning the appointing of an Vniuersall Bishop ouer Gods Churche as also by the practise of that age in that behalfe Wherein I am the more sparing because it hath bene at large declared of others in this age that there is no necessitye in this worde Petra in this place to make Peter the Foundation of the Congregation of Christe and so consequentlye his Successoure but lette vs graunte thus muche that Peter was made that Rocke that hée were the chéefe and Prince of the Apostles how doth it followe therefore that the Bishop of Rome is the Foundation and the chéefe of all Bishops It wil be saide that the Bishop of Rome is Peters successour therefore whatsoeuer prerogatiue was giuen vnto Peter was also giuen to him First besides this consequent followeth not not to driue them to prooue that euer Peter was at Rome which they are not able by any sound proofe out of the Scripture being great presumptions to the contrary neither yet by any agreement of Ecclesiasticall writers not agréeing of the tyme of his comming or abode there I woulde gladly knowe why and wherein the Bishop of Rome is rather accounted Peters successour then any other Bishop If it be because Peter was at Rome so was he
hell whome he will that he hath power to assoyle mens sinnes and to deliuer them both a pena culpa both from the fault penaltie and to reteine and kéepe them at his pleasure that he may binde and loose aboue all other Bishops for he may loose whome other Bishops binde he may bind whome other Bishops loose but whome he bindeth or looseth can no man assoyle or binde but onely he himselfe for Bulles pardons indulgencies anathematizations and all the rest of such trishtrash hath béen founded vpon this power and prerogatiue he challengeth vnto him self by this place the refutation of which particuler pointes being too ample a matter to be handled at this time and besides hauing sufficiently both in this seconde part and also in the thirde declared and proued that no prerogatiue is giuen vnto Peter aboue others by this place that his ministerie was endewed with no greater power and authoritie then the ministerie of the rest of the Apostles it shal bee needelesse to deale with them at this present onely that is needefull to shewe what is meant by the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the authoritie of bynding and loosing By the keyes is meant nothing else here but the preaching of the Gospell and herein wee agree with Chrysostome Crysostom that sayeth they are the knowledge of the Scriptures with Tertullian Tertullian which tearmeth them to bee the interpretation of the lawe and with Eusebius Eusebius that they are the worde of GOD. and verie well may the preaching of the worde bee expressed by the Metaphore of a keye For as by it wee are let into the house so by the preaching of the worde are wee brought into the Church and housholde of GOD and haue accesse to his kingdome For Christ being the dore as Saint Iohn testifieth by whome wee must enter if wee will be saued and the ladder by which wee must ascende vp into heauen as appeareth by Iacobs dreame and the preaching of the Gospell opening and manifesting vnto vs Christ as Paul witnesseth that vnto him the least of al Saints was giuen this grace that hee shoulde preach among the Gentiles the vnsearchable riches of Christ and being the meanes whereby wee are reconciled vnto Christ Paul tearming his ministerie therefore the ministerie of reconciliation the publishing and preachinge of Christ and his Gospell may well therefore be tearmed a keye This Metaphore is vsed of our Sauiour Christ in the same sense Woe be to you interpreters of the lawe Luc. 12.52 for you haue taken away the keye of knowledge Ye entred not in your selues and them that came yee forbad in which wordes our Sauiour Christ termeth the true interpretation of the lawe and preaching of the Gospel the key of knowledge For it was that the Scribes Pharises did suppresse adulterate It is apparant enough that the worde of God according to the sundry effectes and properties therof hath sundrie names So for that it encreaseth and multiplyeth it is called séede for that it cutteth the heart and deuydeth the fleshe from the Spirite it is called a Sworde For that it taketh vs and encloseth vs and bringeth vs togither it is called a nett For that it washeth vs cleane it is called water For that it enflameth vs it is called fire For that it féedeth vs it is called bread euen so for that it openeth giueth vs an entrance into the house it is called a keye This house is the kingdome of heauen Christ is the dore the worde of God is the keye and Preachers the keye bearers So sayeth Chrysostom Chrys opere â—nperfect cap. 23. The keye bearers be the Priestes to whome is committed the teaching of the worde and of the expounding of the Scriptures So then that by the Metaphore of the keye the Euangelist should declare that Christ committed vnto his Apostles the preaching of his worde by which his Church should be gathered togither and built vppon Christ the rocke is no strange speach but verie fit and significant to declare that vnto vs and hereby also he sheweth that he hath committed vnto them a great office and weightie function and that he putteth them in chiefe place and authoritie For he hath the chiefest authoritie in the house or citie to whome the keyes are committed and who hath authoritie to let out and let in by them To this end God vseth this Metaphore in the Prophet Esay Isa 22.22 when he promiseth to Eliachim the chéefe power and authoritie in the King Ezechias house saying with my garments I will cloath him with my girdle I will strengthen him and the keye of the house of Dauid will I lay vppon his shoulder so he shall open and no man shall shut Hereby haue we to learne that as those to whome this charge is committed to beare the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen ought to haue a great care of the well ordering of them so we must also with no lesse carefulnesse and reuerence embrace and receyue them The vse of these keyes is in more perticular manner declared by our Sauiour Christ when as he saith that whatsoeuer he bindeth on earth shall bée bound in heauen c. by the power of binding and losing is meant that which is expressed by Saint Iohn Whose sinnes yee forgiue they are forgiuen him Ioan. 20. and whose sinnes ye retayne they are retayned for when our sinnes are forgiuen we are losed from them when they are not forgiuen wée remayne bound in them these things are brought to passe in vs by the ministerie of his word and by the vertue and power thereof So sayth Ierome Hieron Esai lib. 6 〈…〉 whatsoeuer yée loose in earth shall be losed in Heauen the Apostles lose them by the worde of God and testimonies of the scriptures and exhortations vnto vertue And Ambrose Sinnes be forgiuen by the worde of God the expounder thereof is the Leuite and Priest Ambr. de Cain Abel cap. 4. The Prophet Esai prophecying the sending of Christ sayth that the Lorde had annointed him that he shoulde preache the Gospell to the poore that he shoulde heale the broken hearted and preach deliuerance to the Captiue recouering of sighte to the blind and setting at libertie them that are loosed so that to binde and loose to forgiue and retaine sinnes is a propertie and effect of the worde of God preached For that publisheth vnto vs remission of sinnes worketh in vs mortification deliuereth vs from the power of Sathan and restoreth vnto vs the libertie and fréedome of the children of God which thinges bée brought to passe not by the bare publishing and hearing of the worde but when as by faith we lay hold vpon the swéete promises and greate benefites which bée offered vs in Christ which be deliuered vnto vs by his ministers as by his Legates for remission of sinnes is in the Priest as in the messenger in the worde of God as in the instrument