to reply but only this whch is meerly a bold Affirmation and as absurd as all the rest they were indeed all of them the Heads Governors and Pastors of the Church universal but not after the same manner as Peter was of * Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. Rom. cap. xi Why so For they had the highest and most ample Power as Apostles and Ambassadors but Peter also as an ordinary Pastor As much as to say They had indeed the highest Power in the Church and as large as he but not so high a Power as his Let any Man try if he can make any other Sense of those words that is find any Sense at all in them For was this Power of being an ordinary Pastor greater than that of the Apostles or no If it were greater then it is not true which he affirms that the Apostles had the highest Power †Habuerunt summam Potestatem If it were less than the Power of the Apostles then they were all greater than he as he was an ordinary Pastor and then it is non-sense to say they so had a plenitude of Power as that St. Peter was notwithstanding the Head of them and they all depended on him For he rather depended on them as an ordinary Pastor if that was less than the Power of the Apostleship and if it were not but greater than it then as I said it is false that the Apostles had the highest Power This is sufficient to shew into what Absurdities Men run when they go about to maintain a Falshood and what wretched shifts they devise to obscure the clear Truth which shines in their Eyes Which when they have done they walk as in Darkness and cannot be perswaded to see or acknowledg their Error Nay one Error grows out of another and having begun to wrest the Holy Scripture they go on to strain it so far as to extend it to any purpose they have to serve by it For having presumed that Peter and he alone is promised to be made the Governour of the whole Church by these Words of our Saviour they immediately presume without the shew of a proof that the Bishops of Rome succeed him in this Authority Which is a very large Step or rather Leap from Peter to the Popes of Rome between whom there is such a vast distance that it is impossible to make out the Claim to which they pretend from him For there is no evidence that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome but only that he founded that Church and setled a Bishop there For if he was Bishop of Antioch it was against all antient Rules to leave that and go to another See. The truth is he was properly Bishop of neither but planted a Church in each and first at Antioch before he came to Rome And who can think he did not settle one to take care of that Church of Antioch when he left it who may be called his Successor as well as he whom he is supposed to have placed afterwards in Rome Which two things being allowed as unquestionable Matters of Fact there is no reason can be given why all the Power and Jurisdiction which is claimed upon the account of Succession should not devolve by the Right of Primogeniture upon the Bishop of Antioch since it is confessed he first fat there and sat there seven Years which is more than can be proved he did at Rome where he was not when St. Paul came thither Act. xxviii nor when he first answered before Nero nor when he was ready to be offered 2 Tim. iv 6 11 16. nor can any certain time be assigned when he was there as we are sure St. Paul was who is acknowledged to be a Founder of that Church and had as much or rather more right to leave a Bishop to succeed him there as St. Peter who could transfer to no body neither there nor any where else what was personally vested in him as all the Priviledg here granted him was Or if he was to have any Successor in his supposed Dominion there were others had a better Title to it than the Bishop of Rome particularly St. John who it is certain survived St. Peter L. 1. de Pont. Rom. c. ix Therefore all that Bellarmine dare say in this matter is that the Apostles being dead the Apostolical Authority remained in Peter 's Successor alone For which he gives us not one word of proof but only this notorious Falshood that the Roman Bishop alone is called by all the Apostolical Bishop and his See simply the Apostolical See. When all the World knows Jerusalem Constantinople and divers other Places are called by the same Name of Apostolical Sees or Churches and their Bishops called not only Apostolical but Catholick and said to be Bishops of the Catholick Church The meaning of all which is nothing else but that they held the Catholick Religion and Faith Epist pars 1. ad Franciscum Bonum as Launoy most ingenuously confesses and maintains the Roman Bishops themselves intended no more when they subscribed themselves Bishops of the Catholick Church Nay Bellarmine himself in the place now named is constrained to acknowledg that the Supreme Ecclesiastical Power was given not only to Peter but to other Apostles also For they might all say that of St. Paul 2 Cor. xi 28. My daily business the Care of all the Churches But it was given to Peter as an ordinary Pastor who should have perpetual Successors to others as Delegates who should have no Successors Which is a meer Invention a pure Figment of his own brain without the shadow of a ground for it in the Book of God or any ancient Authority and against his own Confession that all the Apostles had the highest Power which includes all Power both ordinary and extraordinary and a Power to appoint their Successors in the Places they converted There have abundance of other things been said by our Writers to shew that whatsoever may be supposed to have been promised in these Words the Bishops of Rome can thence derive no lawful Claim to the like Authority And yet as if there were nothing plainer than that Christ spake to the Roman Bishops when he said these Words to St. Peter they have the confidence from hence to entitle the Pope to the Priviledg of Infallibility as well as to a Supreme Dominion over the Church So Bellarmine who elsewhere alledges these Words L. iv de Rom. Pontific c. 3. to prove that the chief Bishop i. e. theirs when he teacheth the whole Church in things belonging to Faith can in no case err But this depends upon his former Suppositions that Peter is the Rock of the Church as its Supreme Governour and therefore every one of his Successors in like manner is the same which having no Foundation all his Superstructure upon them falls to the Ground And indeed it is so sandy that honest Men among themselves are ashamed to build any thing of this nature
this sort of feeding must be allowed to others but he alone was to rule and govern in chief to feed by Authority and Power over all whereby he was to prescribe what was to be taught and believed But this is to return where we were before to the signification of the Word Feed which cannot mean one thing with respect to Peter and another with respect to the rest but signifies the same Power be it what it will common to them all If this need any further Explication those Words of our Lord Go and teach all Nations Matth. xxviii 19. Go ye into all the World and preach the Gospel unto every Creature Mark xvi 15. will satisfy us that Peter had no peculiar Authority conferred on him above the other Apostles For he gave this Charge to them all and it was ushered in with a far more magnificent Preface to it than when he spake here particularly to Peter for he first acquaints them with his own Supreme Authority saying All Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth and then adds Go ye therefore and teach all Nations c. which is a Commission as large as could be given to Men including in it all the Power that was necessary for the establishing and governing those Churches which they should gather unto Christ Who can think that they who had this Authority given them were themselves to be taught and governed by Peter alone Nothing could put such a Conceit into Mens Minds but an ambitious desire to advance themselves to the highest Dominion by raising Peter above all others Who it is evident did not take themselves to be all inferiour to him nor to be less able to feed him than he was to feed them For St. Paul who was herein inferiour that he was called late to be an Apostle as one born out of due time did take upon him to feed Peter and that with his Staff too if I may so speak that is with his Reproof and this at Antioch St. Peter's own Seat Where it had been very proper for him one would think to have stood upon his peculiar Prerogative if he had known of any belonging to him Which if he could have challenged we should still be to seek by what right the Bishop of Rome claims the same Authority that St. Peter had O says Boniface the VIIIth * Extravagant L. 1. Tit. 8. de Major Obedientia Christ spake to Peter and to his Successors when he said FEED MY SHEEP But how doth he prove that Why we must take his bare word for it both that he spake these words to Peter's Successors and to them alone and that the Bishops of Rome are his sole Successors All this he delivers as an infallible Dictator and it is not good manners to question that the Universal Flock of Christ is so committed to them that whether Greeks or others shall say they are not committed to Peter and his Successors they must necessarily confess they are none of the SHEEP of Christ But it is worth any bodies while to read on to the end of that Extravagant where he asserts this whereby they will be infallibly satisfied he was no infallible Interpreter but a gross Perverter of the Holy Scriptures For here it is that he proves in the Church there is both the Spiritual and the Temporal Power from those Words Behold here are two Swords Luk. xxii 38. and that the Temporal Power is subject to the Spiritual because the Powers that are are ordained of God Rom. xiii 1. for they would not be in order unless Sword were under Sword and Spiritual things are superiour to Temporal For the Prophecy of Jeremy is verified of the Church and the Ecclesiastical Power ch i. 10. Behold I have set thee this day over the Nations and over the Kingdoms to root up and pull down c. Therefore the Temporal Power if it go out of the way must be judged by the Spiritual but the Supreme Spiritual Power by God alone not by Man as the Apostle bears witness 1 Cor. ii 15. He that is Spiritual judgeth all things but he himself is judged of no Man. After all which goodly Interpretation of Holy Scriptures more like Pasquill than the Pope he concludes most pontifically We declare affirm define and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to Salvation for every humane Creature to be subject to the Pope of Rome This is his Conclusion from FEED MY SHEEP and from other Places of Scripture expounded after the very same fashion as he abuses this Which tho it be very presumptuous yet is not too arrogant for him who could entertain such a monstrous Conceit as this which we read in one of his Decrees * Sexti Decret L. 1. Tit. vi cap. xvii Fundamenta Where he says Christ made Peter the Chief that from him as from a certain Head he might diffuse as it were his Gifts into the whole Body for that having taken him IN CONSORTIVM INDIVIDVAE TRINITATIS into the Partnership of the undivided Trinity He would have him called that which the Lord himself was saying THOV ART PETER and upon THIS ROCK I will build my Church Now if Peter be thus exalted into the Consortship of the Blessed Trinity and the Pope have a just claim unto all that belongs to Peter then is the Pope no less than OUR LORD GOD as some of the Canonists have called him unto whom Boniface might well conclude all must be subject upon pain of Damnation I conclude this whole Discourse with these three Observations which are better grounded than their proud Decrees First It is worth considering that this lofty Structure which they have erected in the Church of Rome of the Supremacy of their Bishop is built barely upon three Metaphorical Speeches of our Saviour unto St. Peter without one word or syllable concerning the Bishop of Rome or any other Successor One would have expected that a thing of this mighty moment should have had a stronger Foundation and been delivered in plainer words than upon this Rock I will give thee the Keys and Feed my Sheep and that we should have been told also in down-right terms who should inherit the supreme Power supposed to be conferred by these Metaphorical Speeches when he was dead and gone especially if all Christians in the World must necessarily upon pain of Damnation be subject to Peter's Successor And yet so it is this is all that a Wit of such height as Bellarmine's who is wont to scrape up all that any way seems to make for his purpose durst venture to alledg out of the Holy Scriptures for the proof of so weighty a Point The Rhemists indeed in their Annotations upon the New Testament make bold with two places more which they apply to this business but with so little Reason not to say so ridiculously that he had the discretion to let them alone One is in St. Matthew xiv 29. where upon the word walked
them all and Christ promising nothing but what he performed he gave therefore the highest Power to them all which is contained in the Keys Here they are at a great loss and cannot agree how to bring themselves off from this difficulty which strips Peter of his Supremacy Therefore some have devised the above-named Conceit that Peter alone had the Keys given him as their Ordinary and they as his Legats But this seems too gross unto others who acknowledg they all had the Keys immediately from God as much as Peter if they be considered as Apostles but not if they be considered as Bishops and Pastors for these two Offices they fancy they had the Apostolical and the Pastoral Dignity the first immediately from Christ the other by and under Peter But this is in a manner the same thing in a little finer dress which was said before Therefore others unsatisfied with this that the Apostles should receive their Jurisdiction from Peter have ordered the matter on this fashion that Peter might use the Keys alone but they not without him But Sixtus Senensis cannot digest this and therefore hath devised a threefold Power in Peter of Apostleship of Order and of the Kingdom * Biblioth Sanct. l. v. Annot. clxix With respect to the first he grants Paul was equal to Peter because he had the Office of Preaching the Gospel not from Peter but from God as much as Peter himself had With respect to the second also he acknowledges the truth of what St. Jerome writes against Jovinian that all the Apostles equally received the Keys let the Catholick Scripturist mind that and firmly laid the Foundation of the Church and of what he says to Evagrius All Bishops are equal because all the Apostles were so But then with respect to the last viz. the Power of the Kingdom and Authority over all Bishops and Churches Peter was Head of all That is Peter must some way or other be above all the rest but how they do not know For Cardinal Baronius †Ad An. 34. n. ccv will have it that all the Apostles had the use of the Keys equally with Peter by the ORDINARY Power of remitting Sins and by this distinction expounds the fore-named words of St. Jerome But his Brother Cardinal Bellarmine being aware that if Peter had the Keys more than the rest by an EXTRAORDINARY Power his Authority would not descend upon his Successors says quite contrary that the Apostles had the Power of the Keys after an EXTRAORDINARY manner and Peter only by an ORDINARY * L. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. xii Thus what one builds up his Fellow pulls down There is a Confusion of Tongues in this Babel which they labour to erect They cannot agree so much as about the Terms wherein they deliver this new Doctrine For it is a pure Invention without any Reason or any Authority for it but it must be so though they know not how because it is their pleasure As all the rest is which they draw from the last place Feed my Sheep In which they say Christ gave the Power which he had promised and therefore since he promised it to all he gave it to all if any thing was given here And yet against such clear demonstration they will have this to be a peculiar Grant to Peter no body knows how or why but because it seems good to them For this is so little approved by others that they fairly grant the ancient Opinion was and make it theirs that these Words were not spoken to Peter in a Personal but in a Publick Capacity as he represented all the Apostles Insomuch that they can find nothing peculiar to him in the word FEED because of that of St. Austin's †De Agone Christ c. 30. When Christ said to Peter he said to all Feed my Sheep nor in the word SHEEP because St. Ambrose saith in the Place before named Those Sheep not only Peter received but he received them with us and we received them with him Which things are so evident that it hath brought some in that Communion to this Conclusion that out of none of these three Places nor all of them together can be gathered so much as the bare Primacy of St. Peter ‖ Du Pin de antiqua Eccles Discipl dissert iv P. 311. after that manner which Bellarmine collects it but it must be gathered thus that in those places Peter bears the Person of the Church speaks for the rest of the Apostles and is himself spoken unto by Christ in their Name as the first and principal Behold then the UNITY of which they boast in that Church and how little CERTAINTY there is among them even of the main point of their Faith and as Bellarmine * Praefatio in L. de Poutifie Rom. makes bold to call it the Sum of Christian Religion It stands upon such a tottering Foundation that finding how little these Texts in the New Testament avail them they ransack'd the Old to fetch some feeble support unto it from thence And the late Catholick Scripturist fancies the Old Testament helps them thus far in this Point that it teaches †Seventh Point n. 1 3. That among the Priests of the Old Law one was chosen successively to be the highest and chief Priest Commanding all such Causes as are Ecclesiastical Causes to be brought to the Tribunal of the High Priest and his Sentence to be obeyed even under pain of Death And for this he alledges Deut. xvii 8. But this only proves how ignorant such Catholicks as he are in the Holy Scriptures Where it is impossible for him to find that the High Priests were chosen successively for they had that Dignity by Inheritance in one certain Family and not by Election And as for the Power which he ascribes to them though he promises us in his Preface to produce loud speaking Texts for all the Points we mislike in their Religion there is not so much as a whisper of it in the place he alledges The words of which he did wisely not to quote but only the Chapter and Verse Which we that have liberty to read the Bible can easily discern speak loudly against him and confute that Doctrine which he would confirm by them If there arise says Moses in that Text a Matter too hard for thee in Judgment between Blood and Blood between Plea and Plea and between Stroke and Stroke being matters of Controversy within thy Gates then shalt thou arise and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose And thou shalt come unto the Priests the Levites and unto the Judg that shall be in those days and enquire and they shall shew thee the sentence of Judgment And thou shalt do according to the Sentence which they of that place which the Lord shall choose shall shew thee c. I need not recite the rest at large to the end of the 12th Verse For every understanding Reader
The TEXTS examined which Papists cite out of the Bible TO PROVE The Supremacy of St. PETER and of the POPE over the whole Church IMPRIMATUR Guil. Needham Febr. 14. 1687. THE Question to be debated in this Paper is Whether the Apostle St. Peter was constituted by Christ himself to be in his stead the Head and supreme Governour of the whole Church This we deny having undeniable Proofs that all the Apostles were placed by Christ in equal Power and Authority over his Church But the Doctors of the Roman Church affirm this with so much Confidence as to say that to deny it is not a simple Error but a pernicious Heresy They are the words of Bellarmine * L. 1. de Rom. Pontif. c. 10 11. who earnestly contends that the Government of the whole Church was committed to Peter especially about Matters of Faith. Which bold Assertion he labours to support three ways First By some places of Holy Scriptures Secondly By many Privileges and Prerogatives of St. Peter Thirdly By Testimonies of Greek and Latin Fathers I am concerned only in the first of these Ways in which if this Cause find no true support we need not trouble our selves about the other two which are so weak that some ingenuous Persons in their Communion have acknowledged the Prerogatives are either feigned at pleasure or no more to the purpose of his Supremacy than the pretended Testimonies of Ancient Fathers which are against it Now the Scriptures which they alledg for the proof of it are two places in the holy Gospels The one in St. Matthew xvi 18 19. the other in St. John xxi 17. In the former of these this Supreme Authority they say is promised to St. Peter in the latter it is conferred I begin with the first Matth. xvi 18 19. And I say unto thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church c. And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind o◠Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven The Sense of which words says Bellarmine is plain and obvious giving us to understand the Soveraignty over the whole Church to be here promised unto Peter in two Metaphors The one is a Metaphor of a Foundation and a Building the other is a Metaphor of Keys For what a Foundation is in the Building that the Head is in the Body the Governour in the City the King in his Kingdom and the Father of the Family in the House and to whom the Keys of a City are delivered he is appointed the King or at least the Governour of that City to admit and shut out whom he pleaseth Unto which I have this to say before I give the true Sense of these words That to call this a plain and obvious Sense of the words which is wrapt up in a couple of Metaphors is to stumble at the very Threshold and to contradict himself in the terms as they ordinarily speak For what is metaphorical is not plain and obvious but needs Explanation by putting it into common words Into which if these Metaphors be reduced we shall find there is no such Sense contained in them as is pretended I shall explain them distinctly and begin with the former part of this Promise Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church which we may call the first Proof they bring of St. Peter's being the Monarch of the Church I. Which Sense is so far from being plain and obvious that having considered both the words and all the ancient Expositors upon them I can find nothing plainer than these two things First That there is no certainty St. Peter is here meant by the Rock upon which Christ saith he will build his Church Nor Secondly If he were that Christ intended by calling him a Rock to make him the Lord of his Church First I say there is no Evidence that St. Peter is here meant by the Rock but quite contrary we are led by the general stream of Ancient Interpreters to understand by the Rock upon which the Church is built that Faith concerning Christ which Peter had newly confessed There are more than two that thus expound the words for one that expounds them otherwise as may be seen in a Sermon lately printed on this Subject * Sermon on St. Peter's day 1686. which shows also that the other Expositions do not really differ from this but even they who apply these words to St. Peter had respect in calling him the Rock to his preaching the Doctrine of Christ and having the honour to be the first Preacher of it to the Gentiles Which is all the Priviledg that can be thought to be peculiarly intended to him in these words For excepting this whatsoever was said to him was directed to all the Apostles because Peter as their Mouth spake the Sense of them all when he said Thou art Christ the Son of the Living God and therefore Christ's Answer was returned to them all when he said Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church As much as to say Thou art what thy Name imports which I have given thee with respect to this solid Faith thou hast now confessed upon which as upon a Rock I will build my Church by your Ministry and particularly by thine who shalt have the Honour to lay the first Stone of it in the Gentile World. Thus St. Austin †Tract exxiv in Joh. Serm. xiii de verbis Dom c. expounds the words in many places where he observes Peter had his Name from Petra the Rock viz. That Faith which he confessed upon which Christ told him he would build his Church For he doth not say Thou art Peter and upon thee will I build my Church but upon this Rock which plainly relates to another thing viz. that immoveable Foundation confessed by Peter that he was Christ the Son of God. Whence those known words of the same Father I will build thee upon me not me upon thee If it were the intention of this Paper to quote Testimonies I could name a great multitude even the ordinary Gloss which speak to the same purpose But it is wholly needless since the other Exposition which makes St. Peter the Rock here spoken of is against the most unanimous consent of the Fathers of the Church which they of the Church of Rome are bound to follow both by the Doctrine of the Council of Trent * Sess iv and by the form of that Oath of Profession of Faith which Pope Pius IV. drew up and enjoined according to the Mind of that Council And yet so vilely are some addicted to regard nothing but their Interest there are those who to make these words sound as if Christ promised to build his Church upon Peter himself have not blush'd thus to translate them Thou art Peter and upon this PETER will
I build my Church So Dr. Allen would have had the Translation run in the Rhemish Testament and so Hart alledges them in his Conference with Dr. Reynolds †Chap. 2. Divis 1. And now lately the Catholick Scripturist translates them after this manner according to the Language which Christ spoke Thou art a Rock and upon this Rock will I build my Church As if it will be lawful for them to do any thing even contradict that very Council whose Decrees they are sworn to observe that they may make the Scripture seem to be on their side For the Council of Trent hath decreed the old Latin Translation to be authentical with a prohibition that no Man dare or presume under any pretence to reject it Notwithstanding which here are Men that presume to reform it and to make a new Translation of their own Heads as different from that authentick vulgar Translation as from ours for in this ours and that are the same as every body may know that understands the Latin Tongue This is a Presumption with a Witness to make their own Translation depart so far from the Language which Christ spoke as to put tu es Petrus instead of tu es Petra For so Christ's words should have been translated if they signified thou art a Rock unless they can shew us that Petrus in any Author is latin for a Rock Till this be done we must say that such Men contrary to their Faith solemnly sworn depart not only from Antiquity but from themselves And when they have done all they can it will evidently appear that the Church was not built by his Hands alone tho he began as I said and laid the first Stone among the Gentiles but by them all and more especially by St. Paul who was called late into this Office 1 Cor. xv 10. iii. 10 11. but laboured more abundantly than they all and as a wise Master-builder laid the Foundation upon which others built Which Foundation he tells us is Jesus Christ himself who he likewise says is the only Foundation and that no Man can lay other Foundation besides him Which shews this Promise I am treating of had respect to all that had the Office of Apostles and wholly ruines the Authority of St. Peter upon which they would have the Church to be built For if Jesus Christ be the only Foundation that can be laid then Peter cannot be the Foundation but only as a Minister of Jesus Christ who help'd to lay the Foundation which is Christ himself and his Faith. In which Ministry he was no more imployed than other Apostles but St. Paul who came last into this Ministry was as wise a Master-builder as himself and took more Pains than he or any of the rest laying the Foundation where neither St. Peter nor any Body else had ever been lest he should build upon another Man's Foundation as he tells the Roman Church Rom. xv 20. Which words uttterly overthrow their vain distinction of a first and a secondary Foundation whereby they endeavour to elude those words of St. Paul in the place before-named 1 Cor. iii. 11. For it appears by this other place that St. Paul was a secondary or ministerial Foundation if we may so speak that is speak improperly meaning thereby one that laid the Foundation Which he did as much as St. Peter or any other Apostle nay a great deal more as he himself tells us when he saith he laboured more abundantly than they all In exact speaking there is no Foundation on which the Church is built but Christ alone as St. Paul assures us in whom all the Building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy Temple in the Lord Ephes ii 21. But Faith in Christ being that whereby we are joyned to him it may be called by the same Name and accordingly the Colossians are said to be grounded * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 1.23 in the Faith as upon a Foundation the Greek word signifies from which he would have them not to be moved And the Apostles as he there saith being the Preachers of this Faith and the Instruments whereby Men were brought to believe on Christ and so joyned to him as Living Stones are called by the Name of Foundation in the place before-named Ephes ii 20. Built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets c. But then it is evident that Peter alone is not this Foundation but all the Apostles For there are XII Foundations of this sort as we read in Rev. xxi 14. by whose Ministry the Church was built upon Christ the sole Foundation in proper speaking that was laid for all to build upon Finally the Apostles understand no such Preheminence as is now pretended to be promised to St. Peter in these words nor did he himself so understand them when the Holy Ghost was come upon them to lead them into all Truth For then St. Paul could not have said that he came not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles and that he was behind them in nothing 2 Cor. xi 5. xii 11. nor could he have undertaken to correct St. Peter Gal. ii 11 12 c. nor would St. Peter have born his Censure if he had known he was the Head of the Church but have bidden St. Paul know his distance and remember that he ought not to controul him but be controuled by him as his Better Secondly After all this that hath been said to shew there is nothing here promised to Peter but what belongs to all the Apostles except only that of his being imployed in laying the first Foundation of Faith among the Gentiles It remains that I shew there is nothing in the word Rock which implies any Superiority of Power and Authority over the rest of his Brethren and the whole Church if we should suppose this Promise to have been made to him alone for it denotes nothing of Government but hath respect to the support and stability of that Structure which is firmly laid upon it And therefore the ancient Doctors as may be seen in the Sermon before-mentioned give other Reasons of his being called a Rock and not this because to him was committed the Government of the whole Church especially about Faith. Which is the Explanation Bellarmine gives of this word affirming it to be the signification of this Metaphor for it is proper to a fundamental Rock to govern and sustain the whole Edifice This is perfectly new Language never heard of in the World before that it is proper to a Foundation to govern for it is altogether improper and no body thinks of any such thing when he reads of a Foundation But if it be proper then all the Apostles were Governours of the whole Church as well as he because they were all Foundations as was before observed having the very same Power given to them by Christ which we now suppose was here promised to him alone Unto which they of the Church of Rome have nothing
these proud Pretensions But be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and ALL YE ARE BRETHREN And call no Man your Father upon the Earth for one is your Father which is in Heaven Neither be ye called Masters for one is your Master even Christ The repetition of one and the same thing so often in words of the same import argues it to be a matter of great moment which ought to be duly weighed And it is this that no Man no not any of his Apostles should take upon him to prescribe that as a part of Religion which God our Saviour hath not prescribed by his Laws and that we ought not absolutely to submit to any Man's Dictates as Children do to the Will of their Fathers nor pin our Faith as we speak upon any Man's sleeve i. e. let it depend intirely upon his Authority For this is a submission which is due only to God our Saviour who in this Sense of the words is our only Father and Master and Leader and therefore we cannot without the highest injury to him own any one else to be such nor give them these Names but as they teach not their own but Christ's Doctrine unto Men. And in this Office all the Apostles were equal and no one of them could claim an Authority over the rest of his Brethren There are many other places wherein we read of one Shepherd one Lord one Lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy from whence we may conclude that Peter himself had no Power to make but only to declare the Laws of his and our Lord and Lawgiver Jesus Christ So the words of Christ's Commission run when he saith not to him alone but to them all Go ye and disciple all Nations c. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you Matth. xxviii 20. Here is their Authority to publish the Commands of their Master not what they pleased to command themselves Which Peter was so far from doing that he went not about the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law and the calling of the Gentiles till he was authorized by an heavenly Vision which discovered this Mystery to him as a part of the Counsel of God but no Law nor so much as a Thought of his own For being charged afterwards by the Jews for eating with Men uncircumcised he excuses himself by a long Apology wherein he relates how he was commanded to do it by God himself whom he could not withstand Acts xi 3 4 c. which was not done like a Lawgiver Nay after this Revelation made to him he was so weak as to observe this Law to the great Offence of the Gentiles for which he was reprehended by St. Paul who had the honour to abrogate the Law of Moses among the Gentiles while St. Peter who began that work was the Minister of the Circumcision Gal. ii 7 10 11 c. Nor doth the word Bind import a Power to impose Laws but only to tie Men to those Laws which are already made Thus it signifies in that very place which Bellarmine alledges to maintain his Sense of the word viz. to make Laws Matth. xxiii 4. For they bind heavy Burdens and grievous to be born and lay them on Men's Shoulders c. that is they were rigorous Interpreters of the Laws of God which it was their Office to expound according to the plain sense and meaning of them and not according to the Traditions of the Elders which had made them intollerable Burdens But suppose the word to signify what they please it will do them no service because this Power of Binding was not promised to Peter alone but to them all as hath been before proved And consequently he could do nothing which they could not do as much as he that is they were all Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God All of them like to Eliakim 1 Cor. iv 1. to whom the Key of the House of David is promised as the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to Peter For by that very word which we translate Stewards or Dispensers is that Office * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which Eliakim was advanced in the room of Shebna expressed by the LXX in Isa xxii 19 21. which was not a Supreme Power in the Court where all the rest of the Courtiers did not depend on him as their Lord and Prince but the Power of a prime Minister in the Royal Family which he governed not after his own Will but the King 's In like manner all the Apostles were Ministers by whom Men believed 1 Cor. iii. 5. Stewards of the heavenly Mysteries which they faithfully dispensed 1 Cor. iv 1 2. according to the Will of Christ who hath the Key of David that is is the sole Supreme Governour of the Church and gives Rules to it which the Apostles delivered but did not ordain themselves nor bind upon Men by their own Authority but by his For they were not Authors of the Divine Laws which they taught but the Publishers of them and equal Publishers of one and the same common Doctrine Which every Bishop in the Church hath as much Authority to bind upon Men as the Pope They being all of the same Merit and Priesthood as St. Hierom * Epist ad Evagrium speaks all Successors of the Apostles There are some other words of St. Hierom it may not be unfit here to note which are usually alledged to prove the contrary viz. That he thought St. Peter had some Supremacy of Power over the rest of the Apostolical Colledg from whence they hope to derive the like Power unto the Pope over all Bishops They are in his first Book against Jovinian where he saith One among the twelve was therefore chosen that an HEAD being constituted the occasion of Schism might be removed But they are unconscionably disingenuous who alledg this Passage and do not give us the entire Sentence but only this Conclusion of it which can have no such meaning as they pretend without making meer Nonsense of the words foregoing which are these But thou sayst the Church was founded upon Peter tho the very same in another place is done upon all the Apostles and they received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and the strength of the Church is solidly bottom'd upon them EQVALLY And then follows the words now named Yet ONE was therefore chosen among the XII c. which makes it as clear as the Sun that he dreamt of no such HEADSHIP of ONE over all the rest as signifies a Supremacy of Power for what one Text he saith affirms of Peter another affirms of them all they all receiving the Keys which is the highest Power and the stability of the Church relying upon them equally I conclude this part of my Discourse with the Observation of a late Learned Writer of our Church * Dr. Hammond 's Dispatcher dispatch'd P. iii. c. 7. Sect. 2. n.
they have this wise Note Peter saith St. Bernard walking upon the Waters as Christ did DECLARED himself the ONLY VICAR of Christ which should be Ruler not over one People but over ALL For many Waters are many People And from hence he deduceth the like Authority and Jurisdiction to his Successors the Bishops of Rome And a goodly Deduction it is for which they are mightily beholden to St. Bernard who could spy such a notable Declaration of St. Peter's sole Vicarship and draw from thence such a fine Argument for the Pope's Authority as no ancient Doctor besides himself was able to find in this place But must his Fancies pass for substantial Proofs of the Bishop of Rome's Supremacy which was raised to a great height in his days At this rate no body need want Proofs for the most detestable Heresies which he shall please to devise if such Conceits as these be allowed for Arguments And their second Annotation is like to this of which for ought I know they may have the honour to be the Inventors without the help of St. Bernard For because our Saviour when there were two Ships went in that which was Simon 's Luke v. 3. and thence taught the People they gravely conclude that undoubtedly he taught out of that Ship and not the other on purpose to signify the Church resembled by Peter's Ship and that in it is the Chair of Christ and only true preaching By which it is evident they intended the Reader should understand that as Peter was Owner of that Ship so he and his Successors are Rulers of the whole Church For upon the following Verses ver 7 10. they observe how Peter had so much work that he was fain to call for help and joyned those who were in the other Ship as Co-partners in the Preaching of the Gospel As much as to say the Work was committed to him alone who took in such help as he needed He was the only Pastor and all the rest as was said before his Curates For they tell us all this aforesaid did properly mean his Travels in the Conversion of the World and his Prerogative therein before all Men as is evident by Christ's special Promise made to him SEVERALLY and APART in this place that he should be made the TAKER OF MEN. What then became of all the rest Were they to sit still in their Ship and do nothing O no by no means He giveth to other say these Annotators the like Office as to Peter 's Co-operators and Coadjutors Before they said that Peter called them and joyned them to himself as Co-partners in the preaching of the Gospel but now having better it seems bethought themselves they say Christ appointed them to this Office yet still they are but as Peter's Co-operators and Assistants He was the Taker of Men and converted the World they only came in to his help and brought all the Fish into his Net. Their Ship signified nothing it was Peter alone that signified all Their Ship stands for a meer Cypher his Ship is the Figure of the whole Church where he governs and they are but helps in Government meer Co-adjutors unto him the great and indeed only Bishop over all Who can endure such Annotations as these in which Men play with the Holy Scriptures as they please and play with them in so saucy a manner as to interpret them directly against the Scriptures In which the Apostles call themselves Workers together with Christ 2 Cor. vi 1. imployed by him to be his Co-operators not St. Peter's who was so far from being the Converter of the World that his Travels and Pains were most bestowed in the least part of it Which Bellarmine I suppose saw well enough and therefore was so wise as not to mention such Allegories Which may serve to entertain the Fancies of silly People but are the just scorn of those that have any measure of Spiritual Understanding Who have heard perhaps that the Fathers sometimes resembled the Church of Christ to Peter's Ship but not that they ever dream'd of making him and the Bishop of Rome after him the Governour of the whole Church because he was Master of that Ship. There is nothing more unaccountable than such a Conclusion unless it be their pretence to Infallibility who are meer Triflers when they meddle with the Holy Scriptures which is the next thing I would have observed Secondly If the danger of wresting the Scriptures be a good reason why the common People should not read them then no body at all should look into them for their most learned Priests have wrested them more than the common People And that against their Oath whereby they are bound to interpret Scripture according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers who all agree that what was said to Peter in these three places belonged to all the Apostles whose Writings as the rest of the Scriptures have by none been more foully abused than by the Popes of Rome whose Interpretations and Applications of them should they be collected in a Book would make one of the most shameful pieces that hath been yet extant in the World. Thirdly And let the Reader observe once more how ill they of that Church are agreed about the Interpretation of these three places of Scripture which are the Subject of this Discourse There are four Interpretations of the first place Thou art Peter c. as hath been else-where observed which have had great Authors in the Roman Church as well as others Some by Rock understand Peter's FAITH in the Confession he had newly made which by the way Joh. Ekius * L. 1. contra Luther de Petri Primatu c. 13. says in the Age before us no body denied to be the sense and bids Luther name the Man that said otherways Others CHRIST himself whom Peter had confessed to be the Son of God others PETER and others ALL the APOSTLES which last is the Exposition of Paschasius Radbertus the famous Broacher of Transubstantiation whose words are these * L. iv in Matthaeum The Church of God is built not only upon Peter but upon all the Apostles Now they who follow the first and second sense can find no Prerogative here for St. Peter above the rest of the Apostles and they that adhere only to the third in opposition to the other as they now commonly do are confuted by those who assert the fourth that these words were spoken to all the Apostles And indeed they are all forced to confess that nothing is here promised which is not contained in the next words And I will give thee the Keys c. But what this is none of them can certainly tell For one sort such as Cajetan hold the Keys contain more than binding and loosing which Bellarmine says is false nay a thing never heard of in the Church And consequently this Power of binding and loosing being promised to them all Matth. xviii 18. the Power of the Keys was promised to
13. If any Power or degree of Power was here promised to Peter more than to the rest of the Apostles it must be gathered either from the force of the Substance of the Promise or from the Circumstances wherewith it was delivered The Substantial part is nothing else but that of a Steward in the Church set forth by the Emblem of Keys and more explicitly declared by the Power of binding and loosing which carries in it no intimation of such a thing as a Supremacy over the whole Church but only of a ruling Power in some Family that is in that part of the Universal Church where his lot should fall For this very thing being presently after promised to all the Apostles it makes it evident there was no Supremacy here promised for then there must be not one but twelve Supremes As for the Circumstances wherein this part and the former of our Saviour's Promise was delivered which some are pleased to urge as very considerable they are of no strength to support so great a weight as they lay upon them For first It is very unreasonable that Circumstances should be thought of greater force to declare the meaning of this Promise than the very Substance it self is And secondly All these Circumstances save only that of his own Name and his Fathers joyned together are not peculiar to him but common to others who confessed Christ's Divinity and had it revealed from God and were blessed and designed for Stones in the Fabrick of the Church as well as Peter And further even that Circumstance of calling him Simon Bar-jona had a visible reason for it to distinguish this Simon from Simon Zelotes So that there is nothing left but the small Circumstance of calling him by his Name to be the grand Foundation of St. Peter's Supremacy Can any one be satisfied with such poor Proofs Which are no better than if we should argue in this manner our Lord said to Peter Follow me and so he did to the other eleven and by this made them his Disciples in common But had he said Simon Barjona Follow thou me as he might very well if any other Simon were then present he alone according to this way of discoursing had been taken into Discipleship and none after him enjoyed this Honour But I have said enough if not too much upon these Texts and must here end this Paper for fear of swelling it beyond the intended bulk The rest shall soon follow ERRATA PAge 81. line 21. for will be read were P. 83. l. 31. r. understood P. 85. l. 10. del of l. ult r. walk on P. 88. penult r. falsified P. 93. l. 29. del of before Peter's LONDON Printed by J. D. for Richard Chiswel at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1688. The Second Part. The TEXTS examined which Papists cite out of the Bible TO PROVE The Supremacy of St. PETER and of the POPE over the whole Church IMPRIMATUR Guil. Needham Febr. 14. 1687. III. NOw we are come to the last reserve of the Roman Church for the support of this Cause which lies in those Words of Christ to Peter John xxi 15 16 17. Feed my Lambs and feed my Sheep They are sensible of the truth of that which hath been oft repeated that in neither of the former places Christ gave any thing to Peter but only promised he would give him such things as are there mentioned Now they are hard put to it to find when he did perform this Promise and not find with all that he performed it to all the Apostles and therefore as I have said made it to them all Here is the only Place they rely upon here they would fain find what is no where else to be found something peculiarly granted to Peter which was conferred upon none of the rest Read the words say they and observe how they are peculiarly spoken to Peter So when they had dined Jesus said to Simon Peter Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou these me more than these He saith unto him Yea Lord thou knowest I love thee He saith unto him FEED MY LAMBS He saith to him again the second time Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou me He saith unto him Yea Lord thou knowest that I love thee He saith unto him FEED MY SHEEP He saith unto him the third time Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou me Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time Lovest thou me And he said unto him Lord thou knowest all things thou knowest that I love thee Jesus saith unto him FEED MY SHEEP See say they with what Solemnity our Lord here speaks to Peter and to him alone calling him three times particularly by his Name and Relation and bidding him as oft feed his Lambs or Sheep whereby he instated him in the Office he had promised him and made him in a particular manner to be a Pastor even the Pastor of the whole Church with a Supreme Power over it First To which we reply That having seen and considered all this we can see nothing here that looks like a Grant or Commission nothing given to St. Peter by these words which are a plain Charge or Command requiring him to do his Office which was therefore conferred upon him before together with the rest of the Apostles when our Lord said As my Father hath sent me so I send you c. Receive ye the Holy Ghost c. Secondly And as here is no Commission no Conveyance of any thing made to him but a bare Precept to do his Duty So the Duty doth not concern him alone but belongs to them all as much as him It is at this time required in a Precept directed to him alone that 's true and Bellarmine might have spared all his Labour to prove that these words were spoken to Peter alone They were so if we understand thereby that he only by Name is now admonished of his Duty the reason of which we shall see presently but the Duty of which he was admonished was not peculiar to him and so the words do not belong to him alone as appears by many Arguments 1. From St. Peter himself who seems to have interpreted the Mind of Christ in this Speech to him in his words to the Elders of the Church to whom he wrote 1 Pet. v. 1. The Elders which are among you I exhort who am What the Monarch of the Church the Vicar of Christ Or Pastor of Pastors The Chief Apostle Or Supreme Bishop No such thing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your fellow Elder c. Feed the Flock of God which is among you c. And from whom did these Elders receive their Power and Authority From St. Peter No such matter but from the chief Shepherd or Pastor from whom he bids them expect their Reward ver 4. 2. In like manner St. Paul gives the very same Charge to the Elders of Ephesus to take heed to themselves and to all the Flock over which the Holy
Infamy his of Falls and blotting out the cowardise of human Infirmity Where a great Person of our own hath justly remarked that word renewal ‖ Bp Andrew Tortura Tort p. 51. He doth not say that our Lord augmented his Dignity which is the new Doctrine but that he renewed it or restored him to it Which Dignity he had said in the beginning of this Discourse Peter was advanced unto when our Lord named him not praealiis above others but cum aliis * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Ib. with other Disciples to be an Apostle and therefore now did not give him more than the rest but only declared he did not take the forfeiture he had made of that Dignity but re-instated him in it together with the rest This is undoubtedly the ancient Sense of Christ's Church to which I know not what to add for the Explication of these words unless it be this that Peter had just before this Discourse of our Lord's begun to express his earnest desire to recover his Favour casting himself into the Sea when the other Disciples came by the Ship to get to our Saviour which may be look'd upon as a token of excessive Love to him and of a more than ordinary desire to enjoy his Company From hence a very learned Writer * Dr. Jackson Book iii. upon the Creed c. 7. of this Church thinks our Lord takes occasion to make this Speech to him but whether to check or to cherish that desire he dares not determine the import of which he gives in this Paraphrase Thou hast made profession of more than ordinary Love to me of readiness to lay down thy Life for my sake tho all others even these thy Fellows should forsake me and art willing I see by thy present hazard of it to make good thy former words But wouldst thou have me yet to shew thee a more excellent way I have told it thee long since Thou art converted strengthen thy Bretren SIMON the Son of JONA if thou desirest to prove thy self a CEPHAS or testify the sincerity of thy Faith and Love which by the Powers of darkness were of late so grievously shaken FEED MY LAMBS FEED MY SHEEP Yea seeing thou thrice deniedst the Shepherd of thy Soul I say unto thee the third time FEED MY SHEEP Let the Memory of thy fore-passed threefold Sin also let this my present threefold admonition excite thee unto triple diligence in thy Charge to shew such pity and compassion as I have shewed if you do but so contrive it that Peter have all under his Care and the Apostles themselves be his Curates But they who can be pleased with such Conceits as these have little Reverence for the Holy Scriptures and it is a great Affront unto our Understandings to offer us meer Imaginations for Reasons their own Dreams instead of the Divine Oracles If it may consist with Christian Sobriety to make such a nice distinction between Lambs and Sheep as to make them imply different things any more than the two several words for feed †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for lovest thou me are thought to do it is far more likely that our Lord intended to signify the Care that ought to be taken of all Christians suitable to the diversity of their States Some of which as a great Man ‖ Dr. Jacks B. 3. c. vii Sect. x. of our own Church speaks are to be handled tenderly and cherished like Lambs others to be look'd unto like elder Sheep and to be fed with stronger Meat but with less personal or assiduous Attendance This hath some sense in it which is very useful and agreeable to all Mens Thoughts but if we set our fancies on work they abound with vain Conceits of which we can find no end For if Lambs and Lambkins and Sheep only be St. Peter's Walk and he the Shepherd where are the Rams as a no less learned * Dr. Collin's EPPHATA p. 51. than ingenious Man asks they are excepted it seems and Rams as Turrianus fancies are the Apostles or their Successors that is Bishops or as Cardinal Tolet †In xv Joh Annot. 3. Bellarmin's Equal will have it they are Kings and Princes and so these two Apostles and Kings are by this Interpretation both shut out whom Bellarmine intended by his Device to have shut into Peter's Fold But the graver sort of Writers even in the Roman Church are ashamed of such Mysteries as these which they see may be invented at pleasure Maldonate ‖ in Joh. xxi 15 c. himself to say nothing of Jansenius bids those who subtilly enquire why Christ calls his Disciples Lambs rather than Sheep think again and again what they do and take heed lest they expose themselves to the laughter of the Learned for the difference is in word not in sense save only that the word Lamb hath something in it more soft and tender and might be used to commend them the more to Peter's Affection For this diminutive form of speech is a sign of very tender and ardent Love and more moving than any other as appears by the common instance of a dying Father who expresses more of his own Affection and works more upon his Friends if he says I commend to you the Care of my little Babes than if he simply says I commend the Care of my Children to you Whence it is our Saviour sometimes used this form just before he parted with his Disciples John xiii 33. Little Children yet a little while I am with you c. and his Apostles also particularly St. John who uses it seven times in his first Epistle to declare the Greatness and Tenderness of his Love and to excite the like in others That Writer * Maldonate indeed pursues no less than the other the pretensions of the Church of Rome from these words though he like not this Curiosity insisting upon Christ's committing all the Sheep i. e. all Christians to Peter Which will not do their business since they were no otherwise committed to him than they were to the rest of Christ's Apostles who had the same Power given them and were to take the same Care of all Christ's Flock that he did Not that every one of them was to feed or teach all Christians simply and universally understood for that was impossible and would have made the Labours of the rest useless if one were sufficient but all indefinitely so that among them none should be neglected but instructed by some or other of them This must necessarily be the meaning for otherwise our Lord bad Peter do that which could not be done by one Man or if it could have been done would have made all the other Apostles idle and left them nothing to do No say they we do not mean that Peter alone was to preach the Gospel to all Nations so he could not feed all but