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
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
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
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
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