Church The other Apostles did receive an equal share of honour and power who also being dispersed in the whole world did preach the Gospel and to whom departing the Bishops did succeed who are constituted through the whole world in the Sees of the Apostles By consequence the Fathers do assert this equality when they affirm as we before did shew the Apostolical Office to be absolutely Supreme when also they affirm as afterwards we shall shew all the Apostles Successours to be equal as such and particularly that the Roman Bishop upon account of his succeeding Saint Peter hath no prâ—-eminence above his Brethren for wherever a Bishop be whether at Rome or at Eugubium at Constantinople or at Rhegium at Alexandria or at Thanis he is of the same worth and of the same Priesthood the force of wealth and lowness of poverty doth not render a Bishop more high or more low for that all of them are Successours of the Apostles 19. Neither is it to prudential esteem a despicable consideration that the most ancient of the Fathers having occasion sometimes largely to discourse of Saint Peter do not mention any such Prerogatives belonging to him 20. The last Argument which I shall use against this Primacy shall be the insufficiency of those Arguments and Testimonies which they alledge to warrant and prove it If this Point be of so great consequence as they make it if as they would persuade us the subsistence order unity and peace of the Church together with the Salvation of Christians do depend on it if as they suppose many great points of truth do hang on this pin if it be as they declare a main Article of Faith and not onely a simple errour but a pernicious heresie to deny this primacy then it is requisite that a clear revelation from God should be producible in favour of it for upon that ground onely such points can firmly stand then it is most probable that God to prevent controversies occasions of doubt and excuses for errour about so grand a matter would not have failed to have declared it so plainly as might serve to satisfie any reasonable man and to convince any froward gainsayer but no such revelation doth appear for the places of Scripture which they alledge do not plainly express it nor pregnantly imply it nor can it by fair consequence be inferred from them No man unprepossessed with affection to their side would descry it in them without thwarting Saint Peter's Order and wresting the Scriptures they cannot deduce it from them This by examining their allegations will appear I. They alledge those words of our Saviour uttered by him upon occasion of Saint Peter's confessing him to be the Son of God Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church here say they Saint Peter is declared the Foundation that is the sole Supreme Governour of the Church To this I answer 1. Those words do not clearly signifie any thing to their purpose for they are metaphorical and thence ambiguous or capable of divers interpretations whence they cannot suffice to ground so main a point of Doctrine or to warrant so huge a Pretence these ought to stand upon down-right evident and indubitable Testimony It is pretty to observe how Bellarmine proposeth this Testimony Of which words saith he the sense is plain and obvious that it be understood that under two metaphors the principate of the whole Church was promised as if that sense could be so plain and obvious which is couched under two metaphors and those not very pat or clear in application to their sense 2. This is manifestly confirmed from that the Fathers and Divines both ancient and modern have much differed in exposition of these words Some saith Abulensis say that this rock is Peter others say and better that it is Christ others say and yet better that it is the confession which Peter maketh For some interpret this rock to be Christ himself of whom Saint Paul saith Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid which is Jesus Christ. St. Austin telleth us in his Retractations that he often had expounded the words to this purpose although he did not absolutely reject that interpretation which made Saint Peter the rock leaving it to the Readers choice which is the most probable Others and those most eminent Fathers do take the rock to be Saint Peter's faith or profession Vpon the Rock saith the Prince of Interpreters that is upon the faith of his profession and again Christ said that he would build his Church on Peter's confession and again he or another ancient Writer under his name upon this rock he said not upon Peter for he did not build his Church upon the man but upon his faith Our Lord saith Theodoret did permit the first of the Apostles whose confession he did fix as a prop or foundation of the Church to be shaken Whence Origen saith that every disciple of Christ is the rock in virtue of his agreement with Peter in that holy confession This sense even Popes have embraced Others say that as Saint Peter did not speak for himself but in the name of all the Apostles and of all faithfull people representing the Pastours and people of the Church so correspondently our Lord did declare that he would build his Church upon such faithfull Pastours and Confessours Others do indeed by the rock understand Saint Peter's person but do not thereby expound to be meant his being Supreme Governour of the Apostles or of the whole Church The Divines Schoolmen and Canonists of the Roman Communion do not also agree in exposition of the words and divers of the most learned among them do approve the interpretation of St. Chrysostome Now then how can so great a Point of Doctrine be firmly grounded on a place of so doubtfull interpretation how can any one be obliged to understand the words according to their interpretation which Persons of so good sense and so great Authority do understand otherwise with what modesty can they pretend that meaning to be clear which so perspicacious eyes could not discern therein why may not I excusably agree with St. Chrysostome or St. Austin in understanding the place may I not reasonably oppose their judgment to the Opinion of any Modern Doctours deeming Bellarmine as fallible in his conceptions as one of them why consequently may I not without blame refuse their Doctrine as built upon this place or disavow the goodness of this proof 3. It is very evident that the Apostles themselves did not understand those words of our Lord to signify any grant or promise to Saint Peter of Supremacy over them for would they have contended for the chief place if they had understood whose it of right was by our Lord 's own positive determination would they have disputed about a question which to their knowledge by their Master was
already stated would they have troubled our Lord to inquire of him who should be the greatest in his Kingdom when they knew that our Lord had declared his will to make Saint Peter Viceroy would the Sons of Zebedee have been so foolish and presumptuous as to beg the place which they knew by our Lord's word and promise fixed on Saint Peter would Saint Peter among the rest have fretted at that idle overture whenas he knew the place by our Lord 's immutable purpose and infallible declaration assured to him And if none of the Apostles did understand the words to imply this Roman sense who can be obliged so to understand them yea who can wisely who can safely so understand them for surely they had common sense as well as any man living now they had as much advantage as we can have to know our Lord's meaning their ignorance therefore of this sense being so apparent is not onely a just excuse for not admitting this interpretation but a strong bar against it 4. This interpretation also doth not well consist with our Lord's answers to the contests inquiries and petitions of his Disciples concerning the point of Superiority for doth he not if the Roman expositions be good seem upon those occasions not onely to dissemble his own word and promise but to disavow them or thwart them can we conceive that he would in such a case of doubt forbear to resolve them clearly to instruct them and admonish them of their duty 5. Taking the Rock as they would have it to be the Person of Saint Peter and that on him the Church should be built yet do not the words being a Rock probably denote government for what resemblance is there between being a Rock and a Governour at least what assurance can there be that this metaphor precisely doth import that sense seeing in other respects upon as fair similitudes he might be called so St. Austin saith the Apostles were Foundations because their Authority doth support our weakness St. Hierome saith that they were Foundations because the Faith of the Church was first laid in them St. Basil saith that Saint Peter's Soul was called the Rock because it was firmly rooted in the Faith and did hold stiff without giving way against the blows of temptation Chrysologus saith that Peter had his name from a Rock because he first merited to found the Church by firmness of Faith These are fair explications of the metaphor without any reference to Saint Peter's Government But however also admitting this that being such a Rock doth imply Government and Pastoral Charge yet do they notwithstanding these grants and suppositions effect nothing for they cannot prove the words spoken exclusively in regard to other Apostles or to import any thing singular to him above or beside them He might be a governing Rock so might others be the Church might be built on him so it might be on other Apostles he might be designed a Governour a great Governour a principal Governour so might they also be this might be without any violence done to those words And this indeed was for all the other Apostles in Holy Scripture are called Foundations and the Church is said to be built on them If saith Origen the Father of Interpreters you think the whole Church to be onely built on Peter alone what will you say of John the Son of thunder and of each of the Apostles c. largely to this purpose Christ as St. Hierome saith was the Rock and he bestowed on the Apostles that they should be called Rocks And You say saith he again that the Church is founded on Peter but the same in another place is done upon all the Apostles The twelve Apostles saith another ancient Authour were the immutable Pillars of orthodoxie the Rock of the Church The Church saith St. Basil is built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Peter also was one of the Mountains upon which Rock the Lord did promise to build his Church St. Cyprian in his disputes with Pope Stephen did more than once alledge this place yet could he not take them in their sense to signify exclusively for he did not acknowledge any imparity of Power among the Apostles or their Successours He indeed plainly took these words to respect all the Apostles and their Successours our Lord taking occasion to promise that to one which he intended to impart to all for themselves and their Successours Our Lord saith he ordering the honour of a Bishop and the order of his Church saith to Peter I say to thee c. hence through the turns of times and successions the ordination of Bishops and the manner of the Church doth run on that the Church should be setled upon the Bishops and every Act of the Church should be governed by the same Prelates as therefore he did conceive the Church to be built not on the Pope singularly but on all the Bishops so he thought our Lord did intend to build his Church not upon Saint Peter onely but on all his Apostles 6. It is not said that the Apostles or the Apostolical Office should be built on him for that could not be seeing the Apostles were constituted and the Apostolical Office was founded before that promise the words onely therefore can import that according to some meaning he was a Rock upon which the Church afterward to be collected should be built he was A Rock of the Church to be built as Tertullian speaketh the words therefore cannot signify any thing available to their purpose in relation to the Apostles 7. If we take Saint Peter himself for the Rock then as I take it the best meaning of the words doth import that our Lord designed Saint Peter for a prime Instrument the first mover the most diligent and active at the beginning the most constant stiff and firm in the support of his Truth and propagation of his Doctrine or conversion of men to the belief of the Gospel the which is called building of the Church according to that of St. Ambrose or some ancient Homilist under his name He is called the Rock because he first did lay in the Nations the Foundations of Faith In which regard as the other Apostles are called Foundations of the Church the Church being founded on their labours so might Saint Peter signally be so called who as Saint Basil saith allusively interpreting our Saviour's words for the excellency of his Faith did take on him the edifying of the Church Both he and they also might be so termed for that upon their testimonies concerning the Life Death and Resurrection of Christ the Faith of Christians was grounded as also it stands upon their convincing discourses their holy practice their miraculous performances in all which Saint Peter was most eminent and in the beginning of Christianity displayed them to the edification of the Church This interpretation plainly doth agree with matter
of Ecclesiastical Affairs concerning the publick state of the Church the defence of the common Faith the maintenance of order peace and unity jointly to belong unto the whole body of Pastours according to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephanus himself Therefore most dear brother the body of Priests is copious being joined together by the glue of mutual concord and the bond of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to make heresie and to tear or waste the flock of Christ the rest may come to succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may recollect the sheep into the flock And again Which thing it concerns us to look after and redress most dear brother who bearing in mind the divine clemency and holding the scales of the Church-government c. So even the Roman Clergy did acknowledge For we ought all of us to watch for the body of the whole Church whose members are digested through several Provinces Like the Trinity whose power is one and undivided there is one Priesthood among divers Bishops So in the Apostolical Constitutions the Apostles tell the Bishops that an universal Episcopacy is entrusted to them So the Council of Carthage with St. Cyprian Clear and manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ sending his Apostles and affording to them alone the power given him of the Father in whose room we succeeded governing the Church of God with the same power Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father commended his Spouse to us A very ancient Instance of which administration is the proceeding against Paulus Samosatenus when the Pastours of the Churches some from one place some from another did assemble together against him as a pest of Christ's flock all of them hastning to Antioch where they deposed exterminated and deprived him of communion warning the whole Church to reject and disavow him Seeing the Pastoral charge is common to us all who bear the Episcopal Office although thou fittest in a higher and more eminent place Therefore for this cause the Holy Church is committed to you and to us that we may labour for all and not be slack in yielding help and assistence to all Hence Saint Chrysostome said of Eustathius his Bishop For he was well instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit that a President or Bishop of a Church ought not to take care of that Church alone wherewith he is entrusted by the Holy Ghost but also of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world They consequently did repute Schism or Ecclesiastical Rebellion to consist in a departure from the consent of the body of the Priesthood as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express it in his Epistles to Pope Stephen and others They deem all Bishops to partake of the Apostolical Authority according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose The Lord himself hath translated thee from the Judges of the Earth unto the Prelacy of the Apostles They took themselves all to be Vicars of Christ and Judges in his stead according to that of St. Cyprian For Heresies are sprung up and Schisms grown from no other ground nor root but this because God's Priest was not obeyed nor was there one Priest or Bishop for a time in the Church nor a Judge thought on for a time to supply the room of Christ. Where that by Church is meant any particular Church and by Priest a Bishop of such Church any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenour of Saint Cyprian's discourse will easily discern They conceive that our Saviour did promise to Saint Peter the Keys in behalf of the Church and as representing it They suppose the combination of Bishops in peaceable consent and mutual aid to be the Rock on which the Church is built They alledge the Authority granted to Saint Peter as a ground of claim to the same in all Bishops jointly and in each Bishop singly according to his rata pars or allotted proportion Which may easily be understood by the words of our Lord when he says to blessed Peter whose place the Bishops supply Whatsoever c. I have the sword of Constantine in my hands you of Peter said our great King Edgar They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be Successours of Saint Peter that his power is derived to them all and that the whole Episcopal Order is the Chair by the Lord's voice founded on Saint Peter thus St. Cyprian in divers places before touched discourseth and thus Firmilian from the Keys granted to Saint Peter inferreth disputing against the Roman Bishop Therefore saith he the power of remitting sins is given to the Apostles and to the Churches which they being sent from Christ did constitute and to the Bishops which do succeed them by vicarious ordination 4. The Bishops of any other Churches founded by the Apostles in the Fathers style are Successours of the Apostles in the same sense and to the same intent as the Bishop of Rome is by them accounted Successour of Saint Peter the Apostolical power which in extent was universal being in some sense in reference to them not quite extinct but transmitted by succession yet the Bishops of Apostolical Churches did never claim nor allowedly exercise Apostolical Jurisdiction beyond their own precincts according to those words of St. Hierome Tell me what doth Palestine belong to the Bishop of Alexandria This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse for in like manner the Pope might be Successour to Saint Peter and Saint Peter's universal power might be successive yet the Pope have no singular claim thereto beyond the bounds of his particular Church 5. So again for instance Saint James whom the Roman Church in her Liturgies doth avow for an Apostle was Bishop of Jerusalem more unquestionably than Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome Jerusalem also was the root and the mother of all Churches as the Fathers of the Second General Synod in their Letter to Pope Damasus himself and the Occidental Bishops did call it forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that Title Yet the Bishops of Jerusalem Successours of Saint James did not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive Jurisdiction yea notwithstanding their succession they did not so much as obtain a metropolitical Authority in Palestine which did belong to Caesarea having been assigned thereto in conformity to the Civil Government and was by special provision reserved thereto in the Synod of Nice whence St. Jerome did not stick to affirm that the Bishop of Jerusalem was subject to the Bishop of Caesarea for speaking to John Bishop of Jerusalem who for compurgation of himself from errours imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he saith Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears possessed than render honour to thy Metropolitan that is to the Bishop of Caesarea By which
to him so many Dependents what might not he say or doe Pope Gregory VII being a man of untameable Spirit and taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of his Times did venture to pull a feather with the Emperour and with success having mated him did set up a peremptory claim to Sovereignty over all Persons in all Causes In his footsteps his Successours have trodden being ever ready upon occasion to plead such a title and to practise according to it No Pope would foregoe any Power which had been claimed by his Predecessours And Popes would ever be sure to have dancers after their pipe numberless abetters of their pretences No wonder then that persons deferring much regard to the Authority of Popes and accommodating their conceits to the Dictates of them or of persons depending on them should in their opinions vary about the nature and extent of Papal Authority it having never been fixed within certain bounds or having in several Ages continued the same thing § XI Wherefore intending by God's help to discuss the pretended Authority of the Pope and to shew that He by no Divine institution and by no immutable right hath any such Power as he doth claim by reason of this perplexed variety of Opinions I do find it difficult to state the Question or to know at what distinct mark I should level my Discourse § XII But seeing his pretence to any Authority in Temporals or to the Civil Sword is so palpably vain that it hardly will bear a serious dispute having nothing but impudence and sophistry to countenance it seeing so many in the Roman Communion do reject it and have substantially confuted it seeing now most are ashamed of it and very few even among those Sects which have been its chief Patrons will own it seeing Bellarmine himself doth acknowledge it a Novelty devised about 500 years ago in St. Bernard's time seeing the Popes themselves what-ever they think dare now scarce speak out and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise according to it I shall spare the trouble of meddling with it confining my Discourse to the Pope's Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs the pretence whereto I am persuaded to be no less groundless and no less noxious than the other to Christendom the which being overthrown the other as superstructed on it must also necessarily fall § XIII And here the Doctrine which I shall contest against is that in which the Cordial partizans of that See do seem to consent which is most common and current most applauded and countenanced in their Theological Schools which the Popes themselves have solemnly defined and declared for standing law or rule of jurisdiction which their most authentick Synods whereby their Religion is declared and distinguished from others have asserted or supposed which the tenour of their Discipline and Practice doth hold forth which their Clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is tied to avow which all the Clients and Confidents of Rome do zealously stand for more than for any other point of Doctrine and which no man can disclaim without being deemed an enemy or a prevaricator toward the Apostolick See § XIV Which Doctrine is this That in the words of the Florentine Synod's Definition the Apostolical Chair and the Roman High-Priest doth hold a Primacy over the Vniversal Church and that the Roman High-Priest is the Successour of Saint Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the true Lieutenant of Christ and the Head of the Church and that he is the Father and Doctour of all Christians and that unto him in Saint Peter full Power is committed to feed and direct and govern the Catholick Church under Christ according as is contained in the Acts of General Councils and in the Holy Canons That in the words of Pope Leo X. approved by the Laterane Synod Christ before his departure from the world did in solidity of the Rock institute Peter and his Successours to be his Lieutenants to whom it is so necessary to obey that who doth not obey must die the death That to the Pope as Sovereign Monarch by Divine Sanction of the whole Church do appertain Royal Prerogatives Regalia Petri the Royalties of Peter they are called in the Oath prescribed to Bishops Such as these which follow To be Superiour to the whole Church and to its Representative a General Synod of Bishops To convocate General Synods at his pleasure all Bishops being obliged to attend upon summons from him To preside in Synods so as to suggest matter promote obstruct over-rule the debates in them To confirm or invalidate their Determinations giving life to them by his assent or subtracting it by his dissent To define Points of Doctrine or to decide Controversies authoritatively so that none may presume to contest or dissent from his Dictates To enact establish abrogate suspend dispense with Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons To relax or evacuate Ecclesiastical Censures by indulgence pardon c. To void Promises Vows Oaths Obligations to Laws by his Dispensation To be the Fountain of all Pastoral Jurisdiction and Dignity To constitute confirm judge censure suspend depose remove restore reconcile Bishops To confer Ecclesiastical Dignities and Benefices by paramount Authority in way of Provision Reservation c. To exempt Colleges Monasteries c. from Jurisdiction of their Bishops and ordinary Superiours To judge all persons in all Spiritual Causes by calling them to his cognizance or delegating Judges for them with a final and peremptory Sentence To receive Appeals from all Ecclesiastical Judicatories and to reverse their Judgments if he findeth cause To be himself unaccountable for any of his doings exempt from judgment and liable to no reproof To erect transfer abolish Episcopal Sees To exact Oaths of Fealty and Obedience from the Clergy To found Religious Orders or to raise a Spiritual Militia for propagation and defence of the Church To summon and commissionate Souldiers by Croisade c. to fight against Infidels or persecute Infidels Some of these are expressed others in general terms couched in those words of P. Eugenius telling the Greeks what they must consent unto The Pope said he will have the Prerogatives of his Church and he will have Appeals to him and to feed all the Church of Christ as Shepherd of the Sheep Beside these things that he may have authority and power to convoke General Synods when need shall be and that all the Patriarchs do yield to his will That the Pope doth claim assume and exercise a Sovereignty over the Church endowed with such Prerogatives is sufficiently visible in experience of fact is apparent by the authorized dictates in their Canon-law and shall be distinctly proved by competent allegations when we shall examine the branches of this pretended Authority In the mean time it sufficeth to observe that in effect all Clergy-men do avow so much who bonâ fide and without prevarication do submit to take the Oaths and Engagements prescribed to them
absolute Monarch upon earth for the Power of St. Peter in their opinion was the same which now the Roman Bishop doth challenge to himself over the Pastours and People of God's Church by virtue of succession to him Saint Peter's Power being the base of the Papal and therefore not narrower than its superstructure but what domination comparable to that hath ever been used in the world What Emperour did ever pretend to a rule so wide in extent in regard either to persons or matters or so absolute in effect Who ever beside his Holiness did usurp a command not onely over the external actions but the most inward cogitations of all mankind subjecting the very Minds and Consciences of Men to his dictates his laws his censures Who ever thundred Curses and Damnations on all those who should presume to dissent from his Opinion or to contest his pleasure Who ever claimed more absolute Power in making abolishing suspending Laws or imposing upon men what he pleased under obligation of Conscience and upon extremest penalties What Prince ever used a style more imperious than is that which is usual in the Papal Bulls Let it be lawfull for no man whatever to infringe this expression of our will and command or to goe against it with bold rashness What Domitian more commonly did admit the appellation of Lord than doth the Pope Our most Holy Lord is the ordinary style attributed to him by the Fathers of Trent as if they were his slaves and intended to enslave all Christendom to him Who ever did exempt his Clients and Dependents in all Nations from subjection to Civil Laws from undergoing common burthens and taxes from being judged or punished for their misdemeanours and crimes Who ever claimed a power to dispose of all things one way or other either directly or indirectly to dispose even of Kingdoms to judge Sovereign Princes and to condemn them to depose them from their authority absolving their Subjects from all allegiance to them and exposing their Kingdoms to rapine To whom but a Pope were ever ascribed prerogatives like those of judging all men and himself being liable to no judgment no account no reproof or blame so that as a Papal Canon assureth us let a Pope be so bad as by his negligence and male-administration to carry with him innumerable people to Hell yet no mortal man whatever must presume here to reprove his faults because he being to judge all men is himself to be judged of no man except he be catcht swerving from the Faith which is a case they will hardly suffer a man to suppose possible To whom but to a Pope was such Power attributed by his followers and admitted by himself that he could hear those words applying to him All Power is given to thee in Heaven and in Earth Such Power the Popes are wont to challenge and when occasion serveth do not fail to execute as Successours of St. Peter to whom therefore consequently they ascribe it and sometimes in express terms as in that brave apostrophe of P. Gregory VII the Spirit of which Pope hath possessed his Successours generally Goe to therefore said he directing his Speech to Saint Peter and Saint Paul most Holy Princes of the Apostles and what I have said confirm by your Authority that now at length all men may understand whether ye can bind and loose that also ye can take away and give on Earth Empires Kingdoms and whatever mortal men can have Now if the assuming and exercising such Powers be not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that exalting ones self that being called Rabbi Father Master which our Lord prohibiteth what is so what then can those words signify what could our Lord mean The Authority therefore which they assign to Saint Peter and assume to themselves from him is voided by those Declarations and Precepts of our Lord the which it can hardly be well conceived that our Lord would have proposed if he had designed to constitute Saint Peter in such a Supremacy over his Disciples and Church 7. Surveying particulars we shall not find any peculiar administration committed to Saint Peter nor any privilege conferred on him which was not also granted to the other Apostles Was Saint Peter an Ambassadour a Steward a Minister a Vicar if you please or Surrogate of Christ so were they by no less immediate and express warrant than he for As the Father sent me so also I send you said our Lord presently before his departure by those words as St. Cyprian remarketh granting an equal Power to all the Apostles and We saith Saint Paul are Ambassadours for Christ we pray you in Christ's stead be reconciled to God and So let a man esteem us as the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the Mysteries of God Was Saint Peter a Rock on which the Church was to be founded Be it so but no less were they all for the Wall of Jerusalem which came down from Heaven had twelve foundations on which were inscribed the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb and We saith Saint Paul are all built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ himself being the chief Corner stone whence Equally saith St. Hierome the strength of the Church is setled upon them Was Saint Peter an Architect of the Spiritual house as himself calleth the Church so were also they for I saith Saint Paul as a wise Master-builder have laid the Foundation Were the Keys of the Church or of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to him So also were they unto them They had a Power to open and shut it by effectual instruction and persuasion by dispensation of the Sacraments by exercise of Discipline by exclusion of scandalous and heretical Persons Whatever faculty the Keys did import the Apostles did use it in the foundation guidance and government of the Church and did as the Fathers teach impart it to those whom they did in their stead constitute to feed and govern the Church Had Saint Peter a Power given him of binding and loosing effectually So had they immediately granted by our Saviour in as full manner and couched in the same terms If thou shalt bind on Earth it shall be bound in Heaven said our Lord to him and Whatsoever things ye shall bind on Earth they shall be bound in Heaven said the same Divine mouth to them Had he a privilege to remit and retain sins it was then by virtue of that common grant or promise Whos 's soever sins ye remit they shall be remitted and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained Had he power and obligation to feed the Sheep of Christ all or some so had they indefinitely and immediately so had others by Authority derived from them who were nominated Pastours who had this charge laid on them Take heed unto your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost
superiour to Saint Paul but his Collegue and equal in Authority although precedeing him in standing repute and other advantages then Saint Paul's free proceeding toward him was not onely warrantable but wholesome and deserving for edification to be recited and recorded as implying an example how Collegues upon occasion should with freedom and sincerity admonish their Brethren of their errours and faults Saint Peter's carriage in patiently bearing that correption also affording another good pattern of equanimity in such cases to which purpose S. Cypr. alledged and approved by S. Austin doth apply this passage for saith he neither Peter whom the Lord first chose and upon whom he built his Church when Paul afterward contested with him about circumcision did insolently challenge or arrogantly assume any thing to himself so as to say that he did hold the primacy and that rather those who were newer and later Apostles ought to obey him neither despised he Saint Paul because he was before a persecutour of the Church but he admitted the counsel of truth and easily consented to the lawfull course which Saint Paul did maintain yielding indeed to us a document both of concord and patience that we should not pertinaciously love our own things but should rather take those things for ours which sometimes are profitably and wholesomely suggested by our Brethren and Collegues if they are true and lawfull this St. Cyprian speaketh upon supposition that Saint Peter and Saint Paul were equals or as he calleth them Collegues and Brethren in rank co-ordinate otherwise St. Cyprian would not have approved the action for he often severely doth inveigh against Inferiours taking upon them to censure their Superiours What tumour saith he of pride what arrogance of mind what inflation of heart is it to call our Superiours and Bishops to our cognisance St. Cyprian therefore could not conceive Saint Peter to be Saint Paul's Governour or Superiour in Power he doth indeed plainly enough in the forecited words signifie that in his judgment Saint Peter had done insolently and arrogantly if he had assumed any obedience from Saint Paul St. Austin also doth in several places of his Writings make the like application of this passage The ancient Writer contemporary to St. Ambrose and passing under his name doth argue in this manner Who dared resist Peter the first Apostle to whom the Lord did give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven but another such an one who in assurance of his election knowing himself to be not unequal to him might constantly disprove what he had unadvisedly done It is indeed well known that Origen and after him St. Chrysostome and St. Hierome and divers of the Ancients beside did conceive that Saint Paul did not seriously oppose or tax Saint Peter but did onely doe it seemingly upon confederacy with him for promoting a good design This interpretation however strained and earnestly impugned by Saint Austin I will not discuss but onely shall observe that it being admitted doth rather strengthen than weaken our discourse for if Saint Peter were Saint Paul's Governour it maketh Saint Peter to have consented to an act in all appearance indecent irregular and scandalous and how can we imagine that Saint Peter would have complotted to the imparing his own just Authority in the eye of a great Church doth not such a condescension imply in him a disavowing of Superiority over Saint Paul or a conspiracy with him to overthrow good Order To which purpose we may observe that St. Chrysostome in a large and very elaborate discourse wherein he professeth to endeavour an aggravation of the irregularity of Saint Paul's dâ—meanour if it were serious doth not lay the stress of that aggravation upon Saint Paul's opposing his lawfull Governour but his onely so treating a Co-apostle of such eminency neither when to that end he designeth to reckon all the advantages of Saint Peter beyond Saint Paul or any other Apostle doth he mention this which was chiefly material to his purpose that he was Saint Paul's Governour which observations if we do carefully weigh we can hardly imagine that St. Chrysostome had any notion of Saint Peter's Supremacy in relation to the Apostles In fine the drift of Saint Paul in reporting those passages concerning himself was not to disparage the other Apostles nor merely to commend himself but to fence the truth of his Doctrine and maintain the liberty of his Disciples against any prejudice that might arise from any authority that might be pretended in any considerable respects superiour to his and alledged against them to which purpose he declareth by arguments and matters of fact that his Authority was perfectly Apostolical and equal to the greatest even to that of Saint Peter the prime Apostle of Saint John the beloved Disciple of Saint James the Bishop of Jerusalem the judgment or practice of whom was no law to him nor should be to them farther than it did consist with that Doctrine which he by an independent Authority and by special revelation from Christ did preach unto them He might as St. Chrysostome noteth have pretended to some advantage over them in regard that he had laboured more abundantly than them all but he forbeareth to do so being contented to obtain equal advantages Well therefore considering the disadvantage which this passage bringeth to the Roman pretence might this History be called by Baronius a History hard to be understood a stone of offence a rock of scandal a rugged place which Saint Austin himself under favour could not pass over without stumbling It may also be considered that Saint Paul particularly doth assert to himself an independent authority over the Gentiles co-ordinate to that which Saint Peter had over the Jews the which might engage him so earnestly to contest with Saint Peter as by his practice seducing those who belonged to his charge the which also probably moved him thus to assert his authority to the Galatians as being Gentiles under his care and thence obliged especially to regard his authority They saith Saint Paul knowing that I was entrusted with the Gospel of uncircumcision as Peter was entrusted with that of circumcision gave unto me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship the which words do clearly enough signifie that he took himself and that the other Apostles took him to have under Christ an absolute charge subordinate to no man over the Gentiles whence he claimeth to himself as his burthen the care of all the Churches he therefore might well contest for their liberty he might well insist upon his authority among them Thus did St. Chrysostome understand the case for Christ saith he committed the Jews to Peter but set Paul over the Gentiles and He saith that great Father farther doth shew himself to be equal to them in dignity and compareth himself not onely to the others but even to the ring-leader shewing that each did enjoy equal dignity
special Revelations from God or upon personal graces his great Faith his special love to our Lord his singular zeal for Christ's Service or upon personal gifts and endowments his courage resolution activity forwardness in apprehension and in speech the which advantages are not transient and consequently a preeminency built on them is not in its nature such 2. All the pretence of Primacy granted to Saint Peter is grounded upon words directed to Saint Peter's Person characterized by most personal adjuncts as name parentage and which exactly were accomplished in Saint Peter's personal actings which therefore it is unreasonable to extend farther Our Lord promised to Simon Son of Jona to build his Church on him accordingly in eminent manner the Church was founded upon his Ministery or by his first preaching testimony performances Our Lord promised to give him the Keys of the Heavenly Kingdom this Power Saint Peter signally did execute in converting Christians and receiving them by Baptism into the Church by conferring the Holy Ghost and the like administrations Our Lord charged Simon Son of Jonas to feed his Sheep this he performed by preaching writing guiding and governing Christians as he found opportunity wherefore if any thing was couched under those promises or orders singularly pertinent to Saint Peter for the same reason that they were singular they were personal for These things being in a conspicuous manner accomplished in St. Peter's Person the sense of those words is exhausted there may not with any probability there cannot with any assurance be any more grounded on them whatever more is inferred must be by precarious assumption and justly we may cast at those who shall infer it that exposâ—ulation of Tertullian What art thou who dost overturn and change the manifest intention of our Lord personally conferring this on Peter 3. Particularly the grand promise to Saint Peter of founding the Church on him cannot reach beyond his person because there can be no other foundations of a Society than such as are first laid the successours of those who first did erect a Society and establish it are themselves but superstructures 4. The Apostolical Office as such was personal and temporary and therefore according to its nature and design not successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence from them It was as such in all respects extraordinary conferred in a special manner designed for special purposes discharged by special aids endowed with special privileges as was needfull for the propagation of Christianity and founding of Churches To that Office it was requisite that the Person should have an immediate designation and commission from God such as Saint Paul so often doth insist upon for asserting his title to the Office Paul an Apostle not from men or by man not by men saith St. Chrysostome this is a property of the Apostles It was requisite that an Apostle should be able to attest concerning our Lord's Resurrection or Ascension either immediately as the twelve or by evident consequence as Saint Paul thus Saint Peter implyed at the choice of Matthias wherefore of those men which have companyed with us must one be ordained to be a witness with us of the Resurrection and Am I not saith Saint Paul an Apostle have I not seen the Lord according to that of Ananias The God of our Fathers hath chosen thee that thou shouldest know his will and see that just one and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth for thou shalt bear witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard It was needfull also that an Apostle should be endowed with miraculous gifts and graces enabling him both to assure his Authority and to execute his Office wherefore Saint Paul calleth these the marks of an Apostle the which were wrought by him among the Corinthians in all patience or perseveringly in signs and wonders and mighty deeds It was also in St. Chrysostome's opinion proper to an Apostle that he should be able according to his discretion in a certain and conspicuous manner to impart Spiritual Gifts as Saint Peter and Saint John did at Samaria which to doe according to that Father was the peculiar gift and privilege of the Apostles It was also a privilege of an Apostle by virtue of his commission from Christ to instruct all Nations in the Doctrine and Law of Christ He had right and warrant to exercise his function every where His charge was universal and indefinite the whole world was his Province he was not affixed to one place nor could be excluded from any he was as St. Cyril calleth him an Oecumenical Judge and an Instructour of all the Subcelestial World Apostles also did govern in an absolute manner according to discretion as being guided by infallible assistence to the which they might upon occasion appeal and affirm It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us Whence their Writings have passed for inspired and therefore Canonical or certain Rules of Faith and Practice It did belong to them to found Churches to constitute Pastours to settle orders to correct offences to perform all such Acts of Sovereign Spiritual Power in virtue of the same Divine assistence according to the Authority which the Lord had given them for edification as we see practised by Saint Paul In fine the Apostleship was as St. Chrysostome telleth us a business fraught with ten thousand good things both greater than all privileges of grace and comprehensive of them Now such an Office consisting of so many extraordinary privileges and miraculous powers which were requisite for the foundation of the Church and the diffusion of Christianity against the manifold difficulties and disadvantages which it then needs must encounter was not designed to continue by derivation for it containeth in it divers things which apparently were not communicated and which no man without gross imposture and hypocrisie could challenge to himself Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicate it they did indeed appoint standing Pastours and Teachers in each Church they did assume Fellow-labourers or Assistents in the work of Preaching and Governance but they did not constitute Apostles equal to themselves in Authority Privileges or Gifts For who knoweth not saith St. Austin that principate of Apostleship to be preferred before any Episcopacy and the Bishops saith Bellarmine have no part of the true Apostolical Authority Wherefore Saint Peter who had no other Office mentioned in Scripture or known to Antiquity beside that of an Apostle could not have properly and adequately any Successour to his Office but it naturally did expire with his Person as did that of the other Apostles 5. Accordingly whereas the other Apostles as such had no Successours the Apostolical Office not being propagated the Primacy of Saint Peter whatever it were whether of Order or Jurisdiction in regard to his Brethren did cease with him for when there were no Apostles extant there could be no Head or Prince of
by Pope Cornelius by Pope Innocent the First and others that two Bishops should preside together in one City This was condemned with good reason for this on the Churches part would be a kind of spiritual Polygamy this would render a Church a monster with two heads this would destroy the end of Episcopacy which is unity and prevention of Schisms But if Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome this irregularity was committed for the same Authority upon which Saint Peter's Episcopacy of Rome is built doth also reckon Saint Paul Bishop of the same the same Writers do make both Founders and Planters of the Roman Church and the same call both Bishops of it wherefore if Episcopacy be taken in a strict and proper sense agreeable to this Controversie that rule must needs be infringed thereby Irenaeus saith that the Roman Church was founded and constituted by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul Dionysius of Corinth calleth it the plantation of Peter and Paul Epiphanius saith that Peter and Paul were first at Rome both Apostles and Bishops so Eusebius implyeth saying that P. Alexander derived a succession in the fifth place from Peter and Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Donys Corinth apud Euseb. 2.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus. 4.1 Wherefore both of them were Roman Bishops or neither of them In reason and rule neither of them may be called so in a strict and proper sense but in a larger and improper sense both might be so styled Indeed that Saint Paul was in some acception Bishop of Rome that is had a Supreme superintendence or inspection of it is reasonable to affirm because he did for a good time reside there and during that residence could not but have the chief place could be subject to no other He saith Saint Luke did abide two whole years in his own hired house and received all that entred in unto him preaching the Kingdom of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence no man forbidding him It may be enquired if Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome how he did become such did our Lord appoint him such did the Apostles all or any constitute him did the people elect him did he put himself into it of none of these things there is any appearance nor any probability Non constat SUPPOSITION IV. They affirm That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease AGainst which Assertions we may consider 1. Ecclesiastical Writers do affirm that Saint Peter either alone or together with Saint Paul did constitute other Bishops wherefore Saint Peter was never Bishop or did not continue Bishop there Irenaeus saith that the Apostles founding and rearing that Church delivered the Episcopal Office into the hands of Linus if so how did they retain it in their own hands or persons could they give and have Tertullian saith that Saint Peter did ordain Clement In the Apostolical Constitutions a very ancient Book and setting forth the most ancient Traditions of the Church the Apostles ordering Prayers to be made for all Bishops and naming the principal do reckon not St. Peter but Clement Let us pray for our Bishop James for our Bishop Clemens for our Bishop Evodius c. These reports are consistent and reconciled by that which the Apostolical Constitutions affirm that Linus was first ordained Bishop of the Roman Church by Paul but Clemens after the death of Linus by Peter in the second place Others between Linus and Clemens do interpose Cletus or Anacletus some taking these for one others for two persons which doth not alter the case Now hence we may infer both that Saint Peter never was Bishop and upon supposition that he was that he did not continue so For 2. If he had ever been Bishop he could not well lay down his Office or subrogate another either to preside with him or to succeed him according to the ancient Rules of Discipline and that which passed for right in the Primitive Church This practice Pope Innocent I. condemned as irregular and never known before his time We saith he in his Epistle to the Clergy and People of Constantinople never have known these things to have been adventured by our Fathers but rather to have been hindred for that none hath power given him to ordain another into the place of one living He did not it seems consider that Saint Peter had used such a power Accordingly the Synod of Antioch to secure the tradition and practice of the Church which began by some to be infringed did make this Sanction that it should not be lawfull for any Bishop to constitute another in his room to succeed him although it were at the point of death 3. But supposing Saint Peter were Bishop once yet by constituting Linus or Clemens in his place he ceased to be so and devested himself of that place for it had been a great irregularity for him to continue Bishop together with another That being in St. Cyprian's judgment the Ordination of Linus had been void and null for seeing saith that H. Martyr there cannot after the first be any second whoever is after one who ought to be sole Bishop he is not now second but none Upon this ground when the Emperour Constantius would have procured Felix to sit Bishop of Rome together with Pope Liberius at his return from Banishment after his complyance with the Arians the people of Rome would not admit it exclaiming One God one Christ one Bishop and whereas Felix soon after that dyed the Historian remarketh it as a special providence of God that Peter's Throne might not suffer infamy being governed under two Prelates he never considered that Saint Peter and Saint Paul Saint Peter and Linus had thus governed that same Church Upon this account St. Austin being assumed by Valerius with him to be Bishop of Hippo did afterward discern and acknowledge his errour In fine to obviate this practice so many Canons of Councils both general and particular were made which we before did mention 4. In sum when Saint Peter did ordain others as story doth accord in affirming either he did retain the Episcopacy and then beside need reason and rule there were concurrently divers Bishops of Rome at one time or he did quite relinquish and finally divorce himself from the Office so that he did not dye Bishop of Rome the which overturneth the main ground of the Romish pretence Or will they say that Saint Peter having laid aside the Office for a time did afterward before his death resume it then what became of Linus of Cletus of Clemens were they dispossessed of their place or deposed from their function would Saint Peter succeed them in it this in Bellarmine's own judgment had been plainly intolerable 5. To avoid all which difficulties in the case and
Pont. 1.10 Tostat. in Matth. 16. qu. 67. 1 Cor. 3.11 Scio me postea saepissimè exposuisse ut super hanc Petram intelligeretur quem confessus est Petrus harum autem duarum sententiarum quae sit probabilior eligat Lector Aug. Retr 1.21 Vide Aug. in Joh. tr 124. de verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Super hanc inquit Petram quam confessus es aedificabe Ecclesiam meam Aug. in Joh. tr 124. de Verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Tom. 10. Super hanc Petram id est super me aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Ans. in Matt. 16.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Matt. 16.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Joh. 1.50 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 163. Super hanc igitur confessionis Petram Ecclesiae aedificatio est Hil. de Trin. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Ep. 77. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orig. in Matt. 16. p. 275. In vera fide persistite vitam vestram in Petra Ecclesiae hoc est in confessione B. Petri Apostolorum Principis solidate Greg. M. Ep. 3.33 Persist in the true Faith and establish and fix your life upon the rock of the Church that is upon the confession of Blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles Super ista confessione aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Felix III. Ep. 5. Vide Nic. I. Ep. 2 6. Joh. VIII Ep. 76. Vnus pro omnibus loquens Ecclesiae voce respondens Cypr. Ep. 55. One speaking for all and answering in the name of the Church Cui Ecclesiae figuram gerenti Dominus ait Super hanc Aug. Ep. 165. To whom representing the whole Church our Lord saith Vpon this rock c. Petrus ex persona omnium Apostolorum profitetur Hier. in loc Peter professes in the person of all the Apostles Vide Rigalt in Cypr. Ep. 27.40.70.71.73.69 Luke 22.14 Mark 9.34 Matth. 18.1 Matth. 20.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when the ten heard it they were moved with indignation Quare sunt fundamenta Apostoli Prophetae quia eorum auctoritas portat infirmitatem nostram Aug. in Ps. 86. In illis erant fundamenta ibi primùm posita est fides Ecclesiae Hier. in Ps. 86. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas. in If. 2. p. 86â— Petrus à Petra nomen adeptus est quia primus meruit Eâ—clesiam fidei firmitate fundare Chrysol Serm. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orig. in Matth. 16. p. 275. Eph. 2.20 Petra Christus est qui donavit Apostolis ut ipsi quoque Petrae vocentur Hier. in Amos. 9.12 Dicis super Petrum sundatur Ecclesia licèt id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat Hier. in Jovin 1.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil. in Isa. 2. p. 869. Cypr. Ep. 71 73. Dominus noster Episcopi honorem Ecclesiae suae rationem disponens dicit Petro Ego tibi dico Inde per temporum successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio Ecclesiae ratio decurrit ut Ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem praepositos gubernetur Cypr. Ep. 27. de Vnit. Eccl. Latuit aliquid Petrum aedificandae Ecclesiae Petram dictum Tertull. de Praescr cap. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Peter first of all the Apostles preached Christ. Petra dicitâ—r eâ— quòd primus in natiorâ—bus fidei fundamenta posuerit Ambr. de Sanctis Serm. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas. contra Eunom lib. 2. Petra aedificandae Ecclesiae Tertull. de praes c. 22. Sic enim exitus docet in ipso Ecclesia extructa est id est per ipsum c. Tert. de pudic cap. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 59. Matth. 10.2 John 6.69 Loci non immeâ—or sui primatum egit primatum Confessionis non honoris Fidei non ordinis Ambr. de Incarn cap. 4. Per claves datos Petro intelligimus summam potestatem in omnem Ecclesiam Bell. de Pont. 1.3 Dixit Petro dabo tibi claves at non dixit dabo tibi soli Rigalt in Epist. Firmil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Matt. 16. p. 275. Quod Petro dicitur Apostolis dicitur Ambr. in Psal. 38. What is said to Peter is said to the Apostles Licè◠id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat cuncti claves regni coelorum accipiant Hier. in Jov. 1.14 Though the same thing in another place is done upon all the Apostles and all receive the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Claves regni coelorum communicandas caeteris solus accepit Opt. lib. 7. Communicandas caeteris dixit quâ—s ipse Christus communicaturus erat caeteris Rigalt in Cypr. de Vn. Eccl. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. in loc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in praef Evang. Joh. Claves intelligit verbum Dei Evangelium Christi Rigalt in Cyp. Ep. 73. Episcopi quos constat esse vicarioâ— Christi clavigeros regni coelorum Conc. Compend apud Bin. Tom. 6. p. 361. Transivit quidem in Apostolos alios vis istius potestatis sed non frustra â—ni commendatur quod omnibus intimetur Petro ergò singulariter hoc creditur quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma proponitur Leo I. in Nat. Petri Pauli Serm. 2. The efficacy of this Power passed indeed upon all the Apostles yet was it not in vain that what was intimated to all was commended to one Therefore this is committed singly to Peter because Peter's pattern and example is propounded to all the Governours of the Church In B. Petro claves regni coelorum cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes Ambr. de dign Sac. 1. Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit id est potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata Aug. tract 124. in Joh. vide tract 50. The Church which is founded upon Christ received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven i. e. the power of binding and loosing Sins In typo unitatis Petro Dominus dedit potestatem Aug. de Bap. 3.17 Our Lord gave the power to Peter as a type of Unity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Cod. 280. Such Authority was given to the rest of the Apostles in the person of him who was the chief Non sine causa inter omnes Apostolos Ecclesiae Catholicae personas sustinet Petrus huic enim Ecclesiae claves regni coelorum datae sunt cùm Petro datae sunt Aug. de Ag. Chr. cap. 30. in Ps. 108. Not without cause does Peter among the rest of the Apostles sustain the Person of the Catholick Church for to this Church are the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven given when they are given unto Peter * August supr Matt. 18.18 John 20.23 Sic enim exitus docet in ipso Ecclesia extructâ— est id est per ipsum ipse clavem imbuit vide quam Viri Israelitae auribus mandate quae dico Jesum Nazerenum virum à Deo vobis destinatum
14. From the Premisses to conclude the Pope's Title to Saint Peter's Authority it is requisite to shew the Power demised by him to be according to God's institution and intent immutable and indefectible for Power built upon the like but far more certain principles hath in course of times and by worldly changes been quite lost or conveyed into other Chanels than those wherein it was first put and that irrecoverably so that it cannot any-wise be retrieved or reduced into the first order For instance Adam was by God constituted Universal Sovereign of mankind and into that Power his eldest Son of right did succeed and so it of right should have been continually propagated Yet soon did that Power fail or was diverted into other courses the world being cantonized into several Dominions so that the Heir at Law among all the descendents of Adam cannot so easily be found as a Needle in a bottle of Hay he probably is a Subject and perhaps is a Peasant So might Saint Peter be Monarch of the Church and the Pope might succeed him yet by revolutions of things by several defaults and incapacities in himself by divers obstructions incident by forfeiture upon encroaching on other mens rights according to that Maxime of a great Pope He loseth his own who coveteth more than his due his Power might be clipped might be transplanted might utterly decay and fail to such fatalities other Powers are subject nor can that of the Pope be exempt from them as otherwhere we shall more largely declare 15. Indeed that God did intend his Church should perpetually subsist united in any one political frame of Government is a principle which they do assume and build upon but can no-wise prove Nor indeed is it true For If the Unity of the Church designed and instituted by God were onely an Unity of Faith of Charity of Peace of fraternal Communion and Correspondence between particular Societies and Pastours then in vain it is to seek for the Subject and Seat of Universal Jurisdiction now that God did not intend any other Unity than such as those specified we have good reason to judge and shall we hope otherwhere sufficiently prove 16. We may consider that really the Sovereign Power such as it is pretended hath often failed there having been for long spaces of time no Roman Bishops at all upon several accounts which is a sign that the Church may subsist without it As 1. When Rome was desolated by the Goths Vandals and Lombards 2. In times when the Romans would not suffer Popes to live with them 3. In case of discontinuance from Rome when the Popes so calling themselves did for above seventy years abide in France when they indeed not being chosen by the Roman People nor exercising Pastoral care over them were onely titular not real Bishops of Rome They were Popes of Avignion not of Rome and Successours of God knows who not of Saint Peter no more than one continually living in England can be Bishop of Jerusalem 4. In times of many long Schisms 22 Schisms when either there was no true Pope or which in effect was the same no one certain one 5. When Popes were intruded by violence whom Baronius himself positively affirmeth to have been no Popes how then could a Succession of true Popes be continued from them by the Clergy which they in virtue of their Papal Authority did pretend to create 6. When Elections had a flaw in them were uncanonical and so null 7. When Popes were Simoniacally chosen who by their own Rules and Laws are no true Popes being Hereticks Heresiarchs The which was done for long courses of time very commonly and in a manner constantly 8. When Popes have been deposed as some by the Emperours others by General Councils in which case according to Papal Principles the Successours were illegal for the Pope being Sovereign he could not be judged or deposed and his Successour is an Usurper 9. When Popes were Heretical that is say they no Popes 10. When Atheists Sorcerers Elections in some of these cases being null and therefore the Acts consequent to them invalid there is probably a defailance of right continued to posterity And probably therefore there is now no true Pope For upon violent intrusion or Simoniacal choice or any usurpation the Cardinals Bishops c. which the Pope createth are not truly such and consequently their Votes not good in the choice of another Pope and so successively These Considerations may suffice to declare the inconsequence of their Discourses even admitting their Assertions which yet are so false or so apparently uncertain I shall in the next place level some Arguments directly against their main Conclusion it self I. My First Argument against this pretence shall be that it is destitute of any good warrant either from Divine or Humane testimony and so is groundless As will appear by the following Considerations I. If God had designed the Bishop of Rome to be for the perpetual course of times Sovereign Monarch of his Church it may reasonably be supposed that he would expresly have declared his mind in the case it being a point of greatest importance of all that concern the administration of his Kingdom in the World Princes do not use to send their Vice Roys unfurnished with Patents clearly signifying their Commission that no man out of ignorance or doubt concerning that point excusably may refuse compliance And in all equity promulgation is requisite to the establishment of any Law or exacting obedience But in all the Pandects of Divine Revelation the Bishop of Rome is not so much as once mentioned either by name or by character or by probable intimation they cannot hook him in otherwise than by streining hard and framing a long Chain of Consequences each of which is too subtile for to constrain any man's persuasion They have indeed found the Pope in the first Chapter of Genesis for if we believe Pope Innocent III. he is one of the two great Luminaries there and he is as plainly there as any where else in the Bible Wherefore if upon this account we should reject this pretence we might doe it justly and for so doing we have the allowance of the ancient Fathers for they did not hold any man obliged to admit any point of Doctrine or rule of Manners which is not in express words or in terms equivalent contained in Holy Scripture or which at least might not thence be deduced by clear and certain inference this their manner of disputing with Hereticks and heterodox People doth shew this appeareth by their way of defining and setling Doctrines of Faith this they often do avow in plain words applicable to our case for If saith St. Austin about Christ or about his Church or about any other thing which concerneth our Faith and Life I will not say We who are no-wise comparable to him who said Although we but even as he going on did
had been then as commonly known and avowed 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on methods of confuting Hereticks it is strange they should be so blind or dull as not to hit on this most proper and obvious way of referring debates to the decision of him to whose Office of Universal Pastour and Judge it did belong Particularly one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis that he on set purpose with great care discoursing about the means of setling points of Faith and of overthrowing Heresies should not light upon this notable way by having recourse to the Pope's Magisterial sentence yea that indeed he should exclude it for he after most intent study and diligent inquiry consulting the best and wisest men could find but two ways of doing it I saith he did always and from almost every one receive this answer that if either I or any other would find out the frauds and avoid the snares of up-start Hereticks and continue sound and upright in the true Faith he should guard and strengthen his Faith God helping him by these two means viz. First by the Authority of the Divine Law and then by the Tradition of the Catholick Church And again We before have said that this hath always been and is at present the custome of Catholicks that they prove their Faith by these two ways First by Authority of the Divine Canon then by the Tradition of the Vniversal Church Is it not strange that he especially being a Western man living in those parts where the Pope had got much sway and who doth express great reverence to the Apostolick See should omit that way of determining points which of all according to the modern conceits about the Pope is most ready and most sure 24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the Catholicks in his time to use such compendious methods of confuting Hereticks We saith he when we would dispatch against Hereticks for the Faith of the Gospel do commonly use these short ways which do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the lateness of impostours and the Authority of the Churches patronizing Apostolical tradition but why did he skip over a more compendious way than any of those namely standing to the judgment of the Roman Bishop 25. It is true that both he and St. Irenaeus before him disputing against the Hereticks of their times who had introduced pernicious novelties of their own devising when they alledge the general consent of Churches planted by the Apostles and propagated by continual successions of Bishops from those whom the Apostles did ordain in doctrines and practices opposite to those devices as a good argument and so indeed it then was next to a demonstration against them do produce the Roman Church as a principal one among them upon several obvious accounts And this indeed argueth the Roman Church to have been then one competent witness or credible retainer of tradition as also were the other Apostolical Churches to whose Testimony they likewise appeal but what is this to the Roman Bishop's judicial Power in such cases why do they not urge that in plain terms they would certainly have done so if they had known it and thought it of any validity Do but mark their words involving the force of their argumentation When saith Irenaeus we do again after allegation of Scripture appeal to that tradition which is from the Apostles which by successions of Presbyters is preserved in the Churches and That saith Tertullian will appear to have been delivered by the Apostles which hath been kept as holy in the Apostolical Churches let us see what milk the Corinthians did draw from Paul what the Philippians the Thessalonians the Ephesians do reade what also the Romans our nearer neighbours do say to whom both Peter and Paul did leave the Gospel sealed with their Bloud we have also the Churches nursed by John c. Again It is therefore manifest saith he in his Prescriptions against Hereticks that every doctrine which doth conspire with those Apostolical Churches in which the Faith originally was planted is to be accounted true as undoubtedly holding that which the Churches did receive from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God but all other doctrine is to be prejudged false which doth think against the truth of the Churches and of the Apostles and of Christ and of God their argumentation then in short is plainly this that the conspiring of the Churches in doctrines contrary to those which the Hereticks vented did irrefragably signifie those doctrines to be Apostolical which discourse doth no-wise favour the Roman pretences but indeed if we do weigh it is very prejudicial thereto it thereby appearing that Christian Doctrines then in the canvasing of points and assuring tradition had no peculiar regard to the Roman Churche's testimonies no deference at all to the Roman Bishop's Authority not otherwise at least than to the Authority of one single Bishop yielding attestation to tradition 26. It is odd that even old Popes themselves in elaborate tracts disputing against Hereticks as Pope Celestine against Nestorius and Pelagius Pope Leo against Eutyches do content themselves to urge testimonies of Scripture and arguments grounded thereon not alledging their own definitive Authority or using this parlous argumentation I the Supreme Doctour of the Church and Judge of controversies do assert thus and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent 27. It is matter of amazement if the Pope were such as they would have him to be that in so many bulky Volumes of ancient Fathers living through many ages after Christ in those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge wherein all sorts of truth are displayed all sorts of duty are pressed this momentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be expressed in clear and peremptory terms I speak so for that by wresting words by impertinent application by streining consequences the most ridiculous positions imaginable may be deduced from their Writings It is strange that somewhere or other at least incidentally in their Commentaries upon the Scripture wherein many places concerning the Church and its Hierarchy do invite to speak of the Pope in their Treatises about the Priesthood about the Unity and Peace of the Church about Heresie and Schism in their Epistles concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs in their Historical narrations about occurrences in the Church in their concertations with heterodox adversaries they should not frequently touch it they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it Is it not marvellous that Origen St. Hilary St. Cyril St. Chrysostome St. Hierome St. Austin in their Commentaries and Tractates upon those places of Scripture Tu es Petrus Pasce oves whereon they now build the Papal Authority should be so dull and drowsie as not to say a word concerning the Pope That St. Austin in his so many elaborate Tractates against the Donatists wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the Church its Unity Communion
pretence or under what distinction soever these pompatick foolish proud perverse wicked profane words these names of singularity elation vanity blasphemy to borrow the Epithets with which Pope Gregory I. doth brand the Titles of Vniversal Bishop and Oecumenical Patriarch no less modest in sound and far more innocent in meaning than those now ascribed to the Pope are therefore to be rejected not onely because they are injurious to all other Pastours and to the People of God's heritage but because they do encroach upon our onely Lord to whom they do onely belong much more to usurp the things which they do naturally signifie is a horrible invasion upon our Lord's Prerogative Thus hath that great Pope taught us to argue in words expressly condemning some and consequently all of them together with the things which they signifie What saith he writing to the Bishop of Constantinople who had admitted the title of Vniversal Bishop or Patriarch wilt thou say to Christ the Head of the Vniversal Church in the trial of the last judgment who by the appellation of VNIVERSAL dost endeavour to subject all his Members to thee whom I pray dost thou mean to imitate in so perverse a word but him who despising the Legions of Angels constituted in fellowship with him did endeavour to break forth unto the top of Singularity that he might both be subject to none and alone be over all who also said I will ascend into heaven and will exalt my throne above the stars for what are thy brethren all the Bishops of the Vniversal Church but the stars of heaven to whom while by this haughty word thou desirest to prefer thy self and to trample on their name in comparison to thee what dost thou say but I will climb into heaven And again in another Epistle to the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch he taxeth the same Patriarch for assuming to boast so that he attempteth to ascribe all things to himself and studieth by the elation of pompous speech to subject to himself all the members of Christ which do cohere to One Sole Head namely to Christ. Again I confidently say that whoever doth call himself Universal Bishop or desireth to be so called doth in his elation forerun Antichrist because he pridingly doth set himself before all others If these argumentations be sound or signifie any thing what is the pretence of Vniversal Sovereignty and Pastourship but a piece of Luciferian arrogance who can imagine that even this Pope could approve could assume could exercise it if he did was he not monstrously senseless and above measure impudent to use such discourses which so plainly without altering a word might be retorted upon him which are built upon suppositions that it is unlawfull and wicked to assume Superiority over the Church over all Bishops over all Christians the which indeed seeing never Pope was of greater repute or did write in any case more solemnly and seriously have given to the pretences of his Successours so deadly a wound that no balm of Sophistical interpretation can be able to heal it We see that according to St. Gregory M. our Lord Christ is the one onely Head of the Church to whom for company let us adjoin St. Basil M. that we may have both Greek and Latin for it who saith that according to Saint Paul we are the body of Christ and members one of another because it is manifest that the one and sole truly head which is Christ doth hold and connect each one to another unto concord To decline these allegations of Scripture they have forged distinctions of several kinds of Churches and several sorts of Heads the which evasions I shall not particularly discourse seeing it may suffice to observe in general that no such distinctions have any place or any ground in Scripture nor can well consist with it which simply doth represent the Church as one Kingdom a Kingdom of Heaven a Kingdom not of this world all the Subjects whereof have their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in heaven or are considered as members of a City there so that it is vain to seek for a Sovereign thereof in this world the which also doth to the Catholick Church sojourning on earth usually impart the name and attributes properly appertaining to the Church most universal comprehensive of all Christians in heaven and upon earth because that is a visible representative of this and we by joining in offices of piety with that do communicate with this whence that which is said of one concerning the Unity of its King its Head its Pastour its Priest is to be understood of the other especially considering that our Lord according to his promise is ever present with the Church here governing it by the efficacy of his Spirit and Grace so that no other corporeal or visible Head of this Spiritual Body is needfull It was to be sure a visible Headship which St. Gregory did so eagerly impugn and exclaim against for he could not apprehend the Bishop of Constantinople so wild as to affect a Jurisdiction over the Church mystical or invisible 2. Indeed upon this very account the Romish pretence doth not well accord with Holy Scripture because it transformeth the Church into another kind of Body than it was constituted by God according to the representation of it in Scripture for there it is represented as a spiritual and heavenly Society compacted by the bands of one faith one hope one Spirit of Charity but this pretence turneth it into a worldly frame united by the same bands of interest and design managed in the same manner by terrour and allurement supported by the same props of force of policy of wealth of reputation and splendour as all other secular Corporations are You may call it what you please but it is evident that in truth the Papal Monarchy is a temporal Dominion driving on worldly ends by worldly means such as our Lord did never mean to institute so that the Subjects thereof may with far more reason than the People of Constantinople had when their Bishop Nestorius did stop some of their Priests from contradicting him say We have a King a Bishop we have not so that upon every Pope we may charge that whereof Anthimus was accused in the Synod of Constantinople under Menas that he did account the greatness and dignity of the Priesthood to be not a spiritual charge of souls but as a kind of politick rule This was that which seeming to be affected by the Bishop of Antioch in encroachment upon the Church of Cyprus the Fathers of the Ephesine Synod did endeavour to nipp enacting a Canon against all such invasions lest under pretext of holy discipline the pride of worldly authority should creep in and what pride of that kind could they mean beyond that which now the Popes do claim and exercise Now do I say after that the Papal Empire hath swollen to such a