The TEXTS examined which Papists cite out of the Bible TO PROVE The Supremacy of St. PETER and of the POPE over the whole Church IMPRIMATUR Guil. Needham Febr. 14. 1687. THE Question to be debated in this Paper is Whether the Apostle St. Peter was constituted by Christ himself to be in his stead the Head and supreme Governour of the whole Church This we deny having undeniable Proofs that all the Apostles were placed by Christ in equal Power and Authority over his Church But the Doctors of the Roman Church affirm this with so much Confidence as to say that to deny it is not a simple Error but a pernicious Heresy They are the words of Bellarmine * L. 1. de Rom. Pontif. c. 10 11. who earnestly contends that the Government of the whole Church was committed to Peter especially about Matters of Faith. Which bold Assertion he labours to support three ways First By some places of Holy Scriptures Secondly By many Privileges and Prerogatives of St. Peter Thirdly By Testimonies of Greek and Latin Fathers I am concerned only in the first of these Ways in which if this Cause find no true support we need not trouble our selves about the other two which are so weak that some ingenuous Persons in their Communion have acknowledged the Prerogatives are either feigned at pleasure or no more to the purpose of his Supremacy than the pretended Testimonies of Ancient Fathers which are against it Now the Scriptures which they alledg for the proof of it are two places in the holy Gospels The one in St. Matthew xvi 18 19. the other in St. John xxi 17. In the former of these this Supreme Authority they say is promised to St. Peter in the latter it is conferred I begin with the first Matth. xvi 18 19. And I say unto thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church c. And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind o◠Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven The Sense of which words says Bellarmine is plain and obvious giving us to understand the Soveraignty over the whole Church to be here promised unto Peter in two Metaphors The one is a Metaphor of a Foundation and a Building the other is a Metaphor of Keys For what a Foundation is in the Building that the Head is in the Body the Governour in the City the King in his Kingdom and the Father of the Family in the House and to whom the Keys of a City are delivered he is appointed the King or at least the Governour of that City to admit and shut out whom he pleaseth Unto which I have this to say before I give the true Sense of these words That to call this a plain and obvious Sense of the words which is wrapt up in a couple of Metaphors is to stumble at the very Threshold and to contradict himself in the terms as they ordinarily speak For what is metaphorical is not plain and obvious but needs Explanation by putting it into common words Into which if these Metaphors be reduced we shall find there is no such Sense contained in them as is pretended I shall explain them distinctly and begin with the former part of this Promise Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church which we may call the first Proof they bring of St. Peter's being the Monarch of the Church I. Which Sense is so far from being plain and obvious that having considered both the words and all the ancient Expositors upon them I can find nothing plainer than these two things First That there is no certainty St. Peter is here meant by the Rock upon which Christ saith he will build his Church Nor Secondly If he were that Christ intended by calling him a Rock to make him the Lord of his Church First I say there is no Evidence that St. Peter is here meant by the Rock but quite contrary we are led by the general stream of Ancient Interpreters to understand by the Rock upon which the Church is built that Faith concerning Christ which Peter had newly confessed There are more than two that thus expound the words for one that expounds them otherwise as may be seen in a Sermon lately printed on this Subject * Sermon on St. Peter's day 1686. which shows also that the other Expositions do not really differ from this but even they who apply these words to St. Peter had respect in calling him the Rock to his preaching the Doctrine of Christ and having the honour to be the first Preacher of it to the Gentiles Which is all the Priviledg that can be thought to be peculiarly intended to him in these words For excepting this whatsoever was said to him was directed to all the Apostles because Peter as their Mouth spake the Sense of them all when he said Thou art Christ the Son of the Living God and therefore Christ's Answer was returned to them all when he said Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church As much as to say Thou art what thy Name imports which I have given thee with respect to this solid Faith thou hast now confessed upon which as upon a Rock I will build my Church by your Ministry and particularly by thine who shalt have the Honour to lay the first Stone of it in the Gentile World. Thus St. Austin †Tract exxiv in Joh. Serm. xiii de verbis Dom c. expounds the words in many places where he observes Peter had his Name from Petra the Rock viz. That Faith which he confessed upon which Christ told him he would build his Church For he doth not say Thou art Peter and upon thee will I build my Church but upon this Rock which plainly relates to another thing viz. that immoveable Foundation confessed by Peter that he was Christ the Son of God. Whence those known words of the same Father I will build thee upon me not me upon thee If it were the intention of this Paper to quote Testimonies I could name a great multitude even the ordinary Gloss which speak to the same purpose But it is wholly needless since the other Exposition which makes St. Peter the Rock here spoken of is against the most unanimous consent of the Fathers of the Church which they of the Church of Rome are bound to follow both by the Doctrine of the Council of Trent * Sess iv and by the form of that Oath of Profession of Faith which Pope Pius IV. drew up and enjoined according to the Mind of that Council And yet so vilely are some addicted to regard nothing but their Interest there are those who to make these words sound as if Christ promised to build his Church upon Peter himself have not blush'd thus to translate them Thou art Peter and upon this PETER will
I build my Church So Dr. Allen would have had the Translation run in the Rhemish Testament and so Hart alledges them in his Conference with Dr. Reynolds †Chap. 2. Divis 1. And now lately the Catholick Scripturist translates them after this manner according to the Language which Christ spoke Thou art a Rock and upon this Rock will I build my Church As if it will be lawful for them to do any thing even contradict that very Council whose Decrees they are sworn to observe that they may make the Scripture seem to be on their side For the Council of Trent hath decreed the old Latin Translation to be authentical with a prohibition that no Man dare or presume under any pretence to reject it Notwithstanding which here are Men that presume to reform it and to make a new Translation of their own Heads as different from that authentick vulgar Translation as from ours for in this ours and that are the same as every body may know that understands the Latin Tongue This is a Presumption with a Witness to make their own Translation depart so far from the Language which Christ spoke as to put tu es Petrus instead of tu es Petra For so Christ's words should have been translated if they signified thou art a Rock unless they can shew us that Petrus in any Author is latin for a Rock Till this be done we must say that such Men contrary to their Faith solemnly sworn depart not only from Antiquity but from themselves And when they have done all they can it will evidently appear that the Church was not built by his Hands alone tho he began as I said and laid the first Stone among the Gentiles but by them all and more especially by St. Paul who was called late into this Office 1 Cor. xv 10. iii. 10 11. but laboured more abundantly than they all and as a wise Master-builder laid the Foundation upon which others built Which Foundation he tells us is Jesus Christ himself who he likewise says is the only Foundation and that no Man can lay other Foundation besides him Which shews this Promise I am treating of had respect to all that had the Office of Apostles and wholly ruines the Authority of St. Peter upon which they would have the Church to be built For if Jesus Christ be the only Foundation that can be laid then Peter cannot be the Foundation but only as a Minister of Jesus Christ who help'd to lay the Foundation which is Christ himself and his Faith. In which Ministry he was no more imployed than other Apostles but St. Paul who came last into this Ministry was as wise a Master-builder as himself and took more Pains than he or any of the rest laying the Foundation where neither St. Peter nor any Body else had ever been lest he should build upon another Man's Foundation as he tells the Roman Church Rom. xv 20. Which words uttterly overthrow their vain distinction of a first and a secondary Foundation whereby they endeavour to elude those words of St. Paul in the place before-named 1 Cor. iii. 11. For it appears by this other place that St. Paul was a secondary or ministerial Foundation if we may so speak that is speak improperly meaning thereby one that laid the Foundation Which he did as much as St. Peter or any other Apostle nay a great deal more as he himself tells us when he saith he laboured more abundantly than they all In exact speaking there is no Foundation on which the Church is built but Christ alone as St. Paul assures us in whom all the Building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy Temple in the Lord Ephes ii 21. But Faith in Christ being that whereby we are joyned to him it may be called by the same Name and accordingly the Colossians are said to be grounded * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 1.23 in the Faith as upon a Foundation the Greek word signifies from which he would have them not to be moved And the Apostles as he there saith being the Preachers of this Faith and the Instruments whereby Men were brought to believe on Christ and so joyned to him as Living Stones are called by the Name of Foundation in the place before-named Ephes ii 20. Built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets c. But then it is evident that Peter alone is not this Foundation but all the Apostles For there are XII Foundations of this sort as we read in Rev. xxi 14. by whose Ministry the Church was built upon Christ the sole Foundation in proper speaking that was laid for all to build upon Finally the Apostles understand no such Preheminence as is now pretended to be promised to St. Peter in these words nor did he himself so understand them when the Holy Ghost was come upon them to lead them into all Truth For then St. Paul could not have said that he came not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles and that he was behind them in nothing 2 Cor. xi 5. xii 11. nor could he have undertaken to correct St. Peter Gal. ii 11 12 c. nor would St. Peter have born his Censure if he had known he was the Head of the Church but have bidden St. Paul know his distance and remember that he ought not to controul him but be controuled by him as his Better Secondly After all this that hath been said to shew there is nothing here promised to Peter but what belongs to all the Apostles except only that of his being imployed in laying the first Foundation of Faith among the Gentiles It remains that I shew there is nothing in the word Rock which implies any Superiority of Power and Authority over the rest of his Brethren and the whole Church if we should suppose this Promise to have been made to him alone for it denotes nothing of Government but hath respect to the support and stability of that Structure which is firmly laid upon it And therefore the ancient Doctors as may be seen in the Sermon before-mentioned give other Reasons of his being called a Rock and not this because to him was committed the Government of the whole Church especially about Faith. Which is the Explanation Bellarmine gives of this word affirming it to be the signification of this Metaphor for it is proper to a fundamental Rock to govern and sustain the whole Edifice This is perfectly new Language never heard of in the World before that it is proper to a Foundation to govern for it is altogether improper and no body thinks of any such thing when he reads of a Foundation But if it be proper then all the Apostles were Governours of the whole Church as well as he because they were all Foundations as was before observed having the very same Power given to them by Christ which we now suppose was here promised to him alone Unto which they of the Church of Rome have nothing
to reply but only this whch is meerly a bold Affirmation and as absurd as all the rest they were indeed all of them the Heads Governors and Pastors of the Church universal but not after the same manner as Peter was of * Bellarm. l. 1. de Pontif. Rom. cap. xi Why so For they had the highest and most ample Power as Apostles and Ambassadors but Peter also as an ordinary Pastor As much as to say They had indeed the highest Power in the Church and as large as he but not so high a Power as his Let any Man try if he can make any other Sense of those words that is find any Sense at all in them For was this Power of being an ordinary Pastor greater than that of the Apostles or no If it were greater then it is not true which he affirms that the Apostles had the highest Power †Habuerunt summam Potestatem If it were less than the Power of the Apostles then they were all greater than he as he was an ordinary Pastor and then it is non-sense to say they so had a plenitude of Power as that St. Peter was notwithstanding the Head of them and they all depended on him For he rather depended on them as an ordinary Pastor if that was less than the Power of the Apostleship and if it were not but greater than it then as I said it is false that the Apostles had the highest Power This is sufficient to shew into what Absurdities Men run when they go about to maintain a Falshood and what wretched shifts they devise to obscure the clear Truth which shines in their Eyes Which when they have done they walk as in Darkness and cannot be perswaded to see or acknowledg their Error Nay one Error grows out of another and having begun to wrest the Holy Scripture they go on to strain it so far as to extend it to any purpose they have to serve by it For having presumed that Peter and he alone is promised to be made the Governour of the whole Church by these Words of our Saviour they immediately presume without the shew of a proof that the Bishops of Rome succeed him in this Authority Which is a very large Step or rather Leap from Peter to the Popes of Rome between whom there is such a vast distance that it is impossible to make out the Claim to which they pretend from him For there is no evidence that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome but only that he founded that Church and setled a Bishop there For if he was Bishop of Antioch it was against all antient Rules to leave that and go to another See. The truth is he was properly Bishop of neither but planted a Church in each and first at Antioch before he came to Rome And who can think he did not settle one to take care of that Church of Antioch when he left it who may be called his Successor as well as he whom he is supposed to have placed afterwards in Rome Which two things being allowed as unquestionable Matters of Fact there is no reason can be given why all the Power and Jurisdiction which is claimed upon the account of Succession should not devolve by the Right of Primogeniture upon the Bishop of Antioch since it is confessed he first fat there and sat there seven Years which is more than can be proved he did at Rome where he was not when St. Paul came thither Act. xxviii nor when he first answered before Nero nor when he was ready to be offered 2 Tim. iv 6 11 16. nor can any certain time be assigned when he was there as we are sure St. Paul was who is acknowledged to be a Founder of that Church and had as much or rather more right to leave a Bishop to succeed him there as St. Peter who could transfer to no body neither there nor any where else what was personally vested in him as all the Priviledg here granted him was Or if he was to have any Successor in his supposed Dominion there were others had a better Title to it than the Bishop of Rome particularly St. John who it is certain survived St. Peter L. 1. de Pont. Rom. c. ix Therefore all that Bellarmine dare say in this matter is that the Apostles being dead the Apostolical Authority remained in Peter 's Successor alone For which he gives us not one word of proof but only this notorious Falshood that the Roman Bishop alone is called by all the Apostolical Bishop and his See simply the Apostolical See. When all the World knows Jerusalem Constantinople and divers other Places are called by the same Name of Apostolical Sees or Churches and their Bishops called not only Apostolical but Catholick and said to be Bishops of the Catholick Church The meaning of all which is nothing else but that they held the Catholick Religion and Faith Epist pars 1. ad Franciscum Bonum as Launoy most ingenuously confesses and maintains the Roman Bishops themselves intended no more when they subscribed themselves Bishops of the Catholick Church Nay Bellarmine himself in the place now named is constrained to acknowledg that the Supreme Ecclesiastical Power was given not only to Peter but to other Apostles also For they might all say that of St. Paul 2 Cor. xi 28. My daily business the Care of all the Churches But it was given to Peter as an ordinary Pastor who should have perpetual Successors to others as Delegates who should have no Successors Which is a meer Invention a pure Figment of his own brain without the shadow of a ground for it in the Book of God or any ancient Authority and against his own Confession that all the Apostles had the highest Power which includes all Power both ordinary and extraordinary and a Power to appoint their Successors in the Places they converted There have abundance of other things been said by our Writers to shew that whatsoever may be supposed to have been promised in these Words the Bishops of Rome can thence derive no lawful Claim to the like Authority And yet as if there were nothing plainer than that Christ spake to the Roman Bishops when he said these Words to St. Peter they have the confidence from hence to entitle the Pope to the Priviledg of Infallibility as well as to a Supreme Dominion over the Church So Bellarmine who elsewhere alledges these Words L. iv de Rom. Pontific c. 3. to prove that the chief Bishop i. e. theirs when he teacheth the whole Church in things belonging to Faith can in no case err But this depends upon his former Suppositions that Peter is the Rock of the Church as its Supreme Governour and therefore every one of his Successors in like manner is the same which having no Foundation all his Superstructure upon them falls to the Ground And indeed it is so sandy that honest Men among themselves are ashamed to build any thing of this nature
upon it Particularly Launnoy who on set purpose demonstrates that Bellarmine neither obeyed the Decree of the Trent Council Epist pars v. Gulielmo Voello nor kept the Profession of Faith enjoined by Pius IV. when he drew this Conclusion of the Popes Infallibility from these Words Thou art Peter c. but was guilty of down-right Flattery of the Court of Rome for whose sake he in like manner falfied in the Citations he brings out of the Fathers to maintain the same Untruth But further than this the same Writer presses these words to prove that General Councils cannot err neither in believing nor teaching †L. 2. de Conc. Autor cap. i. Which is as much as to confess that what Christ said to Peter was intended to all Bishops of whom a General Council consists But here he endeavours to bring off himself by this Salvo if the Council be confirmed by the Pope as if they received their Infallibility from him who turns their doubtful Opinions into Oracles Whence it is that from the very same words Thou art Peter c. he proves the Pope to be above a Council * Ib. cap. xv immediately constituted by Christ the Pastor and Head not only of all particular Churches but also of the whole universal Church congregated together If this be to interpret the Scripture I know not what is setting it upon the Rack and stretching it as far as it pleaseth him who takes it in hand No Hereticks ever took so great a liberty as this which according to their way of reasoning makes it necessary to seal up the Bible quite that no body may look into it For if the danger of wresting the holy Scriptures be a just cause for denying the liberty of reading them to illiterate people it ought not to be granted to the most Learned who it appears by this great Cardinal are in as much or more danger of this than any other Men and so farewel the study of the Scriptures which neither Priest nor People must meddle withal But thanks be to God there is such a thing as Honesty and Integrity still remaining in the World which qualifies all Men for the wholsome perusal of them and hath preserv'd the minds of some in that Communion so uncorrupted as to make them disdain and reject these perverse and arrogant Interpretations or Distortions rather of Holy Scripture There is one hath lately declared his sense of this Promise to St. Peter in remarkable words with which I conclude this part of my Discourse †Du Pin de antiquae Eccles Discipl Dissert iv cap. 1. sect 1. Supposing Christ to have spoken these words and upon this Rock of the Person of Peter he meant nothing else thereby but that Peter should labour very much in the Edification of the Church that is in the Conversion of the Faithful and Administration of the Churches And therefore the most that can be deduced from hence is that he should be the first and the chief among those who were to preach the Gospel but it cannot from hence be gathered with Bellarmine that the Government of the whole Church was committed to Peter especially about Faith. II. The truth of this will further appear in the Explication of the next Words which expound those of which I have now treated And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth it shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven The sense of which is not so plain and obvious as Bellarmine pretends but we agree that they are a plain allusion to the Words of the Prophet Isaiah concerning Eliakim Isa xxii 23. I will give thee the Keys of the House of David i. e. make thee not High-Priest as he grossly mistakes but Steward of the Royal Family to take in and thrust out whom thou shalt think fit Such was the Power here promised to Peter by our Lord who saith of himself that he hath the Key of David Rev. iii. 7. i. e. of the House or Family of David which he alone governs by an absolute Power but tells Peter he intended to make him under himself his Supreme Lord and Master such a Steward in the Church as Eliakim had been in the Court. I say in the Church for by the Kingdom of Heaven I think no body now will dispute is meant the Family of Christ or the Christian Church in a great many places of the Gospel and most likely is so to be interpreted here But if any body be so minded as to understand by the Kingdom of Heaven not the Christian Society here below but the Company of the Blessed above let them consider that the sense will still be the same because by admission into the one and abiding in it we come to the other And Baptism is the Key which lets us into the Church out of which such as notoriously break their Baptismal Vow ought to be shut by the Censures of the Church and again received into it upon their hearty Repentance by granting them Absolution Thus the following Words expound it and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth c. That binding and loosing are one and the same with the Power of the Keys is acknowledged by the Roman Catechism * De Sacrament Paenitenn 44. and by Bellarmine himself who confesses the plain sense of these Words to be that first of all an Authority or Power is promised defined by Keys and then the Actions or Office of this Power is explained by those words loosing and binding So that to loose and to open to shut and to bind is altogether the same thing †L. 1. de Pont. Rom. cap. xii verùm And we need not further trouble our selves to inquire how far this Power extends for it is certain there is nothing here promised though we suppose it never so large which was intended to him alone but to them all except that of opening the door first to let the Gentiles into the Church This is apparent from what was said before concerning Christ speaking to them all in him as he spake for them all in answer to our Saviour's Question propounded to the whole Company Which produced this Promise from our Saviour not to him alone but to all them in whose Name he spake Which is no new Interpretation but as old as the Church it self for the Antients say with an unanimous consent that these Keys were given to the whole Church in the Person of Peter * Du Pin de antiqua Eccles Disc dissert iv c. 1. Sect. 1. as a late Writer in the Roman Communion honestly confesses St. Austin particularly inculcates this an hundred times as his words are a proof of which may be seen in another of his Brethren †Jo. Launoy Epist par 2. Hadriano Valantio p. 14. c. who hath made a Collection of xxvi places out of his Works to