Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A60249
|
An answer to Doctor Piercie's sermon preached before His Majesty at White-Hall, Feb. 1, 1663 by J.S.
|
Simons, Joseph, 1593-1671.
|
1663
(1663)
|
Wing S3805; ESTC R34245
|
67,126
|
128
|
Tradition you pretend noâ—… as well because such discourses in your opinion are but Topicks as because you are able to bring nothing against our positive Doctrines but empty Negatives the silence of the Fathers in two or three ages who writ little or nothing of our present debates And I hope you will not so much as pretend that a few inconsiderable speeches of some Catholick Writers make up Demonstrations against that Church in which they lived and died But 't is now high time to ponder your Demonstrations Against the Pope's Supreamacy The first Demonstration Page 16. 37. Phocas the Emperour in the year 606. saith Baronius as you quote him being angry with Cyriacus Bishop of Constantinople adjudged the Title of Universall to the Roman Bishop alone to whom it had been given in a Nationall Council of Constantinople under Menas seventy yeares before and in the Council of Chalcedon one of the four fiâ—…st Generall Synods more then two hundred yeares past Therefore not onely the Title which was the precise question but also the primaâ—…y of jurisdiction and universall Pastorship whereof there was no question at all began under Phocas and so was a Novelty according to our Saviours words 'T was not so from the beginning A very robustious Demonstration 39. This is confirmed because Phocas was the greatest Villain in the world besides Cromwell and Pontius Pilate Therefore the Pope's Supreamacy must of necessity have begun under Phocas let never so many precedent exercises of that power holy Fathers and Councils shew the Contrary 40. 'T is farther confirm'd by the abuse offered to Baronius whose words are partly alter'd partly conceal'd His words rightly quoted are these Phocas therefore incenst against Cyriacus enacted by an Imperiall Edict that such a Title of universall Bishop did become the Roman Church alone and that it agreed onely to the Roman Bishop to be styled Universall and not to the Bishop of Constantinople And why but because the Bishop of Rome as S. Peter's Successour was known to be the supreame Pastor of all Churches 41. The words quite concealed clearly shewing Baronius his judgement are these What then did Phocas by his Edict conferre upon the Roman Church Nothing but that by his sentence he declared the Title of Universall to be unduly usurped by the Bishop of Constantinople which was due to the Roman Church alone since that even her adversaries the Bishops of Constantinople contradicted not that the Roman Church had alwayes held the Primacy over all Churches as above in due place hath been most largely demonstrated Had all these words been fairly cited your proof out of Baronius that the Pope's Supreamacy began under â—…hocas would have appeared in its proper colours it being evident that Phocas did not first conferre even the Title in question much lesse the Jurisdiction but onely declare that of right it belonged to the Popes of Rome who notwithstanding never used it as the Bishops of Constantinople presumed to doe The second Demonstration Page 17. 42. Looking back to the beginning we find that the Wall of Gods City had twelve Foundations and in them were the Names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb. Revel 21. 24. But all foundations of the same wall in which mens Names are written be equall in every respect Therefore the twelve Apostles signified by those twelve foundations were all equall in every respect Nay more the ancient Prophets upon this account were all equall every way as well amongst themselves though some were Kings and Governours of the rest as with the Apostles because we are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes. 2. 20. And why not the Apostles equal to Christ who is also a foundation of the wall of Gods City Other foundation can no man lay then that that is laid which is Iesus Christ. 2 Cor. 3. Therefore S. Peter was onely equall to the other Apostles and could in no respect have a primacy over them though you your self grant him a primacy of order before them all and by consequence a step above equality A gallant conviction To back this Demonstration let us adde another taken out of the same Chapter of the Revel v. 12. where it is likewise said that the City of God had twelve Gates and at the Gates twelve Angels and Names written thereon which are the Names of the twelve Tribes of the Children of Israel Now if one should argue thus to prove that the Tribe of Iuda had not the Scepter or primacy of Civil power over the rest but was equall in all regards The City of God had twelve Gates with twelve Angels and on them the Names of the twelve Tribes of Israel But all Gates and Angels who have mens names written upon them are equall in every respect Therefore the twelve Tribes of Israel signified by those twelve Gates and Angels were equall in every respect Would not he argue like a stout Logician The third Demonstration Page 17. 43. Whosoever withstands another to his face because through inadvertency or frailty he do's amisse and so speaks to him in the presence of others out of pure charity and zeale of the common good is at least his equall if not superiour But S. Paul did so to S. Peter Galat. 2. 11 12 13 14. Therefore he was at least his equall if not his superiour 44. Blind S. Cyprian that saw not this light of evidence when he said Neither Peter whom our Lord chose the first and upon whom he built his Church when Paul disputed with him about Circumcision challenged insolently or took arrogantly any thing to himself saying that he had the Primacy and therefore the later Disciples ought rather to obey him Blind S. Chrâ—…sostome admiring S. Peter's virtue Paul reproves and Peter heares to the end that whil'st the Master reproved holds his peace the Schollars may learn to change their opinion Blind S. Austin That which was done of S. Paul profitably by the liberty of charity Peter took in good part by holy and benigne godlinesse of humility and thereby gave a more rare example to posterity if at any time they doe amisse to be content to be corrected by their Iuniors then Paul gave to be confidently bold even Inferiours to resist their betters for defending the truth of the Gospel brotherly charity alwayes preserved Blind S. Gregory when he said Peter was silent that he who was on the top of the Apostleship might be the first in humility 45. Sir good Dâ—…vinity teacheth us that there are two kinds of Correction the one of justice that belongs to Superiours in regard of their Subjects the other of Charity which concerns all men For as we are obliged to love our Neighbours so charity bindes us in due circumstances to use fraternall correction to all even Superiours As Iethro did to Moses Ioab to David and S. Bernard to Pope Eugenius In a word S. Peter's authority over S. Paul was so acknowledged by
all Antiquity that as S. Hierome noted the Villain Porphyrius censur'd S. Paul of sawcinesse and pride for checking S. Peter his Superiour The fourth Demonstration Page 17. 46. The next demonstration is taken also out of the Epistle to the Galatians 2. 9. where S. Paul gives an account how by Divine revelation he went up to Ierusalem to communicate his Gospel with the chief Apostles Peter Iames and Iohn because some were apt to mistrust his Doctrine as not having lived with Christ nor conferr'd with the Apostles Schollars of Christ. And that the said Apostles when they saw the grace that was given to Paul gave him and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship that is received them into their society of Preaching upon agreement that we saith S. Paul should goe unto the Gentiles and they unto the Circumcision Hence is hewed out the following demonstration 47. Whosoever receiveth into the fellowship of Preaching one sent unto him by Gods appointment to conferre his Doctrine that he may not Preach in vain is either inferiour to the party sent and received or at most his equal But S. Peter did so receive S. Paul Therefore S. Peter was either inferiour to Saint Paul or at most his equal And reason good for S. Peter was one amongst the three prime Apostles sent to the Iews as Christ himself was and S. Paul to the Gentiles who though in regard of their number they were to the Iewes but as the Ocean to a River yet in many other respects being the chosen people of God had as S. Paul said to the Romans Rom. 3. 3. much advantage every way above the Gentiles and chiefly because unto them were committed the Oracles of God and therefore S. Paul himself Act. 13. 46. profess'd to the Iewes It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you but seeing you put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Lo we turn to the Gentiles Otherwise S. Paul by calling Christ Minister Circumcisionis and himself Doctour of the Gentiles should according to you Mr. Pierce signifie some advantage of honour above Christ in the extent of his Diocesse 48. To reinforce this demonstration you may adde that since fellowship argues equality not onely all Fellowes of a Colledge are equall to their head that governs them who is likewise a Fellow but which is more we are all equal to Christ our Lord being called by God unto the fellowship of his Son Iesus Christ 1 Cor. 9. much more then was S. Paul equal with S. Peter was he not think ye especially if we add to this that S. Paul fourteen years before went up to Ierusalem to see and pay his respects to S. Peter because saith S. Ambrose 't was fit that Paul should desire to see Peter to whom our Saviour had committed the charge of the Churches And Theodoret upon the first to the Galathians He went to yield to S. Peter as to the Prince of the Apostles that honour which was fitting And S. Chrysostome He went to see him above others because he was the mouth and Prince of the Apostles and the Head of the whole Company And elsewhere He went to him as to one greater then himself and that not in a vulgar manner but to behold and admire him as a Personâ—…ge of great Excellency and Majesty as men goe to behold great and famous Cities The fifth Demonstration Page 17. 49. No man can have spiritual jurisdiction and a fatherly power over the Church but he must of necessity Lord it over Gods heritage and fleece the flock of Chrtst. But S. Peter was never known to Lord it over Gods heritage or fleece the flock of Christ. Therefore he had no spiritual jurisdiction or fatherly power over the Church for he rather forbids to domineer in the Clergy The Minor is granted on both sides the Major is clear of it self without proofe for if spiritual jurisdiction could stand without Lording and fleecing S. Peter might be Head of the Church though he did not Lord it over Gods heritage or fleece the flock 'T is also confirmed by instances Christ our Saviour had no jurisdiction forsooth over the Apostles because he came not to Lord it but to serve Non veni ministrari sed ministrare The Apostles had no jurisdiction over their respective Churches for the same reason Nay there is no Hierarchie in the Church as the Presbyterians contend against your Episcopal Protestants because Primates may not Lord it over arch-Arch-Bishops nor these over Bishops nor Bishops over Curats nor Parish Priests over the People for whosoever will be great among you shall be your Minister and whosoever of you will be the chiefest shall be the Servant of all And if you confesse that for the good government of a Nationall Church a Hierarchy is necessary then take the judgement of Mr. Cartwright in Mr. Whitgift's defence If it be necessary for the keeping of unity in the Church that one Arch-Bishop should be Primat over all why not as meet that for the keeping of the whole Universall Church there should be one Arch-Bishop over all Hearken to your Doctor Covell saâ—…ing to the Puritans How can they think that equality would keep all the Pastours in the world in peace and unity c. For in all Societies authority which cannot be where all are equall must procure unity and obedience Oâ—…serve Melancthon's judgement As there are some Bishops that govern divers Churches the Bishop of Rome governs all Bishops And this Canonicall policy I think no wise man doth disallow For the Monarchy of the Bishops of Rome in my judgement is profitable to this end that unity in Doctrine be preserved Wherefore we would easily assent to this Article of the Pope's Supreamacy if we did agree in other matters The sixth Demonstration Page 18. 50. If the Apostles were pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis equall not onely in the substance of Apostleship as power of Preaching founding Churches remitting Sins administration of Sacraments and the like but also in jurisdiction and right to govern the whole Church And if Bishops be all ejusdem meriti Sacerdotii not onely of the same merit in order to Priesthood but also of the same degree of authority over others Then S. Peter was not Head of the Church nor the Bishop of Rome his Successour in that Office But S. Cyprian sayes the first and S. Hierome the second Therefore S. Peter was not Head of the Church nor the Bishop of Rome his Successour in that Office Now whether your interpretation of these ancient holy Doctors be or be not their true meaning the Reader may evidently deduce first by what S. Cyprian addes immediately to the very words above cited and you very unhandsomely not to say maliciously conceale Sed exordium ab unitate proficiscitur Primatus Petro datur ut una Christi Ecclesia