nor probably did they desire so much as our Adversaries do give to Saint Peter yet our Lord doth not onely reject their sute but generally declareth that none of them were capable of such a preferment in his Kingdom which therein differed from worldly Dominion because in it there was no room for such an ambition especially in that state of things wherein the Apostles were to be placed which was a state of undergoing Persecutions not of enjoying Dignity or exercising Command all the preferment which they reasonably could aspire to being to be dispenced in the future state whereof they were not aware according to God's preparation in correspondence to the patience and industry any of them should exert in God's service upon which account St. Chrysostome saith it was a clear case that Saint Paul should obtain the preference It was indeed as our Lord intimateth incongruous for those who had forsaken all things for Christ who had embraced a condition of disgrace who were designed by self-denial humility neglect of temporal grandeur wealth and honour by undergoing persecution and undertaking conformity to our Lord being baptized with the baptism with which he was baptized to propagate the Faith of a Crucified Master to seek or take on them authoritative dignity for among them there could not well be any need of commanding or being commanded it was more fit that all of them should conspire to help and serve one another in promoting the common design and service of their Lord with mutual condescension and compliance which was the best way of recommending themselves to his acceptance and obtaining from him answerable reward Such was the drift of our Lord's discourse whereunto as in the other case he did annex the prohibition of exercising dominion Ye know saith he that the Princes of nations exercise dominion over them and they that are great exercise authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your minister and whosoever will be first among you let him be your servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whoever among you hath a mind to special grandeur and preeminence let him understand that there is no other to be attained beside that which resulteth from the humble performance of charitable Offices to his Brethren the which whoever shall best discharge he alone will become greatest and highest in the eye of God Again at another time the Apostles dreaming of a secular Kingdom to be erected by our Lord disputed among themselves who should be the greatest and for satisfaction presumed to enquire of our Lord about it whenas they surely were very ignorant of Saint Peter's being their head so there was a fair occasion as could be of our Lord 's instructing them in that point and injoyning their duty towards him but he did not so but rather taught him together with the rest not to pretend to any such thing as preferment above the rest He sitting down called the twelve and said unto them If any one desire to be first the same shall be last of all and servant of all how could he considering the occasion and circumstances of that speech in plainer terms establish equality or discountenance any claim to superiority among them Had Saint Peter then advanced such a plea as they now affirm of right belonging to him would he not thereby have depressed and debased himself to the lowest degree To impress this Rule our Lord then calling a little child did set him in the midst of them telling them that except they were converted from such ambitious pretences and became like little children wholly void of such conceits they could not enter into the Kingdom of heaven that is could not in effect be so much as ordinary good Christians adjoyning that whosoever should humble himself as did that little child not affecting or assuming more than such an innocent did should be greatest in the Kingdom of heaven in real worth and in the favour of God transcending the rest so that Saint Peter claiming Superiority to himself would have forfeited any title to eminency among Christians Again as to the power which is now ascribed to Saint Peter by the Party of his pretended Successours we may argue from another place where our Saviour prohibiting his Disciples to resemble the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees in their ambitious desires and practices their affectations of preeminence their assuming places and titles importing difference of rank and authority He saith But be ye not called Rabbi for there is one Master one Guide or Governour of you even Christ but ye are Brethren How more pregnantly could he have declared the nature of his Constitution and the relation of Christians one to another established therein to exclude such differences of Power whereby one doth in way of domination impose his opinion or his will on others Ye are all fellow-scholars fellow-servants and fellow-children of God it therefore doth not become you to be any-wise imperious over one another but all of you humbly and lovingly to conspire in learning and observing the Precepts of your common Lord the doing which is backed with a Promise and a Threat sutable to the purpose He that exalteth himself shall be abased and he that will abase himself shall be exalted the which sentences are to be interpreted according to the intent of the Rules foregoing If it be said that such discourse doth impugn all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction I answer that indeed thereby is removed all such haughty and harsh Rule which some have exercised over Christians that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arbitrary power that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolute uncontrollable authority that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tyrannical prerogative of which the Fathers complain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 domineering over their charges which Saint Peter forbiddeth We saith St. Chrysostome were designed to teach the word not to exercise empire or absolute sovereignty we do bear the rank of advisers exhorting to duty A Bishop saith St. Hierome differeth from a King in that a Bishop presideth over those that are willing the King against their will that is the Bishop's governance should be so gentle and easie that men hardly can be unwilling to comply with it but should obey as Saint Peter exhorteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by constraint but of their own accord and Let saith he the Bishops be content with their honour let them know themselves to be Fathers not Lords they should be loved not feared And Thou saith St. Bernard to Pope Eugenius dost superintend the name of Bishop signifying to thee not dominion but duty At least those precepts of our Lord do exclude that Power which is ascribed to Saint Peter over the Apostles themselves the which indeed is greater than in likelihood any Pharisee did ever affect yea in many respects doth exceed any domination which hath been claimed or usurped by the most
bounds of Papal Authority This disagreement of the Roman Doctours about the nature and extent of Papal Authority is a shrewd prejudice against it If a man should sue for a piece of Land and his Advocates the notablest could be had and well payed could not find where it lieth how it is butted and bounded from whom it was conveyed to him one would be very apt to suspect his Title If God had instituted such an Office it is highly probable we might satisfactorily know what the Nature and Use of it were the Patents and Charters for it would declare it Yet for resolution in this great Case we are left to seek they not having either the will or the courage or the power to determine it This insuperable Problem hath baffled all their infallible methods of deciding Controversies their Traditions blundering their Synods clashing their Divines wrangling endlesly about what kind of thing the Pope is and what Power he rightly may claim There is saith a great Divine among them so much controversie about the plenitude of Ecclesiastical Power and to what things it may extend it self that few things in that matter are secure This is a plain argument of the impotency of the Pope's power in judging and deciding Controversies or of his Cause in this matter that he cannot define a Point so nearly concerning him and which he so much desireth an Agreement in that he cannot settle his own Claim out of doubt that all his Authority cannot secure it self from contest So indeed it is that no Spells can allay some Spirits and where Interests are irreconcilable Opinions will be so Some Points are so tough and so touchy that no-body dare meddle with them fearing that their resolution will fail of success and submission Hence even the anathematizing Definers of Trent the boldest undertakers to decide Controversies that ever were did wave this Point the Legates of the Pope being injoined to advertise That they should not for any cause whatever come to dispute about the Pope's Authority It was indeed wisely done of them to decline this Question their Authority not being strong enough to bear the weight of a Decision in favour of the Roman See against which they could doe nothing according to its Pretences as appeareth by one clear instance For whereas that Council took upon it incidentally to enact that any Prince should be excommunicate and deprived of the dominion of any City or place where he should permit a Duel to be fought the Prelates of France in the Convention of Orders Anno 1595. did declare against that Decree as infringing their King's Authority It was therefore advisedly done not to meddle with so ticklish a point But in the mean time their Policy seemeth greater than their Charity which might have inclined them not to leave the world in darkness and doubt and unresolved in a Point of so main importance as indeed they did in others of no small consequence disputed among their Divines with obstinate Heat viz. The Divine Right of Bishops the Necessity of Residence the immaculate Conception c. The Opinions therefore among them concerning the Pope's Authority as they have been so they are and in likelihood may continue very different § II. There are among them those who ascribe to the Pope an universal absolute and boundless Empire over all Persons indifferently and in all Matters conferred and settled on him by Divine immutable sanction so that all men of whatever degree are obliged in conscience to believe whatever he doth authoritatively dictate and to obey whatever he doth prescribe So that if Princes themselves do refuse obedience to his will he may excommunicate them cashier them depose them extirpate them If he chargeth us to hold no Communion with our Prince to renounce our Allegeance to him to abandon oppose and persecute him even to death we may without scruple we must in duty obey If he doth interdict whole Nations from the exercise of God's Worship and Service they must comply therein So that according to their conceits he is in effect Sovereign Lord of all the World and superiour even in Temporal or Civil matters unto all Kings and Princes It is notorious that many Canonists if not most and many Divines of that Party do maintain this Doctrine affirming that all the Power of Christ the Lord of Lords and King of Kings to whom all Power in Heaven and Earth doth appertain is imparted to the Pope as to his Vice-gerent This is the Doctrine which almost 400 years agoe Augustinus Triumphus in his egregious Work concerning Ecclesiastical Power did teach attributing to the Pope an incomprehensible and infinite Power because great is the Lord and great is his Power and of his Greatness there is no end This is the Doctrine which the leading Theologue of their Sect their Angelical Doctour doth affirm both directly saying that in the Pope is the top of both Powers and by plain consequence asserting that when any one is denounced excommunicate for Apostasie his Subjects are immediately freed from his dominion and their Oath of Allegeance to him This the same Thomas or an Authour passing under his name in his Book touching the Rule of Princes doth teach affirming that the Pope as Supreme King of all the world may impose taxes on all Christians and destroy Towns and Castles for the preservation of Christianity This as Card. Zabarell near 300 years agoe telleth us is the Doctrine which for a long time those who would please Popes did persuade them that they could doe all things whatever they pleased yea and things unlawfull and so could doe more than God According to this Doctrine then current at Rome in the last Laterane Great Synod under the Pope's nose and in his ear one Bishop styled him Prince of the World another Oratour called him King of Kings and Monarch of the Earth another great Prelate said of him that he had all Power above all Powers both of Heaven and Earth And the same roused up Pope Leo X. in these brave terms Snatch up therefore the two-edged sword of Divine Power committed to thee and injoyn command and charge that an universal Peace and Alliance be made among Christians for at least 10 years and to that bind Kings in the fetters of the great King and constrain Nobles by the iron manacles of Censures for to thee is given all Power in Heaven and in Earth This is the Doctrine which Baronius with a Roman confidence doth so often assert and drive forward saying that there can be no doubt of it but that the Civil Principality is subject to the Sacerdotal and that God hath made the Political Government subject to the Dominion of the Spiritual Church § III. From that Doctrine the Opinion in effect doth not differ which Bellarmine voucheth for the common Opinion of Catholicks that by reason of the Spiritual Power the Pope at least indirectly hath a Supreme
sayings to that purpose by suggestion of Hildebrand by whom he was much governed Pope Stephanus VI. told the Emperour Basilius that he ought to be subject with all veneration to the Roman Church Pope John VIII or IX did pretend Obedience due to him from Princes and in default thereof threatned to excommunicate them Pope Nicolas I. cast many imperious sayings and threats at King Lotharius these among others We do therefore by Apostolical authority under obtestation of the Divine judgment injoin to thee that in Triers and Colen thou shouldst not suffer any Bishop to be chosen before a report be made to our Apostleship Was not this satis pro imperio And again That being compelled thou mayst be able to repent know that very soon thou shalt be struck with the Ecclesiastical Sword so that thou mayst be afraid any more to commit such things in God's holy Church And this he suggesteth for right Doctrine that Subjection is not due to bad Princes perverting the Apostle's words to that purpose Be subject to the King as excelling that is saith he in vertues not in vices whereas the Apostle meaneth eminency in power Pope Gregory VII doth also alledge Pope Zachary who saith he did depose the King of the Franks and did absolve all the French from the Oath of fidelity which they had taken unto him not so much for his iniquities as because he was unfit for such a Power This indeed was a notable act of jurisdiction if Pope Gregory's word may be taken for matter of fact but divers maintain that Pope Zachary did onely concur with the rebellious deposers of King Chilperick in way of advice or approbation not by authority It was pretty briskly said of Pope Adrian I. We do by general decree constitute that whatever King or Bishop or Potentate shall hereafter believe or permit that the Censure of the Roman Pontifes may be violated in any case he shall be an execrable Anathema and shall be guilty before God as a betrayer of the Catholick Faith Constitutions against the Canons and Decrees of the Bishops of Rome or against good manners are of no moment Before that Pope Gregory II. because the Eastern Emperour did cross the worship of Images did withdraw Subjection from him and did thrust his Authority out of Italy He saith Baronius did effectually cause both the Romans and Italians to recede from Obedience to the Emperour This was an act in truth of Rebellion against the Emperour in pretence of Jurisdiction over him for how otherwise could he justify or colour the fact So as Baronius reflecteth he did leave to posterity a worthy example forsooth that Heretical Princes should not be suffered to reign in the Church of Christ if being warned they were found pertinacious in errour And no wonder he then was so bold seeing the Pope had obtained so much respect in those parts of the World that as he told the Emperour Leo Is. all the Kingdoms of the West did hold Saint Peter as an earthly God of which he might be able to seduce some to uphold him in his rebellious practices This is the highest source as I take it to which this extravagant Doctrine can be driven For that single passage of Pope Felix III. though much ancienter will not amount to it It is certain that in causes relating to God 't is the safest course for you that according to his institution ye endeavour to submit the will of the King to the Priests c. For while the Emperour did retain any considerable Authority in Italy the Popes were better advised than to vent such notions and while they themselves did retain any measure of pious or prudent Modesty they were not disposed to it And we may observe divers Popes near that time in word and practice thwarting that practice For instance Pope Gelasius a vehement stickler for Papal Authority doth say to the Emperour Anastasius I as being a Roman born do love worship reverence thee as the Roman Prince And he saith that the Prelates of Religion knowing the Empire conferr'd on him by Divine Providence did obey his Laws And otherwhere he discourseth that Christ had distinguished by their proper acts and dignities the offices of Ecclesiastical and Civil Power that one should not meddle with the other so disclaiming Temporal Power due to himself being content to scrue up his Spiritual Authority After him as is well known Pope Gregory I. as became a pious and good man did avow the Emperour for his Lord by God's gift superiour to all men to whom he was subject whom he in duty was bound to obey and supposed it a high presumption for any one to set himself above the honour of the Empire by assuming the title of Universal Bishop After him Pope Agatho in the Acts of the sixth General Council doth call the Emperour Constantine Pogonatus his Lord doth avow himself together with all Presidents of the Churches servants to the Emperour doth say that his See and his Synod were subject to him and did owe Obedience to him Presently after him Pope Leo II. who confirmed that General Synod doth call the Emperour the prototype Son of the Church and acknowledgeth the body of Priests to be servants meanest servants of his Royal Nobleness After him Pope Constantine the immediate Predecessour of Pope Greg. II. when the Emperour did command him to come to Constantinople The most holy man saith Anastasius in his Life did obey the Imperial Commands Yea Pope Gregory II. himself before his defection when perhaps the circumstances of time did not animate him thereto did in his Epistle to Leo Isaurus acknowledge him as Emperour to be the Head of Christians and himself consequently subject to him This Gregory therefore may be reputed the Father of that Doctrine which being fostered by his Successours was by Pope Gregory VII brought up to it s robust pitch and stature I know Pope Gregory VII to countenance him doth alledge Pope Innocent I. excommunicating the Emperour Arcadius for his proceeding against St. Chrysostome and the Writers of St. Chrysostome's Life with others of the like age and credit do back him therein But seeing the Historians who lived in St. Chrysostome's own time and who write very carefully about him do not mention any such thing seeing that being the first Act in the kind must have been very notable and have made a great noise seeing that story doth not sute with the tenour of proceedings reported by those most credible Historians in that case seeing that fact doth no-wise sort to the condition and way of those Times that report cannot be true and it must be numbred among the many fabulous narrations devised by some wanton Greeks to set out the Life of that excellent Personage The same Pope doth also alledge St. Gregory M. denouncing Excommunication and Deprivation of honour to all Kings Bishops Judges
Authority can hardly be assigned For was it when he was constituted by our Lord an Apostle Then indeed probably he began to obtain all the primacy and preeminence he ever had but no such power doth appear then conferred on him or at any time in our Saviour's life at least if it was it was so covertly and indiscernibly that both he himself and all the Apostles must be ignorant thereof who a little before our Lord's Passion did more than once earnestly contest about Superiority And it is observable that whereas our Lord before his Passion did carefully teach and press on the Apostles the chief duties which they were to observe in their behaviour toward each other The maintenance of peace of charity of unity of humility toward one another yet of paying due respect and obedience to this Superiour he said nothing to them The collation of that Power could not well be at any time before the celebration of our Lord's Supper because before that time Saint Peter was scarce an Ecclesiastical Person at least he was no Priest as the Convention of Trent under a curse doth require us to believe for it were strange that an unconsecrated Person or one who was not so much as a Priest should be endowed with so much spiritual Power After his Resurrection our Lord did give divers common Instructions Orders and Commissions to his Apostles but it doth not appear that he did make any peculiar grant to St. Peter for as to the pretence of such an one drawn out of the Appendix to Saint John's Gospel or grounded on the words Pasce oves we shall afterward declare that to be invalid 4. If Saint Peter had been instituted Sovereign of the Apostolical Senate his Office and state had been in nature and kind very distinct from the common Office of the other Apostles as the Office of a King from the Office of any Subject as an ordinary standing perpetual successive Office from one that is onely extraordinary transitory temporary personal and incommunicable to speak according to distinctions now in use and applied to this case whence probably as it was expedient to be it would have been signified by some distinct name or title characterizing it and distinguishing it from others as that of Arch-apostle Arch-pastour High-priest Sovereign Pontife Pope his Holiness the Vicar of Christ or the like whereby it might have appeared that there was such an Officer what the nature of his Office was what specialty of respect and obedience was due to him But no such name or title upon any occasion was assumed by him or was by the rest attributed to him or in History is recorded concerning him the name of an Apostle being all that he took on him or by others was given to him 5. There was indeed no Office above that of an Apostle known to the Apostles or to the primitive Church this saith St. Chrysostome was the greatest authority and the top of authorities there was saith he none before an Apostle none superiour none equal to him this he asserteth of all the Apostles this he particularly applieth to Saint Paul this he demonstrateth from Saint Paul himself who purposely enumerating the chief Officers instituted by God in his Church doth place Apostles in the highest rank Our Lord saith Saint Paul gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastours and Teachers and God hath set some in his Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why not first a Pope an Universal Pastour an Oecumenical Judge a Vicar of Christ a Head of the Catholick Church Could Saint Paul be so ignorant could he be so negligent or so envious as to pass by without any distinction the Supreme Officer if such an one then had been As put case that one should undertake to recite the Officers in any State or Republick would he not do strangely if he should pretermit the King the Duke the Consul the Major thereof would not any one confiding in the skill diligence and integrity of such a relatour be induced from such an omission to believe there was no such Officer there St. Chrysostome therefore did hence very rationally infer that the Apostolical Office was the Supreme in the Christian state having no other Superiour to it Saint Peter therefore was no more than an Apostle and as such he could have no command over those who were in the same highest rank co-ordinate to him and who as Apostles could not be subject to any 6. Our Lord himself at several times declared against this kind of Primacy instituting equality among his Apostles prohibiting them to affect to seek to assume or admit a superiority of Power one above another There was saith Saint Luke among the twelve at the participation of the Holy Supper a strife among them who of them should be accounted the greatest or who had the best pretence to Superiority this strife our Lord presently did check and quash but how not by telling them that he already had decided the case in appointing them a Superiour but rather by assuring them that he did intend none such to be that he would have no Monarchy no exercise of any Dominion or Authority by one among them over the rest but that notwithstanding any advantages one might have before the other as greater in gifts or as preceding in any respect they should be one as another all humbly condescending to one another each being ready to yield help and service to one another The Kings said he of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them and they that exercise authority over them are called benefactours but ye shall not be so but he that is greater among you let him be as the younger and he that is leader as he that doth minister that is whatever privilege any of you obtaineth let it not be employed in way of command but rather of compliance and subserviency as occasion shall require let him not pretend to be a Superiour but rather behave himself as an Inferiour thus our Lord did smother the debate by removing from among them whatever greatness any of them did affect or pretend to forbidding that any of them should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise any Dominion or Authority over the rest as worldly Princes did over their Subjects Again upon another occasion as the circumstances of the place do imply when two of the Apostles of special worth and consideration with our Lord Saint James and Saint John the Sons of Zebedee did affect a preeminence over the rest requesting of our Lord Grant unto us that we may sit one on thy right hand and the other on thy left hand in thy glory or in thy Kingdom as Saint Matthew hath it that is in that new state which they conceived our Lord was ready to introduce which request doth not seem to import any great matter of Authority
instances which follow In the designation of a new Apostle to supply the place of Judas he did indeed suggest the matter and lay the case before them he first declared his sense but the whole company did chuse two and referred the determination of one to lot or to God's arbitration At the institution of Deacons the twelve did call the multitude of disciples and directed them to elect the persons and the proposal being acceptable to them it was done accordingly they chose Stephen c. whom they set before the Apostles and when they had prayed they layd their hands on them In that important transaction about the observance of Mosaical Institutions a great stir and debate being started which Saint Paul and Saint Barnabas by disputation could not appease what course was then taken did they appeal to Saint Peter as to the Supreme Dictatour and Judge of Controversies not so but they sent to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem to enquire about the question when those great messengers were arrived there they were received by the Church and the Apostles and Elders and having made their report the Apostles and Elders did assemble to consider about that matter In this assembly after much debate passed and that many had freely uttered their sense Saint Peter rose up with Apostolical gravity declaring what his reason and experience did suggest conducing to a resolution of the point whereto his words might indeed be much available grounded not onely upon common reason but upon special revelation concerning the case whereupon Saint James alledging that revelation and backing it with reason drawn from Scripture with much authority pronounceth his judgment Therefore saith he I judge that is saith St. Chrysostome I authoritatively say that we trouble not them who from among the Gentiles are turned to God but that we write unto them c. And the result was that according to the proposal of Saint James it was by general consent determined to send a decretal Letter unto the Gentile Christians containing a Canon or advice directive of their practice in the case It then seemed good to or was decreed by the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send and the Letter ran thus The Apostles and Elders and Brethren to the Brethren of the Gentiles Now in all this action in this leading precedent for the management of things in Ecclesiastical Synods and consistories where can the sharpest sight descry any mark of distinction or preeminence which Saint Peter had in respect to the other Apostles did Saint Peter there any-wise behave himself like his pretended Successours upon such occasions what authority did he claim or use before that Assembly or in it or after it did he summon or convocate it no they met upon common agreement did he preside therein no but rather Saint James to whom saith Saint Chrysostome as Bishop of Jerusalem the government was committed did he offer to curb or check any man or to restrain him from his liberty of discourse there no there was much disputation every man frankly speaking his sense did he more than use his freedom of speech becoming an Apostle in arguing the case and passing his vote no for in so exact a relation nothing more doth appear did he form the definitions or pronounce the Decree resulting no Saint James rather did that for as an ancient Authour saith Peter did make an Oration but Saint James did enact the Law was beside his suffrage in the debate any singular approbation required from him or did he by any Bull confirm the Decrees no such matter these were devices of ambition creeping on and growing up to the pitch where they now are In short doth any thing correspondent to Papal pretences appear assumed by Saint Peter or deferred to him If Saint Peter was such a man as they make him how wanting then was he to himself how did he neglect the right and dignity of his Office in not taking more upon him upon so illustrious an occasion the greatest he did ever meet with How defective also were the Apostolical College and the whole Church of Jerusalem in point of duty and decency yielding no more deference to their Sovereign the Vicar of their Lord Whatever account may be framed of these defailances the truth is that Saint Peter then did know his own place and duty better than men do know them now and the rest as well understood how it became them to demean themselves St. Chrysostome's reflexions on those passages are very good that indeed then there was no fastuousness in the Church and the souls of those primitive Christians were clear of Vanity the which dispositions did afterward spring up and grow rankly to the great prejudice of Religion begetting those exorbitant pretences which we now disprove Again when Saint Peter being warned from Heaven thereto did receive Cornelius a Gentile Souldier unto Communion divers good Christians who were ignorant of the warrantableness of that proceeding as others commonly were and Saint Peter himself was before he was informed by that special revelation did not fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contest with him about it not having any notion as it seemeth of his Supreme unaccountable Authority not to say of that infallibility with which the Canonists and Jesuits have invested him unto whom Saint Peter rendreth a fair account and maketh a satisfactory Apology for his proceedings not brow-beating those audacious contenders with his Authority but gently satisfying them with reason But if he had known his Power to be such as now they pretend it to be he should have done well to have asserted it even out of good-will and Charity to those good Brethren correcting their errour and checking their misdemeanour shewing them what an enormous presumption it was so to contend with their Sovereign Pastour and Judge Farther so far was Saint Peter from assuming Command over his Brethren that he was upon occasion ready to obey their Orders as we may see by that passage where upon the conversion of divers persons in Samaria it is said that the Apostles hearing it did send to them Peter and John who going down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost The Apostles sent him that had he been their Sovereign would have been somewhat unseemly and presumptuous for Subjects are not wont to send their Prince or Souldiers their Captain to be sent being a mark of inferiority as our Lord himself did teach A servant said he is not greater than his Lord nor he that is sent greater than he that sent him Saint Luke therefore should at least have so expressed this passage that the Apostles might have seemed to keep their distance and observed good manners if he had said they beseeched him to go that had sounded well but they sent him is harsh if he were Dominus noster Papa as the modern Apostles of Rome
It may also by any prudent considerer easily be discerned that if Saint Peter had really been as they assert him so in Authority superiour to the other Apostles it is hardly possible that Saint Paul should upon these occasions express nothing of it 16. If Saint Peter had been appointed Sovereign of the Church it seemeth that it should have been requisite that he should have outlived all the Apostles for then either the Church must have wanted a Head or there must have been an inextricable Controversie about who that Head was Saint Peter dyed long before Saint John as all agree and perhaps before divers others of the Apostles Now after his departure did the Church want a Head then it might before and after have none and our Adversaries lose the main ground of their pretence did one of the Apostles become Head which of them was it upon what ground did he assume the Headship or who conferred it on him who ever did acknowledge any such thing or where is there any report about it was any other person made Head suppose the Bishop of Rome who onely pretendeth thereto then did Saint John and other Apostles become subject to one in degree inferiour to them then what becometh of Saint Paul's first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers what do all the Apostolical privileges come to when St. John must be at the command of Linus and Cletus and Clemens and of I know not who beside was it not a great absurdity for the Apostles to truckle under the Pastours and Teachers of Rome The like may be said for Saint James if he as the Roman Church doth in its Liturgicks suppose were an Apostle who in many respects might claim the preeminence Who therefore in the Apostolical Constitutions is preferred before Clement Bishop of Rome 17. Upon the same grounds on which a Supremacy of power is claimed to Saint Peter other Apostles might also challenge a Superiority therein over their Brethren but to suppose such a difference of power among the rest is absonous and therefore the grounds are not valid upon which Saint Peter's Supremacy is built I instance in Saint James and Saint John who upon the same probabilities had after Saint Peter a preference to the other Apostles For to them our Saviour declared a special regard to them the Apostles afterwards may seem to have yielded a particular deference they in merit and performances seem to have surpassed they after St. Peter and his Brother were first called to the Apostolical Office they as Saint Peter were by our Lord new Christned as it were and nominated Boanerges by a name signifying the efficacy of their endeavour in their Master's service they together with Saint Peter were assumed to behold the transfiguration they were culled out to wait on our Lord in his agony they also with Saint Peter others being excluded were taken to attest our Lord's performance of that great Miracle of restoring the Ruler's Daughter to life they presuming on their special favour with our Lord did pretend to the chief places in his Kingdom To one of them it is expressed that our Saviour did bear a peculiar affection he being the disciple whoâ— Jesus loved and who leaned on his bosome to the other he particularly discovered himself after his Resurrection and first honoured him with the Crown of Martyrdom They in bloud and cognation did nearest touch our Lord being his Cousin Germans which was esteemed by the Ancients a ground of preferment as Hegesippus reporteth Their industry and activity in propagation of the Gospel was most eminently conspicuous To them it was peculiar that Saint James did first Suffer for it and Saint John did longest persist in the faithfull Confession of it whose Writings in several kinds do remain as the richest magazines of Christian Doctrine furnishing us with the fullest Testimonies concerning the Divinity of our Lord with special Histories of his Life and with his divinest Discourses with most lively incitements to Piety and Charity with propheâ—ical Revelations concerning the state of the Church He therefore was one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chief Pillars and props of the Christian Profession one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Superlative Apostles Accordingly in the Rolls of the Apostles and in reports concerning them their names usually are placed after Saint Peter Hence also some of the Fathers do take them as Saint Peter was to have been preferred by our Lord Peter saith Saint Gregory Nazianzene and James and John who both were indeed and were reckoned before the others so indeed did Christ himself prefer them and Peter James and John saith Clemens Alex. did not as being preferred by the Lord himself contest for honour but did chuse James the Just Bishop of Jerusalem or as Ruffinus read Bishop of the Apostles Hence if by designation of Christ by the Concession of the Apostolical College by the prefulgency of his excellent worth and merit or upon any other ground Saint Peter had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first place the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or next place in the same kind by like means upon the same grounds seem to have belonged unto them and if their advantage did imply difference not in Power but in Order onely not authoritative Superiority but honorary Precedence then can no more be allowed or concluded due to him 18. The Fathers both in express terms and implicitly or by consequence do assert the Apostles to have been equal or co-ordinate in Power and Authority What can be more express than that of St. Cyprian The other Apostles were indeed that which Peter was endowed with equal consortship of honour and power and again Although our Lord giveth to all the Apostles after his resurrection an equal power and saith As the Father sent me so I send you What can be more plain than that of St. Chrysostome Saint Paul sheweth that each Apostle did enjoy equal dignity How again could St. Chrysostome more clearly signifie his Opinion than when comparing Saint Paul to Saint Peter he calleth Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal in honour to him adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for I will not as yet say any thing more as if he thought Saint Paul indeed the more honourable How also could St. Cyril more plainly declare his sense to be the same than when he called Saint Peter and Saint John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equâ—â— to one another in honour Did not St. Hierome also sufficiently declare his mind in the case when he saith of the Apostles that the strength of the Church is equally settled upon them Doth not Dionysius the supposed Areopagite call the decad of the Apostles co-ordinate with their foreman Saint Peter in conformity I suppose to the current judgment of his Age. What can be more full than that of Isidore whose words shew how long this sense continued in the
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
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
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
instance we may discern what little consideration sometimes was had of personal or topical succession to the Apostles in determining the extent of Jurisdiction and why should the Roman Bishop upon that score pretend more validly than others 6. Saint Peter probably e'er that he came at Rome did found divers other Churches whereof he was paramount Bishop or did retain a special superintendency over them particularly Antioch was anciently called his See and he is acknowledged to have sate there seven years before he was Bishop of Rome Why therefore may not the Bishop of Antioch pretend to succeed Saint Peter in his universal Pastourship as well as his younger brother of Rome why should Evodius ordained by Saint Peter at Antioch yield to Clemens afterward by him ordained at Rome Antioch was the first-born of Gentile Churches where the name of Christians was first heard Antioch was as the Constantinopolitan Fathers called it the most ancient and truly Apostolical Church Antioch by virtue of Saint Peter's sitting there or peculiar relation to it was according to their own conceits the principal See Why therefore should Saint Peter be so unkind to it as not onely to relinquish it but to debase it not onely transferring his See from it but devesting it of the privilege which it had got Why should he prefer before it the City of Rome the mystical Babylon the mother of abominations of the earth the Throne of Satan's Empire the place which did then most persecute the Christian Faith and was drunk with the bloud of the Saints 7. The ground of this preference was say they Saint Peter's Will and they have reason to say so for otherwise if Saint Peter had died intestate the Elder Son of Antioch would have had best right to all his goods and dignities But how doth that Will appear in what Tables was it written in what Registers is it extant in whose presence did he nuncupate it it is no-where to be seen or heard of Neither do they otherwise know of it than by reasoning it out and in effect they say onely that it was fit he should will it but they may be mistaken in their divinations and perhaps notwithstanding them Saint Peter might will as well to his former See of Antioch as to his latter of Rome 8. Indeed Bellarmine sometimes positively and briskly enough doth affirm that God did command Saint Peter to fix his See at Rome but his proofs of it are so ridiculously fond and weak that I grudge the trouble of reciting them and he himself sufficiently confuteth them by saying other-where It is not unprobable that our Lord gave an express command that Peter should so fix his See at Rome that the Bishop of Rome should absolutely succeed him He saith it is not improbable if it be no more than so it is uncertain it may be a mere conjecture or a dream It is much more not-unprobable that if God had commanded it there would have been some assurance of a command so very important 9. Antioch hath at least a fair plea for a share in Saint Peter's Prerogatives for it did ever hold the repute of an Apostolical Church and upon that score some deference was paid to it why so if Saint Peter did carry his See with all its Prerogatives to another place But if he carried with him onely part of his Prerogative leaving some part behind at Antioch how much then I pray did he leave there why did he divide unequally or leave less than half if perchance he did leave half the Bishop of Antioch is equal to him of Rome 10. Other persons also may be found who according to equal judgment might have a better title to the succession of Peter in his Universal Authority than the Pope having a nearer relation to him than he although his Successour in one charge or upon other equitable grounds For instance Saint John or any other Apostle who did survive Saint Peter for if Saint Peter was the Father of Christians which Title yet our Saviour forbiddeth any one to assume Saint John might well claim to be his eldest Son and it had been a very hard case for him to have been postponed in the succession it had been a derogation to our Lord 's own choice a neglect of his special affection a disparagement of the Apostolical Office for him to be subjected to any other neither could any other pretend to the like gifts for management of that great charge 11. The Bishop of Jerusalem might with much reason have put in his claim thereto as being Successour of our Lord himself who unquestionably was the High-priest of our Profession and Archbishop of all our Souls whose See was the Mother of all Churches wherein St. Peter himself did at first reside exercising his Vicarship If our Lord upon special accounts out of course had put the Sovereignty into Saint Peter's hands yet after his decease it might be fit that it should return into its proper chanel This may seem to have been the judgment of the times when the Authour of the Apostolical Constitutions did write who reporteth the Apostles to have ordered Prayers to be made first for James then for Clement then for Evodius 12. Equity would rather have required that one should by common consent and election of the whole Church be placed in Saint Peter's room than that the Bishop of Rome by election of a few Persons there should succeed into it As the whole body of Pastours was highly concerned in that Succession so it was reasonable that all of them should concur in designation of a Person thereto it is not reasonable to suppose that either God would institute or Saint Peter by will should devise a course of proceeding in such a case so unequal and unsatisfactory If therefore the Church considering this equity of the case together with the expediency of affairs in relation to its good should undertake to chuse for its self another Monarch the Bishop of another See who should seem fitter for the place to succeed into the Prerogatives of Saint Peter that Person would have a fairer title to that Office than the Pope for such a Person would have a real title grounded on some reason of the case whenas the Pope's pretence doth onely stand upon a positive Institution whereof he cannot exhibit any Certificate This was the mind of a great man among themselves who saith that if possibly the Bishop of Triers should be chosen for Head of the Church For the Church has free power to provide its self a Head Bellarmine himself confesseth that if Saint Peter as he might have done if he had pleased should have chosen no particular See as he did not for the first five years then after Peter's death neither the Bishop of Rome nor of Antioch had succeeded but he whom the Church should have chosen for it self Now if the Church upon that supposition would have
which did contain this Article of Faith 10. It is much that this point of Faith should not be delivered in any of those ancient Expositions of the Creed made by St. Austin Ruffin c. which enlarge it to necessary points of Doctrine connected with the Articles therein especially with that of the Catholick Church to which the Pope's Authority hath so close a connexion that it should not be touched in the Catechetical Discourses of Cyril Ambrose c. that in the Systemes of Divinity composed by Saint Austin Lacâ—antius c. it should not be treated on The world is now changed for the Catechism of Trent doth not overlook so material a Point and it would pass for a lame Body of Theology which should omit to treat on this Subject 11. It is more wonderfull that this Point should never be defined in downright and full terms by any ancient Synod it being so notoriously in those old times opposed by divers who dissented in opinion and discorded in practice from the Pope it being also a Point of that consequence that such a solemn declaration of it would have much conduced to the ruine of all particular Errours and Schisms which were maintained then in opposition to the Church 12. Indeed had this Point been allowed by the main Body of Orthodox Bishops the Pope could not have been so drowsie or stupid as not to have solicited for such a definition thereof nor would the Bishops have been backward in compliance thereto it being in our adversaries conceit so compendious and effectual a way of suppressing all Heresies Schisms and Disorders although indeed later Experience hath shewed it no less available to stifle Truth Justice and Piety The Popes after Luther were better advised and so were the Bishops adhering to his Opinions 13. Whereas also it is most apparent that many persons disclaimed this Authority not regarding either the Doctrines or Decrees of the Popes it is wonderfull that such men should not be reckoned in the large Catalogues of Hereticks wherein Errours of less obvious consideration and of far less importance did place men If Epiphanius Theodoret Leontius c. were so negligent or unconcerned yet St. Austin Philastrius Western men should not have overlooked this sort of desperate Hereticks Aerius for questioning the dignity of Bishops is set among the Hereticks but who got that name for disavowing the Pope's Supremacy among the many who did it It is but lately that such as we have been thrust in among Hereticks 14. Whereas no Point avowed by Christians could be so apt to raise offence and jealousie in Pagans against our Religion as this which setteth up a Power of so vast extent and huge influence whereas no novelty could be more surprizing or startling than the Erection of an Universal Empire over the Consciences and religious Practices of men whereas also this Doctrine could not but be very conspicuous and glaring in ordinary practice it is prodigious that all Pagans should not loudly exclaim against it It is strange that Pagan Historians such as Marcellinus who often speaketh of Popes and blameth them for their luxurious way of living and pompous garb as Zozimus who bore a great spight at Christianity as all the Writers of the Imperial History before Constantine should not report it as a very strange pretence newly started up It is wonderfull that the eager Adversaries of our Religion such as Celsus Porphyrie Hierocles Julian himself should not particularly level their Discourse against it as a most scandalous position and dangerous pretence threatning the Government of the Empire It is admirable that the Emperours themselves enslamed with emulation and suspicion of such an Authority the which hath been so terrible even to Christian Princes should not in their Edicts expresly decry and impugn it that indeed every one of them should not with extremest violence implacably strive to extirpate it In consequence of these things it may also seem strange that none of the Advocates of our Faith Justin Origen Tertullian Arnobius Cyril Austin should be put to defend it or so much as forced to mention it in their elaborate Apologies for the Doctrines and Practices which were reprehended by any sort of Adversaries thereto We may add that divers of them in their Apologies and representations concerning Christianity would have appeared not to deal fairly or to have been very inconsiderate when they profess for their common belief assertions repugnant to that Doctrine as when Tertullian saith We reverence the Emperour as a man second to God and less onely than God when Optatus affirmeth that above the Emperour there is none beside God who made the Emperour and that Donatus by extolling himself as some now do above the Emperour did in so doing as it were exceed the bounds of men that he did esteem himself as God not as a man When St. Chrysostome asserteth the Emperour to be the crown and head of all men upon earth and saith that even Apostles Evangelists Prophets any men whoever are to be subject to the temporal Powers when St. Cyril calleth the Emperour the Supreme top of glory among men elevated above all others by incomparable differences c. When even Popes talk at this rate as Pope Gregory I. calling the Emperour his Lord and Lord of all telling the Emperour that his Competitour by assuming the title of Universal Bishop did set himself above the honour of his Imperial Majesty which he supposeth a piece of great absurdity and arrogance and even Pope Gregory II. doth call that Emperour against whom he afterward rebelled the Head of Christians Whereas indeed if the Pope be Monarch of the Church endowed with the Regalities which they now ascribe to him it is plain enough that he is not inferiour to any man living in real power and dignity wherefore the modern Doctours of Rome are far more sincere or considerate in their Heraldry than were those old Fathers of Christendom who now stick not down-rightly to prefer the Pope before all Princes of the World not onely in Doctrine and Notion but in the Sacred Offices of the Church for in the very Canon of their Mass the Pope together with the Bishop of the Diocese one of his Ministers is set before all Christian Princes every Christian Subject being thereby taught to deem the Pope superiour to his Prince Now we must believe for one Pope hath written it another hath put it in his Decretals and it is current Law that the Papal Authority doth no less surpass the Royal than the Sun doth outshine the Moon Now it is abundantly declared by Papal definition as a point necessary to Salvation that every humane creature neither King nor Kesar excepted is subject to the Roman High-priest Now the mystery is discovered why Popes when summoned by Emperours declined to go in Person to General Synods because it was not tolerable that the Emperour who sometime would be present in Synods
Discipline should never insist upon the duty of Obedience to the Pope or charge those Schismaticks with their rebellion against him or alledge his Authority against them If we consider that the Pope was Bishop of the Imperial City the Metropolis of the World that he thence was most eminent in rank did abound in wealth did live in great splendour and reputation had many dependences and great opportunities to gratify and relieve many of the Clergy that of the Fathers whose Volumes we have all well affected towards him divers were personally obliged to him for his support in their distress as Athanasius Chrysostome Theodoret or as to their Patrons and Benefactours as St. Hierome divers could not but highly respect him as Patron of the cause wherein they were engaged as Basil Gregory Nazianzene Hilary Gregory Nyssene Ambrose Austin some were his partizans in a common quarrel as Cyril divers of them lived in places and times wherein he had got much sway as all the Western Bishops that he had then improved his Authority much beyond the old limits that all the Bishops of the Western or Latine Churches had a peculiar dependence on him especially after that by advantage of his Station by favour of the Court by colour of the Sardican Canons by voluntary deferences and submissions by several tricks he had wound himself to meddle in most of their chief Affairs that hence divers Bishops were tempted to admire to court to flatter him that divers aspiring Popes were apt to encourage the commenders of their Authority which they themselves were apt to magnifie and inculcate considering I say such things it is a wonder that in so many voluminous discourses so little should be said favouring this pretence so nothing that proveth it so much that crosseth it so much indeed as I hope to shew that quite overthroweth it If it be asked how we can prove this I answer that beside who carefully peruseth those old Books will easily see it we are beholden to our Adversaries for proving it to us when they least intended us such a favour for that no clear and cogent passages for proof of this pretence can be thence fetched is sufficiently evident from the very allegations which after their most diligent raking in old Books they produce the which are so few and fall so very short of their purpose that without much stretching they signifie nothing 28. It is monstrous that in the Code of the Catholick Church consisting of the decrees of so many Synods concerning Ecclesiastical order and discipline there should not be one Canon directly declaring his Authority nor any mention made of him except thrice accidentally once upon occasion of declaring the Authority of the Alexandrine Bishop the other upon occasion of assigning to the Bishop of Constantinople the second place of honour and equal privileges with him If it be objected that these discourses are negative and therefore of small force I answer that therefore they are most proper to assert such a negative proposition for how can we otherwise better shew a thing not to be than by shewing it to have no footstep there where it is supposed to stand how can we more clearly argue a matter of right to want proof than by declaring it not to be extant in the Laws grounding such right not taught by the Masters who profess to instruct in such things not testifyed in records concerning the exercise of it such arguments indeed in such cases are not merely negative but rather privative proving things not to be because not affirmed there where in reason they ought to be affirmed standing therefore upon positive Suppositions that Holy Scripture that general tradition are not imperfect and lame toward their design that ancient Writers were competently intelligent faithfull diligent that all of them could not conspire in perpetual silence about things of which they had often fair occasion and great reason to speak In fine such considerations however they may be deluded by Sophistical Wits will yet bear great sway and often will amount near to the force of demonstration with men of honest prudence However we shall proceed to other discourses more direct and positive against the Popish Doctrine II. Secondly we shall shew that this pretence upon several accounts is contrary to the Doctrine of Holy Scripture 1. This pretence doth thwart the Holy Scripture by assigning to another the prerogatives and peculiar Titles appropriated therein to our Lord. The Scripture asserteth him to be our onely Sovereign Lord and King To us saith it there is one Lord and One King shall be King over them who shall reign over the house of David for ever and of his Kingdom there shall be no end who is the onely Potentate the King of Kings and Lord of Lords the One Law-giver who is able to save and to destroy The Scripture speaketh of one Arch-Pastour and great Shepherd of the Sheep exclusively to any other for I will said God in the Prophet set up one Shepherd over them and he shall feed the Sheep and There saith our Lord himself shall be one Fold and one Shepherd who that shall be he expresseth adding I am the good Shepherd the good Shepherd giveth his life for the Sheep by Pope Boniface his good leave who maketh Saint Peter or himself this Shepherd The Scripture telleth us that we have one High-Priest of our Profession answerable to that one in the Jewish Church his Type The Scripture informeth us that there is but one Supreme Doctour Guide Father of Christians prohibiting us to acknowledge any other for such Ye are all Brethren and call ye not any one Father upon Earth for one is your Father even he that is in Heaven Neither be ye called Masters for one is your Master even Christ. Good Pope Gregory not the seventh of that name did take this for a good argument for What therefore dearest Brother said he to John of Constantinople wilt thou say in that terrible trial of the Judge who is coming who dost affect to be called not onely Father but General Father in the World The Scripture representeth the Church as a building whereof Christ himself is the chief Corner-stone as a Family whereof he being the Pater-familias as all others are fellow-servants as one Body having one Head whom God hath given to be Head over all things to the Church which is his Body He is the One Spouse of the Church which title one would think he might leave peculiar to our Lord there being no Vice-husbands yet hath he been bold even to claim that as may be seen in the Constit. of Pope Greg. X. in one of their General Synods It seemeth therefore a Sacrilegious arrogance derrogating from our Lord's Honour for any man to assume or admit those Titles of Sovereign of the Church Head of the Church our Lord Arch-Pastour Highest-Priest Chief Doctour Master Father Judge of Christians upon what
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
to a Donatist his Adversary citing the Authority of St. Cyprian against him he thus replieth But now seeing it is not Canonical which thou recitest with that liberty to which the Lord hath called us I do not receive the opinion differing from Scripture of that man whose praise I cannot reach to whose great learning I do not compare my writings whose wit I love in whose speech I delight whose charity I admire whose martyrdom I reverence This Liberty not onely the Ancients but even divers Popes have acknowledged to belong to every Christian as we shall hereafter shew when we shall prove that we may lawfully reject the Pope as a Patron of Errour and Iniquity 6. It particularly doth thwart Scripture by wronging Princes in exempting a numerous sort of People from subjection to their Laws and Judicatures whereas by God's Ordination and express Command every soul is subject to them not excepting the Popes themselves in the opinion of St. Chrysostome except they be greater than any Apostle By pretending to govern the Subjects of Princes without their leave to make Laws without his permission or confirmation to cite his Subjects out of their Territories c. which are encroachments upon the Rights of God's unquestionable Ministers III. Farther because our Adversaries do little regard any allegation of Scripture against them pretending themselves to be the onely Masters of its sense or of common sense Judges and Interpreters of them we do alledge against them that this pretence doth also cross Tradition and the common Doctrine of the Fathers For 1. Common usage and practice is a good interpreter of Right and that sheweth no such Right was known in the Primitive Church 2. Indeed the state of the Primitive Church did not admit it 3. The Fathers did suppose no Order in the Church by original Right or divine Institution superiour to that of a Bishop whence they commonly did style a Bishop the Highest Priest and Episcopacy the top of Ecclesiastical Orders The chief Priest saith Tertullian that is the Bishop hath the right of giving baptism Although saith St. Ambrose the Presbyters also do it yet the beginning of the Ministery is from the highest Priest Optatus calleth Bishops the tops and Princes of all The Divine Order of Bishops saith Dionysius is the first of Divine Orders the same being also the extreme and last of them for into it all the frame of our Hierarchy is resolved and accomplished This language is common even among Popes themselves complying with the speech then current for Presbyters saith Pope Innocent I. although they are Priests yet have they not the top of High priesthood No man saith P. Zosimus I. against the precepts of the Fathers should presume to aspire to the highest Priesthood of the Church It is decreed saith Pope Leo I. that the Chorepiscopi or Presbyters who figure the sons of Aaron shall not presume to snatch that which the Princes of the Priests whom Moses and Aaron did typifie are commanded to doe Note by the way that seeing according to this Pope's mind after St. Hierome Moses and Aaron did in the Jewish Policy represent Bishops there was none there to prefigure the Pope In those days the Bishop of Nazianzum a petty Town in Cappadocia was an High-priest so Gregory calleth his Father And the Bishop of a poor City in Africk is styled Sovereign Pontif of Christ most blessed Father most blessed Pope and the very Roman Clergy doth call St. Cyprian most blessed and glorious Pope which Titles the Pope doth now so charily reserve and appropriate to himself But innumerable Instances of this kind might be produced I shall onely therefore add two other passages which seem very observable to the enforcement of this discourse St. Hierome reprehending the discipline of the Montanists hath these words With us the Bishops do hold the places of the Apostles with them a Bishop is in the third place for they have for the first rank the Patriarchs of Pepusa in Phrygia for the second those whom they call Cenones so are Bishops thrust down into the third that is almost the last place as if thence Religion became more stately if that which is first with us be the last with them Now doth not St. Hierome here affirm that every Bishop hath the place of an Apostle and the first rank in the Church doth not he tax the advancement of any Order above this may not the Popish Hierarchy most patly be compared to that of the Montanists and is it not equally liable to the censure of St. Hierome doth it not place the Roman Pope in the first place and the Cardinals in the second detruding the Bishops into a third place Could the Pepusian Patriarch or his Cenones either more over-top in dignity or sway by power over Bishops than doth the Roman Patriarch and his Cardinals Again St. Cyprian telleth Pope Cornelius that in Episcopacy doth reside the sublime and divine power of governing the Church it being the sublime top of the Priesthood He saith the Blessed man concerning Pope Cornelius did not suddenly arrive to Episcopacy but being through all Ecclesiastical Offices promoted and having in divine administrations often merited of God did by all the steps of Religion mount to the sublimest pitch of Priesthood where it is visible that St. Cyprian doth not reckon the Papacy but the Episcopacy of Cornelius to be that top of Priesthood above which there was nothing eminent in the Church unto which he passing through the inferiour degrees of the Clergy had attained In fine it cannot well be conceived that the Ancients constantly would have spoken in this manner if they had allowed the Papal Office to be such as now it doth bear it self the which indeed is an Order no less distant from Episcopacy than the rank of a King differeth from that of the meanest Baron in his Kingdom Neither is it prejudicial to this Discourse or to any preceding that in the Primitive Church there were some distinctions and subordinations of Bishops as of Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans common Bishops for These were according to prudence constituted by the Church it self for the more orderly and peaceable administration of things These did not import such a difference among the Bishops that one should domineer over others to the infringing of primitive fraternity or common liberty but a precedence in the same rank with some moderate advantages for the common good These did stand under Authority of the Church and might be changed or corrected as was found expedient by common agreement By virtue of these the Superiours of this kind could doe nothing over their subordinates in an arbitrary manner but according to the regulation of Canons established by consent in Synods by which their influence was amplified or curb'd When any of these did begin to domineer or exceed his limits he was liable to account and correction he was
Ecclesiastical State to raise Schisms and Troubles It is like to extinguish genuine Charity which is free and uncompelled All the peace and charity which it endureth is by force and compulsion not out of choice and good affection V. The Ancients did assert to each Bishop a free absolute independent Authority subject to none directed by none accountable to none on Earth in the administration of affairs properly concerning his particular Church This is most evident in St. Cyprian's Writings out of which it will not be amiss to set down some passages manifesting the sense and practice of the Church in his time to the satisfaction of any ingenuous mind The Bond of concord abiding and the Sacrament or Doctrine of the Catholick Church persisting undivided every Bishop disposeth and directeth his own acts being to render an account of his purpose to the Lord this he writeth when he was pleading the cause of Pope Cornelius against Novatian but then it seemeth not dreaming of his Supremacy over others But we know that some will not lay down what once they have imbibed nor will easily change their mind but the bond of peace and concord with their Collegues being preserved will retain some peculiar things which have once been used by them in which matter neither do we force any or give law whenas every Prelate hath in the administration of his Church the free power of his will being to render unto the Lord an account of his acting this saith he writing to Pope Stephanus and in a friendly manner out of common respect and single love not out of servile obeisance acquainting him what he and his brethren in a Synod by common consent and authority had established concerning the degradation of Clergy-men who had been ordained by Hereticks or had lapsed into Schism For seeing it is ordained by us all and it is likewise equal and just that each man's cause should be there heard where the crime is committed and to each Pastour a portion of the Flock is assigned which each should rule and govern being to render an account to his Lord those indeed over whom we preside ought not to ramble about this saith he in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius upon occasion of some factious Clergy-men addressing themselves to him with factious suggestions to gain his countenance These things I have briefly written back according to our meanness dear brother prescribing to none nor prejudging that every Bishop should not doe what he thinks good having a free power of his will In which matter our bashfulness and modesty doth not prejudge any one so that every one may not judge as he thinketh and act as he judgeth Prescribing to none so that every Bishop may not resolve what he thinks good being to render an account to the Lord c. It remaineth that each of us do utter his opinion about this matter judging no man nor removing any man if he dissenteth from the right of communion for neither doth any of us constitute himself Bishop of Bishops or by tyrannical terrour driveth his Collegues to a necessity of obeying whenas every Bishop hath upon account of his liberty and authority his own free choice and is no less exempted from being judged by another than he is uncapable to judge another but let us all expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ who and who alone hath power both to prefer us to the government of his Church and to judge of our acting these words did St. Cyprian speak as Proloquntour of the great Synod of Bishops at Carthage and what words could be more express or more full in assertion of the Episcopal Liberties and Rights against almost every branch of Romish pretences He disavoweth the practice of one Bishop excluding another from communion for dissent in opinion about disputable points He rejecteth the pretence that any man can have to be a Bishop of Bishops or superiour to all his Brethren He condemneth the imposing opinions upon Bishops and constraining them to obedience He disclaimeth any power in one Bishop to judge another He asserteth to each Bishop a full liberty and power to manage his own concerns according to his discretion He affirmeth every Bishop to receive his power onely from Christ and to be liable onely to his judgment We may observe that St. Austin in his reflexions upon the passages in that Synod doth approve yea admire that Preface passing high commendations on the smartest passages of it which assert common liberty professing his own conformity in practice to them In this consultation saith he is shewed a pacifick soul overflowing with plenty of charity and We have therefore a free choice of inquiry granted to us by the most mild and most veracious speech of Cyprian himself and Now if the proud and tumid minds of hereticks dare to extoll themselves against the holy humility of this speech than which what can be more gentle more humble Would St. Austin have swallowed those Sayings could he have so much applauded them if he had known a just power then extant and radiant in the World which they do impeach and subvert No I trow he did not know nor so much as dream of any such although the Pope was under his nose while he was discussing that point and he could hardly talk so much of St. Cyprian without thinking of Pope Stephen However let any man of sense honestly reade and weigh those passages considering who did write them to whom he writ them upon what occasions he writ them when he writ them that he was a great Primate of the Church a most holy most prudent most humble and meek person that he addressed divers of them to Bishops of Rome that many of them were touching the concerns of Popes that he writ them in times of persecution and distress which produce the most sober and serious thoughts then let him if he can conceive that all-Christian Bishops were then held subject to the Pope or owned such a power due to him as he now claimeth We may add a contemporary Testimony of the Roman Clergy addressing to St. Cyprian in these words Although a mind well conscious to it self and supported by the vigour of Evangelical discipline and having in heavenly doctrines become a true witness to it self is wont to be content with God for its onely judge and not to desire the praises nor to dread the accusations of another yet they are worthy of double praise who when they know they owe their consciences to God onely as judge yet desire also their actions to be approved by their brethren themselves the which it is no wonder that you brother Cyprian should do who according to your modesty and natural industry would have us not so much judges as partakers of your Counsels Then it seems the College of Cardinals not so high in the instep as they are now did take St. Cyprian to be free and not accountable
offences should be judged in their Provinces or upon appeal from them in Patriarchal Synods but he receiveth appeals at the first hand and determineth them in his Court without calling such a Synod in an age for any such purpose The ancient Patriarchs did order all things as became good Subjects with leave and under submission to the Emperour who as he pleased did interpose his confirmation of their Sanctions but this man pretendeth to decree what he pleaseth without the leave and against the will of Princes Wherefore he is not a Patriarch of the Western Churches for that he acteth according to no Patriarchal Rule but a certain kind of Sovereign Lord or a tyrannical Oppressour of them 11. In all the transactions for modelling the Church there never was allowed to the Pope any dominion over his Fellow-patriarchs or of those great Primates who had assumed that name to themselves among whom indeed for the dignity of his City he had obtained a priority of honour or place but never had any power over them setled by a title of Law or by clear and uncontested practice Insomuch that if any of them had erred in Faith or offended in Practice it was requisite to call a General Synod to judge them as in the cases of Athanasius of Gregory Nazianzene and Maximus of Theophilus and St. Chrysostome of Nestorius and of Dioscorus is evident 12. Indeed all the Oriental Churches did keep themselves pretty free from his encroachments although when he had swollen so big in the West he sometimes did take occasion to attempt on their Liberty which they sometimes did warily decline sometimes stoutly did oppose But as to the main those flourishing Churches constantly did maintain a distinct administration from the Western Churches under their own Patriarchs and Synods not suffering him to interlope in prejudice to their Liberty They without his leave or notice did call and celebrate Synods whereof all the first great Synods are instances their Ordinations were not confirmed or touched by him Appeals were not with publick regard or allowance thence made to him in causes great or little but they decided them among themselves they quashed Heresies springing up among them as the Second General Synod the Macedonians Theophilus the Origenists c. Little in any case had his Worship to doe with them or they with him beyond what was needfull to maintain general communion and correspondence with him which they commonly as piety obliged were willing to doe And sometimes when a pert Pope upon some incidental advantage of differences risen among them would be more busie than they deemed convenient in tampering with their affairs they did rap his fingers so Victor so Stephanus so Julius and Liberius of old did feel to their smart so afterward Damasus and other Popes in the case of Flavianus Innocent in the case of St. Chrysostome Felix and his Successours in the case of Acacius did find little regard had to their interposals So things proceeded till at length a final rupture was made between them and they would not suffer him at all to meddle with their affairs Before I proceed any farther I shall briefly draw some Corollaries from this Historical account which I have given of the original and growth of Metropolitical Primatical and Patriarchal Jurisdiction 1. Patriarchs are an humane Institution 2. As they were erected by the power and prudence of men so they may be dissolved by the same 3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes and by the same they may be dejected if great reason do appear 4. The Patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own Province or Diocese doth not subsist upon any Canon of a General Synod 5. He can therefore claim no such power otherwise than upon his invasion or assumption 6. The Primates and Metropolitans of the Western Church cannot be supposed otherwise than by force or out of fear to have submitted to such an authority as he doth usurp 7. It is not really a Patriarchal Power like to that which was granted by the Canons and Princes but another sort of power which the Pope doth exercise 8. The most rightfull Patriarch holding false Doctrine or imposing unjust Laws or tyrannically abusing his power may and ought to be rejected from communion 9. Such a Patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod if it may be had 10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of Princes each Church may free it self from the mischiefs induced by his perverse doctrine or practice 11. No Ecclesiastical Power can interpose in the management of any affairs within the Territory of any Prince without his concession 12. By the Laws of God and according to ancient Practice Princes may model the bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction erect Bishopricks enlarge diminish or transfer them as they please 13. Wherefore each Prince having Supreme Power in his own Dominions and equal to what the Emperour had in his may exclude any foreign Prelate from Jurisdiction in his Territories 14. It is expedient for peace and publick good that he should doe thus 15. Such Prelate according to the rules of Christianity ought to be content with his doing so 16. Any Prelate exercising power in the Dominion of any Prince is eatenus his Subject as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman Emperours 17. Those joints of Ecclesiastical Discipline established in the Roman Empire by the confirmation of Emperours were as to necessary continuance dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman Empire 18. The power of the Pope in the Territories of any Prince did subsist by his authority and favour 19. By the same reason as Princes have curbed the exorbitancy of Papal power in some cases of entertaining Legats making Appeals disposing of Benefices c. by the same they might exclude it 20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend upon the subsistence of such a form instituted by man Having shewed at large that this Universal Sovereignty and Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome over the Christian Church hath no real Foundation either in Scripture or elsewhere it will be requisite to shew by what ways and means so groundless a claim and pretence should gain belief and submission to it from so considerable a part of Christendom and that from so very slender roots from slight beginnings and the slimmest pretences one can well imagin this bulk of exorbitant power did grow the vastest that ever man on earth did attain or did ever aim at will be the less wonderfull if we do consider the many causes which did concur and contribute thereto some whereof are proposed in the following Observations 1. Eminency of any kind in wealth in honour in reputation in might in place or mere order of dignity doth easily pass into advantages of real power and command over those who are inferiour in those respects and have any dealings or common transactions with such Superiours For to persons endowed with such eminency by
voluntary deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allowed none presuming to stand in competition with them every one rather yielding place to them than to their equals The same conduct of things upon the same accounts and by reason of their possession doth continue fast in their hands so long as they do retain such advantages Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an opinion or a pretence of right thereto they are apt to assume a title and others ready to allow it Men naturally do admire such things and so are apt to defer extraordinary respect to the possessours of them Advantages of wealth and might are not onely instruments to attain but incentives spurring men to affect the getting authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours for men will not be content with bare eminency but will desire real power and sway so as to obtain their wills over others and not to be crossed by any Pope Leo had no reason to wonder that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople was not content with dry honour Men are apt to think their honour is precarious and standeth on an uncertain foundation if it be not supported with real power and therefore they will not be satisfied to let their advantages lie dead which are so easily improveable to power by inveigling some and scaring or constraining others to bear their yoke and they are able to benefit and gratifie some and thereby render them willing to submit those afterwards become serviceable to bring others under who are disaffected or refractory So the Bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem at first had onely privileges of honour but afterward they soon hooked in power Now the Roman Bishops from the beginning were eminent above all other Bishops in all kinds of advantages He was seated in the Imperial City the place of general resort thence obvious to all eyes and his name sounding in all mouths He had a most numerous opulent splendid flock and Clergy He had the greatest income from liberal oblations to dispose of He lived in greatest state and lustre He had oportunities to assist others in their business and to relieve them in their wants He necessarily thence did obtain great respect and veneration Hence in all common affairs the conduct and presidence were naturally devolved on him without contest No wonder then that after some time the Pope did arrive to some pitch of authority over poor Christians especially those who lay nearest to him improving his eminency into power and his pastoral charge into a kind of Empire according to that observation of Socrates that long before his time the Roman Episcopacy had advanced it self beyond the Priesthood into a Potentacy And the like he observeth to have happened in the Church of Alexandria upon the like grounds or by imitation of such a pattern 2. Any small power is apt to grow and spread it self a spark of it soon will expand it self into a flame it is very like to the grain of mustard seed which indeed is the least of all seeds but when it is grown it is the greatest among herbs and becometh a tree so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof Encroaching as Plutarch saith is an innate disease of Potentacies Whoever hath any pittance of it will be improving his stock having tasted the sweetness of having his will which extremely gratifieth the nature of man he will not be satisfied without having more he will take himself to be straitned by any bounds and will strive to free himself of all restraints Any pretence will serve to ground attempts of enlarging power and none will be balked For Power is bold enterprizing restless it always watcheth or often findeth never passeth opportunities of dilating it self Every accession doth beget farther advantages to amplifie it as its stock groweth so it with ease proportionably doth encrease being ever out at use As it groweth so its strength to maintain and enlarge it self doth grow it gaining more wealth more friends more associates and dependents None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and manifold disadvantages for as its adherents are deemed loyal and faithfull so its opposers are branded with the imputations of rebellion contumacy disloyalty and not succeeding in their resistence they will be undone None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its careir so that it seldom loseth by opposition and it ever gaineth by composition If it be checked at one time or in one place it will like the Sea at another season in another point break in If it is sometimes overthrown in a Battel it is seldom conquered in the War It is always on its march forward and gaineth ground for one encroachment doth countenance the next and is alledged for a precedent to authorize or justifie it It seldom moveth backward for every Successour thinketh he may justly enjoy what his Predecessour did gain or which is transmitted into his possession so that there hardly can ever be any restitution of ill-gotten power Thus have many absolute Kingdoms grown the first Chief was a Leader of Volunteers from thence he grew to be a Prince with stated Privileges after he became a Monarch invested with high Prerogatives in fine he creepeth forward to be a Grand Seigniour usurping absolute dominion so did Augustus Caesar first onely assume the style of Prince of the Senate demeaning himself modestly as such but he soon drew to himself the administration of all things and upon that foundation his Successours very suddenly did erect a boundless power If you trace the foot-steps of most Empires to the beginning you may perceive the like So the Pope when he had got a little power continually did swell it The puny pretence of the succeeding Saint Peter and the name of the Apostolical See the precedence by reason of the Imperial City the honorary Privileges allowed him by Councils the Authority deferred to him by one Synod of revising the Causes of Bishops the countenance given to him in repressing some Heresies he did improve to constitute himself Sovereign Lord of the Church 3. Spiritual power especially is of a growing nature and more especially that which deriveth from Divine Institution for it hath a great awe upon the hearts and consciences of men which engageth them to a firm and constant adherence It useth the most subtile arms which it hath always ready which needeth no time or cost to furnish which cannot be extorted from its hand so that it can never be disarmed And its weapons make strong impression because it proposeth the most effectual encouragements to its abettours and discouragements to its adversaries alluring the one with promises of God's favour and eternal happiness terrifying the other with menaces of vengeance from heaven and endless misery the which do ever quell religious superstitious weak people and often daunt men of knowledge and courage It is presumed unchangeable
that you would command a General Synod to be celebrated within Italy to which request although back'd with the desire of the Western Emperour Theodosius would by no means consent for as Leontius reporteth when Valentinian being importuned by Pope Leo did write to Theodosius II. that he would procure another Synod to be held for examining whether Dioscorus had judged rightly or no Theodosius did write back to him saying I shall make no other Synod The same Pope did again of the same Emperour petition for a Synod to examin the cause of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Let your clemency saith he be pleased to grant an Vniversal Council to be held in Italy as with me the Synod which for this cause did meet at Rome doth request Thus did that Pope continually harp upon one string to get a General Synod to be celebrated at his own doors but never could obtain his purpose the Emperour being stiff in refusing it The same Pope with better success as to the thing though not as to the place did request of the Emperour Marcian a Synod for he concurring in opinion that it was needfull did saith Liberatus at the petition of the Pope and the Roman Princes command a General Council to be congregated at Nice Now if the Pope had himself a known right to convocate Synods what needed all this application or this supplication to the Emperours would not the Pope have endeavoured to exercise his Authority would he not have clamoured or whined at any interruption thereof would so spiritfull and sturdy a Pope as Leo have begged that to be done by another which he had authority to doe of himself when he did apprehend so great necessity for it and was so much provoked thereto would he not at least have remonstrated against the injury therein done to him by Theodosius All that this daring Pope could adventure at was to wind in a pretence that the Synod of Chalcedon was congregated by his consent for it hath been the pleasure of whom I pray that a General Council should be congregated both by the command of the Christian Princes and with the consent of the Apostolick See saith he very cunningly yet not so cunningly but that any other Bishop might have said the same for his See This power indeed upon many just accounts peculiarly doth belong to Princes It suteth to the dignity of their state it appertaineth to their duty they are most able to discharge it They are the Guardians of publick tranquillity which constantly is endangered which commonly is violated by dissensions in religious matters whence we must pray for them that by their care we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty they alone can authorize their Subjects to take such Journeys or to meet in such Assemblies they alone can well cause the expences needfull for holding Synods to de exacted and defrayed they alone can protect them can maintain Order and Peace in them can procure Observance to their Determinations they alone have a Sword to constrain resty and refractory persons and in no cases are men so apt to be such as in debates about these matters to convene to confer peaceably to agree to observe what is settled They as nursing Fathers of the Church as Ministers of God's Kingdom as encouragers of good works as the Stewards of God entrusted with the great Talents of Power Dignity Wealth enabling them to serve God are obliged to cause Bishops in such cases to perform their duty according to the example of good Princes in Holy Scripture who are commended for proceedings of this nature for so King Josias did convocate a General Synod of the Church in his time then saith the Text the King sent and gathered together all the Elders of Judah and Jerusalem In this Synod he presided standing in his place and making a covenant before the Lord its Resolutions he confirmed causing all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to that Covenant and he took care of their Execution making all present in Israel effectually to serve the Lord their God So also did King Hezekiah gather the Priests and Levites together did warn did command them to doe their duty and reform things in the Church My Sons said he be not now negligent for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him to serve him and that ye should minister unto him and burn incense Beside them none other can have reasonable pretence to such a Power or can well be deemed able to manage it so great an Authority cannot be exercised upon the Subjects of any Prince without eclipsing his Majesty infringing his natural right and endangering his State He that at his pleasure can summon all Christian Pastours and make them trot about and hold them when he will is in effect Emperour or in a fair way to make himself so It is not fit therefore that any other person should have all the Governours of the Church at his beck so as to draw them from remote places whither he pleaseth to put them on long and chargeable Journeys to detain them from their charge to set them on what deliberations and debates he thinketh good It is not reasonable that any one without the leave of Princes should authorize so great conventions of men having such interest and sway it is not safe that any one should have such dependencies on him by which he may be tempted to clash with Princes and withdraw his Subjects from their due obedience Neither can any success be well expected from the use of such Authority by any who hath not Power by which he can force Bishops to convene to resolve to obey whence we see that Constantine who was a Prince so gentle and friendly to the Clergy was put to threaten those Bishops who would absent themselves from the Synod indicted by him at Tyre and Theodosius also a very mild and religious Prince did the like in his summoning the two Ephesine Synods We likewise may observe that when the Pope and Western Bishops in a Synodical Epistle did invite those of the East to a great Synod indicted at Rome these did refuse the journey alledging that it would be to no good purpose so also when the Western Bishops did call those of the East for resolving the difference between Flavianus and Paulinus both pretending to be Bishops of Antioch what effect had their summons and so will they always or often be ready to say who are called at the pleasure of those who want force to constrain them so that such Authority in unarmed hands and God keep Arms out of a Pope's hands will be onely a source of discords Either the Pope is a Subject as he was in the first times and then it were too great a presumption for him to claim such a power over his fellow-Subjects in prejudice to his Sovereign nor indeed did he presume so far untill he
express it by I confirm I define I decree But the effectual confirmation of Synods which gave them the force of Laws was in other hands and depended on the Imperial Sanction So Justinian affirmeth generally All these things at diverse times following our above-named predecessours of pious memory corroborated and confirm'd by their Laws what each Council had determin'd and expell'd those Hereticks who attempted to resist the definitions of the aforesaid four Councils and disturb the Churches So particularly Constantine as Athanasius himself reporteth did by Law confirm the decrees of the great Synod of Nice and Eusebius assureth the same He saith he did ratifie the decrees of the Synod by his authority His Letters are extant which he sent about the world exhorting and requiring all to conform to the constitutions of that Synod So Theodosius did confirm the Decrees of the Second General Synod adding saith Sozomen his confirmatory suffrage to their decree the which he did at the supplication of the Fathers addressed to him in these terms We therefore do beseech your Grace that by your pious Edict the sentence of the Synod may be authorized that as by the letters of convocation you did honour the assembly so you would also confirm the result of things decreed The third General Synod was also confirmed by Theodosius II. as Justinian telleth us The above-named Theodosius of pious memory maintaining what had been so justly determined against Nestorius and his impiety made his condemnation valid And this Emperour asserted this privilege to himself as of right and custom belonging to him writing to the Synod in these words for all things so as may please God without contentiousness and with truth being examined ought so to be established by our religiousness The other abortive Synod at Ephesus was also confirmed by Theodosius Junior as Dioscorus in his defence alledged in these words which shew the manner of practice in this case We then indeed did judge the things which were judged the whole Synod did accord with us and gave verdict by their own votes and subscribed and they were referred to the most religious Emperour Theodosius of happy memory and he did by a general Law confirm all things judged by the Holy and Oecumenical Synod So also did the Emperour Marcian confirm the Synod of Chalcedon as himself telleth us in his Royal Edict We saith He having by the sacred Edict of our serenity confirmed the Holy Synod did warn all to cease from disputes about religion with which Pope Leo signifieth his compliance in these terms But because by all means your piety and most religious will must be obeyed I have willingly approv'd the Synodical Constitutions about confirming the Catholick faith and condemning hereticks which pleased me Justinian did with a witness confirm the Fifth Synod punishing with banishment all who would not submit to its determinations In the Sixth Synod the Fathers did request the Emperour according to custom to confirm its definitions in these very words To what we have determined set your Seal your royal ratification by writing and confirmation of them all by your sacred edicts and holy constitutions according to custom We beg that by your sacred signing of it you would give force to what we have defined and subscribed We intreat the power of our Lord guided by God's wisedom to confirm for the great strength and security of the orthodox faith the copies of our determination read in the hearing of your most serene Majesty and subscribed by us that they may be delivered to the five Patriarchal Sees with your pious confirmation Accordingly he did confirm that Synod by his Edict All these things being thus ordered by this Sixth Holy and Oecumenical Synod We decree that none whosoever trouble himself farther about this faith or advance any new inventions about it So he told Pope Leo II. in his Epistle to him This divine and venerable determination the Holy Synod has made to which we also have subscribed and confirmed it by our Religious Edicts exhorting all our people who have any Love for Christ to follow the faith there written Pope Leo tells his name-sake Leo the Emperour That he must always remember that the Imperial power was given him not onely to rule the world but more especially to protect the Church So by long prescription commencing with the first General Synod did the Emperour enjoy this Prerogative and with good reason He having an unquestionable warrant and obligation to promote the welfare of the Church designed by those Conventions He being the Guardian of Concord among his Subjects and protectour of their Liberties which might be nearly concerned in Conciliar proceedings the power of enacting Laws being an incommunicable branch of Sovereign Majesty He alone having power committed to him able to enforce the observance of Decrees without which they would in effect signifie little Because also commonly the Decrees of Synods did in a manner retrench some part of the Royal Prerogative translating or imparting to others Causes before appropriate to his Jurisdiction as in the case of appeals and of prohibiting addresses to Court ordered in the Sardican and other Synods of exempting Clergymen from secular Jurisdiction from taxes and common burthens c. which ought not to be done without his licence and authority So that the Oriental Bishops had good reason to tell the Emperour that it was impossible without his authority to order the matters under consideration with good law and order It is no-wise reasonable that any other should have this power it being inconsistent with publick peace that in one State there should be two Legislative powers which might clash the one with the other the one enacting Sanctions prejudicial to the interest and will of the other wherefore the Pope being then a Citizen of Rome and a Subject to the Emperour could not have a Legislative power or a negative Vote in Synods but that wholly did belong to the Imperial authority But it is opposed that some Synods have been declared invalid for want of the Pope's confirmation for to the Decrees of the Synod at Ariminum it was excepted that they were null because the Bishop of Rome did not consent to them There could not say the Roman Synod in Theodoret be any prejudice from the number of those assembled in Ariminum it being plain that neither the Roman Bishop whose suffrage ought first to have been received nor Vicentius who for so many years did hold his Episcopacy blameless nor others agreeing to such things To which exception I answer that 1. That which is alledged against the Synod of Ariminum is not the defect of the Pope's confirmation subsequent but of his consent and concurrence before it or in it which is very reasonable because he had a right to be present and to concur in all such Assemblies especially being so eminent a Bishop 2. The same exception every
Aeneas Sylvius his Account hereof Ibid. Catholick How much the abuse of that Word hath conduced to the Pope's Pretences 264. Censures Ecclesiastical Censures the great advantages made from them by the Pope 182. Ceremonies Why multitude of them in the Church of Rome 139. Charity Want thereof in the Church of Rome 286. Charity among Christians 299 301. breach thereof denominates a man to be no Christian 300. Charity to the Poor of other Churches in primitive Times no Argument of Unity of Church Government 320. Church Unity thereof 293. The various acceptations of the Word Church 294. The Titles and Privileges thereof 295. Church Government and Discipline in ancient times 162 c. Church Government No necessity of one kind onely of external Admistration thereof 306 307. The contrary shewed to be most proper and convenient in seq Church of Rome An Account of them who by voluntary Consent or Command of Princes do adhere in Confederation to the Church of Rome 325. Civil Magistrates Authority 271. Clergy Romish Clergy's Exemption from secular Jurisdiction whence 138. Communion Church Communion 296. Community of Men on several accounts may be termed One 297. Confession Auricular Confession 139. Confirmation of Magistrates belongs not to the Pope 269. Conscience The Usurpations made thereupon by the Popish Doctrines 288. Constantine M. His Judgment of Eusebius 86. No General Synod before his Reign 185. Controversies in the Church how in ancient times determined 115 149 264 303 304. Council of Trent Their Character 2. Enjoyned the Pope's Supremacy should not be disputed 18. Councils Their Authority above the Pope's 25. Councils Their Infallibility why pretended 139. Councils General Councils which so esteemed 188 first called by the Emperours ibid. when first celebrated 209 Use of them proves not there was Unity of Government in the Primitive Church 320 the proper occasion of General Councils assigned ibid Cup in the Sacrament why with-holden from the Laity 139. S. Cyprian's Account of S. Peter's primacy of Order 33 his Epistle concerning the deposing Marcianus examined 235 c. S. Cyril's supplying the Place of P. Celestine in the General Council 203 204. Cyril of Hierusalem the first according to Socrates who did introduce Appeals 249. D. POpe Damasus An Epistle of his in Theodoret whence Bellarmine's pretence for the Pope's Supremacy adjudged spurious 156 157. Decrees of Popes when contested against the ancient Canons 214. Whence their new Decrees introduced ibid. Decretal Epistles Their forgery and great advantage to the Church of Rome 184. Discipline and Order of the Primitive Church 211. Discipline The enacting and dispensing with Ecclesiastical Laws about the same belong'd of old to Emperours 214. Discipline of the Church 305. main Form thereof not to be violated ibid. Dispensations 184. the Pope no power to grant them 270 281. Dissentions The Mischiefs arising from them 175 18â— The Profits accrewing from hence to the Romanists ibid. Dissentions How reconciled among Christians 323. E. ECclesiastical Jurisdiction not impugn'd by disclaiming S. Peter's Superiority 40. Emperours not Popes did first conâ—â—â—gate General Synods 185. Testimonies of Popes owning the same 193. Emperours themselves or Honourable Persons authorized by them did heretofore preside in General Synods 203. Empires Their Original and Increase 174. Episcopacy The Ends assigned of that Order 87. Eusebius Constantine M. his Character of him 86. Excommunicated Persons not admitted into Communion by other Churches 305 324 325. Exemptions The Pope no Power to grant them 270. F. FAith Unity of the Church preserved by it 299. Fathers What regard to be given to their account of S. Peter's Primacy of Order or bare Dignity 32. Fathers A Censure of their Writings 71. Bellarmine's account of the same ibid. The latter Fathers most guilty in Expressions 72. Fathers A Character of their Writings 119. Feed my sheep The Romish Interpretation rejected and the true established ibid. G. GLosses of the Romanists on Scripture 70 their Corruptions and Partiality herein 73. Gregory M. his Character and Authority against the Pope 123. H. HEresie of Simony Popes guilty of it 266. Hereticks How confuted in ancient times 115 c. Humility strictly enjoyned to Christ's Apostles and Followers 39. I. JEsuites Their Character 182. Jesus according to common notion of the Jews did imply his being the Son of God 30. Ignorance of Popes in Divinity 267. Ignorance How serviceable to the Church of Rome 182. Image Worship 139 280. Indulgences 184. Infallibility Pretence to it the greatest Tyranny 137. Whence pretended 139. The mother of Incorrigibility and Corruption of Manners 140. v. 265. Inspiration The Popes and Synods bold pretensions to it 286. Jurisdiction Universal Jurisdiction over the Clergy the Pope's Presumption herein and when begun 215. Jurisdiction Temporal and Ecclesiastical nature thereof 271. K. KEys Power thereof as also all other Authority communicated to all the Apostles equally 42 64. Kings have the Power onely of calling General Councils 191. The unreasonableness of the contrary 192. v. Emperours L. LEgends of the Church of Rome the Profits arising from them 184. Laws Ecclesiastical Laws In whose Power to enact them 212. The Pope subject to them ibid. M. MArriage The Romanists abuse thereof 284. Why forbidden to their Priests 139. Mass. Doctrine thereof ibid. Merit Doctrine thereof in the Chur. of Rome 138 286. Miracles Why pretended to by the Romanists 139. Monarchy Universal Monarchy not politick nor convenient 130 neither in Church nor State 152. Monarchy less subject to abuse than other ways of Government 315. Monastries why exempted by the Pope from secular Jurisdiction 138. Monkery 140. N. POpe Nicholas the first who excommunicated Princes secundum Bodin 146. O. OAth of Bishops of Rome at their Election 22. Obedience Blind Obedience 177. Order and Discipline of the Primitive Church 211. v. Discipline Ordination Priority therein did anciently ground a Right to Precedence 34. Orthodox Who such in the Primitive Church 299. P. PAstours of the Church Their duty to maintain Peace and Charity 304. Patriarchs not an higher Order than Primates 169 their Institution and Authority 170 171. Peace to be inviolable among Christians 301 the Sacraments conducive to the same 302 as also Convocation of Synods ibid. S. Peter in personal accomplishments most eminent among the Apostles 32 It is probable he was first called to the Apostolical office 33 his Zeal and Activity 30 34 his Superiority in Power rejected 35 was no Priest at the Celebration of our Lord's Supper contra Concil Trid. 36 not Bishop of Rome 82 whether ever at Rome 83 whence his Primacy asserted 27. Popes Supremacy The Controversies about it 1 The great Disturbances it hath caused 2 pretended authority to depose Princes 3 their behaviour according to their circumstances 17 pretended Supremacy in Spirituals 20 their imperious arbitrary Government 40 the insolent Titles given them 41 no Judge of Controversies 115 c. their Character before and after Constantine 142 Usurpation on Princes 145 Causes of the growth of pretended Supremacy 172
piissimi Patris omnium ad se confugientium tutissimi defensoris ac protectoris c. Rothaldi appell in P. Nich. I. Ep. 37. p. 563. my Lord so great a Pontif and most pious a Father the safe defender and protectour of all those that flee unto him for succour Cypr. Ep. 68. Epist. 55. Calendion of Antioch Liber cap. 18. P. Leo Ep. 89. Marc. 5.32 P. Nich. I. ◠Ep. 38. p. 564. Rothaldus Cod. Lib. 1. tit 2. cap. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Chalc. p. 27. Qualiter Imperatores eam diversis beneficiis extulerint donis ditaverint beneficiis ampliaverint qualiter illam c. P. Nic. I. Ep. 8. p. 513. Romanus tempore prisco Pauper erat Praesul Regali munere crevit c. Gunth Lig. lib. 6. Haec Leo sed Acaci◠fastu tumentis proculdubio verbis concepta stylo superbiae exarata Baron Ann. 473. § 4. Apud Marc. 5.32 * Bin. ad P. Hil. Ep. 11. p. 576. Ex his intelligis Lector cum de rebus sacris Imperatores leges sanxivere id ipsum admonitione ss Praesulum requirentium eorum officium ex scriptis legibus statuisse Baron Ann. 458. § 4. Christianorum quoque Principum lege decretum est c. P. Hilarius Ep. 11. p. 576. P. Nich. I. Ep. 36. Theod. 5.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When the Oak is fallen every one gets some wood Anast. in Vit. Zach. P. Nich. I. Ep. 25.30 c. Non sine suspicione quod illorum temporum Pontifices qui bella extinguere discordias tollere debuissent suscitarent ea potiùs atque nutrirent Modruviensi◠Episc. in Conc. Lat. su◠Leone X. Sess. 6. p. 72. Anno 752. Anno 1060. Anno 1139. Anselme Anno 1109. Eadmer Matt. Par. Becket Anno 1154. Eadmer Matt. Par. Pro pallio omninò aliquid dare prohibeo Greg. I. Ep. 4.44 Vendit plumbum pro auro Taxa Camerariae ‖ In the times of Henry I. the Bishop of York did pay 10000 l. Sterling for his Pall. Matt. Par. p. 274. Peter-pence Plat. p. 257. Quantas nobis divitias peperit haec fabula Christi Quando Apostolica praeceptio ad injuriam B. Petri in illis partibus non observatur à te spernitur violatur P. Nich. I. Ep. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thess. 2.10 Twisd p. 17. Non necessitatis sed honoris causâ peto Extortis assentationibus P. Leo. Epist. ad Syn. Chalc. Distinct. 17. Cùm etiam solum Rom. Pontificem pro tempore existentem tanquam auctoritatem super omnia Concilia habentem Conciliorum indicendorum transferendorum ac dissolvendorum plenum jus potestatem habere manifestè constet Con. Later Sess. 11. p. 152 Ann. Cui jussione Domini meritis B. Petri Apostoli singularis congregandarum Synodorum authoritas Sanctorum Canonum ac Venerandorum Patrum decretis multipliciter privata tradita est potestas P. Hadrian I. apud Bin. Tom. 5. p. 565. Ann. 785. Cùm generalium Synodorum convocandi auctoritas Apostolicae Sedi B. Petri singulari privilegio sit tradita P. Pelag. II. Epist. 8. Bin. Tom. 4. p. 476. Ann. 587. qu. an haec Epistola sit Pelagii II Negat Launoius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. 5. prooem Semper studium fuit Orthodoxis piis Imperatoribus pro tempore exortas Haereses per congregationem religiosissimorum Episcoporum amputare recta fide sincerè praedicata in pace Sanctam Dei Ecclesiam custodire Justin. in Syn. 5. Collat. 1. p. 209. Graecé p. 368. magìs Emphaticé Doce quis Imperator hanc Synodum jusserit congregari Hier. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus. de Vit. Const. I. 44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus. Hist. 10.5 Epist. ad Chrestum Ad Arelatensium civitatem piissimi Imperatoris voluntate adducti say the Fathers in their Epistle to P. Sylvester himself Vid. Euseb. de Vit. Const. lib. 4. cap. 41 42 43. Socr. 1.28 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. 2 4· Soz. 3.11 Socr. 2.16 20. Athan. Tom. 1. p. 761. Hil. in fragm p. Jubet ex toto orbe apud Sardicam Episcopos congregari Sulp. 2.52 †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Syn. Arim. Epist. ad Const. Socr. 2.37 ‖ Socr. 2.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ann. 381. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. 2.99 Soz. 4.6 †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. 1.36 Soz. 4.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 4.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. 7.7 Socr. 5.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 5.7 Repugnante Damaso celebrata c. Baron Ann. 553. § 224. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. 7.34 Evagr. 1.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Eph. Act. 1. p. 291. The holy Synod assembled by the grace of God according to the Decree of our most Religious Emperours c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 297. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Act. 5. p. 347. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 404. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Synod our most Christian and gracious Emperours appointed saith Philip the Pope's Legate Act. 3. p. 330. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the holy Synod assembled by the grace of God and the command of our Emperours c. So do Cyril and Memnon inscribe in their Epistle Act. 4. p. 337. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Chalc. pars 1. p. 53. Episcopale concilium quod haberi apud Ephesum praecepistis P. Leo. I. Ep. 2◠24. ad Theod. Ann. 451. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 6. p. 345. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 6.346 Ann. 533. Act. p. 368. Gr. p. 309. Lat. Pro Dei voluntate jussione piissimi Imperatoris ad hanc vrbem convenimus Collat. 8. Vt quae resistente Romano Pontifice fuerit congregata Baron Ann. 553. § 219. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. p. 255. p. 285. in Epist. ad P. Agath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. p. 256. in definitione Synodica 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. Leo. II. in Epist. ad Constant. Imp. p. 305. ‖ P. Joh. VIII Ep. 247. P. Nich. I. Ep. 7 8 10. P. Hadrian II. Ep. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 7. p. 831. Act. 1. p. 519. Act. 2. p. 551. Act. 3. p. 586. Act. 4. p. 609. Act. 5. p. 696. Act. 6. p. 722. Act. 7. p. 812. Defin. Synod Act. 7. p. 817. Euseb. de Vit. Const. 4.42 Vid. in 5. p. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Jun. Ep. ad Cyril Conc. Eph. par◠1. p. 226 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodos. in Ep. ad Diosc. in Conc. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Epist. ad Episc. Syn. Chal. pars 1. p. 34. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evagr. 1.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 2.16 Multi ex Italia Episcopi convenerunt qui mecum religiosissimum Imperatorem fuerant deprecati ut juberet sicut ipsi placuerat dudum concilium Aquileiense congregari Baron Ann. 353. §
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