no more than acknowledging a person although rejected by undue Sentence to be de jure worthy of communion and capable of the Episcopal Office upon which may be consequent an Obligation to communicate with him and to allow him his due Character according to the Precept of Saint Paul Follow righteousness faith charity peace with them that call upon the Lord with a pure heart This may be done when any man notoriously is persecuted for the Truth and Righteousness Or when the iniquity and malice of pretended Judges are apparent to the oppression of Innocence Or when the Process is extremely irregular as in the cases of Athanasius of St. Chrysostome And this is not an act of Jurisdiction but of Equity and Charity incumbent on all Bishops And there are promiscuous Instances of Bishops practising it Thus Socrates saith that Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem did restore communion and dignity to Athanasius And so Cyril of Alexandria and John of Antioch being reconciled and reduced to a good understanding of each other did restore to each other their Sees rescinding the Censures which in heat they had denounced each on other Which sheweth that Restitution is not always taken for an act of Jurisdiction wherein one is Superiour to another for those persons were in rank and power co-ordinate 2. Restitution sometime doth import no more than a considerable influence toward the effects of restoring a person to communion or Office no judicial act being exercised about the case The Emperour writing that Paulus and Athanasius should be restor'd to their Sees availed nothing That was a Restitution without effect Thus a Pope's avowing the Orthodoxy or Innocence or Worth of a person after a due information about them by reason of the Pope's eminent rank in the Church and the regard duely had to him might sometimes much conduce to restore a person and might obtain the name of Restitution by an ordinary scheme of speech 3. Sometimes persons said to be restored by Popes are also said to be restored by Synods with regard to such instance or testimony of Popes in their behalf In which case the Judicial Restitution giving right of Recovery and completion thereto was the act of the Synod 4. When Cases were driven to a legal debate Popes could not effectually resolve without a Synod their single acts not being held sufficiently valid So notwithstanding the Declarations of Pope Julius in favour of Athanasius for the effectual resolution of his case the great Synod of Sardica was convened So whatever Pope Innocent I. did endeavour he could not restore St. Chrysostome without a General Synod Nor could Pope Leo restore Flavianus deposed in the Second Ephesine Synod without convocation of a General Synod the which he did so often sue for to the Emperour Theodosius for that purpose Pope Simplicius affirmed that Petrus Moggus having been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer or Usurper of the Alexandrian See could not without a common Council be freed from condemnation 5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the Person who assumeth any power for busie bodies often will exceed their bounds 6. Emperours did sometimes restore Bishops Constantine as he did banish Eusebius of Nicomedia and others so he did revoke and restore them so says Socrates They were recall'd from banishment by the Emperour's command and receiv'd their Churches Theodosius did assert to Flavianus his right whereof the Popes did pretend to deprive him which did amount to a Restitution at least to the Romanists who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the Popes Instantius and Priscillianus were by the rescript of the Emperour Gratianus restored to their Churches Justinian did order Pope Silverius to be restored in case he could prove his Innocence 7. Commonly Restitution was not effectual without the Emperour's consent whence Theodoret although allowed by the great Synod did acknowledge his Restitution especially due to the Emperour as we shall see in reflecting on his case Now to the particular Instances produced for the Pope we answer 1. They pretend that Pope Stephanus did restore Basilides and Martialis Spanish Bishops who had been deposed for which they quote St. Cyprian's Epistle where he says Basilides going to Rome imposed upon our Collegue Stephen who lived a great way off and was ignorant of the truth of the matter seeking unjustly to be restored to his Bishoprick from which he had justly been deposed But we answer The Pope did attempt such a Restitution by way of Influence and Testimony not of Jurisdiction wherefore the result of his act in St. Cyprian's judgment was null and blameable which could not be so deemed if he had acted as a Judge for a favourable Sentence passed by just Authority is valid and hardly liable to Censure The Clergy of those places notwithstanding that pretended Restitution did conceive those Bishops uncapable and did request the judgment of St. Cyprian about it which argueth the Pope's judgment not to have been peremptory and prevalent then in such cases St. Cyprian denieth the Pope or any other person to have power of restoring in such a case and exhorteth the Clergy to persist in declining the communion of those Bishops Well doth Rigaltius ask why they should write to St. Cyprian if the judgment of Stephanus was decisive and he addeth that indeed the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman Bishop to him of Carthage No wonder seeing the Pope had no greater authority and probably St. Cyprian had the fairer reputation for wisedom and goodness Considering which things what can they gain by this Instance which indeed doth considerably make against them 2. They alledge the Restitution of Athanasius and of others linked in cause with him by Pope Julius He says Sozomen as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his See restored to each his own Church I answer the Pope did not restore them judicially but declaratively that is declaring his approbation of their right and innocence did admit them to communion Julius in his own Defence did alledge that Athanasius was not legally rejected so that without any prejudice to the Canons he might receive him and the doing it upon this account plainly did not require any Act of Judgment Nay it was necessary to avow those Bishops as suffering in the cause of the common Faith Besides the Pope's proceeding was taxed and protested against as irregular nor did he defend it by virtue of a general power that he had judicially to rescind the acts of Synods And lastly the Restitution of Athanasius and the other Bishops had no complete effect till it was confirmed by the Synod of Sardica backed by the Imperial authority which in effect did restore them This instance therefore is in many respects deficient as to their purpose 3. They produce Marcellus being restored by the same Pope Julius But that Instance beside the forementioned defects hath this that the
Christians If he claimeth exorbitant Power and exerciseth Oppression and tyrannical Domination over his Brethren cursing and damning all that will not submit to his Dictates and Commands If instead of being a Shepherd he is a Wolf worrying and tearing the Flock by cruel Persecution He by such behaviour ipso facto depriveth himself of Authority and Office He becometh thence no Guide or Pastour to any Christian there doth in such case rest no obligation to hear or obey him but rather to decline him to discost from him to reject and disclaim him This is the reason of the case this the Holy Scripture doth prescribe this is according to the Primitive Doctrine Tradition and Practice of the Church For 10. In reason the nature of any spiritual Office consisting in Instruction in Truth and Guidance in Vertue toward attainment of Salvation if any man doth lead into pernicious Errour or Impiety he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such Office As a blind man by being so doth cease to be a Guide and much more he that declareth a will to seduce for Who so blind as he that will not see No man can be bound to follow any one into the ditch or to obey any one in prejudice to his own Salvation to die in his iniquity Seeing God saith in such a case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In vain do they worship me teaching for Doctrines the Precepts of men They themselves do acknowledge that Hereticks cease to be Bishops and so to be Popes Indeed they cease to be Christians for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such a one is subverted 11. According to their Principles the Pope hath the same relation to other Bishops and Pastours of the Church which they have to their people he being Pastour of Pastours But if any Pastour should teach bad Doctrine or prescribe bad Practice his people may reject and disobey him therefore in proportion the Pastours may desert the Pope misguiding or misgoverning them In such cases any Inferiour is exempted from obligation to comply with his Superiour either truly or pretendedly such 12. The case may be that we may not hold communion with the Pope but may be obliged to shun him in which case his Authority doth fail and no man is subject to him 13. This is the Doctrine of the Scripture The High Priest and his fellows under the Jewish Oeconomy had no less Authority than any Pope can now pretend unto they did sit in the Chair of Moses and therefore all their True Doctrines and Lawfull Directions the people were obliged to learn and observe but their false Doctrines and impious Precepts they were bound to shun and consequently to disclaim their Authority so far as employed in urging such Doctrines and Precepts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them alone saith our Saviour they are blind leaders of the blind Under the Christian dispensation the matter is no less clear our Lord commandeth us to beware of false Prophets and to see that no man deceive us although he wear the cloathing of a Sheep or come under the name of a Shepherd coming in his name Saint Paul informeth us that if an Apostle if an Angel from heaven doth preach beside the old Apostolical Doctrine introducing any new Gospel or a Divinity devised by himself he is to be held accursed by us He affirmeth that even the Apostles themselves were not Lords of our faith nor might challenge any power inconsistent with the maintenance of Christian Truth and Piety We saith he can doe nothing against the truth but for the truth the which an ancient Writer doth well apply to the Pope saying that he could doe nothing against the truth more than any of his Fellow-priests could doe which S. Paul did in practice shew when he resisted Saint Peter declining from the truth of the Gospel He chargeth that if any one doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach heterodoxies we should stand off from him that if any brother walketh disorderly and not according to Apostolical tradition we should withdraw from him that if any one doth raise divisions and scandals beside the doctrine received from the Apostles we should decline from him that we are to refuse any heretical person He telleth us that grievous Wolves should come into the Church not sparing the flock that from among Christians there should arise men speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them but no man surely ought to follow but to shun them These Precepts and Admonitions are general without any respect or exception of Persons great or small Pastour or Lay-man nay they may in some respect more concern Bishops than others for that they declining from truth are more dangerous and contagious 14. The Fathers in reference to this case do clearly accord both in their Doctrine and Practice St. Cyprian telleth us that a people obedient to the Lord's commandments and fearing God ought to separate it self from a sinfull Bishop that is from one guilty of such sins which unqualifie him for Christian Communion or Pastoral charge and Let not addeth he the common people flatter it self as if it could be free from the contagion of guilt if it communicate with a sinfull Bishop whose irreligious Doctrine or Practice doth render him uncapable of communion for how saith he otherwhere can they preside over integrity and continence if corruptions and the teaching of vices do begin to proceed from them They who reject the commandment of God and labour to establish their own tradition let them be strongly and stoutly refused and rejected by you St. Chrysostome commenting on Saint Paul's words If I or an Angel saith that Saint Paul meaneth to shew that dignity of persons is not to be regarded where truth is concerned that if one of the chief Angels from heaven should corrupt the Gospel he were to be accursed that not onely if they shall speak things contrary or overturn all but if they preach any small matter beside the Apostolical doctrine altering the least point whatever they are liable to an anathema And other-where very earnestly persuading his Audience to render due respect and obedience to there Bishop he yet interposeth this exception If he hath a perverse opinion although he be an Angel do not obey him but if he teacheth right things regard not his life but his words Ecclesiastical Judges as men are for the most part deceived For neither are Catholick Bishops to be assented to if peradventure in any case they are mistaken so as to hold any thing contrary to the canonical Scriptures of God If there be any Church which rejects the faith and does not hold the fundamentals of the Apostolical doctrine it ought to be forsaken lest it infect others with its heterodoxy If in such a case we must desert any Church then the Roman if any Church then much more any Bishop particularly him of
or prejudice to Charity The Faith of Christians did at first consist in few Points those which were professed in Baptism whereof we have divers Summaries in the Ancients by analogy whereto all other Propositions were expounded and according to agreement whereto sound Doctrines were distinguished from false so that he was accounted orthodox who did not violate them So he that holds that immovable Rule of truth which he received at his Baptism will know the words and sayings and parables which are taken out of the Scriptures c. II. It is evident that all Christians are united by the bands of mutual Charity and Good-will They are all bound to wish one another well to have a complacence in the good and a compassion of the evils incident to each other to discharge all offices of kindness succour consolation to each other This is the command of Christ to all This is my commandment saith he That ye love one another This is the common badge by which his Disciples are discerned and distinguished Hereby saith he shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye love one another They must have the same love They must love as brethren be compassionate pitifull courteous each to other They must bear one anothers burthens and especially as they have opportunity doe good to the houshold of faith If one member suffer all the members must suffer with it and if one member be honoured all the members must rejoice The multitude of them who be-believe must be like that in the Acts of one heart and of one soul. They must walk in love and doe all things in love Whoever therefore doth highly offend against Charity maligning or mischieving his brethren doth thereby separate himself from Christ's body and cease to be a Christian. They that are enemies to brotherly charity whether they are openly out of the Church or seem to be within they are Pseudo-christians and Anti-christs When they seem to be within the Church they are separated from that invisible conjunction of Charity Whence Saint John They went out from us but were not of us He saith not that by their going out they were made aliens but because they were aliens therefore he declareth that they went out Wherefore the most notorious violations of Charity being the causing of dissentions and factions in the Church the causeless separation from any Church the unjust condemnation of Churches Whoever was guilty of any such unchristian behaviour was rejected by the Fathers and held to be no Christian. Such were the Novatians the Donatists the Meletians the Luciferians and other Schismaticks For what can be more acceptable and pleasant than to see those who are severed and scattered into so many places yet knit and joined together in the bond and union of charity as harmonious members of the body of Christ. In old time when the Church of God flourished being rooted in the same faith united in love there being as it were one conspiracy or league of different members in one body For the communion of the Spirit is wont to knit and unite mens minds which conjunction we believe to be between us and your charitable affection They therefore who by the bond of Charity are incorporated into the building setled upon the rock But the members of Christ are joined together by the charity of union and by the same cleave close to their head which is Christ. III. All Christians are united by spiritual cognation and alliance as being all regenerated by the same incorruptible seed being alike born not of bloud nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God whence as the sons of God and brethren of Christ they become brethren one to another so that it is a peculiar title or appellation of Christians the brethren signifying all Christian people and a brother being the same with a Christian professour IV. The whole Christian Church is one by its incorporation into the mystical body of Christ or as Fellow-subjects of that spiritual heavenly Kingdom whereof Christ is the sovereign Head and Governour whence they are governed by the same Laws are obliged by the same Institutions and Sanctions they partake of the same Privileges and are entitled to the same Promises and encouraged by the same Rewards being called in one hope of their calling So they make up one spiritual Corporation or Republick whereof Christ is the Sovereign Lord. Though the place disjoin them yet the Lord joins them together being their common Lord c. Hence an habit of Disobedience doth sever a man from this Body for not every one that saith Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven or continue therein Every such person who denieth God in works is a Rebel an Outlaw renouncing his Allegiance forfeiting his Title to God's protection and favour He is not a sheep of Christ because he doth not hear his voice He is separated from the Body by not holding the Head 'T is a lie to call one's self a Christian and not to doe the works of Christ. He that does not the work of a Christian name seems not to be a Christian. When in stead of the works themselves he begins to oppose even the most apparent truth whereby he is reproved then he is cut off from the Body or the Church Hence St. Austin often denieth wicked persons to be in the Church or to appertain unto its Unity For when there is one and the same Lord that dwelleth in us he every where joins and couples those that are his with the bond of Vnity V. All Christians are linked together in peaceable concord and confederacy so that they are bound to live in good correspondence to communicate in works of Piety and Devotion to defend and promote the common interest of their Profession Upon the entrance of the Gospel by our Lord's Incarnation it was by a celestial Herald proclaimed Peace on earth and good-will among men It was our Lord's office to preach Peace It was a principal end and effect of his Death to reconcile all men and to destroy enmity He specially charged his Disciples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to maintain Peace one with another It was his Will at parting with them Peace I leave with you The Apostles frequently do enjoin to pursue Peace with all them who call upon the Lord with a pure heart to follow the things which make for Peace and edification mutual to keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace It was in the Prophecies concerning the Evangelical state declared that under it The Wolfe should dwell with the Lamb and the Leopard should lie down with the Kid and the sucking Child should play on the hole of the Aspe that is that men of all tempers and conditions by virtue of this Institution should
c. Which thing also Agrippinus of blessed memory with his other Fellow-bishops who then governed the Church of Christ in the African Province and in Numidia did establish and by the well-weighed examination of the common advice of them all together confirmed it Thus it was the custome in the Churches of Asia as Firmilian telleth us in those words Vpon which occasion it necessarily happens that every year we the Elders and Rulers do come together to regulate those things which are committed to our care that if there should be any things of greater moment by common advice they be determined Yet while things went thus in order to common Truth and Peace every Church in more private matters touching its own particular state did retain its Liberty and Authority without being subject or accountable to any but the common Lord in such cases even Synods of Bishops did not think it proper or just for them to interpose to the prejudice of that Liberty and Power which derived from a higher Source These things are very apparent as by the course of Ecclesiastical History so particularly in that most pretious Monument of Antiquity St. Cyprian's Epistles by which it is most evident that in those times every Bishop or Pastour was conceived to have a double relation or capacity one toward his own Flock another toward the whole Flock One toward his own Flock by virtue of which he taking advice of his Presbyters together with the conscience of his People assisting did order all things tending to particular Edification Order Peace Reformation Censure c. without fear of being troubled by Appeals or being liable to give any account but to his own Lord whose Vicegerent he was Another toward the whole Church in behalf of his People upon account whereof he did according to occasion or order apply himself to confer with other Bishops for preservation of the common Truth and Peace when they could not otherwise be well upheld than by the joint conspiring of the Pastours of divers Churches So that the Case of Bishops was like to that of Princes each of whom hath a free Superintendence in his own Territory but for to uphold Justice and Peace in the World or between adjacent Nations the entercourse of several Princes is needfull The Peace of the Church was preserved by communion of all Parts together not by the subjection of the rest to one Part. 7. This political Unity doth not well accord with the nature and genius of the Evangelical dispensation Our Saviour affirmed that his Kingdom is not of this World and Saint Paul telleth us that it consisteth in a Spiritual influence upon the Souls of men producing in them Vertue Spiritual Joy and Peace It disavoweth and discountenanceth the elements of the world by which worldly designs are carried on and worldly frames sustained It requireth not to be managed by politick artifices or fleshly wisedom but by Simplicity Sincerity Plain-dealing as every Subject of it must lay aside all guile and dissimulation so especially the Officers of it must doe so in conformity to the Apostles who had their conversation in the world and prosecuted their design in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisedom but by the grace of God not walking in craftiness or handling the word of God deceitfully c. It needeth not to be supported or enlarged by wealth and pomp or by compulsive force and violence for God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise and the weak things of the world to confound the mighty and base despicable things c. that no flesh should gloâ—y in his presence And The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty through God c. It discountenanceth the imposition of new Laws and Precepts beside those which God hath injoined or which are necessary for order and edification derogating from the Liberty of Christians and from the Simplicity of our Religion The Government of the Christian State is represented purely spiritual administred by meek persuasion not by imperious awe as an humble ministery not as stately domination for the Apostles themselves did not Lord it over mens faith but did co-operate to their joy they did not preach themselves but Christ Jesus to be the Lord and themselves their servants for Jesus It is expresly forbidden to them to domineer over God's people They are to be qualified with Gentleness and Patience they are forbidden to strive and enjoined to be gentle toward all apt to teach patient in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves They are to convince to rebuke to exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine They are furnished with no Arms beside the divine Panoply they bear no sword but that of the Spirit which is the word of God they may teach reprove they cannot compell They are not to be entangled in the cares of this life But supposing the Church was designed to be one in this manner of political regiment it must be quite another thing nearly resembling a worldly state yea in effect soon resolving it self into such an one supposing as is now pretended that its management is committed to an Ecclesiastical Monarch it must become a worldly Kingdom for such a Polity could not be upheld without applying the same means and engines without practising the same methods and arts whereby secular Governments are maintained It s Majesty must be supported by conspicuous Pomp and Phantastry It s Dignity and Power must be supported by Wealth which it must corrade and accumulate by large Incomes by exaction of Tributes and Taxes It must exert Authority in enacting of Laws for keeping its State in order and securing its Interests backed with Rewards and Pains especially considering its Title being so dark and grounded on no clear warrant many always will contest it It must apply Constraint and Force for procuring Obedience and correcting Transgression It must have Guards to preserve its Safety and Authority It must be engaged in Wars to defend its self and make good its Interests It must use Subtilty and Artifice for promoting its Interests and countermine the Policies of Adversaries It must erect Judicatories and must decide Causes with Formality of legal process whence tedious Suits crafty Pleadings Quirks of Law and Pettifoggeries Fees and Charges Extortion and Barretry c. will necessarily creep in All which things do much disagree from the original constitution and design of the Christian Church which is averse from pomp doth reject domination doth not require craft wealth or force to maintain it but did at first and may subsist without any such means I do not say that an Ecclesiastical Society may not lawfully for its support use Power Policy wealth in some measure to uphold or defend it self but that a Constitution needing such things is not Divine or that so far as it doth use them it is
from a stupid Easiness in admitting such a Lieutenancy to our Lord if we do not see exhibited to us manifest and certain Patents assuring its Commission to us We should love the Church better than to yield up its Liberty to the will of a Pretender upon slight or no ground Their boldly claiming such a Power their having sometime usurped such a Power will not excuse them or us Nor will precarious Assumptions or subtile Distinctions or blind Traditions or loose Conjectures serve for probations in such a case § XIX Such demands they cannot wholly balk wherefore for satisfaction to them not finding any better plea they hook in Saint Peter affirming that on him by our Lord there was instated a Primacy over his brethren all the Apostles and the Disciples of our Lord importing all the Authority which they claim and that from him this Primacy was devolved by succession to the Bishops of Rome by right indefectible for all future Ages Which Plea of theirs doth involve these main Suppositions I. That Saint Peter had a Primacy over the Apostles II. That Saint Peter 's Primacy with its Rights and Prerogatives was not personal but derivable to his Successours III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease V. That the Bishops of Rome according to God's institution and by original right derived thence should have an Vniversal Supremacy and Jurisdiction over the Christian Church VI. That in fact the Roman Bishops continually from Saint Peter's time have enjoyed and exercised this Sovereign Power VII That this Power is indefectible and unalterable The truth and certainty of these Propositions we shall in order discuss so that it may competently appear whether those who disclaim these Pretences are as they are charged guilty of Heresie and Schism or they rather are liable to the imputations of Arrogancy and Iniquity who do obtrude and urge them A TREATISE OF THE Pope's Supremacy MATTH 10.2 Now the names of the twelve Apostles were these the first Simon who is called Peter AMONG the Modern Controversies there is scarce any of greater consequence than that about Universal Supremacy which the Bishop of Rome claimeth over the Christian Church the assertion whereof on his side dependeth upon divers Suppositions namely these I. That Saint Peter by our Lord's appointment had a Primacy implying a Sovereignty of Authority and Jurisdiction over the Apostles II. That the Rights and Prerogatives of this Sovereignty were not personal but derivable and transmitted to Successours III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease V. That hence of Right to the Bishops of Rome as Saint Peter 's Successours an Vniversal Jurisdiction over the whole Church of Christ doth appertain VI. That in Fact the said Bishops continually from Saint Peter 's time have enjoyed and exercised this Power VII That this Power is indefectible such as by no means can be forfeited or fail In order to the discussion and resolution of the first Point I shall treat upon the Primacy of Saint Peter endeavouring to shew what Primacy he was capable of or might enjoy what he could not pretend to nor did possess SUPPOSITION I. The first Supposition of those who claim Universal Jurisdiction to the Pope over the Church is That Saint Peter had a primacy over the Apostles IN order to the resolution of this Point we may consider that there are several kinds of Primacy which may belong to a person in respect of others for there are 1. A Primacy of Worth or Personal Excellency 2. A Primacy of Reputation and Esteem 3. A Primacy of Order or bare Dignity and Precedence 4. A Primacy of Power or Jurisdiction To each of these what title Saint Peter might have let us in order examine I. As for the first of these a Primacy of Worth or Merit as some of the Ancients call it we may well grant it to Saint Peter admitting that probably he did exceed the rest of his Brethren in personal endowments and capacities both natural and moral qualifying him for the discharge of the Apostolical Office in an eminent manner particularly that in quickness of apprehension in boldness of spirit in readiness of speech in charity to our Lord and zeal for his Service in resolution activity and industry he was transcendent may seem to appear by the tenour of the Evangelical and Apostolical Histories in the which we may observe him upon all occasions ready to speak first and to make himself the mouth as the Fathers speak of the Apostles in all deliberations nimble at propounding his advice in all undertakings forward to make the onset being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 always hot and eager always prompt and vigorous as S. Chrysostome often affirmeth concerning him these things are apparent in his demeanour and it may not be amiss to set down some instances When our Lord observing the different apprehensions men had concerning him asked the Apostles but whom say ye that I am up starteth he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he skippeth forth and preventeth the rest crying Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God The other Apostles were not ignorant of the Point for they at their Conversion did take Jesus for the Messias which even according to the common Notion of the Iews did imply his being the Son of God Nathanael that is Saint Bartholomew as is supposed had in terms confessed it the whole company upon seeing our Lord walk on the Sea had avowed it Saint Peter before that in the name of them all had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have believed and have known that thou art the Christ the Son of the living God They therefore had the same Faith but he from a special alacrity of spirit and expedition in utterance was more forward to declare it He was more hot saith St. Greg. Naz. than the rest at acknowledging Christ. When our Saviour walked on the Sea who but He had the Faith and the Courage to venture on the Waters towards him When our Lord was apprehended by the Souldiers presently up was his spirit and out went his Sword in defence of him When our Lord predicted that upon his coming into trouble all the Disciples would be offended and desert him he was ready to say Though all men shall be offended because of thee yet will I never be offended and Though I should dye with thee yet will I not deny thee such was his natural courage and confidence When our Lord was discoursing about his Passion he suddenly must be advising in the case and urging him to spare himself upon which St. Chrysostome biddeth us to consider not that his answer was unadvised but that it came from a genuine and fervent affection And at the Transfiguration he
hath made you Overseers to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Bloud whom he doth himself exhort Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof Let feeding signify what it can instruction or guidance or governance or all of them together Regio more impera if you please as Bellarmine will have it it did appertain to their charge to teach was a common duty to lead and to rule were common functions Saint Peter could not nor would not appropriate it to himself it is his own exhortation when he taketh most upon him Be mindfull of the commandment or precept of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Was his commission universal or unlimited so was theirs by the same immediate Authority for All Power said he to them when he gave his last charge is given to me in Heaven and in Earth Goe therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them and teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you and Goe ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every Creature They as St. Chrysostome speaketh were all in common intrusted with the whole world and had the care of all Nations Was he furnished with extraordinary gifts with special graces with continual directions and assistences for the discharge of the Apostolical Office so were they for the promise was common of sending the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth and cloathing them with the power from on high and of endowing them with Power to perform all sorts of miraculous works Our Lord before his departure breathed into them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost All of them saith Saint Luke were filled with the Holy Ghost all of them with confidence and truth could say It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us all of them did abundantly partake of that character which Saint Paul respected when he did say The Signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in signs and wonders and mighty deeds Did Saint Peter represent the Church as receiving privileges in its behalf as the Fathers affirm so did they according to the same Fathers If therefore saith St. Austin citing the famous place sicut me misit Pater they did bear the Person of the Church and this was said to them as if it were said to the Church it self then the peace of the Church remitteth Sins What singular prerogative then can be imagined appertaining to Saint Peter what substantial advantage could he pretend to beyond the other Apostles Nothing surely doth appear whatever the Patrons of his Supremacy do claim for him is precariously assumed without any fair colour of proof he for it is beholding not to any testimony of Holy Scripture but to the invention of Roman fancy We may well infer with Cardinal Cusanus We know that Peter did not receive more Power from Christ than the other Apostles for nothing was said to Peter which was not also said to the others Therefore addeth he we rightly say that all the Apostles were equal to Peter in Power 8. Whereas Saint Peter himself did write two Catholick Epistles there doth not in them appear any intimation any air or savour of pretence to this Arch-apostolical Power It is natural for Persons endowed with unquestionable Authority howsoever otherwise prudent and modest to discover a spice thereof in the matter or in the style of their writing their Mind conscious of such advantage will suggest an authoritative way of expression especially when they earnestly exhort or seriously reprove in which cases their very Authority is a considerable motive to assent or compliance and strongly doth impress any other arguments But no Critick perusing those Epistles would smell a Pope in them The Speech of Saint Peter although pressing his Doctrine with considerations of this nature hath no tang of such Authority The Elders saith he which are among you I exhort who also am an Elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ and also a partaker of the Glory that shall be revealed by such excellent but common advantages of his Person and Office he presseth on the Clergy his advices Had he been what they make him he might have said I the peculiar Vicar of Christ and Sovereign of the Apostles do not onely exhort but require this of you this language had been very proper and no less forcible but nothing like this nothing of the Spirit and Majesty of a Pope is seen in his discourse there is no pagina nostrae voluntatis mandati which now is the Papal style when He speaketh highest it is in the common name of the Apostles Be mindfull saith he of the command that is of the Doctrine and Precepts of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour 9. In the Apostolical History the proper place of exercising this power wherein as St. Chrysostome saith we may see the predictions of Christ which he uttered in the Gospels reduced to act and the truth of them shining in the things themselves no footstep thereof doth appear We cannot there discern that Saint Peter did assume any extraordinary authority or that any deference by his Brethren was rendred to him as to their Governour or Judge No instance there doth occur of his laying commands on any one Apostle or exercising any act of jurisdiction upon any one but rather to the contrary divers passages are observable which argue that he pretended to no such thing and that others did not understand any such thing belonging to him His temper indeed and zeal commonly did prompt him to be most forward in speaking and acting upon any emergency for the propagation or maintenance of the Gospel and the memory of the particular charge which our Lord departing had lately put on him strongly might instigate him thereto regard to his special gifts and sufficiency did incline the rest willingly to yield that advantage to him and perhaps because upon the considerations before touched they did allow some preference in order to him but in other respects as to the main administration of things he is but one among the rest not taking upon him in his speech or behaviour beyond others All things are transacted by common agreement and in the name of all concurring no appeal in cases of difference is made singly to him no peremptory decision or decree is made by him no orders are issued out by him alone or in a special way in Ecclesiastical Assemblies he acteth but as one member in deliberations he doth onely propound his opinion and passeth a single vote his judgment and practice are sometime questioned and he is put to render an account of them he doth not stand upon his Authority but assigneth reasons to persuade his opinion and justify his actions yea sometimes he is moved by the rest receiving orders and employment from them these things we may discern by considering the
fed by him but the common Believers or People of God which St. Peter himself doth call the Flock of God Feed saith he to his fellow-Elders the flock of God which is among you and Saint Paul Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers 9. Take Feeding for what you please for Teaching for Guiding the Apostles were not fit objects of it who were immediately taught and guided by God himself Hence we may interpret that saying of St. Chrysostome which is the most plausible argument they can alledge for them that our Lord in saying this did commit to St. Peter a charge or presidency over his brethren that is he made him a Pastour of Christian people as he did others at least if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be referred to the Apostles it must not signifie authority over them but at most a primacy of order among them for that Saint Peter otherwise should feed them St. Chrysostome could hardly think who presently after saith that seeing the Apostles were to receive the administration of the whole world they ought not afterward to converse with one another for that would surely have been a great damage to the world 10. But they forsooth must have Saint Peter solely obliged to feed all Christ's sheep so they do impose upon him a vast and crabbed Province a task very incommodious or rather impossible for him to undergo how could he in duty be obliged how could he in effect be able to feed so many flocks of Christian people scattered about in distant Regions through all Nations under Heaven he poor man that had so few helps that had no Officers or dependents nor wealth to maintain them would have been much put to it to feed the sheep in Britaine and in Parthia unto infinite distraction of thoughts such a charge must needs have engaged him But for this their great Champion hath a fine expedient Saint Peter saith he did feed Christ's whole flock partly by himself partly by others so that it seemeth the other Apostles were Saint Peter's Curates or Vicars and Deputies this indeed were an easie way of feeding thus although he had slept all his time he might have fed all the sheep under heaven thus any man as well might have fed them But this manner of feeding is I fear a later invention not known so soon in the Church and it might then seem near as absurd to be a shepherd as it is now in his own account to be a just man by imputation that would be a kind of putative pastorage as this a putative righteousness However the Apostles I dare say did not take themselves to be St. Peter's Surrogates but challenged to themselves to be accounted the Ministers the Stewards the Ambassadours of Christ himself from whom immediately they received their Orders in whose name they acted to whom they constantly refer their Authority without taking the least notice of Saint Peter or intimating any dependence on him It was therefore enough for Saint Peter that he had Authority restrained to no place but might as he found occasion preach the Gospel convert confirm guide Christians every where to truth and duty nor can our Saviour's words be forced to signifie more In fine this together with the precedent Testimonies must not be interpreted so as to thwart Practice and History according to which it appeareth that Saint Peter did not exercise such a Power and therefore our Lord did not intend to confer such an one upon him IV. Farther in confirmation of their Doctrine they do draw forth a whole shole of Testimonies containing divers Prerogatives as they call them of Saint Peter which do as they suppose imply this Primacy so very sharp-sighted indeed they are that in every remarkable accident befalling him in every action performed by him or to him or about him they can descry some argument or shrewd insinuation of his preeminence especially being aided by the glosses of some fancyfull Expositour From the change of his Name from his walking on the Sea from his miraculous draught of Fish from our Lord 's praying for him that his Faith should not fail and bidding him to confirm his Brethren from our Lord 's ordering him to pay the tribute for them both from our Lord's first washing his feet and his first appearing to him after the Resurrection from the prediction of his Martyrdom from sick persons being cured by his shadow from his sentencing Ananias and Saphira to death from his preaching to Cornelius from its being said that he passed through all from his being prayed for by the Church from Saint Paul's going to visit him from these passages I say they deduce or confirm his Authority Now in earnest is not this stout arguing is it not egregious modesty for such a point to alledge such proofs what cause may not be countenanced by such rare fetches who would not suspect the weakness of that Opinion which is fain to use such forces in its maintenance In fine is it honest or conscionable dealing so to wrest or play with the Holy Scripture pretending to derive thence proofs where there is no shew of consequence To be even with them I might assert the Primacy to Saint John and to that purpose might alledge his Prerogatives which indeed may seem greater than those of Saint Peter namely that he was the beloved disciple that he leaned on our Lord's breast that Saint Peter not presuming to ask our Lord a question desired him to doe it as having a more special confidence with our Lord that Saint John did higher service to the Church and all posterity by writing not onely more Epistles but also a most divine Gospel and a sublime Prophecy concerning the state of the Church that Saint John did outrun Peter and came first to the Sepulchre in which passage such acute devisers would find out marvellous significancy that Saint John was a Virgin that he did out-live all the Apostles and thence was most fit to be Universal Pastour that St. Hierome comparing Peter and John doth seem to prefer the latter for Peter saith he was an Apostle and John was an Apostle but Peter was onely an Apostle John both an Apostle and an Evangelist and also a Prophet and saith he that I may in brief speech comprehend many things and shew what privilege belongeth to John yea Virginity in John by our Lord a Virgin his Mother the Virgin is commended to the Virgin Disciple thus I might by Prerogatives and passages very notable infer the Superiority of Saint John to Saint Peter in imitation of their reasoning but I am afraid they would scarce be at the trouble to answer me seriously but would think it enough to say I trifled wherefore let it suffice for me in the same manner to put off those levities of discourse V. They argue this Primacy from the constant placing
for the like reason Saint Peter might assume the Bishoprick of Rome I answer 1. It is not certain that Saint James the Bishop of Jerusalem was an Apostle meaning an Apostle of the primary rank for Eusebius the greatest Antiquary of old times doth reckon him one of the 70 disciples So doth the Authour of the Apostolical Constitutions in divers places suppose Hegesippus that most ancient Historian was of the same mind who saith that there were many of this name and that this James did undertake the Church with the Apostles Of the same opinion was Epiphanius who saith that Saint James was the Son of Joseph by another Wife The whole Greek Church doth suppose the same keeping three distinct solemnities for him and the two Apostles of the same name Gregory Nyssene St. Hierome and divers other ancient Writers do concur herein whom we may see alledged by Grotius Dr. Hammond who themselves did embrace the same opinion Valesius Blondel c. Salmasius after his confident manner saith it is certain that he was not one of the twelve I may at least say it is not certain that he was and consequently the objection is grounded on an uncertainty 2. Granting that Saint James was one of the Apostles as some of the Ancients seem to think calling him an Apostle and as divers modern Divines conceive grounding chiefly upon these words of Saint Paul But other of the Apostles saw I none save James the Lord's Brother and taking Apostles there in the strictest sense I answer That the case was peculiar and there doth appear a special reason why one of the Apostles should be designed to make a constant residence at Jerusalem and consequently to preside there like a Bishop For Jerusalem was the Metropolis the Fountain the Centre of the Christian Religion where it had birth where was greatest matter and occasion of propagating the Gospel most people disposed to embrace it resorting thither where the Church was very numerous consisting as St. Luke or Saint James in him doth intimate of divers myriads of believing Jews whence it might seem expedient that a person of greatest Authority should be fixed there for the confirming and improving that Church together with the propagation of Religion among the people which resorted thither the which might induce the Apostles to settle Saint James there both for discharging the Office of an Apostle and the supplying the room of a Bishop there According to him saith Eusebius The Episcopal Throne was committed by the Apostles or our Lord saith Epiphanius did entrust him with his own Throne But there was no need of fixing an Apostle at other places nor doth it appear that any was so fixed especially Saint Peter was uncapable of such an employment requiring settlement and constant attendance who beside his general Apostleship had a peculiar Apostleship of the dispersed Jews committed to him who therefore was much engaged in travel for propagation of the Faith and edifying his Converts every where 3. The greater consent of the most ancient Writers making St. Iames not to have been one of the twelve Apostles it is thence accountable why as we before noted Saint James was called by some ancient Writers the Bishop of Bishops the Prince of Bishops c. because he was the first Bishop of the first See and Mother Church the Apostles being excluded from the comparison Upon these considerations we have great reason to refuse the assertion or scandal cast on Saint Peter that he took on him to be Bishop of Rome in a strict sense as it is understood in this controversie SUPPOSITION V. A father Assertion is this superstructed by consequence on the former That the Bishops of Rome according to God's institution and by original right derived thence should have an Vniversal Supremacy and jurisdiction containing the privileges and prerogatives formerly described over the Christian Church THIS Assertion to be very uncertain yea to be most false I shall by divers considerations evince 1. If any of the former Suppositions be uncertain or false this Assertion standing on those legs must partake of those defects and answerably be dubious or false If either Peter was not Monarch of the Apostles or if his privileges were not successive or if he were not properly Bishop of Rome at his decease then farewell the Romish claim if any of those things be dubious it doth totter if any of them prove false then down it falleth But that each of them is false hath I conceive been sufficiently declared that all of them are uncertain hath at least been made evident The Structure therefore cannot be firm which relieth on such props 2. Even admitting all those Suppositions the inference from them is not assuredly valid For Saint Peter might have an Universal Jurisdiction he might derive it by Succession he might be Bishop of Rome yet no such Authority might hence accrue to the Roman Bishop his Successour in that See For that Universal Jurisdiction might be derived into another Chanel and the Bishop of Rome might in other respects be Successour to him without being so in this As for instance in the Roman Empire before any Rule of Succession was established therein the Emperour was Sovereign Governour and he might dye Consul of Rome having assumed that place to himself yet when he dyed the Supreme Authority did not lapse into the hands of the Consul who succeeded him but into the hands of the Senate and People his Consular Authority onely going to his Successour in that Office So might Saint Peter's Universal Power be transferred unto the Ecclesiastical College of Bishops and of the Church his Episcopal inferiour Authority over the singular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province of Rome being transmitted to his Followers in that Chair 3. That in truth it was thus and that all the Authority of Saint Peter and of all other Apostles was devolved to the Church and to the representative Body thereof the Fathers did suppose affirming the Church to have received from our Lord a Sovereign Power This saith St. Cyprian is that One Church which holdeth and possesseth all the power of its Spouse and Lord in this we preside for the honour and unity of this we fight saith he in his Epistle to Jubaianus wherein he doth impugn the proceedings of Pope Stephanus the which Sentence St. Austin appropriateth to himself speaking it absolutely without citing St. Cyprian To this Authority of the Church St. Basil would have all that confess the faith of Christ to submit To which end we exceedingly need your assistence that they who confess the Apostolick faith would renounce the schisms which they have devised and submit themselves henceforth to the Authority of the Church They after the Holy Scripture which saith that each Bishop hath a care of God's Church and is obliged to feed the Church of God and is appointed to edify the body of Christ do suppose the administration
lay all the stress of his hopes on the consent of the Western Bishops why doth he not say a word of the dominion resident in them over all the Church these things are unconceivable if he did take the Pope to be the man our adversaries say he is But St. Basil had other notions for indeed being so wise and good a man if he had taken the Pope for his Sovereign he would not have taxed him as he doth and so complain of him when speaking of the Western Bishops whereof the Pope was the ringleader and most concerned he hath these words occasioned as I conceive by the Bishop of Rome's rejecting that excellent person Meletius Bishop of Antioch What we should write or how to joyn with those that write I am in doubt for I am apt to say that of Diomedes You ought not to request for he is a haughty man for in truth observance doth render men of proud manners more contemptuous than otherwise they are For if the Lord be propitious to us what other addition do we need but if the anger of God continue what help can we have from the Western Superciliousness who in truth neither know nor endure to learn but being prepossessed with false suspicions do now doe those things which they did before in the cause of Marcellus affecting to contend with those who report the Truth to them and establishing Heresie by themselves would that excellent Person the greatest man of his time in reputation for wisedom and piety have thus unbowelling his mind in an Epistle to a very eminent Bishop smartly reflected on the qualities and proceedings of the Western Clergy charging them with pride and haughtiness with a suspicious and contentious humour with incorrigible ignorance and indisposition to learn if he had taken him who was the leader in all these matters to have been his Superiour and Sovereign would he have added the following words immediately touching him I would not in the common name have written to their ringleader nothing indeed about Ecclesiastical Affairs except onely to intimate that they neither do know the truth of things with us nor do admit the way by which they may understand it but in general about their being bound not to set upon those who were humbled with afflictions nor should judge themselves dignifyed by pride a sin which alone sufficeth to make one God's enemy surely this great man knew better what belonged to government and manners than in such rude terms to accost his Sovereign nor would he have given him that character which he doth otherwhere where speaking of his Brother St. Gregory Nyssene he saith he was an unfit Agent to Rome because although his address with a sober man would find much reverence and esteem yet to a haughty and reserved man sitting I know not where above and thence not able to hear those below speaking the truth to him what profit can there be to the publick from the converse of such a man whose disposition is averse from illiberal flattery But these speeches sute with that conceit which St. Basil as Baronius I know not whence reporteth expressed by saying I hate the pride of that Church which humour in them that good man would not be guilty of fostering by too much obsequiousness St. Chrysostome having by the practices of envious men combined against him in a packed assembly of Bishops upon vain surmises been sentenced and driven from his See did thereupon write an Epistle to Pope Innocent I. Bishop of Rome together with his Brethren the Bishops of Italy therein representing his case complaining of the wrong vindicating his innocency displaying the iniquity of the proceedings against him together with the mischievous consequences of them toward the whole Church then requiring his succour for redress yet although the sense of his case and care of his interest were likely to suggest the greatest deference that could be neither the style which is very respectfull nor the matter which is very copious do imply any acknowledgment of the Pope's Supremacy He doth not address to him as to a Governour of all who could by his Authority command justice to be done but as to a brother and a friend of innocence from whose endeavour he might procure relief He had recourse not to his Sovereign power but to his brotherly love He informed his Charity not appealed to his bar He in short did no more than implore his assistence in an Ecclesiastical way that he would express his resentment of so irregular dealings that he would avow communion with him as with an Orthodox Bishop innocent and abused that he would procure his cause to be brought to a fair trial in a Synod of Bishops lawfully called and indifferently affected Had the good man had any conceit of the Pope's Supremacy he would one would think have framed his address in other terms and sued for another course of proceeding in his behalf but it is plain enough that he had no such notion of things nor had any ground for such an one For indeed Pope Innocent in his answer to him could doe no more than exhort him to patience in another to his Clergy and People could onely comfort them declare his dislike of the Adversaries proceedings and grounds signifie his intentions to procure a general Synod with hopes of a redress thence his Sovereign power it seems not availing to any such purposes But what saith he can we doe in such cases a Synodical cognizance is necessary which we heretofore did say ought to be called the which alone can allay the motions of such tempests It is true that the later Popes Siricius Anastasius Innocent Zozimus Bonifacius Celestinus c. after the Sardican Council in their Epistles to the Western Bishops over whom they had encroached and who were overpowred by them c. do speak in somewhat more lofty strain but are more modest toward those of the East who could not bear c. 22. Farther It is most prodigious that in the disputes managed by the Fathers against Hereticks the Gnosticks Valentinians Marcionites Montanists Manichees Paulianists Arians c. they should not even in the first place alledge and urge the sentence of the Universal Pastour and Judge as a most evidently conclusive argument as the most efficacious and compendious method of convincing and silencing them Had this point been well proved and pressed then without any more concertations from Scripture tradition reason all Hereticks had been quite defeated and nothing then could more easily have been proved if it had been true when the light of tradition did shine so brightly nothing indeed had been to sense more conspicuous than the continual exercise of such an Authority We see now among those who admit such an Authority how surely when it may be had it is alledged and what sway it hath to the determination of any controversie and so it would have been then if it
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
bulk whereas so long ago when it was but in its budd and stripling age it was observed of it by a very honest Historian that the Roman Episcopacy had long since advanced into a high degree of power beyond the Priesthood 3. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture by destroying that brotherly co-ordination and equality which our Lord did appoint among the Bishops and chief Pastours of his Church He did as we before shewed prohibit all his Apostles to assume any domination or authoritative Superiority over one another the which command together with others concerning the Pastoral function we may well suppose to reach their Successours so did St. Hierome suppose collecting thence that all Bishops by original Institution are equals or that no one by our Lord's order may challenge Superiority over another Whereever saith he a Bishop is 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 power of wealth or lowness of poverty do not make a Bishop higher or lower but all are Successours of the Apostles where doth not he plainly deny the Bishop of Eugubium to be inferiour to him of Rome as being no less a Successour of the Apostles than he doth he not say these words in way of proof that the authority of the Roman Bishop or Church was of no validity against the practice of other Bishops and Churches upon occasion of Deacons there taking upon them more than in other places as Cardinal Deacons do now which excludeth such distinctions as Scholastical fancies have devised to shift off his Testimony the which he uttered simply never dreaming of such distinctions This consequence St. Gregory did suppose when he therefore did condemn the Title of Vniversal Bishop because it did imply an affectation of Superiority and dignity in one Bishop above others of abasing the name of other Bishops in comparison of his own of extolling himself above the rest of Priests c. This the ancient Popes did remember when usually in their compellation of any Bishop they did style them Brethren Collegues fellow-Ministers fellow-Bishops not intending thereby complement or mockery but to declare their sense of the original equality among Bishops notwithstanding some differences in Order and Privileges which their See had obtained And that this was the general sense of the Fathers we shall afterward shew Hence when it was objected to them that they did affect Superiority they did sometimes disclaim it so did Pope Gelasius I. a zealous man for the honour of his See 4. This pretence doth thwart the Holy Scripture not onely by trampling down the dignity of Bishops which according to St. Gregory doth imply great pride and presumption but as really infringing the Rights granted by our Lord to his Church and the Governours of it For to each Church our Lord hath imposed a Duty and imparted a Power of maintaining divine Truth and so approving it self a pillar and support of truth of deciding Controversies possible and proper to be decided with due temper ultimately without farther resort for that he who will not obey or acquiesce in its Decision is to be as a heathen or publican Of censuring and rejecting Offenders in Doctrine or Demeanour Those within saith Saint Paul to the Church of Corinth do not ye judge But them that are without God judgeth wherefore put away from among your selves that wicked person Of preserving Order and Decency according to that Rule prescribed to the Church of Corinth let all things be done decently and in order Of promoting edification Of deciding Causes All which Rights and Privileges the Roman Bishop doth bereave the Churches of snatching them to himself pretending that he is the Sovereign Doctour Judge Regulatour of all Churches over-ruling and voiding all that is done by them according to his pleasure The Scripture hath enjoyned and empowered all Bishops to feed guide and rule their respective Churches as the Ministers Stewards Ambassadours Angels of God for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edification of the Body of Christ To them God hath committed the care of their People so that they are responsible for their Souls All which Rights and Privileges of the Episcopal Office the Pope hath invaded doth obstruct cramp frustrate destroy pretending without any warrant that their Authority is derived from him forcing them to exercise it no otherwise than as his Subjects and according to his pleasure But of this Point more afterward 5. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture by robbing all Christian People of the Liberties and Rights with which by that Divine Charter they are endowed and which they are obliged to preserve inviolate Saint Paul enjoyneth the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and not to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage there is therefore a liberty which we must maintain and a power to which we must not submit and against whom can we have more ground to doe this than against him who pretendeth to dogmatize to define Points of Faith to impose Doctrines new and strange enough on our Consciences under a peremptory obligation of yielding assent to them to prescribe Laws as Divine and necessary to be observed without warrant as those Dogmatists did against whom Saint Paul biddeth us to maintain our Liberty so that if he should declare vertue to be vice and white to be black we must believe him some of his Adherents have said consistently enough with his pretences for Against such tyrannical Invaders we are bound to maintain our Liberty according to that Precept of Saint Paul the which if a Pope might well alledge against the proceedings of a General Synod with much more reason may we thereby justify our non-submission to one man's exorbitant domination This is a Power which the Apostles themselves did not challenge to themselves for We saith Saint Paul have not dominion over your faith but are helpers of your joy They did not pretend that any Christian should absolutely believe them in cases wherein they had not Revelation general or special from God in such cases referring their Opinion to the judgment and discretion of Christians They say Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed If any man c. which Precept with many others of the like purport injoyning us to examine the truth to adhere unto the received Doctrine to decline heterodoxies and novelties doth signify nothing if every Christian hath not allowed to him a judgment of discretion but is tyed blindly to follow the dictates of another St. Austin I am sure did think this liberty such that without betraying it no man could be obliged to believe any thing not grounded upon Canonical Authority for
2 Cor. 13.10.10.8 Gal. 2.9 2 Cor. 12.16 17. 2 Cor. 12.11.11.5 1 Cor. 15.9 Eph. 3.8 1 Cor. 15.10 Eph. 3.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 11.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 12.11.1.16 17. Rom. 11.13 Bell. de Pont. 1.11 Gal. 2.2 Gal. 2.6 Gal. 2.12 13 14. Vid. P. Pelag. II. apud Bin. Tom. 4. p. 308. in Epist. ad Eliam V. 11.14 Nunquid ideò aut illa ejus sequenda sunt quae meritò ejus Co-apostolus ejus facta redarguit Gelas. I. de Anath apud Bin. Tom. 3. p. 645. Apostolo Paulo monstrante corrigente Aug. c. Crescon 1.32.2.32 Ep. 19. de Bap. c. Dor. 2.1 2. correptus cont Don. 2.1 objurgavit Ep. 8. qui de minorâ— causa conversationis ambiguae Petro ipsi non peperciâ— Tert. 5.3 contra Marc. who for a smaller matter of doubtfull conversation spared not Peter himself Cùm laâ—detur etsaâ— Pauli minimi Apostolorum sana ratio atque libertas quòd Petrum Apostolorum primum adductum in â—â—pocrisin non â—ectâ viâ inâ—edenâ—em ad veritatem Evangelii fidenter improbans in faciem illi restitit eúmque coram omnibus corà m objâ—â—gavit Fac. Her 8.6 Whereas the sound reason and freedom even of Paul the least of the Apostles is commended in that when Peter the chief of the Apostles was carryed away with dissimulation and walked not in a right way according to the truth of the Gospel he â—oldly dislik'd and withstood him to the face and reprov'd him openly before all Hier. ad Aug. Epist. 11. in Prol. ad Gal. Non sunt consentiendi sed reprobandi qui praelatos suos reprehendunt vel accusant Pelag. II. Ep. 2. Bonis subditis sic praepositorum suorum mala displicent ut tamen haec ab aliis occultent Greg. M. Moral 25.15 Admonendi sunt subditi nè prâ—positorum suoruâ— vitam temerâ— judicent siquid eos fortasse agere reprehensibiliter vident c. Greg. Past. part 3. cap. â— Admon 5. Grat. dist 40. cap. 6. * Nam nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit c. Cypr. Ep. 71. ad Quint. †Aug. de Bapt. c. Don. 2.2 Quis enim hic est superbiae tumor quae arrogantia animi quae mentis inflatio ad cognitionem suos praepositos Sacerdotes vocare Cpr. Ep. 69. Aug. c. Don. de Bap. 2.1 2. Ep. 19. Nam quis eorum auderet Petro primo Apostolo cui claves regni coelorum Dominus dedit resistere nisi alius talis qui fiduciâ electionis suae sciens se non imparem constanter improbaret quod ille sine consilio fecerat Ambr. in Gal. 2.9 Paulus Petrum reprehendit quod non auderet nisi se non imparem sciret Hieron vel alius quis ad Gal. citatus à Grat. Caus. 2. qu. 7. cap. 33. Paul reprehended Peter which he would not have dared to doe had he not known himself to be equal to him S. Cyril c. Jul. lib. 9. p. 325. Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. Ep. 11. c. Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that 't is no advantage to me if when Peter has confuted the charge Paul appear to accuse his Fellow-apostle boldly and inconsiderately Gal. 1.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Gal. 1.1 Baron Anno 51. § 32 34 35. c. Rom. 11.13 Plena authoritas Petro in Judaismi praedicatione data dignoscitur Pauli perfecta authoritas in praedicatione Gentium invenitur Ambros. There is discerned a full authority given to Peter of preaching to the Jews and in Paul there is found a perfect power and authority of preaching to the Gentiles Gal. 1.6 7. 2 Cor. 11.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. T. 5. Or. 59. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Gal. 2.8 1 Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.11 Matt. 4.21 Luke 5.10 Mark 3.17 Matth. 17.1 2 Pet. 1.16 Matt. 26.37 Mark 14.33 Matt. 20.20 Mark 10.35 Mark 10.37 John 13 2â—.21 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hegesipp apud Euseb. 3.20 They being dismiss and sent away to govern the Churches as being both Witnesses and also Kinsmen of our Lord. Act. 12. â— Gal. 2.9 2 Cor. 12.11.11.5 Mark 3.17 Act. 1.13 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Matt. 17.1 Taking therefore the chief and principal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. ib. Wherefore taketh he these onely with him because these were the chief and principal above the others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz. Or. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ruffinus reddit Apostolorum Episcopum Clem. Alex. apud Euseb. 2.1 Hoc erant utique cateri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis quamvis Apostolis omnibus posâ— resurrectionem suam pareâ—â— potestatem triâ—â—at ac dicat c. Cypr. de Vn. Eccl. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Gal. 2.8 Chrys. in Gal. 1.8 Vide Tert. de Praescr cap. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. Con. Eph. part 1. p. 209. Peter and John were equal in honour one to another as were also the Apostles and holy Disciples Did Tertullian think Saint Paul inferiour to Saint Peter when he said It is well that Peter is even in martyrdom equalled to Paul Bene quod Petrus Paulo in martyrio adaequatur Tert. de Praes 24. At dicis super Petrum fundatur Ecclâ—sia licèt id ipsum alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat ex 〈◊〉 super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur Hier. in Jovin 1.14 But you will say the Church is founded upon Peter though the same thing in another place is affirmed of all the Apostles and that c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dionys. de Eccl. Hier. cap. 5. Caeteri Apostoli cum Petro par consortium honoris potestatis acceperunt qui etiam in toto orbe dispersi Evangelium praedicaverunt quibâ—sque decedentibus successerum Episcopi qui sunt constituâ—i per totum mâ—ndum in sedibus Apostoâ—â—â—am Isid. Hisp. de Off. 2.5 Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus sive Romae sive Eugubii c. Hier. ad Evagr Ep. 85. Clem. ad Corinth Iren. 3.12.3.1 3. Agitur de summa rei Christianae c. Bell. praef ad lib. de Pontif. R. Est enim reverà non simplex error sed perniciosa haeresis negare B. Petri primatum à Christo institutum Bell. de Pont. R. 1.10 2 Pet. 3.16 Matt. 16.18 S. Romana Ecclesia nullis Synodicis constitutis caeteris Ecclesiis praelata est sed Evangelicâ voce Domini salvatoris nostri primatum obtinuit Tu es Petrus inquiens c. P. Gelas 1. dist 21. cap. 3. The Holy Church of Rome is not prefer'd before other Churches by any Synodical Decrees but has obtain'd the primacy by the voice of our Lord and Saviour in the Gospel saying Thou art Peter c. Quorum verborum planus obvius sensus est ut intelligatur sub duabus metaphoris promissum Petro totius Ecclesiae principatum Bell. de