〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal in honour to Saint Peter as we before shewed The like we declared of St. Hierome St. Cyril c. And as for St. Cyprian who did allow a Primacy to Saint Peter nothing can be more evident than that he took the other Apostles to be equal to him in power and honour The like we may conceive of St. Austin who having carefully perused those Writings of St. Cyprian and frequently alledging them doth never contradict that his sentiment Even Pope Gregory himself acknowledgeth Saint Peter not to have been properly the Head but onely the first member of the universal Church all being members of the Church under one head 6. If Pope Leo I. or any other ancient Pope do seem to mean farther we may reasonably except against their Opinion as being singular and proceeding from partial affection to their See such affection having influence on the mind of the wisest men according to that certain maxime of Aristotle every man is a bad Judge in his own case 7. The Ancients when their subject doth allure them do adorn other Apostles with the like titles equalling those of Saint Peter and not well consistent with them according to that rigour of sense which our adversaries affix to the commendations of Saint Peter The Epistle of Clemens Rom. to Saint James an Apocryphal but ancient Writing calleth St. James our Lord's Brother The Bishop of Bishops the Clementine Recognitions call him the Prince of Bishops Ruffinus in his translation of Eusebius The Bishop of the Apostles St. Chrysost. saith of him that he did preside over all the Jewish believers Hesychius Presbyter of Jerusalem calleth him the chief Captain of the New Jerusalem the Captain of Priests the Prince of the Apostles the top among the Heads c. The same Hesychius calleth Saint Andrew the first-born of the Apostolical Choire the first setled pillar of the Church the Peter before Peter the foundation of the foundation the first-fruits of the beginning c. St. Chrysostome saith of Saint John that he was a pillar of the Churches through the world he that had the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven c. But as occasion of speaking about Saint Paul was more frequent so the elogies of him are more copious and indeed so high as not to yield to those of Saint Peter He was saith St. Chrysostome the ringleader and guardian of the Choire of all the Saints He was the tongue the teacher the Apostle of the world He had the whole world put into his hands and took care thereof and had committed to him all men dwelling upon Earth He was the light of the Churches the foundation of Faith the pillar and ground of Truth He had the patronage of the World committed into his hands He was better than all men greater than the Apostles and surpassing them all Nothing was more bright nothing more illustrious than he None was greater than he yea none equal to him Pope Gregory I. saith of Saint Paul that he was made head of the Nations because he obtained the principate of the whole Church These Characters of Saint Paul I leave them to interpret and reconcile with those of Saint Peter 8. That the Fathers by calling Saint Peter Prince Chieftain c. of the Apostles do not mean Authority over them may be argued from their joining Saint Paul with him in the same appellations who yet surely could have no Jurisdiction over them and his having any would destroy the pretended Ecclesiastical Monarchy St. Cyril calleth them together Patrons or Presidents of the Church St. Austin or St. Ambr. or Max. calleth them Princes of the Churches The Popes Agatho and Adrian in their General Synods call them the ring-leading Apostles The Popes Nicholas I. and Gregory VII c. call them Princes of the Apostles St. Ambrose or St. Austin or St. Maximus Taur chuse you which doth thus speak of them Blessed Peter and Paul are most eminent among all the Apostles excelling the rest by a kind of peculiar prerogative but whether of these two be preferred before the other is uncertain for I count them to be equal in merit because they are equal in suffering c. To all this discourse I shall onely adde that if any of the Apostles or Apostolical men might claim a presidency or authoritative headship over the rest Saint James seemeth to have the best title thereto for Jerusalem was the mother of all Churches the fountain of the Christian Law and Doctrine the See of our Lord himself the chief Pastour He therefore who as the Fathers tell us was by our Lord himself constituted Bishop of that City and the first of all Bishops might best pretend to be in special manner our Lord's Vicar or Successour He saith Epiphanius did first receive the Episcopal Chair and to him our Lord first did entrust his own Throne upon Earth He accordingly did first exercise the Authority of presiding and moderating in the first Ecclesiastical Synod as St. Chrysostome in his Notes thereon doth remark He therefore probably by Saint Paul is first named in his report concerning the passages at Hierusalem and to his orders it seemeth that Saint Peter himself did conform for 't is said there that before certain came from Saint James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew Hence in the Apostolical Constitutions in the Prayer prescribed for the Church and for all the Governours of it the Bishops of the principal Churches being specified by name Saint James is put in the first place before the Bishops of Rome and of Antioch Let us pray for the whole Episcopacy under Heaven of those who rightly dispense the word of thy Truth and let us pray for our Bishop James with all his Parishes let us pray for our Bishop Clemens and all his Parishes let us pray for Evodius and all his Parishes Hereto consenteth the Tradition of those ancient Writers afore cited who call Saint James the Bishop of Bishops the Bishop of the Apostles c. SUPPOSITION II. I proceed to examine the next Supposition of the Church Monarchists which is That Saint Peter's Primacy with its Rights and Prerogatives was not personal but derivable to his Successours AGainst which Supposition I do assert that admitting a Primacy of Saint Peter of what kind or to what purpose soever we yet have reason to deem it merely personal and not according to its grounds and its design communicable to any Successours nor indeed in effect conveyed to any such It is a rule in the Canon Law that a personal Privilege doth follow the Person and is extinguished with the Person and such we affirm that of St. Peter for 1. His Primacy was grounded upon personal acts such as his chearfull following of Christ his faithfull confessing of Christ his resolute adherence to Christ his embracing
had been then as commonly known and avowed 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on methods of confuting Hereticks it is strange they should be so blind or dull as not to hit on this most proper and obvious way of referring debates to the decision of him to whose Office of Universal Pastour and Judge it did belong Particularly one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis that he on set purpose with great care discoursing about the means of setling points of Faith and of overthrowing Heresies should not light upon this notable way by having recourse to the Pope's Magisterial sentence yea that indeed he should exclude it for he after most intent study and diligent inquiry consulting the best and wisest men could find but two ways of doing it I saith he did always and from almost every one receive this answer that if either I or any other would find out the frauds and avoid the snares of up-start Hereticks and continue sound and upright in the true Faith he should guard and strengthen his Faith God helping him by these two means viz. First by the Authority of the Divine Law and then by the Tradition of the Catholick Church And again We before have said that this hath always been and is at present the custome of Catholicks that they prove their Faith by these two ways First by Authority of the Divine Canon then by the Tradition of the Vniversal Church Is it not strange that he especially being a Western man living in those parts where the Pope had got much sway and who doth express great reverence to the Apostolick See should omit that way of determining points which of all according to the modern conceits about the Pope is most ready and most sure 24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the Catholicks in his time to use such compendious methods of confuting Hereticks We saith he when we would dispatch against Hereticks for the Faith of the Gospel do commonly use these short ways which do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the lateness of impostours and the Authority of the Churches patronizing Apostolical tradition but why did he skip over a more compendious way than any of those namely standing to the judgment of the Roman Bishop 25. It is true that both he and St. Irenaeus before him disputing against the Hereticks of their times who had introduced pernicious novelties of their own devising when they alledge the general consent of Churches planted by the Apostles and propagated by continual successions of Bishops from those whom the Apostles did ordain in doctrines and practices opposite to those devices as a good argument and so indeed it then was next to a demonstration against them do produce the Roman Church as a principal one among them upon several obvious accounts And this indeed argueth the Roman Church to have been then one competent witness or credible retainer of tradition as also were the other Apostolical Churches to whose Testimony they likewise appeal but what is this to the Roman Bishop's judicial Power in such cases why do they not urge that in plain terms they would certainly have done so if they had known it and thought it of any validity Do but mark their words involving the force of their argumentation When saith Irenaeus we do again after allegation of Scripture appeal to that tradition which is from the Apostles which by successions of Presbyters is preserved in the Churches and That saith Tertullian will appear to have been delivered by the Apostles which hath been kept as holy in the Apostolical Churches let us see what milk the Corinthians did draw from Paul what the Philippians the Thessalonians the Ephesians do reade what also the Romans our nearer neighbours do say to whom both Peter and Paul did leave the Gospel sealed with their Bloud we have also the Churches nursed by John c. Again It is therefore manifest saith he in his Prescriptions against Hereticks that every doctrine which doth conspire with those Apostolical Churches in which the Faith originally was planted is to be accounted true as undoubtedly holding that which the Churches did receive from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God but all other doctrine is to be prejudged false which doth think against the truth of the Churches and of the Apostles and of Christ and of God their argumentation then in short is plainly this that the conspiring of the Churches in doctrines contrary to those which the Hereticks vented did irrefragably signifie those doctrines to be Apostolical which discourse doth no-wise favour the Roman pretences but indeed if we do weigh it is very prejudicial thereto it thereby appearing that Christian Doctrines then in the canvasing of points and assuring tradition had no peculiar regard to the Roman Churche's testimonies no deference at all to the Roman Bishop's Authority not otherwise at least than to the Authority of one single Bishop yielding attestation to tradition 26. It is odd that even old Popes themselves in elaborate tracts disputing against Hereticks as Pope Celestine against Nestorius and Pelagius Pope Leo against Eutyches do content themselves to urge testimonies of Scripture and arguments grounded thereon not alledging their own definitive Authority or using this parlous argumentation I the Supreme Doctour of the Church and Judge of controversies do assert thus and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent 27. It is matter of amazement if the Pope were such as they would have him to be that in so many bulky Volumes of ancient Fathers living through many ages after Christ in those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge wherein all sorts of truth are displayed all sorts of duty are pressed this momentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be expressed in clear and peremptory terms I speak so for that by wresting words by impertinent application by streining consequences the most ridiculous positions imaginable may be deduced from their Writings It is strange that somewhere or other at least incidentally in their Commentaries upon the Scripture wherein many places concerning the Church and its Hierarchy do invite to speak of the Pope in their Treatises about the Priesthood about the Unity and Peace of the Church about Heresie and Schism in their Epistles concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs in their Historical narrations about occurrences in the Church in their concertations with heterodox adversaries they should not frequently touch it they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it Is it not marvellous that Origen St. Hilary St. Cyril St. Chrysostome St. Hierome St. Austin in their Commentaries and Tractates upon those places of Scripture Tu es Petrus Pasce oves whereon they now build the Papal Authority should be so dull and drowsie as not to say a word concerning the Pope That St. Austin in his so many elaborate Tractates against the Donatists wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the Church its Unity Communion
superiour to Saint Paul but his Collegue and equal in Authority although precedeing him in standing repute and other advantages then Saint Paul's free proceeding toward him was not onely warrantable but wholesome and deserving for edification to be recited and recorded as implying an example how Collegues upon occasion should with freedom and sincerity admonish their Brethren of their errours and faults Saint Peter's carriage in patiently bearing that correption also affording another good pattern of equanimity in such cases to which purpose S. Cypr. alledged and approved by S. Austin doth apply this passage for saith he neither Peter whom the Lord first chose and upon whom he built his Church when Paul afterward contested with him about circumcision did insolently challenge or arrogantly assume any thing to himself so as to say that he did hold the primacy and that rather those who were newer and later Apostles ought to obey him neither despised he Saint Paul because he was before a persecutour of the Church but he admitted the counsel of truth and easily consented to the lawfull course which Saint Paul did maintain yielding indeed to us a document both of concord and patience that we should not pertinaciously love our own things but should rather take those things for ours which sometimes are profitably and wholesomely suggested by our Brethren and Collegues if they are true and lawfull this St. Cyprian speaketh upon supposition that Saint Peter and Saint Paul were equals or as he calleth them Collegues and Brethren in rank co-ordinate otherwise St. Cyprian would not have approved the action for he often severely doth inveigh against Inferiours taking upon them to censure their Superiours What tumour saith he of pride what arrogance of mind what inflation of heart is it to call our Superiours and Bishops to our cognisance St. Cyprian therefore could not conceive Saint Peter to be Saint Paul's Governour or Superiour in Power he doth indeed plainly enough in the forecited words signifie that in his judgment Saint Peter had done insolently and arrogantly if he had assumed any obedience from Saint Paul St. Austin also doth in several places of his Writings make the like application of this passage The ancient Writer contemporary to St. Ambrose and passing under his name doth argue in this manner Who dared resist Peter the first Apostle to whom the Lord did give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven but another such an one who in assurance of his election knowing himself to be not unequal to him might constantly disprove what he had unadvisedly done It is indeed well known that Origen and after him St. Chrysostome and St. Hierome and divers of the Ancients beside did conceive that Saint Paul did not seriously oppose or tax Saint Peter but did onely doe it seemingly upon confederacy with him for promoting a good design This interpretation however strained and earnestly impugned by Saint Austin I will not discuss but onely shall observe that it being admitted doth rather strengthen than weaken our discourse for if Saint Peter were Saint Paul's Governour it maketh Saint Peter to have consented to an act in all appearance indecent irregular and scandalous and how can we imagine that Saint Peter would have complotted to the imparing his own just Authority in the eye of a great Church doth not such a condescension imply in him a disavowing of Superiority over Saint Paul or a conspiracy with him to overthrow good Order To which purpose we may observe that St. Chrysostome in a large and very elaborate discourse wherein he professeth to endeavour an aggravation of the irregularity of Saint Paul's dâ—meanour if it were serious doth not lay the stress of that aggravation upon Saint Paul's opposing his lawfull Governour but his onely so treating a Co-apostle of such eminency neither when to that end he designeth to reckon all the advantages of Saint Peter beyond Saint Paul or any other Apostle doth he mention this which was chiefly material to his purpose that he was Saint Paul's Governour which observations if we do carefully weigh we can hardly imagine that St. Chrysostome had any notion of Saint Peter's Supremacy in relation to the Apostles In fine the drift of Saint Paul in reporting those passages concerning himself was not to disparage the other Apostles nor merely to commend himself but to fence the truth of his Doctrine and maintain the liberty of his Disciples against any prejudice that might arise from any authority that might be pretended in any considerable respects superiour to his and alledged against them to which purpose he declareth by arguments and matters of fact that his Authority was perfectly Apostolical and equal to the greatest even to that of Saint Peter the prime Apostle of Saint John the beloved Disciple of Saint James the Bishop of Jerusalem the judgment or practice of whom was no law to him nor should be to them farther than it did consist with that Doctrine which he by an independent Authority and by special revelation from Christ did preach unto them He might as St. Chrysostome noteth have pretended to some advantage over them in regard that he had laboured more abundantly than them all but he forbeareth to do so being contented to obtain equal advantages Well therefore considering the disadvantage which this passage bringeth to the Roman pretence might this History be called by Baronius a History hard to be understood a stone of offence a rock of scandal a rugged place which Saint Austin himself under favour could not pass over without stumbling It may also be considered that Saint Paul particularly doth assert to himself an independent authority over the Gentiles co-ordinate to that which Saint Peter had over the Jews the which might engage him so earnestly to contest with Saint Peter as by his practice seducing those who belonged to his charge the which also probably moved him thus to assert his authority to the Galatians as being Gentiles under his care and thence obliged especially to regard his authority They saith Saint Paul knowing that I was entrusted with the Gospel of uncircumcision as Peter was entrusted with that of circumcision gave unto me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship the which words do clearly enough signifie that he took himself and that the other Apostles took him to have under Christ an absolute charge subordinate to no man over the Gentiles whence he claimeth to himself as his burthen the care of all the Churches he therefore might well contest for their liberty he might well insist upon his authority among them Thus did St. Chrysostome understand the case for Christ saith he committed the Jews to Peter but set Paul over the Gentiles and He saith that great Father farther doth shew himself to be equal to them in dignity and compareth himself not onely to the others but even to the ring-leader shewing that each did enjoy equal dignity
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
no more than Humane Thus in effect we see that it hath succeeded from the Pretence of this Unity the which hath indeed transformed the Church into a mere worldly State wherein the Monarch beareth the garb of an Emperour in external splendour surpassing all worldly Princes crowned with a triple Crown He assumeth the most haughty Titles of Our most holy Lord the Vicar general of Christ c. and he suffereth men to call him the Monarch of Kings c. He hath Respects paid him like to which no Potentate doth assume having his Feet kissed riding upon the backs of men letting Princes hold his Stirrup and lead his Horse He hath a Court and is attended with a train of Courtiers surpassing in State and claiming Precedence to the Peers of any Kingdom He is encompassed with armed Guards He hath a vast Revenue supplied by Tributes and Imposts sore and grievous the exaction of which hath made divers Nations of Christendom to groan most lamentably He hath raised numberless Wars and Commotions for the promotion and advancement of his Interests He administreth things with all depth of Policy to advance his Designs He hath enacted Volumes of Laws and Decrees to which Obedience is exacted with rigour and forcible constraint He draweth grist from all Parts to his Courts of Judgment wherein all the formalities of suspence all the tricks of squeezing money c. are practised to the great trouble and charge of Parties concerned Briefly it is plain that he doth exercise the proudest mightiest subtlest Domination that ever was over Christians 8. The Union of the whole Church in one Body under one Government or Sovereign Authority would be inconvenient and hurtfull prejudicial to the main designs of Christianity destructive to the Welfare and Peace of Mankind in many respects This we have shewed particularly concerning the Pretence of the Papacy and those Discourses being applicable to any like Universal Authority perhaps with more advantage Monarchy being less subject to abuse than other ways of Government I shall forbear to say more 9. Such an Union is of no need would be of small use or would doe little good in balance to the great Mischiefs and Inconveniences which it would produce This Point also we have declared in regard to the Papacy and we might say the same concerning any other like Authority substituted thereto 10. Such a Connexion of Churches is not any-wise needfull or expedient to the Design of Christianity which is to reduce Mankind to the Knowledge Love and Reverence of God to a just and loving Conversation together to the practice of Sobriety Temperance Purity Meekness and all other Vertues all which things may be compassed without forming men into such a Policy It is expedient there should be particular Societies in which men may concur in worshipping God and promoting that Design by instructing and provoking one another to good practice in a regular decent and orderly way It is convenient that the Subjects of each temporal Sovereignty should live as in a civil so in a spiritual Uniformity in order to the preservation of Goodwill and Peace among them for that Neighbours differing in opinion and fashions of practice will be apt to contend each for his way and thence to disaffect one another for the beauty and pleasant harmony of Agreement in Divine things for the more commodious succour and defence of Truth and Piety by unanimous concurrence But that all the World should be so joined is needless and will be apt to produce more mischief than benefit 11. The Church in the Scripture sense hath ever continued One and will ever continue so notwithstanding that it hath not had this political Unity 12. It is in fact apparent that Churches have not been thus united which yet have continued Catholick and Christian. It were great no less folly than uncharitableness to say that the Greek Church hath been none There is no Church that hath in effect less reason than that of Rome to prescribe to others 13. The Reasons alledged in proof of such an Unity are insufficient and inconcluding the which with great diligence although not with like perspicuity advanced by a late Divine of great repute and collected out of his Writings with some care are those which briefly proposed do follow together with Answers declaring their invalidity Arg. I. The name Church is attributed to the whole body of Christians which implieth Unity Answ. This indeed doth imply an Unity of the Church but determineth not the kind or ground thereof there being several kinds of Unity one of those which we have touched or several or all of them may suffice to ground that comprehensive Appellation Arg. II. Our Creeds do import the belief of such an Unity for in the Apostolical we profess to believe the Holy Catholick Church in the Constantinopolitan the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church Answ. 1. The most ancient Summaries of Christian Faith extant in the first Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian c. do not contain this Point The word Catholick was not originally in the Apostolical or Roman Creed but was added after Ruffin and Saint Austin's time This Article was inserted into the Creeds upon the rise of Heresies and Schisms to discountenance and disengage from them Answ. 2. We do avow a Catholick Church in many respects One wherefore not the Unity of the Church but the Kind and Manner of Unity being in question the Creed doth not oppose what we say nor can with reason be alledged for the special kind of Unity which is pretended Answ. 3. That the Unity mentioned in the Constantinopolitan Creed is such as our Adversaries contend for of external Policy is precariously assumed and relieth onely upon their interpretation obtruded on us Answ. 4. The genuine meaning of that Article may reasonably be deemed this That we profess our adhering to the Body of Christians which diffused over the World doth retain the Faith taught the Discipline setled the Practices appointed by our Lord and his Apostles that we maintain general Charity toward all good Christians that we are ready to entertain communion in Holy Offices with all such that we are willing to observe the Laws and Orders established by Authority or Consent of the Churches for maintenance of Truth Order and Peace that we renounce all heretical doctrines all disorderly practices all conspiracy with any factious combinations of people Answ. 5. That this is the meaning of the Article may sufficiently appear from the reason and occasion of introducing it which was to secure the Truth of Christian Doctrine the Authority of Ecclesiastical Discipline and the common Peace of the Church according to the Discourses and Arguments of the Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian St. Austin Vincentius Lirinensis the which do plainly countenance our Interpretation Answ. 6. It is not reasonable to interpret the Article so as will not consist with the State of the Church in the Apostolical and
offices of humanity toward their subjects travelling or trading any where in the World common Reason doth require such things But may common Unity of Polity from hence be inferr'd Arg. X. The effectuâ—â— Preservation of Unity in the primitive Church is alledged as a strong Argument of its being united in one Government Answ. 1. That Unity of Faith and Charity and Discipline which we admit was indeed preserved not by influence of any one Sovereign Authority whereof there is no mention but by the concurrent vigilance of Bishops declaring and disputing against any Novelty in Doctrine or Practice which did start up by their adherence to the Doctrine asserted in Scripture and confirmed by Tradition by their aiding and abetting one another as Confederates against Errours and Disorders creeping in Answ. 2. The many Differences which arose concerning the Observation of Easter the Re-baptization of Hereticks the Reconciliation of Revolters and scandalous Criminals concerning the decision of Causes and Controversies c. do more clearly shew that there was no standing common Jurisdiction in the Church for had there been such an one recourse would have been had thereto and such Differences by its Authority would easily have been quashed Arg. XI Another Argument is grounded on the Relief which one Church did yield to another which supposeth all Churches under one Government imposing such Tribute Answ. 1. This is a strange Fetch as if all who were under obligation to relieve one another in need were to be under one Government Then all Mankind must be so Answ. 2. It appeareth by St. Paul that these Succours were of free Charity Favour and Liberality and not by Constraint Arg. XII The use of Councils is also alledged as an Argument of this Unity Answ. 1. General Councils in case Truth is disowned that Peace is disturbed that Discipline is loosed or perverted are wholsome Expedients to clear Truth and heal Breaches but the holding them is no more an Argument of political Unity in the Church than the Treaty of Munster was a sign of all Europe being under one civil Government Answ. 2. They are extraordinary arbitrary prudential means of restoring Truth Peace Order Discipline but from them nothing can be gathered concerning the continual ordinary State of the Church Answ. 3. For during a long time the Church wanted them and afterwards had them but rarely For the first three hundred years saith Bell. there was no general assembly afterwards scarce one in a hundred years And since the breach between the Oriental and Western Churches for many Centenaries there hath been none Yet was the Church from the beginning One till Constantine and long afterwards Answ. 4. The first General Councils indeed all that have been with any probable shew capable of that denomination were congregated by Emperours to cure the Dissentions of Bishops what therefore can be argued from them but that the Emperours did find it good to settle Peace and Truth and took this for a good mean thereto Alb. Pighius said that General Councils were an invention of Constantine and who can confute him Answ. 5. They do shew rather the Unity of the Empire than of the Church or of the Church as National under one Empire than as Catholick for it was the State which did call and moderate them to its Purposes Answ. 6. It is manifest that the congregation of them dependeth on the permission and pleasure of secular Powers and in all equity should do so as otherwhere is shewed Answ. 7. It is not expedient that there should be any of them now that Christendom slandeth divided under divers temporal Sovereignties for their Resolutions may intrench on the Interests of some Princes and hardly can they be accommodated to the Civil Laws and Customs of every State Whence we see that France will not admit the Decrees of their Tridentine Synod Answ. 8. There was no such inconvenience in them while Christendom was in a manner confined within one Empire for then nothing could be decreed or executed without the Emperour's leave or to his prejudice Answ. 9. Yea as things now stand it is impossible there should be a free Council most of the Bishops being sworn Vassals and Clients to the Pope and by their own Interests concerned to maintain his exorbitant Grandeur and Domination Answ. 10. In the opinion of St. Athanasius there was no reasonable cause of Synods except in case of new Heresies springing up which may be confuted by the joint consent of Bishops Answ. 11. As for particular Synods they do onely signifie that it was usefull for neighbour Bishops to conspire in promoting Truth Order and Peace as we have otherwhere shewed Councils have often been convened for bad Designs and been made Engines to oppress Truth and enslave Christendom That of Antioch against Athanasius of Ariminum for Arianism The second Ephesine to restore Eutyches and reject Flavianus The second of Nice to impose the Worship of Babies The Synod of Ariminum to countenance Arians So the fourth Synod of Laterane sub Inn. III. to settle the prodigious Doctrine of Transubstantiation and the wicked Doctrine of Papal Authority over Princes The first Synod of Lions to practise that hellish Doctrine of Deposing Kings The Synod of Constance to establish the maime of the Eucharist against the Calistines of Bohemia The Laterane under Leo X. was called as the Arch-bishop of Patras affirmed for the Exaltation of the Apostolical See The Synod of Trent to settle a raff of Errours and Superstitions Obj. II. It may farther be objected that this Doctrine doth favour the Conceits of the Independents concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline I answer No. For 1. We do assert that every Church is bound to observe the Institutions of Christ and that sort of Government which the Apostles did ordain consisting of Bishops Priests and People 2. We avow it expedient in conformity to the primitive Churches and in order to the maintenance of Truth Order Peace for several particular Churches or Parishes to be combined in political Corporations as shall be found convenient by those who have just Authority to frame such Corporations for that otherwise Christianity being shattered into numberless shreds could hardly subsist and that great Confusions must arise 3. We affirm that such Bodies having been established and being maintained by just Authority every man is bound to endeavour the upholding of them by Obedience by peaceable and compliant Demeanour 4. We acknowledge it a great Crime by factious behaviour in them or by needless separation from them to disturb them to divide them to dissolve or subvert them 5. We conceive it fit that every People under one Prince or at least of one Nation using the same Language Civil Law and Fashions should be united in the bands of Ecclesiastical Polity for that such a Unity apparently is conducible to the peace and welfare both of Church and State to the furtherance of God's worship and
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
Rome This hath been the Doctrine of divers Popes Which not onely the Apostolical Prelate but any other Bishop may doe viz. discriminate and severe any men and any place from the Catholick communion according to the rule of that fore-condemned heresie Faith is universal common to all and belongs not onely to Clergymen but also to Laicks and even to all Christians Therefore the sheep which are committed to the cure of their Pastour ought not to reprehend him unless he swerve and go astray from the right faith 15. That this was the current opinion common practice doth shew there being so many instances of those who rejected their Superiours and withdrew from their communion in case of their maintaining errours or of their disorderly behaviour such practice having been approved by General and Great Synods as also by divers Popes When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople did introduce new and strange Doctrine divers of his Presbyters did rebuke him and withdraw communion from him which proceeding is approved in the Ephesine Synod Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those remarkable words presented to that same Synod 'T is the wish and desire of all well affected persons to give always all due honour and reverence especially to their spiritual Fathers and Teachers but if it should so happen that they who ought to teach should instill unto those who are set under them such things concerning the faith as are offensive to the ears and hearts of all men then of necessity the order must be inverted and they who teach wrong Doctrine must be rebuked of those who are their inferiours Pope Celestine I. in that case did commend the people of Constantinople deserting their Pastour Happy flock said he to whom the Lord did afford to judge about its own Pasture St. Hierome did presume to write very briskly and smartly in reproof of John Bishop of Hierusalem in whose Province he a simple Presbyter did reside Who makes a schism in the Church we whose whole house in Bethlehem communicate with the Church or thou who either believest aright and proudly concealest the truth or art of a wrong belief and really makest a breach in the Church Art thou onely the Church and is he who offendeth thee excluded from Christ Malchion Presbyter of Antioch disputed against Paulus Samosatenus his Bishop Beatus Presbyter confuted his Bishop Elipandus of Toledo But if the Rectour swerve from the faith he is to be reproved by those who are under him 16. The case is the same of the Pope for if other Bishops who are reckoned Successours of the Apostles and Vicars of Christ within their precinct if other Patriarchs who sit in Apostolical Sees and partake of a like extensive Jurisdiction by incurring heresie or schism or committing notorious disorder and injustice may be deprived of their Authority so that their Subjects may be obliged to forsake them then may the Pope lose his for truth and piety are not affixed to the Chair of Rome more than to any other there is no ground of asserting any such Privilege either in Holy Scripture or in old Tradition there can no promise be alledged for it having any probable shew that of Oravi pro te being a ridiculous pretence it cannot stand without a perpetual miracle there is in fact no appearance of any such miracle from the ordinary causes of great errour and impiety that is ambition avarice sloth luxury the Papal state is not exempt yea apparently it is more subject to them than any other all Ages have testified and complained thereof 17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn communion from the Pope as other-where we have shewed by divers Instances 18. The Canon Law it self doth admit the Pope may be judged if he be a Heretick Because he that is to judge all persons is to be judged of none except he be found to be gone astray from the faith The supposition doth imply the possibility and therefore the case may be put that he is such and then he doth according to the more current Doctrine ancient and modern cease to be a Bishop yea a Christian Hence no obedience is due to him yea no communion is to be held with him 19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great Pope allowing the condemnation of Pope Honorius for good because he was erroneous in point of Faith for saith he in that which is called the Eighth Synod although Honorius was anathematized after his death by the Oriental Bishops it is yet well known that he was accused for heresie for which alone it is lawfull for inferiours to rise up against superiours Now that the Pope or Papal succession doth pervert the truth of Christian Doctrine in contradiction to the Holy Scripture and Primitive Tradition that he doth subvert the practice of Christian piety in opposition to the Divine commands that he teacheth falshoods and maintaineth impieties is notorious in many particulars some whereof we shall touch We justly might charge him with all those extravagant Doctrines and Practices which the high flying Doctours do teach and which the fierce Zealots upon occasion do act for the whole succession of Popes of a long time hath most cherished and encouraged such folks looking squintly on others as not well affected to them But we shall onely touch those new and noxious or dangerous positions which great Synods managed and confirmed by their Authority have defined or which they themselves have magisterially decreed or which are generally practised by their influence or countenance It is manifest that the Pope doth support and cherish as his special Favourites the Venters of wicked Errours such as those who teach the Pope's infallibility his power over temporal Princes to cashier and depose them to absolve subjects from their allegiance the Doctrine of equivocation breach of faith with hereticks c. the which Doctrines are heretical as inducing pernicious practice whence whoever doth so much as communicate with the maintainers of them according to the principles of ancient Christianity are guilty of the same crimes The Holy Scripture and Catholick Antiquity do teach and injoin us to worship and serve God alone our Creatour forbidding us to worship any Creature or Fellow-servant even not Angels For I who am a Creature will not endure to worship one like to me But the Pope and his Clients do teach and charge us to worship Angels and dead men yea even to venerate the reliques and dead bodies of the Saints The Holy Scripture teacheth us to judge nothing about the present or future state of men absolutely before the time untill the Lord come who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of hearts and then each man shall have praise of God But the Pope notoriously in repugnance to those precepts anticipating God's judgment and arrogating to himself a knowledge requisite thereto doth presume to determine
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
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
do style their Peter The truth is then among Christians there was little standing upon punctilio's private considerations and pretences to power then took small place each one was ready to comply with that which the most did approve the community did take upon it to prescribe unto the greatest persons as we see again in another instance where the Brethren at Antioch did appoint Paul and Barnabas the most considerable persons among them to go up unto Jerusalem They were then so generous so mercifull so full of charity as rather than to cause or foment any disturbance to recede or go whither the multitude pleased and doe what was commanded by it 10. In all relations which occur in Scripture about Controversies incident of Doctrine or Practice there is no appeal made to Saint Peter's Judgment or allegation of it as Decisive no Argument is built on his Authority dissent from his Opinion or disconformity to his Practice or disobedience to his Orders are not mentioned as ground of reproof as aggravation of any errour any misdemeanour any disorder which were very strange if then he was admitted or known to be the Universal Prince and Pastour of Christians or the Supreme Judge and Arbitratour of Controversies among them for then surely the most clear compendious and effectual way to confute any errour or check any disorder had been to alledge the Authority of Saint Peter against it who then could have withstood so mighty a prejudice against his cause If now a question doth arise about any Point of Doctrine instantly the Parties at least one of them which hopeth to find most favour hath recourse to the Pope to define it and his Judgment with those who admit his pretences proveth sufficiently decisive or at least greatly swayeth in prejudice to the opposite Party If any Heresie or any Opinion disagreeing from the current sentiments is broached the Pope presently doth roar that his voice is heard through Christendom and thundreth it down if any Schism or disorder springeth up you may be sure that Rome will instantly meddle to quash it or to settle matters as best standeth with its Principles and Interests such influence hath the shadow of Saint Peter's Authority now but no such regard was then had to poor Pope Peter himself he was not so busie and stirring in such cases the Apostles did not send Hereticks to be knocked down by his Sentence nor Schismaticks to be scourged by his Censure but were fain to use the long way of Disputation striving to convince them by Testimonies of Scripture and rational discourse If they did use authority it was their own which they challenge as given to them by Christ for edification or upon account of the more than ordinary gifts and graces of the Divine Spirit conferred on them by God Saint Peter no-where doth appear intermedling as a Judge or Governour paramount in such cases yea where he doth himself deal with Hereticks and disorderly persons confuting and reproving them as he dealeth with divers notoriously such he proceedeth not as a Pope decreeing but as an Apostle warning arguing and persuading against them It is particularly remarkable how Saint Paul reproving the factions which were among Christians at Corinth doth represent the several parties saying I am of Paul I am of Apollos I am of Cephas I am of Christ Now supposing the case then had been clear and certain and if it were not so then how can it be so now that Saint Peter was Sovereign of the Apostles is it not wonderfull that any Christian should prefer any Apostle or any Preacher before him as if it were now clear and generally acknowledged that the Pope is truly what he pretendeth to be would any body stand in competition with him would any glory in a relation to any other Minister before him It is observable how Saint Clemens reflecteth on this contention Ye were saith he less culpable for that partiality for ye did then incline to renowned Apostles and to a man approved by them but now c. If it be replyed that Christ himself did come into the comparison I answer that probably no man was so vain as to compare him with the rest nor indeed could any there pretend to have been baptized by him which was the ground of the emulation in respect of the others but those who said they were of Christ were the wise and peaceable sort who by saying so declined and disavowed faction whose behaviour Saint Paul himself in his discourse commendeth and confirmeth shewing that all indeed were of Christ the Apostles being onely his Ministers to work faith and vertue in them None saith Saint Austin of those contentious persons were good except those who said but I am of Christ. We may also here observe that Saint Paul in reflecting upon these contentions had a fair occasion of intimating somewhat concerning Saint Peter's Supremacy and aggravating their blameable fondness who compared others with him 12. The consideration of the Apostles proceeding in the conversion of people in the foundation of Churches and in administration of their spiritual affairs will exclude any probability of Saint Peter's Jurisdiction over them They went about their business not by Order or Licence from St. Peter but according to special instinct and direction of God's Spirit being sent forth by the Holy Ghost going by revelation or according to their ordinary prudence and the habitual wisedom given unto them by those aids without troubling St. Peter or themselves more they founded Societies they ordained Pastours they framed Rules and Orders requisite for the edification and good Government of Churches reserving to themselves a kind of paramount inspection and jurisdiction over them which in effect was onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paternal care over them which they particularly claimed to themselves upon account of spiritual parentage for that they had begotten them to Christ If saith St. Paul to the Corinthians I am not an Apostle to others I am however so to you why so because he had converted them and could say As my beloved sons I warn you for though ye have ten thousand instructours in Christ yet ye have not many fathers for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel This paternal charge they did exercise without any dependence or regard to Saint Peter none such appearing it not being mentioned that they did ever consult his pleasure or render him an account of their proceedings but it rather being implyed in the reports of their actions that they proceeded absolutely by virtue of their universal Office and Commission of our Lord. If it he alledged that Saint Paul went to Jerusalem to Saint Peter I answer that it was to visit him out of respect and love or to confer with him for mutual edification and comfort or at most to obtain approbation from him and the other Apostles which might satisfy some doubters but not