Domini by an error of the Press I suppose put for Serm. 13. which is as little to the purpose as either of the former and shall desire the Discussor to resolve me these two Questions 1. Whether every one of the Apostles received the Keys as Head of the Church because they are all by St. Austin joined with Peter in representing the Church For having quoted the Words of our Saviour As my Father sent me so send I you Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. He adds If therefore they did bear the person of the Church and so this was said to them as if it was said to the Church it self ‖ Sicut misit me Pater et ego mitto vos ergo si personam gerebant Ecclesiae sic eis hoc dictum est tanquam ipsi Ecclesiae diceretur c. De Baptismo Contr. Donatist l. 3. c. 18. 2. Whether St. John was the Primate of the Church Triumphant The ground of the Query is because St. Austin in this same Tractat quoted by the Discussor makes St. John the Figure of the State of the Church in Heaven as he does St. Peter of the State of the Church on Earth But it tends much to Peter 's Glory that in St. Austin 's Judgment none of the Apostles represented the Church but he How much soever it may otherwise tend to his Glory nothing of Dominion can be hence inferred Nor is this Glory so appropriated by Austin to Peter but it is by him ascrib'd to the other Apostles together with him as I have shewed before But how bright soever this Glory may be in it self the Discussor has here drawn a Vail over it by making him who before received the Keys as their Prince to receive them now as their Proxy for so he adds in the same Page He received them immediately They received them by a Proxy c. Now a Proxy as such hath not one Ray of Claritude by which he outshines those whose Proxy he is When Optatus says That he alone received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to be COMMUNICATED to the rest he doth not mean to be communicated by him but by Christ as a Roman Doctor expounds it * Et claves regni Coelorum communicandas caeteris id est quas Christus commendaturus erat caeteris Du Pin. Dissertat 4. c. 1. And the preference Optatus there gives to him consists in this that he alone received the Promise first which was afterwards perform'd to all the rest As to what he adds concerning Matth. 18. 18. That the Fathers expound it of fraternal Correption If he mean all or the greater number of the Fathers it shews either his Ignorance or his Insincerity Of those four he mentions Origen I grant does so Chrysostom Maldonat says speaks obscurely that he knows not whether he was of this opinion or not but in another place he as plainly as words can make it applies this Text to the Apostles only †De utilitat Lect. Script Tom. 5. p. 590. Edit Front. Duc. St. Jerom he palpably abuses by quoting his Words on ver 16. whereas he expresly expounds ver 18. of the Power given to the Church of binding and loosing The words cited from St. Ambrose I know not where to find but I suspect he has dealt as fairly with him as with St. Jerom. The remainder of this Chapter is either ridiculous or impertinent except that he says St. Jerom in his Comments on Matth. 16. speaking of the Power of Keys acknowledges Peter to have received it SPECIATIM Which is not I grant impertinent but that which is much worse a downright Falsity For in his Comments upon that Chapter the word Speciatim is not to be found nor any other of a like import relating to St. Peter Nor yet those Words he quotes as following after it Proposition IV. That by the Keys promised and given to PETER is meant the supreme Power of governing the Vniversal Church ‖ P. 133 134. This will be dispatched in a word If he meant Supreme in a negative sense viz. that Power than which there is none in the Church higher it would be true but then in this sense Supreme Power was given to every Apostle But as he means thereby a Power superior to that of the other Apostles by which Peter was constituted their Governour so it is false For since as has been already proved and as the Sorbonist before-quoted affirms * Primum est Petro promissas esse eas ipsas claves quae postea caeteris concessae sunt ac proinde per claves hic non intelligi ut vult Bellarminus summam potestatem in omnem Ecclesiam Ellies du Pin. dissertat 4. c. 1. p. 309. the very same Keys promised to Peter were afterward granted to the rest therefore by the Keys cannot be here understood the supreme Power over the Whole Church What he produces for proof is of no force St. Chrysostom he tells us affirms that our Saviour by virtue of his Promise of the Donation of the Keys did not only give S. Peter Power over the whole World but to rise a Key higher EVEN OVER THINGS IN HEAVEN †Pag. 134. And S. Chrysostom also says of S. Paul That he took upon him the whole World And of all the Apostles in common That not Nations and divers Cities but the World was committed to them as we have before heard And to rise to the higher Key Did not Christ give to the other Apostles the same power over things in Heaven when he said to them Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in HEAVEN And does not the same Chrysostom speaking of these Words Matth. 18. 18. say of all the Apostles They sitting upon Earth give Sentence and the virtue of their Sentence passes to the Heavens As Emperors sitting in some one City give Sentence and constitute Laws but the Power of their Sentences and Laws runs through all the World so the Apostles sitting in some one place ordained these things but the Power of their Laws and Bonds did not pass through the World only but ascended to the very Height of the Heavens ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. De Utilitat Lect. Script p. 590 591. He adds the Keys likewise Apoc. 1. 10. signifie supreme Power where our Saviour says of himself I have the Keys of Death and of Hell by which Phrase absolute Dominion over Death and Hell are indigitated * Pag. 134. But were these Keys in St. Peter's keeping Had he absolute power of raising the Dead No he will say he doth not quote it to this purpose but only to shew that the Keys in this place signify absolute Dominion over that which is spoken of Suppose they do so here what then Do the Keys signify as much when attributed to Peter as when attributed to Christ Is there no difference between the Keys in the Hands of the Master of the Family and
spared all the places he quotes from St. Austin for the proof of it The previous words in St. Basil he would perswade us make wholly against that for which they are by Protestants alledg'd I shall therefore set them down together with those that follow and then leave it to the impartial Reader to judg They are by himself thus rendred in English For a Governour is nothing else but one that represents the Person of our Saviour and this we are taught by Christ constituting Peter the Pastor of his Church after himself for he says Peter do you love me more than these Feed my Sheep * In the Original 't is constituting Peter Pastor after himself not the Pastor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What is there here that is so destructive and fatal to our purpose Does this set Peter above the rest of the Apostles Had not Christ before created every one of them Pastor of his Church after himself But see now what follows And giving henceforth to all Pastors and Teachers an equal Power and of this it is a Sign that they all bind and loose as he †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Constitut Monast c. 22. He said in the words foregoing that he constituted Peter after himself Pastor of the Church he says in these that he conferred to all Pastors and Teachers not a Power subordinate but equal to that he gave to Peter Whereof this is a sign that they do all bind and loose not in subjection to him but in like manner as he See now what credit is to be given to this Man who can have the face to pervert so plain a Testimony as this That Christ spake these words Feed my Sheep to Peter only is not denied by Protestants and therefore all his Fathers and all his Arguments from the Context to prove it are needless ‖ Pag. 188 189 190. But it is his way to be copious in the proof of that which is granted and to say little or nothing to the purpose where there is most need of proof But though they were for a special reason directed to him only yet all the rest were equally concerned in them SECT II. In all that confused heap we have in the Remainder of these two Chapters there is nothing needs an Answer but that alone which is the main thing in Debate viz. That Peter as supreme Pastor had Authority of feeding the universal Church including both the Apostles and other Christians * Pag. 187 194. This he attempts to prove by two Arguments from the Text it self which he pretends are agreeable to the sense of the Fathers The first from the Question Lovest thou me more than these The second from the Injunction Feed MY SHEEP The Vanity of his Attempt will soon appear 1. If Christ says he had designed him to be no more a Pastor than any of the rest the Question had been more rationally stated thus Simon Jona do you love me AS MVCH as any of the other do but our Savior asking him whether he loved him more than the rest did by the Shape and Frame of the Question intend him a particular Superiority above the rest †Pag. 190 191. To the same purpose Dr. Tho. G. says to take away all Suspicion as if he meant not to give him an Authority above that of the rest of his Brethren he asked him not only if he loved him but if he did not love him MORE THAN THEY manifestly declaring by the Excess of Love he required from him a proportionable EXCESS or Superiority in the Power that he committed to him ‖ Pag. 30. This adds the Discussor seems to me most serenely to be the native and genuine meaning of of our Saviour's Question disarray'd of all Heretical Depravation rarely elegant otherwise I desire to know to what Purpose and Designment was the Interrogation of a greater Degree of Love. I will be so kind as to tell him most serenely what is the native and genuine Reason of this The Interrogation is of a greater degree of Love with respect to that Profession Peter had formerly made tho all should be offended because of thee yet will I never be offended * Matth. 26. 33. Where Peter having professed a Love to Christ above all the rest and yet when he was put upon the Trial having failed more than any of them by thrice denying him our Saviour therefore puts the Question comparatively Lovest thou me more than these Art thou still as confident as thou wast heretofore that thou hast a greater Love for me than these have To which he now returns a more modest Answer professing only the Sincerity of his Love but making no Comparison with others Lord thou knowest I love thee As much as to say I have now learnt by sad Experience not to prefer my self before others I will not therefore say that I love thee more than any of my fellow-Disciples but I dare appeal to thy self who knowest the Heart for the Truth of my Love thou Lord that knowest all things knowest that I love thee And therefore that Peter loved Christ more than any of the other Apostles though it were certain that he did so cannot be concluded from this Question much less that this his egregious Love was the Motive that induc'd Christ to grant him this Commission as the Discussor words it and less yet that Christ by commanding him to feed his Sheep did declare him to be the greatest Lover Nor can it hence be inferr'd as Dr. Tho. G. would have it that Christ required an Excess of Love from him The feeding of his Sheep being enjoyn'd as an Expression of his Love only and not of his greater Love. If thou lovest me as thou professest give proof of thy Love to me by feeding my Sheep There is therefore no need to determine whether Peter's Love surpassed that of all the other Apostles since all that is here upon the Profession of his Love required of him or if the Discussor will have it so the Commission here given him does no way exceed that given to the other Apostles so that supposing him never such a raging ardent mad Lover of Christ as the Discussor very handsomly renders St. Chrysostom's words and that this Love was the Ground of the Trust here committed to him it cannot hence with any colour of Reason be inferr'd that he was advanc'd to any the least Superiority over them And therefore all the Quotations of the Fathers to prove either of these are lost Labour and I may pass over the two next Pages as impertinent except one Passage which deserves an Asterisk had we not met with something like it before That according to the Proportion and Measure of his Love was the Extension and Latitude of his Power †Pag. 192. If the Pope's Power have the same measure to what a narrow Compass will it be reduc'd For if we may judge their Love by what their own Writers tell
find in the story of Cornelius Acts 10. He is called the Rock because he first laid the Foundations of Faith among the Gentiles ‖ Petra enim dicitur eo quod primus in nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit says an antient Author in a Homily father'd on St. Ambrose In the remainder of this Chapter which is spent in answering several Objections made by his Adversary I find nothing but what either needs no answer or what hath been already answered Though I confess there are many things that deserve an Asterisk particularly the first part of his Answer to this Question What Inconvenience would arise from expounding this Rock to be Christ To this saith he I answer Though I grant Christ to be called a Rock yet it is very irrational to interpret the word ROCK of Christ wheresoever you find it express'd in Scripture our Saviour being not really a Rock but only call'd so by a metaphorical locution * Pag. 129. This he says is observed by St. Austin A notable Observation CHAP. III. I Think I have said enough to satisfy every impartial considering Reader that St. Peter's Supremacy is not founded upon this Rock and therefore must fall to the Ground unless some other Foundation be found to support it I proceed therefore to the other Promise here made And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth c. upon which they also tell us this vast Fabrick is solidly superstructed Now the whole of their Discourse from hence that is pertinent to the present Question may be reduc'd to these four Propositions 1. That this Promise of the Keys was made to Peter alone II. That he alone immediately receiv'd them and the other Apostles derivatively from him III. That the Power of the Keys communicated to the other Apostles was inferior and subordinate to a higher Degree of it in St. Peter IV. That by the Keys thus promised to and received by St. Peter is meant the supreme Power of governing the Church Proposition I. This Promise saith Dr. G. our Saviour made to St. Peter and to him alone †Serm of St. Peter p. 28. And you see saith the Discussor Christ addresses his Reply to Peter only the Words Tu and Tibi shutting out all Partnership ‖ St. Peter 's Supremacy p. 18. To which it will be sufficient to return these two things 1. Suppose the Reply addressed to Peter only and the Promise here made to him alone doth it hence follow that Christ intended to give the thing promised to none else Had Christ said to Peter to thee only will I give the Keys this would have followed but it no way follows from Christ's saying only to him I will give thee the Keys From the Promise made to him in particular it only follows that he in particular should have them not that none others should have them besides him 2. Nothing can be more plain than that at another time Christ made the same Promise to all the Apostles indefinitely Verily I say unto you Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven ‖ Matth. 18. 18. But says the Doctor however we read that the Power of binding and loosing which is an Effect of the Keys was promised to all the Apostles in common Matth. 18. 18. yet it was not till after the Keys had been promised to Peter Matth. 16. 19 * Pag. 29. What then does before or after make any Difference in the Promise it self If the King promise to day a Commission to one Man in particular and promise to morrow the same Commission to him and ten more together with him hath that one any Power given him over the other ten by having his Commission first promised him But it is not any where read in Scripture that the KEYS THEMSELVES the proper TOKEN and BADGE of the supreme Stewardship over the Church were promised to the rest but to PETER alone But doth not the Power suppose the Badge Or if it doth not is there any need of it Since it is not the Badge but the Office alone that we are concerned for †See Dr. Hammond 's Answ to Schism disarm'd Sect. 7. n. 12 13 14. If it be granted that all the rest have equal Power with Peter let Peter by my consent have the sole Honour of carrying the Keys And yet doth he not say just before That the Power of binding and loosing which is an effect of the Keys is promised to all the Apostles And if so then surely the Keys themselves since the effect ever presupposes the Cause But the truth is as loosing and binding are the effect of the Keys so the Power of loosing and binding are the Keys themselves The Church which is founded in Christ saith St. Austin received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Peter that is the Power of binding and loosing Sins ‖ Ecclesia ergo quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni Caelorum accepit id est potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata In Evang. Johannis Tractat 124. This is the very definition your Schoolmen give of them The Power of binding and loosing says Aquinas is call'd the Key * Clavis dicitur potestas ligandi solvendi Aquin. suppl Qu. 17. Art. 2. The spiritual Key says Biel is thus described It is the Power of judging that is of loosing and binding by which an Ecclesiastical Judg ought to receive those that are worthy and exclude those that are unworthy from the Kingdom of God †Sic describitur clavis spiritualis est potestas judicandi id est solvendi ligandi c. Eiel in quartum Sentent Dist 18. Qu. 1. And therefere to suppose that Christ promises the power of binding and loosing and not the Keys is to suppose a contradiction This therefore is not to argue like Dr. G. though it very well becomes the Discussor who also talks at the same rate It cannot says he be prov'd out of the Scripture that the Keys in EXPRESS WORDS were given to any but to him viz. Peter ‖ Peter's Supremacy p. 160. in express words It may then it seems be proved by Consequence and is not that as well But unless as he goes on you can shew me some place in the New Testament where our Saviour saith to his Disciples JOYNTLY IWILL GIVE YOV THE KEYS * The Discussor's word are conjunctim Vobis dabo claves or to any of them in particular I WILL GIVE THEE THE KEYS †His words are particulatim tibi dabo claves he hath the best Plea and Title to them The best Plea this is poor and sneaking a plain giving up the cause for should he have the best Plea that doth not hinder but they may have a good Plea since his Title is no way inconsistent with theirs it
Apostles RECEIVE YE THE HOLY GHOST TO WHOMSOEVER YE REMIT SINS THEY ARE REMITTED AND WHOSOEVER'S SINS YE RETAIN THEY ARE RETAINED ‖ Serm. 108. de Divers And Theophylact in his Comment on Matth. 16. 19. Tho it was said to Peter only I will give thee the Keys yet it was afterwards given to all the Apostles when Christ said to them WHOSE SINS YE REMIT THEY ARE REMITTED c. Instead of producing more of the Fathers I challenge the Discussor to produce one ancient Author who hath said the contrary 2. But if the Fathers should now lose their Authority as they are wont to do with the Romanists whensoever they contradict their new Faith yet unless he put on his triple case he will not be able to resist that which follows passing over many private Authors as they commonly call them though licensed by the highest publick Authority I shall produce only the Roman Catechism composed by the order of the Council of Trent and the Council of Trent it self The Roman Catechism speaking of the Minister of the Sacrament of Penance says He must have not only the Power of Order but of Jurisdiction who ought to perform this Office. But those words of our Lord in St. John afford us an illustrious Testimony of this Ministry WHOSE SINS YE REMIT THEY ARE REMITTED TO THEM AND WHOSE SIN YE RFTAIN THEY ARE RETAINED * De Paenit Sacramento c. 5. S. 55. And the Council of Trent declares that all those Opinions are false and Strangers from the Truth of the Gospel which perniciously extend to other Men besides Bishops and Priests the Ministry of the KEYS thinking those words of our Lord WHATSOEVER YE BIND ON EARTH And WHOSESOEVER SINS YE REMIT THEY ARE REMITTED TO THEM AND WHOSESOEVER SINSYE RETAIN THEY ARE RETAINED to be spoken indiffently to all the faithful c. †Sess 14. de Sacram. Paenit c. 6. By which it is plain that the Trent Fathers took remitting and retaining in St. John to signify the same thing with loosing and binding in St. Matthew Secondly This Power is here given equally to St. Peter and the other Apostles or in as high a degree to the other Apostles as it is to Peter This will be cleared from First The Words themselves Secondly The Judgment of the Fathers upon them Thirdly The Concessions of many Learned Men of the Church of Rome First From the Words themselves no part of which is addressed to Peter alone or to Peter more especially than to any of the rest but to all of them jointly without any note of Difference between them Had our Saviour been of the Discussor's Mind he would have spoken to this Effect As my Father hath sent me so send I thee Peter and as I send thee so do thou send them Whosesoever sins thou remittest they are remitted and whosesoever sins they remit in Subordination to thee as their Prince they are remitted Whereas we see no such Distinction made but as my Father sent me so send I you without any Preference of Peter before the meanest of them And accordingly as an excellent Divine of our own Church observes when the Holy Ghost descended it was imparted to each of them alike without any mark of Distinction For we read not of one Flame that crowned the Head of St. Peter greater and more illustrious than that of his Brethren but the Text saith the Tongues like as of Fire were divided and sat upon every one of them singly and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost Acts 2. 2 3. The mighty Wind also wherein this Flame came filled all the House where they were sitting and not only that corner where St. Peter was placed And so this Promise was equally perform'd in common to them all as it had been made to them all ‖ Texts examined which Papists cite for St. Peter 's Supremacy Part 1. p. 95. Secondly If we consult the Fathers we may observe in them those two things pertinent to our Purpose 1. Not one of them intimates that any thing was to be found in this Text peculiar to Peter by which he was set above his Brethren but whatsoever Power was here given they supposed it given in common and equally to them all And some of them expresly tell us that he gave the same Power here to all the Apostles that he had before given to one so do St. Cyprian and Theophylact 2. The Power here given to all the Apostles they take to be so full that a fuller and more ample could not be given to Peter St. Chrysostom says He gave them all Heavenly Power when he said to them Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. And what Power can be greater than this The Father hath given all Judgment to the Son but I see this all Judgment commited to these by the Son * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Sacerdot l. 3. c. 5. And Cyril of Alexandria as I find him quoted by Bellarmine says That by these Words the Apostles were properly created Apostles and Teachers of the whole World and that we may understand that all Ecclesiastical Power is contained in the Apostolical Authority therefore Christ added AS MY FATHER SENT ME c. For as much as the Father sent the Son invested with the highest Power †Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 23. Now can there be any Power or Degree of Power that is not contained in all and in the highest Power I shall add no more but that Pope Gregory I. by virtue of these Words ascribes to all the Apostles superni judicii Principatum and makes them all to be God's Vicars in retaining some Men's Sins and relaxing others ‖ Principatumque superni judicii sortiuntur ut vice Dei quibusdam peccata retineant quibusdam relaxent Hom. 26. de divers Lect. Evang. Yea Thirdly This is no more than what is acknowledged by many zealous Assertors of the Pope's Supremacy Of which I shall now name but three because they may serve instead of a thousand Witnesses two of the three being Jesuits and two of them also Cardinals The Jesuit Maldonate in his Comment upon these Words tells us That the Power which Christ had received as sent by his Father he gave to his Apostles whom he sent in his stead whom he made his Vicars This is manifest saith he from the Words following for therefore he breathed on them therefore he said Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. that he might shew that he gave as great Authority to them as he had received from his Father for there can be no greater than that of remitting Sins * Quam potestatem ipse a Patre missus accepisset eam Apostolis dare quos suo loco mitteret quos vicarios suos faceret Hoc apparet ex verbis sequentibus propterea enim insufflavit in eos propterea dixit Quorum remiseritis peccata ut ostenderet se quantam authoritatem ipse a