of Christs sheepe CHAP. V. Of the course that is to be followed in this disputation I Haue shewed that the foundation of the saith of the Church of Rome is the authority and testimony of the church and haue refused that foundation as vnsound and erroneous It will now perhaps be looked for that I should proceed by prouing that it is false and counterfeit But I see no necessary or sufficient reason for this course and therefore haue rather chosen to follow thaâ— way in this disputation which the matter it selfe leads me to and in which it leads me The question betwixt the church of Rome and vs is this Whether the articles or propositions to which they require our assent as to certaine truths reuealed by God and commanded of him to be beleeued vpon perill of damnation if we do not assent and beleeue be reuealed and commanded by God or no as Bellarmine himselfe putteth it in the assumption of his Syllâ—gisme set down by me Chap. 3. num 9. The church of Rome saith they are and call for obedience thereto accordingly We deny that they are reuealed and enioynâ—d by God and therefore refuse to giue assent to them Who seeth not that the very nature of this difference betwixt vs layeth vpon them a necessity of prouing that those points or articles are propounded by God to be beleeued as matters of faith reuealed by him This made the reuerend and learned B. Iewell in his Apology 3 B. Iewell Apol. part 1. chap. 10. diuis 1. tell the Doctors of the Romish church that It was their part to prooue clearly and truly that the Romish Church is the true and right instructed Church of God And in his second answer to Dr. Cole lett D D. E E. to affirme that It was vnreasonable for that Dr to call for the proofes of our doctrine And therefore as it appeares in that answer lett O. he stands vpon the negatiue as he speakes and putteth the Papists to their proofes because they presse vs to receiue those points for articles of faith This course I haue holden in those bookes that I haue formerly published in this kind of writing this I meane to hold now and hereafter if it please God to afford me opportunity to goe forward in the defence of his truth Yet for their better satisfaction and clearer manifesting of the truth I will alwaies giue some reason of my denying the propositions I refuse howsoeuer it were enough for an answer to deny that which of it selfe is not apparantly true And thus much of the course of this disputation I returne now to the disputation it selfe The maine ground for the proofe of the authority of the church in this kind is taken by Bellarmine out of Iohn 21. 15 16 17. Ioh. 21. 15 16. De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum testimonium seqq Iesus said to Simon Peter Simon the sonne of Ionas louest thou mee more then these He said yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee He said vnto him Feed my sheepe c. From these words Bellarmine disputeth thus Feeding of Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is a singular office of teaching the whole Church by determining and iudging what is to bee beleeued of all men To Peter and his successours the feeding of Christs sheepe is committed Ioh. 21. Therefore to Peter and his successors a singular office of teaching the whole Church by iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men is committed Vpon this conclusion Bellarmine inferreth that he that will not be thus taught by Peter is none of Christs sheepe Many weighty points are hudled vp together in this Syllogisme worthy of serious consideration and debating In the Proposition or first part these foure things are comprised 1. In those words Ioh. 21. 15. a singular Office is contained 2 Feeding there signifieth teaching 3 Feeding Christs sheepe is teaching the whole Church 4 Teaching the whole church is by way of determining what is to be beleeued of all men All these are contained in the Proposition and euery one of them so necessarily required to the truth thereof that if any one of them bee vntrue the Proposition of necessity must be false How then shall the conclusion be an article of faith as the Papists will haue it I will therfore examine euery one of them seuerally and then goe forward to consider of the Assumption CHAP. 6. Of the two former points of the foure THE first of the foure points to be discussed is this In the words rehearsed Ioh. 21. 15. a singular office is appointed That Bellarmine speakes of a singular Office the words themselues shew that hee must needs bee vnderstood of appointing such an office not of disposing of one already appointed it is manifest as well because there was no office yet ordained but that which was common to Peter with the rest of the Apostles and therefore not singular as also for that it will not serue Bellarmines turne to speake of an office common to all the Apostles since hee endeauors to settle such an office vpon Peter as was proper and peculiar to him and such as no other Apostle euer had This may farther appeare by another place in Bellarmine where he saith that that very thing is really giuen Iohn 21. 15. which was promised Mat 16. 19. I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen and as he there saith giuen to the same Simon to whom Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sect. Ac primum cap. 12. Sect Et propterea before it was promised hee saith that the keyes were promised Math. 16. 19. and â—eliuered Iohn 21. 15 16 17. Thus haue we the first point in Bellarmines proposition now let vs try the truth of it For our parts we vtterly reiect it as false because wee are out of doubt it cannot any way bee soundly proued And we are the rather so perswaded because Bellarmine hath not once attempted to proue it although hee could not chose but see that there was necessity of prouing it for it is not so plaine and manifest in it selfe that it needs no proofe and the conclusion drawne out of it is an Article of their faith yea such an article as like Atlas beareth the waight of the whole body of their faith Besides Bellarmine knew well enough that we deny it to be true For hee brings Luthers words to that purpose Martin Luther saith Bellarmine in his booke de potestate Papae affirmes that by the word Feed Iohn 21. there is no new power giuen but only the duty of louing Bellar. de Rom. Pont. la. ca. 15. Sect. Iam vero and teaching enioyned Peter who was made an Apostle before Neither doth the text it selfe nor any other place of Scripture for ought they say or we see afford vs any proofe thereof If there bee any thing in the text for their reliefe it is in that Peter is commanded to feed But
contenteth not himself with this kind of teaching but will haue the teaching here spoken of to be a difiâ—itiue sentence declaring and determining what is reuealed and what the sense and meaning of it is as I shewed chapter 4. numb 7. To this must his proofes be applyed which lie thus If feeding Iohn 21. 15. be not teaching by way of determing what is reueâ—led and what the meaning of it is Then we must vnderstand it of preaching or writing commentaries How shall the consequence of this proposition bee made good since this feeding may at the least as reasonably be vnderstood of reuealing the sacred mysteries yea this interpretatioÌ„ is more reasonable because the words were spoken to him whose office it was to reueale those mysteries by vertue of his Apostolicall commission as I shewed numb 4. yea they are the very same in sense and meaning with those that are vsed in the commission Goe teach all Nations Mark 16. 16. and Iohn 20. 23. as was declared c. 4. n. 4. But admit a man should say it is meant of preaching or writing how doth Bellarmine refute him By telling vs that if we so take it wee must condemne many Popes that haue written nothing at all As if that were any inconuenience to vs although to say the truth most of the Popes that haue written might haue had as much thanke to spare their labors as to write as they haue done Well say we vnderstand it of preaching That may not be neither saith Bellarmine Why so because the Pope cannot preach to all no not diuers Popes to any at all For as their owne Histories confesse some of them did not so much as vnderstand their Grammar But what if the Pope cannot no more could any of the Apostles nor Peter preach to all yet had they authority to preach to all as occasion might happen and were not restrained to this or that congregation diocesse prouince nation or Country and in that respect were vniuersall Pastors of the whole Church yea euery one of them CHAP. VIII Of the Assumption of Bellarmines syllâ—gisme c. 3. n. 5. HItherto I haue shewed what little shew of reason there is for that interpretation of Iohn 21. 15. whereon the strength of Bellarmines conclusion principally dependeth I will now set my selfe to the sifting of the assumption or second part of his syllogisme which is To Peter and his successors that feeding Iohn 21. 15. is committed As the proposition so the assumption also containeth foure seuerall points distinctly to be considered that 1 Those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter 2 The office of seeding is committed to Peter 3 Peter hath his successours 4 The office of seeding is committed to Peters successors The first of these foure â—entences or points is rather supposed then expressed in the assumption but it is plainly deliuered by Bellarmin It is said to Peter only Feed my sheepe Bel de Rom. Poâ— l c. 14. Sect. Hactenâ— Who denyeth this if it be â—ightly vnder The speech was directed immediately to Peter with whom our Lord then talked but not so to Peter as if the duty to which he is exhorted belonged to none but to Institut lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. him Therefore Calvin truely saith that as Peter receiued mandemâ—m of 〈◊〉 Iohn 21. 15. so all other ministers are exhorted to feed the sheepe 1. Pet. 5. 2. and by so saying hee granteth that those words were spoken to Peter but hee telleth the Papists withall that if they will proue that they auouch they must shew that whosoeuer are commanded â—o feed Christs sâ—eepe to them the power ouer the whole Church is committed In which words he denieth the consequence of the proposition which he doth not expresse but acknowledgeth the assumption contained in those words To Peter Bellar. de Rom. ponl lib. 1. c. 14. Sect. Sed coâ—tra onely Christ said feed my sheepe By which it is manifest that Bellarmine doth Caluin great wrong in charging him with the denying that those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter onely and spendeth his time and strength in vaine to proue by seuen arguments against Caluin that which Caluin neuer denyed But Bellarmines meaning is that the words are so spoken to Peter that the thing signified by them belongeth not to the rest of the Apostles And in this sense we say it is false that those words were spoken to Peter onely If Bellarmine can not proue them true in this sense as I am sure he cannot his argument is nothing worth For how shall that proue for Peter and his successors against the rest of the Apostles which was spoken to them as well as to him yet it is not to be wondred at that Bellarmin goeth not about to proue it in that sense For indeed there is no shew or colour of proofe for it because the Word of God no where maketh any distinction betwixt this feeding Iohn 21. 15. and that teaching Mat. 16. 16. Iohn 20. 21. which was enioyned Peter and the rest of the Apostles equally and alike as Bellarmine De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. â—ices confesseth The keyes were giuen Iohn 20. and 21. For when our Lord said Iohn 20. 19. Peace be vnto you as my Father sent me so send I you then hee gaue them the power or key of iurisdiction For by those words hee made them as it were Legates and Gouernors of the Church in his name But in the words following Receiue ye the holy Ghost whose sinnes yee remit c. he gaue them the power of order And thus much of the first proposition of the foure The second followeth namely The office of feeding Ioh. 21. is committed to Peter This is affirmed in plaine words and must bee vnderstood of Peter alone not of him and the other Apostles For that will not serue Bellarmines turne because it proues nothing for the Popes power or against that wee defend Besides Bellarmine striues here for an office proper to Peter because he cals it a singular office But how can that be proper to Peter which is cominon to the rest of the Apostles with him This also we deny as Caluin did long since In this word Institut lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. feed saith he nothing is giuen to Peter more then to the other Bellarmine should haue proued that this conueyeth a proper office to the Pope and not haue taken that for granted which he knoweth we alwayes deny But hee doth not so much as offer to make any proofe of it either de verbo Lib. 3. cap. 5. Lib. 1. cap. 14. Dei or de Roman Pontif. in both which places he professedly disputeth the point Indeed in the latter place hee proueth that the words Feed my sheepe were spoken to Peter only But what is that to proue that feeding Iohn 21. is committed to Peter onely Some man perhaps will imagine that the latter dependeth vpon the former but he wil quickly change his
mind if he doe but looke vpon them both together in one proposition If those words feed my sheepe were spoken to Peter onely then the feeding is commited to Peter onely as if it were all one To require or exhort Peter to feed and To commit the feeding to Peter onely Put case a man that hath many seruants to goe about a peece of worke reaping or the like should say to some one of them whom he might suspect of idlenesse Looke that you reape cleane and faire Will any wise man conclude hereupon that by these words hee giueth him an office to ouer-see and iudge of his other fellowes worke or maketh him the onely worke-man And yet it cannot be denyed that he speaketh to him onely But it will peraduenture bee replyed in defence of the consequence of the forme proposition that if Christ required Peter onely to feed and did not commit that feeding onely to him then there was no end or reason of his speaking to him onely but it were absurd yea blasphemous to say of our Sauiour that there was no end or reason of his speech It were certainely blasphemous for any man to say of the Lord Iesus that any action or speech of his was without reason or not to good purpose But it were also a bold and blind presumption for any man to affirme that there is no reason or end of our Sauiours speech at all because there is none knowne to men What if I know not the end or reason of it may I conclude that therefore there is none So then if wee should grant that there can no reason bee giuen by vs of our Sauiours speech vnlesse thereby such an office bee bestowed vpon Peter yet it might well bee there was some reason thereof though vnknowne to vs. But we can assigne good reason of that speech that is we can shew that there was good reason why our Sauiour Christ should direct his speech in that sort to Peter onely though he meant not to place him in any office thereby First therefore wee say that our Lord speake to Peter thus particularly that hee might giue him occasion to make profession of his loue to him which hee had brought into question by denying his Master with swearing and cursing And because there was no meanes more effectuall to proue the continuance or renuing of Peter loue to our Sauiour then the feeding of his sheepe therefore our Sauiour presseth him with this duty aboue the rest because there was more need to haue his loue shewed then the others who had not made their loue to him so doubtfull Let me adde to these two a third that it was needfull for Peter himselfe that the execution of the commission formerly giuen should bee viged on Peter because it might seeme that by so soule a fall hee had wholly beene put out of commission which doubt is fully remoued by our Sauiours charging him to goe forward in the execution thereof We shall not need then to make any such construction of the Lord Iesus words as if hee had intended by them to seale a commission to Peter for an office to bee newly erected for feare it should be suspected that those words were to no purpose or without reason Nay rather most vnreasonable is that consequence that would haue those things inferre each other betwixt which there is no kinde of agreâ—ment CHAP. IX Of Peters successours NOw in the next place the third proposition offereth it selfe to be considered although it bee but implyed not expressed that Peter hath his successours which is manifestly implyed For he that saith The office is committed to Peters successors supposeth that Peter hath successors This sentence is thus to be vnderstood Peter onely hath his successors so as none of the other Apostles haue For so Bellarmine expoundeth himselfe De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9. Sect. Respondeo Pontificatum The chiefe ecclesiasticall power was giuen to Peter as to the ordinary pastour who was alwaies to haue successors to the other Apostles as to the delegates who were not to haue successors And he saith that The Bishop of Româ— succedeth Peter properly L. 4. c. 25. Sect. Respondeo magnum as the ordinary pastour of the whole Church but the Apostles were extraordinary and as it were delegated pastors and such haue no successors That Peter hath successors in the ministery of the Gospell wee confesse and professe but wee adde that this is common to him with the rest of the Apostles For the farther explication whereof wee say that to succeed the Apostles is either to succeed them properly as one King succeedeth another or in similitude or proportion as Bellarmine truely saith Wee grant that all the Apostles haue De Rom Pon. l. c. 15. Sect. Dicunâ—ur successors in a proportion namely such as preach the Gospell as they did though not by reuelation and that also haue power of ordination and iurisdiction fit for the good gouernment of the Church But we say none of the Apostles haue any successors of the second kind Therefore Bellarmine might haue saued his labor in prouing that the Apostles De Rom. Pont. l 4 c. 25. Sect. sta vero haue no such successors Let vs see how he proueth that which we deny that Peter hath successors properly This hee propoundeth in these tearmes Some must succeed Peter in the Bishopricke of the whole De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Primum ergo Church Which he doth more plainly declare where he saith that the Bishop of Rome succeeds Peter properly not as an Apostle lib. 4 c. 25. Sect. Respondâ—â— magnum but as an ordinary Pastor ouer the whole Church This we vtterly deny that Peter was to haue any such successor in the Bishopricke of the whole Church Our reason is that Peter himselfe had no such office But let vs see how Bellarmine would proue that he had such successors Bellarmines proofe of this point is set downe and is thus De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Nos ergo â—tramque to be framed Either Peter hath successors in Episcopall office ouer the whole Church or that office perished at Peters death But that office perished not at Peters death for that office was ordained for the good of the Church and the Church hath had and shall alwaies haue no lesse need of it then it had while Peter liued Therefore Peter hath successors in the Episcopall office ouer the whole Church Who seeth not that in this argument Bellar. taketh that for granted which he should proue namely that Peter had such an office while he liued For he was not ignorant that all Protestants deny it What is this else according to Aristotles Topicorum l. 8. cap. 13. Philosophy but to beg the question He saith Aristotle that takes that as granted which he ought to proue manifestly beggeth the question As for the proofes hee hath formerly brought touching this office of Peter I haue
not be without an head at Peters death and after Therefore some must succeed Peter in his pastorall office Here Bellarmine perceiued that we were like enough to deny the proposition because the disiunction in it is naught for that Christ the head of the church continued to be the head thereof at Peters death and shall do so for euer Therfore he telleth vs it is not sufficient for the Church to haue Christ for head but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church his reason lyeth thus The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Christ for that head 1 Cor. 12. 12. hath need of the members which is not true of Christ The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church Therefore there is some head of the Church which is not Christ Wee easily yeeld the proposition is true and therfore Bellarmine needed not haue troubled himselfe to proue it especially since his proofe is no better For our Sauiour considered as the Mediatour the head of the Church cannot say to the Members which make the body I haue no neede of you although as he is God he hath absolutely no need of any of them The assumption that the head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church we refuse as false And how doth Bellarmine proue it As he doth many other points by saying so But this will not serue our turne in a matter of faith Belike he looketh we should disproue it Though it be no orderly course of disputation yet I say in a word the head in that 21 verse in which the words quoted by Bellarmine signifies the naturall head to which the principall members in the church are resembled which as principall as they are cannot be without the feet that is the meanest members And this interpretation is warranted by Chrysostome and Theophilact who by head vnderstand those which had receiued greater gifts So that indeed the place containeth a comparison wherein the coniunction of the parts of the mysticall body is declared by the like in the naturall body There are two other arguments in the same chapter Sect. Sexto and Sect. Denique the one is drawne from the succession of the high Priests in the old Testament the other from the necessity of monarchicall gouernment in the church But they are so sleight and idle that I should but wast time labour and paper to meddle with them where-I thus end this third point and this Chapter CHAP. X. Of Feeding committed to Peters Successours THe fourth and last point to be considered in Bellarmines 1 Chapt. 5 num 5. chap. 8. num assumption is this Feeding Ioh. 21. is committed to Peters Successors also This we say is vntrue and will make it appeare to bee 1. Ioh. 21. 25. so by answering the arguments he bringeth to proue it Bellarm. leverbo De il b. 3 cap 5. Sect. Quartum The first whereof is in this manner Either our Sauiour when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Ioh. 21. spake also to his successors or else he prouided for his church for twenty fiue yeares onely and not to the end of the world But when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Iohn 21. he prouided for his Church not for fiue and twenty years onely but to the end of the world Therefore Ioh. 21. he spake also to Peters successors Concerning the assumption we say that wee are out of doubt our Sauiour by those words prouided for his church to the end of the world For hee thereby required Peter to publish the Gospell by reuealing it Now this reuealing or preaching of the Gospell by reuelation is and shall be of great vse to the Church in all ages and times so long as the world shall enduâ—e And in this sensâ— I grant the assumption but in Bellermines sense that our Sauiour prouided for his Church by instituting such an Office as hee fancieth which the whole argument presumeth I deny the assumption and proposition too Indeed the proposition is vtterly false our Lord prouided for the Church to the end of the world though hee spake not at all in that place to Peters successors For in those words hee tooke order for the reuealing of the Gospell which reuelation of Peters containeth prouision for the Church to the end of the world There is a second argument of Bellarmines to the same Bellarm. do Pont. Rom. l. 2 cap. 12. Sect. quinto purpose In which words Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter in those he spoke to Peters successors also for Peter was not to liue alwaies in the flesh But in those words Ioh. 21. Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter For it behoued our Sauiour to haue no lesse care of vs then of our Predecessors Therefore in those words Iohn 21. Christ spake to Peters successors also Of the assumption which speaketh of our Lords committing his sheepe to Peter by those words there hath beene enough said already in the former chapter which needeth no repetition The proposition I reiect as false For our Sauiour might well by those words commit all his sheepe for place and time to Peters Feeding by the doctrine of the Gospell to be reuealed which was to continue as by Gods blessing it hath done and shall doe no lesse to vs and our posterity then to our predecessors from time to time whereby hee sheweth his care of vs as well as of them Now for a conclusion of this fourth point and a full satisfaction to this whole argument drawn from those words Iohn 21. 15. I will propound a reason or two out of the text it selfe by which it shall appeare if not necessarily yet with as great likelihood as any thing Bellarmine hath brought in this question that our Lord spake to Peter onely and not to his successors also Of them to whom those words were spoken our Sauiour demanded whether they loued him or no. Of Peterâ— successors Christ did not demand whether they loued him or no for they neither were there in presence nor at all in being in the world Therefore to Peters successours those words were not spoken He to whom those words were spoken had giuen occasion that our Sauiour should repeat this question thrice For it is not likely that our Lord would haue repeated them so often if there had not beene occasion giuen and wee finde iust occasion of repeating them thrice in Peters denying him thrice But Peters successors had giuen no occasion of the threefold repetition for they neither were at that time nor had beene before in the world Therefore to Peters successors those words were not spoken Thus haue I at the last examined this argument of Bellarmines with all the proofes of euery seuerall part thereof whereby it hath appeared I doubt not to euery iudicious and vnpartiall Reader that there is no force in it to proue that the Church or Pope hath a
this charge doth not so much as imply the appointing of an office because feeding is many times enioyned where there is no singular office ordained but the executing of an office commanded which had before been appointed So the Apostle Peter 1. Peter 5. 2. chargeth th 〈…〉 were already 1 Pet. 5. 2. Ministers to feed the flicke of God And the Apostle Paul Acts 20. 28. giues the like charge to the Elders or Ministers of Act. 10. 28. Ephesus Take heed to your selues and to all the flocke to feed the Church of God And this Dr. Reynolds well obserued Dr. Reynolds against â—art Chap. 3. diuis 2. and vrged against Hart You say true wee might therefore with good reason refuse this proposition till it be proued But I will deale more kindly with Bellarmine and shew that Luther truely affirmed there was no new office erected by those words but the execution of one formerly appointed enioyned If this feeding be the teaching for which all the Apostles had commission Mark 16 15. Goe ye into all the world and Mark 16. 15. preach the Gospell to euery creature Iohn 20. 23. Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them then is it not the erecting of a new office for this was at our Sauiours third appearing to his Disciples Iohn 20. 13. that at his first Ioh. 20. Ioh. 20. 19. Bellarm. de pont Rom. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. Dices c. 19. 20. when as Bellarmine affirmeth they had power giuen them both of iudisdiction to gouerne and of order to execute their sacrificing Priesthood And it had beene a thing not beseeming our Sauiours wisdome to giue a new Commission when there was no need nor occasion of so doing Yea to say the truth it had beene altogether in vaine because the former being as sufficient and in force there could be no place for this later But this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is the teaching for which they had commission Mark. 16. 15. Ioh. 20. 23. For wee finde no other kinde of feeding but this one practised by the Apostles in the new Testament namely feeding by way of reuealing This appeareth touching the Scriptures Bellarm. de Coâ—cil authorit lib 2. cap. 12. Sect. Obseruandum c. and Sect. Diâ—untur Counc Trent Sess 4 decretde Canon scripturatum 2. Tim. 4. 15. The Scriptures were giuen by inspiration 2. Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost as Bellarmine also confesseth The Scripture is the word of God immediatly reuealed The holy writers had immediate reuelation and writ the words of God As for traditions which the church of Rome makes a second part of the diuine testimony or word of God by their owne confession they are also by reuelation for so saith the Councell of Trent Traditions were either receiued by the Apostles from the mouth of our Sauiour or deliuered by themselues the holy Ghost enditing them Indeed this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is nothing else but an exhortation or charge for the performance of that duty which was enioyned in that Commission Mark 16. 15. That it was such an exhortation the manner of deliuering the words sheweth which is by repeating the same thing three seuerall times For this course is very fit to make an impression of a duty commanded no way beseeming the giuing of a Commission Besides it answereth to Peters denying of his Master thrice as Cyril noteth in Ioh. Because Cyril supra Ioh. lib. 12. cap. 64. he denied him thrice at his passion therefore there is a threefold confession of loue required of him A threefold confession saith S. Austin answereth to a threefold negation that the tongue may Aug. Tract in Ioh. 123. expresse as much loue as it did feare Adde hereunto that our Lord calls for the performance of this duty as a proofe of Peters loue to him wherein hee had failed more then the rest because he had made more protestation of it then the rest For thus lies the reason If thou loue me as thou hast professed thou doest shew thy loue by the performing of the duty of feeding But what proofe had it beene of Peters loue to our Sauiour to become the visible Monarch of the whole Church Well might the giuing of such an office argue our Sauiours loue to Peter but the taking it vpon him could not testifie any great loue of his to our Sauiour For who would haue refused such an offer The burthen of teaching was laid vpon the other Apostles as well as vpon him the honour of the Supremacy if this were true was appropriated to him yea the rest of the Apostles who before were equall to him were now made inferiour and subiect to him Lastly in giuing a commission the authority of him that giues is ordinarily expressed alwaies implyed Mat. 28. 18 19. All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth Goe therefore and teach all nations Ioh. 20. 21 22 23. As my father sent me so send I you receiue the holy Ghost whose sins c. But here although as they say it is the onely place that speaks of this commission there is no authority either expressed or implyed onely as Cyrill saith It was a duty of loue to feed as it had beene formerly a proofe of feare to deny What else then can this Feeding be but the teaching which was enioyned all the Apostles at our Sauiours first appearing to them Whereupon I may safely conclude that the word neither necessarily nor in any likelihood of reason importeth the erection of any new office in the Church Let vs now proceed to debate the second point yet with this memorandum that although it be neuer so plainly proued yet Bellarmines proposition of a new office appointed Ioh. 21. 15. is false because the first point contained in it of a singular office here ordained is neither true nor likely The thing now to be discussed is this Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching This sentence is plainly deliuered by Bellarmine in that proposition as he that looks vpon it cannot choose but see and proued also by two reasons the former that Reasonable sheepe are fed by teaching the latter that The Lord saith by Ieremy I will giue you Pastors according to my heart which Ier. 3. 15. shall feed you with knowledge and vnderstanding But these proofes might haue been spared for we acknowledge that Feeding is Teaching But for the fuller discussing of this matter wee must remember that Bellarmine as we saw chap. 4. numb 9. telleth vs Teaching is double by reuealing or propounding things reuealed Wee say that the teaching here spoken of is by reuelation not by propounding matters already reuealed as they would haue it But if they will haue vs yeeld to it they must proue it and not take it for granted as Bellarmine doth For without it be proued as I signified chap. 6. numb 6. his proposition cannot be true It is therfore
as easie and reasonable for vs to refuse his argument grounded vpon that which we deny as for him to affirme that he cannot proue Yet that we may deale more kindly with him then he doth with vs wee will giue him a reason of our answer which is that None of the Apostles did euer vse any other kind of teaching then reuealing If they deny this let them shew that any Apostle did euer informe the Church that This or that booke was scripture that this or that tradition was by diuine authority that this or that place had this or that sense And that this information of theirs was not by way of reuelation that is of immediate inspiration and motion from God wherby they were freed from all errour If they cannot doe this as I am out of doubt they cannot it must needs be granted that they taught onely by reuelation not otherwise They will perhaps obiect Act. 15. 7. but in vaine For the Apostles doe not there expound any place of Scripture formerly written or propound matters already reuealed by God but by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost resolue and enioyne what was to be done in that case So that their determination was a law then first giuen by way of reuelation from God not by way of interpreting and propounding what the Lord had formerly deliuered For it is manifest that the Lord hath no where taught in the old Testament the new was not then written that the Gentiles conuerted to the faith were to abstain from strangled things and from blood to the forbidding wherof the holy Ghost directed them immediately vpon that occasion for that time From which after a time he freed them by the like direction and reuelation giuen to the Apostle S. Paul and by him to the Church Rom. 14. And that this decree of the Apostles was made by reuelation and inspiration of the holy Ghost * De Rom. Pons lib. 4. cap. 25. Sect. Respondeâ— ad primum Bellarmine himselfe grants Yea the Apostles in that same place seeme to take a contrary course to that which if they had expounded the former Scriptures or propounded things formerly deliuered they must haue followed For as it appeareth by debating of the point by Iames and Peter the old testament absolutely Act. 15. freed the Gentiles conuerted from the ceremoniall law Why tempt ye God saith Peter Vers 10. to lay a yoake on the Disciples neckes which neither our fathers nor wee were able to beare Yet the Apostles by this decree of theirs bind them to part of that law by enioyning them Vers 20. 29. To obstaine from blood and that that is strangled Which they might not haue done if they had propounded matters already resolued of and not followed the immediate reuelation and direction of the holy Ghost To this I may adde the manner of this charge giuen by the Apostles which is by inspiration from the holy Ghost whose authority in this case they alledge It seemed good to the holy Ghost not thus saith Moses Dauid or the Lord by this or that Prophet Therfore in that Councel the Apostles did reueale what was to be done not propound what formerly had beene reuealed And yet this is the onely place in all the new Testament wherein there is any shew of Feeding by expounding and propounding otherwise then by reuelation CHAP. VII Of the two latter points in Bellarmines Propositions HAuing found the two former points to be light and false I come now to weigh the third which is set downe as plainly as either of the former that Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching the whole Church There hath beene enough said already to discredit and disable the proposition yet I will goe forward that it may appeare what truth there is in it Bellarmine laboureth De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 16. much to proue that by Christs Sheepe in this place all Christians whatsoeuer are signified But what needeth all this adoe Wee neuer meant to deny it neither doth our granting or his prouing of it any thing at all helpe them or hinder vs. For there is nothing meant in this place by teaching but reuealing as I shewed in the former chap. numb 10 11 12. But this the church of Rome claimes not but striueth tooth and naile for such a teaching as consisteth in expounding and propounding things reuealed yea I will grant him both proposition and assumption in the tearmes wherein they are deliuered Because the whole Church was to bee instructed by the feeding here spoken of and no man had or hath liberty either to refuse as vntrue or not to obey as needlesse any thing that should be deliuered according to this commandement Feed my sheepe The more doth Bellarmin wrong vs in saying that we denie that the whole Church is meant by the name of sheepe in this place For whereas our Diuines say that Peter was made a particular not an vniuersall Bishop they meane not thereby to deny his authority to teach all Nations whatsoeuer and all congregations in all nations as occasion was offered but onely to signifie that hee had no commission giuen by those or any other words to be soueraigne Bishop of the whole Church as they speake in the words going a little Sect. Primum before As for that of Iohn 21. 15. they shew that those words can argue no such authority because then Paul might not haue had the same office among the Gentiles which Peter had among the Iewes so that the vniuersality denied in that and other places by our Diuines is an authority of feeding those who were ioyned with him in the same commission of feeding and had equall authority with him to reueale the truth of God to all the sheepe of Christ without exception which Caluin expresseth thus If the Caluin Institut lib. 4. c. 6. n. 4. same authority be granted to all which was promised to one wherin shall he be aboue his fellowes in office As for n. 7. which Bellarmine quoteth Caluin doth neither mention nor signifie that place Iohn 21. 15. therein There remaineth the fourth poynt to be considered that seeding Christs sheepe Iohn 21. 15. is teaching by way of iudging or determining what is to be beleeued of all men This also is expressed in plaine termes and is of as much importance as any of the other three His proofe is that wee cannot better vnderstand it then in that sense I see not why I may not grant him this without any inconuenience For indeed the Apostles feeding either by word of mouâ—h or writing was by way of sentence so that no man might deny or doubt of any thing which they deliuered Neither was there any higher court to which there might be any appeale from their sentence but all men were absolutely bound to beleeue and obey whatsoeuer they taught and commanded This wee grant and herein we would agree with Bellarmine if this were all he meaneth But he
commission from our Lord Iesus to teach the whole Church by way of iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men and what is not It will bee looked for perhaps that I should proceed to the discussing of some other that are brought for the proofe of this question But I thinke it would bee but lost labour for Bellarmine who was as able as any Popish writer that hath dealt with this matter and had allowance of that he wirt especially in a point that so nearely touched the Popes free-hold if not from the Consistory immediately yet with the knowledge thereof from the office appointed for that purpose in Rome setteth vp his rest vpon that place in Iohn and telleth vs confidently that Then onely Peter receiued the keyes of the kingdome as principall Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. vt autem and ordinary gouernour when he heard those words Feede my sheepe and then also as he saith the charge of the rest of the Apostles his brethren was committed to him Therefore since we require a commission for such an office and that is either here or no where to bee found to what purpose should we examine other arguments which can proue no such matter Now that we haue good reason to call for the sight of a commission by which such an office should be erected no reasonable man can doubt if he consider what himselfe would doe if any man should challenge to himselfe the authority of the Lord Chancellor or Lord Treasurer of England would he take his word without knowledge of his commission vnder the broad seale And why then should wee be so simple as in a businesse of such importance to take the word of a Cardinall for the Popes prerogatiue Master Fisher the Iesuit after some other Papists alleageth for the proofe of this commission Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations But Bellarmine hath disclaimed and disproued all commission in that place and that not without reason For he saith Then onely he receiued the keyes of the Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. Sect. Vt autem Kingdome as principall and ordinarie gouernour when he heard Feed my sheepe In this he disclaimeth it his disproofe is that the commission Mat. 28. 19. is all one with that Ioh. 20. 21. as that which by Bellarmines confession Sect. Dices containeth power both of order and iurisdiction which is also conueyed to the Apostles Math. 28. 20. Goe teach and baptize And this Master Fisher must needs acknowledge if he will haue that place be a commission for the Popes authority As for that Iohn 20. 21. the power there was not committed seuerally to Peter alone but to all the Apostles as to Legates not to ordinary pastors as Bellarmine noteth All other Sect. Vt autem places of Scripture brought by the Papists to this purpose are of the same kind and concerne all the Apostles as well as Peter wherefore all this considered I hold it altogether needlesse to meddle with those other eight arguments of Bellarmines which indeed are of another kinde and perswade my selfe that I haue said enough of that weake foundation of the Papists faith the authority of the Church in person of the Pope for the time being Whereupon I infer my former conclusion that The saith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false euen in the very foundation of it and therefore to bee refused and reiected of all men CHAP. XI Containing a second proofe that the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false SVch as the foundation of the Romish faith is such is the faith it selfe namely false and erroneous as I will shew by the argument that followes in the seuerall parts of it If some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome bee false and erroneous then the faith of that Church is false and erroneous But some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous Lest any man should hastily except against the consequence of the proposition as if I went about to proue the whole by the part which may not bee I must intreat him to remember that as I noted before in this question wee take the faith of the Church of Rome for one intire thing because of that one bond the authority of the Church or Pope by which all the parts of it are so ioyned together that they all make but one body By reason of which bond he that refuseth any one part reiecteth the whole For by that his refusall he accuseth their Church of errour and failing in determining matters of faith and so ouerthroweth the very foundation of their faith Besides the denying of any one such Article let it bee in it selfe of neuer so small importance draweth vpon the denyer that Anathema or curse which seizeth on all them which are not of the faith of the Church of Rome Wherefore I may presume without presumption that the consequence is good seeing euery Article is equally and alike a matter of faith My assumption I will make good by setting downe out of the Councill of Trent diuers Articles of the Romish saith which are false and erroneous and these they are 1 The sauing verity or truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written bookes or Scriptures and vnwritten traditions Concil Trident. Sess 4. decret de Canon Scripturae 2 The bookes of Iudith Tobit Ester chap. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16. Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch Daniel chap. 3. 13 14. Macchabees 1 2. are canonicall scripture d. decret de scriptur 3 The whole bookes of Scripture and euery part of them as they are in the vulgar Latine edition are to be receiued for sacred and canonicall d. decret de scriptur 4 It is the office of the Church to iudge of the true sense or interpretation of the sacred or holy Scriptures d. sess 4. de edit vsu librorum sacrorum Sect. insuper 5 The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on earth Sess 6. decret de reform cap. 1. and sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. 6 The Church of Rome is the mother and Mistris of all Churches Sess 7. de baptis can 3. and sess 13. de extrem vnct cap. 3. and sess 22. de sacrif missae cap. 8. 7 Grace bestowed in baptisme doth take away whatsoeuer hath the true proper nature of sin sess de pec orig can 5. 8 Concupiscence in the regenerate is not truely and properly sinne d. canon 5. 9 Man doth freely assent to and cooperate or worke together with Gods exciting and cooperating grace so that he can also reiect or refuse the same grace Sess 6. de iustif cap. 5. And dessent if he will can 4. 10 The onely formall cause of iustification is iustice or righteousnesse inhaerent d. sess de iustit cap. 7. 11 By keeping the commandements of the