soueraigne authority for the very light of nature and common custome of all nations doth teach vs that he vvho succeedeth vnto another in any established estate and calling doth at his lawfull enstalement therein enter into ful possession of al the rights dignities and priuiledges therevnto belonging For example vvhen one is crowned King of any nation he presently there vpon is endowed with al the power and prerogatiues which his Predecessors in that Kingdome enjoyed before him And to speake of spirituall Prelates vvho doubteth but that assoone as any Ecclesiastical person is chosen confirmed for example Archbishop of Canterbury but that forth-with he is not only made gouernor of that Diocesse but also Metrapolitane and supreame Pastor of the Church of England his very succession in that Sea making him as it were inheritour vnto all the priuiledges and prerogatiues of his Predecessours in that seate Euen so the Bishops of Rome succeeding vnto S. Peter in that Apostolicall Sea doe inherite and succeede him in that supreme authority which Christ gaue vnto S. Peter for to be continued in his Church vntill the worldes end Now to auouch as some desperately doe that S. Peter did not die at Rome nor neuer was at Rome is so grosse and palpable an vntruth auerred by meere ghesse and phantasie contrary to the euident testimony of all auncient fathers and repugnant vnto the expresse and sensible monuments of the place of his execution of his reliques and Churches builded by Constantine the great to the perpetuall remembrance of them in the City of Rome yet to this day most famously knowne through the world this their assertion is I say so blockish and impudent that it were but lost time to stand about the proofe of it for he that is so sencelesse as to beleeue such a paradoxe deserueth small paynes for his recouery But for an vpshot of this question let vs heare the opinions of the principal Doctors of the East Church who of all men are most likely not to attribute any such supremacy vnto a Bishop of the West Church if they had thought it due vnto any Patriarke of theirs or if they had not judged it to be a cleare case in true Diuinity that such soueraigne authority was due vnto that one chiefe Pastor in Gods Church The first shall be one the auncientest of them that most worthy champion of Christ Athanasius who was also one of the chiefest Patriarkes of the East Church as being Bishop of Alexandria He in a speciall treatise of Dionysius one of his predecessours in that Sea sheweth howe he went to Rome to another Dionysius then Pope there to haue his cause heard and determined which he would not haue done if he had not acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for his superiour and one to whose finall sentence all of the East Church as vvell as of the West were bound to obey And in his Epistle vnto Pope Foelix he hath these wordes God hath therefore placed you and your predecessours Apostolicall Prelates in the tower of superiority and hath commanded you to take charge of all Churches that you may succour and helpe vs. This Epistle indeede of Athanasius M. PER. doth mislike but because he sheweth not vvherefore his authority vvill not serue to discred it it But he saith as much in another of his and of all the Bishops of Aegipt joyned with him to Pope Marke to wit That they al with al committed to their charge were and euer would be obedient vnto the Bishop of Rome Lib. 3. hist cap. 7. It is also recorded by the Ecclesiasticall Hystoriographer Zozemene howe that both Athanasius Patriarke of Alexandria and Paule Patriarke of Constantinople with diuers others of the Greeke Church being by the Arrians banished out of their owne Bishoprickes did flie vnto the Bishop of Rome for refuge Who as that authour witnesseth because the care of all did belong vnto him through the dignity of his place and seate did restore their Churches to euery of them Athanasius also in his second Apology hath recorded these words of the same most holy Pope Iulius to the Bishops of the East Are yee ignorant this to be the custome that first of all you must write vnto vs that from hence it may be defined what is just Wherefore if there had beene any such suspition against the Bishop you ought to haue related it to our Church of Rome thus much of S. Athanasius the first of the foure Greeke Doctors Nowe to the second S. Gregory Nazianzene who had beene also Patriarke of Constantinople In câ—râ—a de vita sua Epist 52. ad Athan. he saith That the Church of Rome had alwaies mainetayned the true faith and opinion of God as it became the City that was superiour to all the world His diuine companion S. Basil aduertiseth Athanasius That he thought it good to write vnto the Bishop of Rome to heare their matters and by the decree of his judgement to determine them and because it was hard to send from thence that the Pope would giue to certayne chosen men authority to compose their controuersies and to reuerse and make voide the actes of the Councell of Arimini See what soueraignety this learned auncient Father of the East Church doth attribute vnto the Church of Rome The very same doth that golden mouth and most learned and holy Doctor S. Chrysostome acknowledge vvriting vnto Innocentius the first Pope of Rome Epist 1. ad Innocentium Beseeching him that he would repeale and make voide the wicked fact of the Patriarke of Alexandria with a whole Councell of the East and lay the Ecclesiasticall censures and punishments vpon them vvhich euery man knoweth that he could not haue done if he had not power and jurisdiction ouer all the East Church Vnto these foure most firme pillars of the Greeke Church let vs joyne one neighbour of theirs little inferiour vnto them for either standing learning or authority I meane Theodorete a Bishop in Asia that had 800. Churches vnder him He notwithstanding his distance from Rome writeth thus vnto Leo the first Epist ad Leonem I doe expect the sentence of your Apostolicall Sea and in humble wise doe beseech your Holynesse that your just and right judgement may helpe me appealing vnto you and that you will command me to runne vnto you to verifie that my doctrine is consonant to the Apostles And in another Epistle to Renatus a Priest of Rome he writeth That the Heretikes had spoyled him of his Bishopricke and cast him out of the Cyties without any reuerence or respect of his gray-hayres wherefore saith he I request you that you will perswade the most holy Archbishop Leo that he will vse his Apostolicall authority and command vs to come to your Councell for that holy seate of Rome boldeth the stearne of gouerning all the Churches in the world Well then to conclude this long and intricate question seing the Bishops of Rome from all antiquity as is
of the sheepe but of all other Pastors thou alone art the Pastor Thus farre S. Bernard and much more doth he say in fauour of the Popes Supremacy in the same booke vvherefore to pike out a broken sentence of his against ouer-ruling thereby to disproue that which he doth most plainely proue and allowe argueth an euill conscience in M. PERKINS and a minde fully bent to deceiue them that be so simple as to beleeue him Ephes 4. His fourth reason Mention is made of gifts which Christ gaue to his Church after his ascension whereby some were Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors some Teachers nowe of there had beene an office in which men as deputies of Christ should haue gouerned the whole Church that calling might here haue beene named and no doubt but that Paul would not haue concealed it where he mentioneth callings of lesse importance Answere This man will neuer leaue playing the Sophister and vsing of fallacies insteade of sound arguments vvhat a reason is this there is no mention made of the supreme Pastors calling in one place of S. Paul therefore there is no mention made of it at all Let vs returne this his weapon vpon his owne pate In that place of the Apostle there is no mention made of the Kinges supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall but rather a playne declaration that the Church of God needeth no such officer for her Ecclesiasticall gouernement ergo Kinges haue no such authority And because M. PER. seemeth not greatly to care for the Princes supremacy let this argument be vrged against the admirable Elders of their consistoriall discipline who notwithstanding they be such peerelesse peeres of the reformed Churches yet were vtterly concealed or rather neuer thought vpon by the Apostle when and where he mentioneth callings of lesser moment Nowe the direct answere to that place may be twofold eyther that there is not mention made of all Church officers as it is euident and must be confessed on all parts or else that by conuenient interpretation they may be reduced vnto some of them there named and so may the supreme Pastor of Christes Church be contayned well in that name of Pastors or because it belongeth vnto the supreme Pastor to haue a generall care of all Christendome and to send alwayes some to conuert Infidels his chardge and calling may be well an Apostleship as it is in the very wordes cited by M. PER. in his last argument out of S. Bernard Epist 162. Lib. 2. cōt Ruffinum Besides S. Augustine and S. Hierome with others doe call the Sea of Rome an Apostolicall chayre and seate M. PERKINS fift reason The Popes supremacy is condemned by sentences of Scripture before it was manifest to the world by the spirit of prophesie to wit the man of sinne which is Antichrist shall exalt himselfe aboue all that is called God nowe this whole Chapter with all the circumstances of it 2. Thess 2. most fitly agreeth to the sea of Rome and the head thereof Answere This is a capitall accusation and therefore should haue bin throughly well proued and yet you vvould meruaile to see how sleightly he goeth about it I can scarse bring his proofe into any forme of argument it is so substantiall But thus he seemeth to argue At the decay of the Roman Empire the man of sinne shal be reuealed but the Sea of Rome neuer slourished till the Empire decayed ergo that Sea is the man of sinne Here is a newe found manner of arguing Let vs admit the first proposition because it may hap to be true though it be very vncertaine what is meant by that defection mentioned by S. Paul But let vs graunt it shall euery thing that beginneth then to flourish be the man of sinne and if euery flourishing state shall not then be that man of sinne vvhy shall the Sea of Rome be rather that man of sinne then any other flourishing estate sure it is that it hath no consequence out of that argument Secondly it is most false also that the Sea of Rome neuer flourished till the Empire decayed for when did it euer flourish more then in that good Emperors daies Constantine the great and in many other excellent Christian Emperors that liued an hundred yeares after him Thirdly S. Paul speaketh not of a decay of the Roman Empire or vvhatsoeuer else he meaneth but rather of a generall reuolt or vtter ruyne and decay of it vvhich is not as yet happened for the Empire to this day yet continueth in some part of Hungary and Beameland so that man of sinne cannot be the Sea of Rome vvhich so many yeares hath flourished together with that Roman Empire Finally S. Peter and three and thirty other Popes of Rome after him enjoyed the supreme gouernement of the Church more then foure hundred yeares before that declination decay of the Roman Empire which they speake off so that nothing can be more fond and absurd then to draw thence any argument against the Popes supremacy And whereas he saith that all that chapter agreeth fitly to the Sea of Rome I say wil briefly proue that nothing in that Chapter agreeth vnto it any thing aptly First the Apostle speaketh of one particular man as his vvordes doe manifestly shewe for he calleth him the man of sinne Vers 3. the sonne of perdition and that with the Greeke article which doth more formally particularize howe can this be applyed vnto more then two hundred Popes Vers 4. In illum locum Secondly it is said that that man of sinne shall be extolled aboue all that is called God and as S. Chrysostome expoundeth it shall command himselfe to be adored and worshipped as God vvhich is and hath euer beene most farre from the thoughtes of all Popes vvho professe themselues seruants of all Gods seruants Vers 9. Thirdly that man of iniquity shall worke many strange signes and wonders Let them name vvhich of the Popes hath so done for these last 900. yeares vvhich they accuse most Fourthly that man shall be receiued of the Iewes for saith S. Paul Vers 10. Because they receiued not the charity of truth that they might be saued therefore God will send them the operation of errour to beleeue lying now al the Greeke interpreters doe vnderstand this of the Iewes as the very text leadeth them With whome agreeth S. Hierome interpreting these vvordes thus Quaest 11. ad Algasiū Antichrist shall doe all these signes not by the power but by the permission of God for the Iewes that because they would not receiue the charity of truth that is the spirit of God by Christ and so receiuing the Sauiour they might haue beene saued God will send them c. With these accord both S. Augustine and S. Cyril vpon this sentence of our Sauiour speaking to the Iewes I come to you in the name of my father Ioh. 5. vers 43. and you receiued me not if any
vvas so commanded to doe by the formall lawes of those foure his temporall Soueraignes and so might without any offence to God haue beene nowe of the old religion then of the newe and againe of neither old nor newe but of a hotch-potch and mingle-mangle of some of the one and some of the other vvhich is most absurd euen so is that of which it followeth And to confirme this with some testimony of antiquity S. Ambrose a most firme pillar of the West Church spake resolutely vnto the Emperour Valentinian saying Epist 35. Trouble not your selfe ô Emperour with thinking that you haue any imperial jurisdiction ouer those thinges that be Diuine and Holy for the right of Ciuill causes was committed vnto you but not the chardge of Holy thinges And another his auncient S. Athanasius Epist ad solita vitaÌ„ ageÌ„tes the first of the foure Doctors of the Greeke Church doth reprehend the Emperour Constantius for intermedling vvith Ecclesiasticall causes and recordeth an notable saying of that venerable Bishop Hosius vvho vvas present at the first generall Councell of Nyce vnto the same Constantius to vvit Command vs not ô Emperour in this kinde of affaires rather learne these thinges of vs for God hath committed the Empire to your chardge but hath bequeathed vnto vs and put vs in trust with the affaires that appertayne vnto his Church And therefore vvould not that most renowmed Emperour Constantine the great judge of Bishops causes although the Bishops themselues referred theiâ— matter to him and requested him to compose them but said That it did not belong vnto him to judge them but to be judged by them vvhose blessed steps the most learned and juditious Emperours that followed him chose rather to followe then the euill example of his Arrian Sonne Constantius For Iustinianus the elder that famous lawe-maker faith vnto Iohn the second Pope of that name In Codice tit primo We doe not suffer any thing to passe that belongeth vnto the state of the Church but that we make it knowne vnto your Holynesse who are the head of all the holy Church And Valentinian the Emperour in an Epistle vnto Theodosius vvriteth We must in our times mainetaine the dignity of â—uâ— reuerence vnto the most blessed Apostle S. Peter Extat inter praeambulas ad Concil Chalced. so farre-forth as the most happy Bishop of Rome vnto whome antiquity hath yeelded the principality of Priestly office aboue all others may haue place and power to judge of matters of faith and of Priests And thus much by the way against the Supremacy of Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall It remayneth nowe that I briefly proue S. Peter to haue had this Supremacy in his time and that therein the Bishops of Rome doe succeede him And for a foundation of this Question I take that for an assured truth vvhich the best Philosophers doe grant and the practise of the best and greatest Kingdome hath confirmed to wit That in one Kingdome it is best to haue one King and supreme gouernour assisted with the counsell of his wisest subjects which is so well knowne and confessed generally that he must needes betaken for a vvrangler that will denie it nowe then to our purpose Christes Church is but one state or spirituall Kingdome vvhich hath but one faith one baptisme and forme of Sacraments one true religion and solemne manner of diuine seruice Nowe seing vve are not to doubt but that he who purchased himselfe this one Church with the shedding of his owne most pretious bloud would haue it gouerned in the best sort therefore we must confesse that he hath ordayned one supreme Gouernour of it They say that this supreme Pastor is Christ himselfe and that he is alwayes present with it in spirit and by his word vvherefore there needeth no deputy or other in his roome This I haue once before confuted graunting that Christ is present to his Church in spirit and that he doth inwardly quicken and gouerne it but that is not sufficient for vnlesse we haue one certayne person visibly present to assure vs vvhich is the vvord of God and what is the true sence of all doubtfull places of it we shall neuer haue vnity of faith for if they who mistake the true sence must be left to their owne judgement and the direction of their owne spirit which they beleeue to be guided with the holy Ghost then shall vve haue so many heresies currant in the Church as there be Archeretikes to coyne and stampe them The like may be said for Sacraments and sacred rites of religion the which without one Supreme Moderatour cannot be kept vniforme so that it resteth most cleare that our Sauiour Christ being to leaue this world and to returne vnto his heauenly Father he was to commit the high charge of his only Spouse and Doue vnto the custody and fidelity of one supreme Pastor This is confirmed by the example of the old Testament vvhich vvas a figure of the newe Deut. 17. ab 8. ad 13. vvhere the soueraigne and supreme authority of deciding all doubtfull questions that should arise about the lawe was by Gods expresse order giuen vnto the high Priests and euery Israelite bound vnder payne of death to obey him and stand to his sentence And that this Supremacy continued all along the state of the old Testament euen vntill Christes dayes both the Magdeburgenses and Caluin doe testifie Centur. 1. lib. 1. c. 7. Lib. 4. Instit ca. 6. But the Protestants object that some Iudges and Kinges of Iuda did take vpon them to deale in matters appertayning to religion I graunt that good Kinges as principall members of the temporalty ought to haue a speciall regard to the preseruation of the seruice of God and to see that matters of religion be duly ordered because the peaceable gouernement of their temporall affaires dependeth much vpon the concord piety and vertue of Ecclesiasticall persons and therefore they are to admonish and call vpon the Bishops and Gouernours of the Clergy to redresse all disorders among them but not to meddle by themselues as their superiours in spiritual causes so did those good Kinges of Israell as it is recorded of one of the best of their King Iosaphat who sought for reformation of Church matters 2. Paralip 19. But reserued the Presidency of those thinges which appertayne vnto God vnto Amarias the high Priest And nowe a-dayes we giue many priuiledges to Princes as the denomination of most Bishops and higher Magistrates of the Church that the two states spirituall and temporal may the better agree and liue more peaceably together S. Augustine also doth declare it to be the duty of Kings to defend the Church and her decrees and to punish with seuere lawes all Heretikes and other condemned by the Church But directly to the former objection let the places of the old Testament be perused where the authority and right of Kinges be specified and you shall not finde
he was when it pleased him visible to his Apostles and at other times inuisible and yet was not his man-hood thereby abolished as M. PER. would make vs beleeue no more is it when his body is in many places at once or in one place circumscribed and in the other vncircumscribed For these externall relations of bodies vnto their places doe no whit at all destroy their inward and naturall substances as al Philosophie testifieth wherefore hence to gather that we denie both the Father and the Sonne to be God doth sauour I will not say of a silly wit but of a froward will peeuishly bent to cauill and calumniate Secondly Master PERKINS chargeth vs with disgrading Christ of his offices saying that for one Iesus Christ the onely King lawe-giuer and head of the Church they joyne vnto him the Pope not only as a Vicar but as a fellowe in that they giue vnto him power to make lawes binding in conscience to resolue and determine infallibly the sence of holy Scripture properly to pardon sinne to haue authority ouer the whole earth and a part of hell to depose Kinges to whome vnder Christ euery soule is subject to absolue subjects from the oath of alleageance c. Answere Here is a bed-role of many superfluous speeches for not one of all these thinges if we admitte them all to be true doth conuince vs to haue disgraded Christ of his offices which are these to appease Gods wrath towardes vs to pay the ransome for our sinnes to conquer the Diuell to open the Kingdome of heauen to be supreme head of both men and Angels and such like He may without any derogation vnto these his soueraigne prerogatiues giue vnto his seruants first power to make lawes that binde in conscience as he hath done to all Princes which the Protestantes themselues dare not denie then to determine vnfallibly of the true sence of holy Scripture which the Apostles could doe as all men confesse and yet doe not make them Christes fellowes but his humble seruants to whome also he gaue power properly to pardon sinnes Luc. 24. Ioan. 20. Mar. 16. Matt. 28. Whose sinnes you pardon on earth sbal be pardoned in heauen and finally to them he also gaue authority ouer the whole earth goe into the vniuersall world Ouer part of hell no Pope hath authority and when he doth good to any soule in Purgatory it is per modum suffragij as a suppliant and entreater not as a commander Whether he hath any authority ouer Princes their subjects in temporall affaires it is questioned by some yet no man not wilfully blinde can doubt but that Christ might haue giuen him that authority without disgrading himselfe of it as he hath imparted to him and to others also faculties of greater authority and vertue reseruing neuerthelesse the same vnto himselfe in a much more excellent manner As a King by substituting a viceroy or some such like deputie to whome he giues most large commission doth not thereby disgrade himselfe of his Kingly authority as all the world knowes no more did our Sauiour Christ Iesus bereaue himselfe of his power or dignity when he bestowed some part thereof vpon his substitutes He goes on multiplying a number of idle wordes to small purpose as that we for one Christ the only reall Priest of the newe Testament joyne many secondary Priestes vnto him which offer Christ daylie in the Masse We indeede hold the Apostles to haue beene made by Christ not imputatiue or phantasticall but reall and true Priestes And by Christ his owne order and commandement to haue offered his body and bloud daylie in the sacrifice of the Masse what of that see that question Furthermore he saith for one Iesus the all sufficient mediatour of intercession they haue added many fellowes to him to make request for vs namely as many Saintes as be in the Popes Kalendar yea and many more too For we hold that any of the faithfull yet liuing may be also requested to pray for vs neither shall he in hast be able to proue that Christ only maketh intercession for vs though he be the only mediatour that hath redeemed vs. Lastly saith M. PERKINS for the only merittes of Christ in whome alone the Father is well pleased what was he not well pleased with his Apostles they haue deuised a treasury of the Churches contayning besides the merittes of Christ the ouerplus of the merittes of Saints to be dispensed to men at the discretion of the Pope and thus we see that Christ and his merittes be abolished Answere The good man is somewhat mistaken for we hold not any ouerplus of merits in Saints the which we acknowledge to be by God fully rewarded in heauen but we affirme that some Saints and blessed Martirs haue suffered more paynes in this life then the temporall punishment of their owne sinnes â—eserued Iob 6. v. â— Who therefore might truely say with that just man Iob would to God my sinnes whereby I haue deserued wrath were weighed with the calamitie that I suffer euen as the sandes of the Sea this should be the heauyer Nowe parte of these sufferinges of Gods Saints as being needelesse for their owne satisfaction are reserued in the Churches store-house and may by the high steward of the Church to whome the dispensation of her treasure belongeth he communicated to others as very reason teacheth vs for who is fitter to dispose of any mans goodes then he to whome the charge thereof is giuen by his testament And thus I hope euery reasonable man doth finde vs Catholikes to be farre of from transforming Christ into an Idoll of mans conceite as Master PERKINS dreameth only we see a misconceited man labouring in vaine to deface Christes benefites toward vs to calumniate his chiefe seruantes and to skirmish more against his owne phantasies then against any doctrine of ours He layeth lastly a third kinde of Atheisme against vs for worshipping of God not with such respect as is sutable to his nature For saith he our worshippe is meere will worshippe for the most part without any allowance or commandement of God as Durand in his Rationale in effect acknowledgeth it is a carnall seruice standing of innumerable bodylie rites and ceremonies borrowed partly from the Iewes and partly from the Heathens it is deuided betweene God and some of his creatures in that they are worshipped both with one kinde of worshippe let them paint it as they can c. Answere Ipse dixit Pythagoras hath pronounced his sentence yet you neede not beleeue him vnlesse you list because he fableth so formally doth Durand acknowledge that all our worship is meere will worship and that it hath no allowance of God O egregious and impudent deceiuer For that learned deuout Author Durand doth nothing else in all that booke then set out the Majesty and declared the meaning of the true worship of God vsed daylie in our seruice throughout the whole yeare And therefore doth entitle
promise of Christ made although in and by him to the great benefit of the whole Church In cap. 16. Math. But Theophilact hath that they who receiue the gift of a Bishop haue the power of committing and binding as Peter had Answere We grant that all lawfull Bishops can binde and loose both in the court of conscience and publikely but thereof it followeth not that that promise of Christ for building his Church on S. Peter c. was common vnto the rest of the Apostles In psal 38 But Ambrose saith that which is said to Peter is said to the Apostles Then belike that was also said vnto the rest as well as to him This night before the Cocke crowe twise thou shalt denie me thrife which no man can say To vnderstand then such generall propositions take this distinction vvith you that thinges spoken vnto S. Peter are of three sundry sortes Some are spoken vnto him as an ordinary Christian and such sentences doe agree vnto all Christians other thinges are spoken vnto him as an Apostle and those are common vnto the rest of the Apostles there be lastly certayne thinges spoken vnto him particularly as head of the Church which may not be extended vnto any other of the Apostles but only vnto his successors Nowe S. Ambrose speaketh of the second kinde of thinges but against this M. PER. excepteth thus That although Peter be admitted to haue beene in commission aboue the rest for the time yet hence may not be gathered any supremacy for the Bishops of Rome because the authority of the Apostles were personall and consequently ceased with them without being conueyed vnto any others and he addeth the reason of this to be because that when the Church of the newe Testament was once founded it was needefull only that there should be Pastors and Teachers for the building of it vp vnto the worldes end Reply What meaneth this man by Pastors doth he comprehend Bishops vvithin that word then he ouerthroweth himselfe for if such Pastors be yet necessary then is it needfull that the Bishops of Rome doe succeede S. Peter in that ample power which he had If by Pastors he vnderstand Parish Priestes or Ministers that haue charge of flockes and by Teachers other Preachers then doth he here as much for the Bishops as in his last discourse he did for temporall Princes that is as he vvent about there to proue that Christ as our redeemer could haue no creature for his deputy in gouernement and consequently that Kings cannot be Christs Lieutenants in Ecclesiasticall causes so here he doth insinuate that Bishops be not necessary to the building vp of Christes Church but the Minister of euery Parish with the Elders thereof will suffice for ordinary matters and that affaires of greater moment must be referred belike to the Consistoriall assembly of many Ministers and Elders togither Doth not this sauour rankely of Puritanisme but because he only saith this without any proofe let it suffice for answere to say that as Ministers are necessary to teach the word of God and to administer the Sacraments so are Bishops both to institute and ordayne the Ministers and to see that they doe diligently discharge their duty And as Bishops are necessary to ouer-see Priests and Ministers so are Archbishops and Metropolitanes to looke vnto Bishops and to prouide that there be no schismes or diuisions among them and to determine their controuersies if any arise betweene them And in like manner one Supreme Pastor is necessary in the Vniuersall Church of Christ to hold all Archbishops Primates and Patriarkes in vnity of faith and in conformity of Christian ceremonies and manners M. PERKINS third reason When the Sonnes of Zebedee sued vnto Christ for the greatest roomes of honour in his Kingdome Christes answere was Ye knowe that the Lordes of the Gentils haue dominion and they that are great exercise authority ouer them but it shall not be so vvith you Bernard applyeth this to Pope Eugenius on this manner Lib. 2. do consid it is playne that here dominion is forbidden the Apostles goe to then dare you if you will to take vpon you ruling an Apostleship or in your Apostleship rule and dominion if you will haue both alike you shall leefe both otherwise you must not thinke your selfe excempted from the number of them of whome the Lord complayned ye haue raygned but not of me Answere Insolent and tyrannicall dominion such as was in those daies practised by the Gentils Pagans and Idolaters is there by our Sauiour forbidden the Apostles but not modest and vigilant Prelature in Ecclesiasticall gouernement as the very text it selfe doth plainely shewe for in that he doth foretel that there should not be such a haughty disdaineful kinde of superiority among his disciples he doth giue vs to vnderstand that there should be some other better and saith further Luc. 22. vers 26. That he who is greater among you let him become as the lesser and he that is your leader or as it is in the Greeke égouménos your Captaine or Prince let him be your wayter See he vvill haue among them one greater then the rest to be their Captayne and leader which he confirmeth with his owne example saying As I my selfe came not to be wayted on or ministred vnto but came to minister or to wayte vpon others so that this discourse of our Sauiours only disproueth in Christians such Lord-like domination as vvas then in vse among the Gentils who were giuen for the most part to take their owne pleasures to ouer-rule lawes as they listed to oppresse their subjects with taxes and to vse them like slaues Nowe in Ecclesiasticall gouernementall must be otherwise the Prelate must not seeke his owne ease wealth or pleasure but most vigilantly study day and night to feede and profit his flocke vvith whome he must conuerse most modestly not scorning or contemning to speake familiarly vvith the meanest amongst them And this is that vvhich S. Bernard counsaileth Eugenius to doe To rule as an Apostle and not to ouer-rule or to dominier like vnto some temporal Princes which in the same booke he doth plainely teach saying That when Eugenius was created Pope he then was exalted ouer Nations and Kingdomes yet not to domineer ouer them but to serue them And further he doth in the same booke deliuer the Popes Supremacy in these most euident wordes speaking thus to the same Pope Eugenius Who art thou a great Priest the highest Bishop thou art the Prince of the Bishops the heyre of the Apostles c. Thou art he to whome the keyes of heauen were deliuered to whome the sheepe were committed There are also indeede other Porters of heauen and Pastors of sheepe but thou art so much the more glorious as thou hast inherited a more excellent name aboue them They haue their flockes to each man me but to thee all were committed as one flocke to one Pastor Thou art not only Pastor
in any one of them that they vvere to haue the supreme gouernement in cases Ecclesiasticall but where the first institution of Kinges is mentioned There they are willed to receiue the examplar and copy of the lawe Deut. 17. vers 18. from the Priests of the tribe of Leuy And in the same Chapter a little before All men are bound to take the true exposition of the same lawe not from the King but from the high Priest of the same tribe of Leuy Nowe if the Iewes being but one nation could not be kept in vnity of truth without one supreme Gouernour what diuision in faith and religion would there be among all the nations of Christendome which be so many and so diuers if there were not one supreme Pastor to vvhose finall sentence they should all be obedient and bound to stand first then it is euident that there must be one supreme Gouernour in the Church Nowe to goe one steppe forward this supreme authority was by our Sauiour Christ IESVS giuen vnto S. Peter which I will proue both by the promise and performance of it Math. 16. vers 15. The promise of this supremacy is recorded in these wordes Whome doe you say that I am Simon Peter answered and said thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God and IESVS answering said vnto him blessed art thou Simon Bar-Iona because flesh and bloud hath not reuealed it to thee but my Father which is in heauen And I say to thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church c. Whence I reason thus That is the foundation in a building which is the head in a body and supreme Gouernour in a common-weale for the foundation is first laide and doth vphold all the rest of the building but our Sauiour promiseth to build the spirituall common-wealth of his Church vpon Peter as vpon a firme Rocke and foundation therefore he meant to make him the head and chiefe Pastor vnder himselfe of it Some answere that Christ said not that he would build his Church vpon Peter but vpon that Rocke which was himselfe because that Christ is called a Rocke 1. Cor. 10. Reply This cannot be for albeit Christ be the most firme foundation and chiefe corner stone of all that building yet hath it pleased him to appoint a Deputy and Vicar to gouerne in his absence vnder him and so to communicate his Titles in a certayne measure and degree vnto his seruants Math. 5. vers 15. He is the light of the world and yet saith he to his Apostles You are the light of the world He is the Pastor of our soules and he maketh them our Pastors so he is the Rocke that sustayneth all partes of the Church by his owne power and vertue but hath imparted to Peter that name to signifie that he should be made able to beare the person of his Vicar on earth and to rule vnder him and by vertue receiued from him the whole Church for his time Nowe the very course of the text doth conuince that the Rocke there specified cannot be Christ for it hath joyned vvith it the word this and vpon this Rocke which doth demonstrate and point out that vvhich was spoken of immediately before vvhich vvas Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke c. Againe what congruity should there be in this sentence to beginne with Peter and to make shewe of bestowing some high reward on him for his noble confession and in the end of it to say that he would build his Church vpon himselfe Thirdly in the next sentence there is no question made but that Christ did promise to Peter the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen and not to reserue them to himselfe therefore most certayne it is that in the former sentence he promised to build his Church vpon Peter Finally in the Syriake tongue in vvhich our Sauiour then spake it is so playne that it cannot be doubted of for it is thou art Cephas and vpon this Cephas I wil build my Church nowe the vvord Cephas signifieth a rocke or stone Let vs to make the matter more manifest heare the judgement of some of the auncient and most learned Fathers of both the Greeke and Latin Church touching this exposition S. Epiphanius In Ancorate Our Lord made Peter the chiefe of the Apostles a firme Rocke vpon which the Church of God is builded S. Gregory Nazianzeno * Orat. de mod seruand in disput Peter is called a Rocke and hath the foundations of the Church committed vnto his fidelity S. Chrysostome a Hom. 55 in Math. Our Lord said thou art Peter and vpon thee will I build my Church S. Cyril b Lib. 2. in Iob. ca. 2. Christ fore-told that he should not be called Simon but Peter by the name it selfe fitly signifying that he would build his Church vpon him as on a Rocke and most sure stone S. Cyprian c Epist ad QuirinuÌ„ Our Lord did choose Peter the first or chiefest and vpon him did he build his Church S. Ambrose saith d Serm. 42 That Peter is called the Rocke both because he first of all laid the foundation in the actions of faith and also for that as an vnmoueable stone he doth sustayne and bold together the frame and burden of all the Christian worke S. Hierome vpon that place e Math. 16 According vnto the metaphor of a Rocke it is rightly said to Peter vpon thee will I build my Church S. Augustine sometimes indeede giueth an other interpretation but yet alloweth of this and leaueth it to the readers choise adding f Lib. 1. retract 21. That in his time that Hymne of S. Ambrose beganne to be chaunted publikely in the Church that the Cocke crowing the Rocke of the Church with teares washed away his fault so common was that exposition euen then that the Rocke of the Church was taken for a sufficient description of S. Peters person By these plaine sentences of the most approued Doctors of the church may be expounded some others more obscure vvhich say that vpon Peters faith or confession Christ built his Church in this manner for the excellency of Peters faith and confession he vvas chosen to be the rocke or foundation of the Church which is S. Basils owne interpretation who saith that Peter for the excellencie of his faith Lib. 2. in EunomiuÌ„ receaued the building of the Church vpon him And in true reason the Church being a congregation of men cannot be builded 〈…〉 qualities but must haue a man of the same nature to be her 〈…〉 indeede with such spiritâ— all and heauenly qualities or else it should not haue beene a proportionable and wel shaped body but some monster Neither can that other shift of the Protestants which M. PERKINS insiâ—â—â—teth serue their turne that forsooth what is sâ—â—a â—ere to S. Peter is vnderstood to haue beene spoken vnto all the rest of the Apostles For
for the amendment of their liues or else they should be the most foolish judges that euer vvere appointed vpon earth Wherefore seing that the Apostles had authority to forgiue sinnes and vvere in discretion to admmister the same vnto penitent sinners it must needes followe necessarily that the penitent should confesse all his sinnes in particular vnto them and that authority was to continue in the Church for euer it being giuen to the Apostles for the due gouerning of the Church and to the comfort of al sinners which should neuer fayle to be vntill Christes last comming to judgement They to defeate all this discourse answere That Christ gaue not his Apostles authority to pardon any mans sinnes but only to declare that their sinnes were pardoned if with true repentance and faith they receiued the preaching of the Gospell This interpretation first is repugnant to the text vvhich in expresse tearmes hath Whose sinnes yee shall remit or pardon not vvhose sinnes yee shall declare to be remitted Secondly it hath that Whose sinnes yee shall forgiue they are forgiuen to wit euen then when they remit them and not that they were remitted before as he should haue said if he had giuen them authority only to declare them to be remitted Thirdly the metaphor of keyes giuen vnto them doth demonstrate that power was giuen them to absolue and not to declare only they were absolued because keyes are giuen to open or shut dores and not to signifie that eyther the dores are already open or shall be vpon condition Lastly the Ministers pronouncing of men absolued should be very rash and friuolous if they doe not truly absolue them For if he pronounce them absolutely to be absolued without good assurance of their faith repentance he should but lie and if he doe pronounce them absolued conditionally if they beleeue aright and be truly penitent then vvere his absolution in vaine for it depending vpon their faith and repentance and not vpon the Ministers pronouncing it bringeth no further assurance then they had before yea they themselues being of the faithfull could not be ignorant of so much before to wit that he was free from sinne and needed not his absolution Nowe that the Apostles then and Bishops and Priests their successours euer sithence did truly absolue men from their sinnes and were not like to cryers only proclaymers thereof see first S. Chrysostome who saith That such power was giuen here to men Lib. 3. de Sacerdot which God would neuer giue to Angels who yet had power to pronounce saluation to penitent sinners Secondly That Priestes haue such power of binding and loosing ouer the soules as Kinges haue ouer their subjects bodyes vvhich is truly to binde or to loose them and not only to declare them bound or loosed Thirdly he saith expresly That the Priestes among the Iewes had power to purge the leprosie or rather to try whether they were purged from it or no but it is graunted vnto our Priestes not only to discerne whether the body be purged from leprosie or no but playnely to purge our soules from the filth of sinne S. Ambrose in diuers places proueth directly against the Nouatians that Christ gaue power to Priestes to remit sinnes Lib. 1. de Poenitent c. 2. 7. The Nouatians denyed not but that one might preach the Gospell vnto such sinners that vvere relapsed and promise them pardon too if they repented but would not haue the Priests to reconcile them vnto the Church by the Sacrament of Penance denying that Priestes had any such power ouer such sinners but that they must leaue them to God alone vvhich the holy Doctor confuteth by these places of Scripture Math. 16. vers 19. cap. 18. vers 18. Ioh. 20. vers 23. Whatsoeuer yee forgiue in earth shall be forgiuen in heauen Epist ad Heliodor S. Hierome saith God forbidde that I should speake any euill of them who succeeding in the Apostolike degree doe with their sacred mouth make the body of Christ and by whome we are made Christians who hauing the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen doe in a certayne manner judge before the day of judgement Lib. 20. de ciuit c. 9. S. Augustine doth define in these wordes Whatsoeuer yee shall binde vpon earth shal be bound in heauen that authority is giuen vnto the rulers of the Church to judge in spirituall causes and not only to declare Hom. 62. in Euang. S. Gregory vpon these vvordes Whose sinnes you forgiue c. Behold saith he the Apostles are not only made secure of themselues but haue power giuen them to release other mens handes and doe obtayne a prerogatiue of the heauenly judgement that in Gods steede they may forgiue to some their sinnes and binde some others and truly the Bishops nowe doe hold the same place in the Church they receiue authority to binde and to loose c. By this you may see in part vvith what fore-head M. PERKINS affirmed that for a thousand yeares after Christ there was no mention of the Sacrament of Penance and more you shall see shortly if that first I shall note out of the Scripture it selfe both the acknowledgement of receite of that power to reconcile and absolue and the practise and commandement of confession S. Paul acknowledgeth and declareth 2. Cor. 5. vers 18. 20. that God had giuen vnto them the ministery of reconciliation and addeth that they be Gods Legates and therefore exhorteth them to be reconciled but they that be sent Ambassadours vvith full commission to reconcile men vnto their Prince must knowe both howe grieuously they haue offended and what recompence they are willing to make vvhich must needes be by their owne confession Nowe for the practise of confession by the first Christians Act. 19. vers 18. 19. it is recorded That many of the faithfull came confessing and declaring their deedes and many that had followed curious actes brought their bookes and burned them in the presence of al the rest Note here both particular confession made vnto S. Paul of the seuerall deedes and factes and not in generall that they vvere sinners as the very vvordes doe witnesse Confessing their deedes that is vvhat they had done in particular And againe howe should he haue knowne their study of curious bookes if they had not told their sinnes in particular some Protestants conuinced by the text say That they confessed some of their sinnes in particular but not all But I meruaile how they came by the knowledge of that for vvhy should they confesse some more then others and the vse of Scriptures is by the naming of sinnes indefinitely to signifie all as when we pray Forgiue vs our sinnes we meane all our sinnes and when it is said of Christ He shall saue his people from their sinnes it is meant that he shall saue them not from some of their sinnes but from al. Lastly touching the commandement S. Iames doth charge vs a Iac.
to that which M. PERKINS letteth fall by the way That though Peter excelled the rest of the twelue yet Paul passed him euery way this said he boldly and barely vvithout any authour or any shewe of proofe but let vs in kindnesse helpe him to proue it Galat. 2. vers 9. First S. Paul saith Iames. Cephas and Iohn who seemed to be the pillars gaue me and Barnabas the right hand of foâ—tery nowe if he were fellowe with the best he was not inferiour to Peter Answere In an orderly fellowship there is ordinarily one head and chiefe commander and so S. Paul might be very well admitted into that holy society and fellowship of preaching the Gospell and yet be vnder the President and Master of that Colledge or company S. Peter Secondly S. Paul further saith That the Gospell of the prepuce that is the preaching vnto the Gentils was committed vnto him as the chardge of the Israelites was vnto S. Peter therefore he was S. Peters equall at least and perhaps his better too because a larger commission was grounted vnto him Answere A partition of preaching the Gospell vnto all nations was made by common consent among the Apostles and it seemeth that S. Paul who was called afterward vvas admitted in S. Peters circuit or quarter vvhereupon for the more orderly proceeding in that blessed vvorke it was agreed vpon by them that S. Paul should haue principall care of the Gentils and S. Peter of the Iewes not that each of them might not also deale with both Iewes and Gentils for S. Peter was the first of all others that by reuelation from heauen did conuert the Gentils as he testifieth saying Act. 15. vers 7. Bretheren you knowe that God chose that by my mouth the Gentils should heare the word of God and beleeue yet because men commonly doe most tender and affect that vvhich is more specially committed to their charge to S. Paul were the Gentils recommended as to S. Peter the care of the Iewes But this might be very well done and yet S. Paul be inferiour vnto S. Peter and owe him a reuerent duty in the cases of supremacy as the Bishops of Canterbury and London haue charges of seuerall men and places yet is London to acknowledge Canterbury as his superiour And if the other Apostles who had also their diuisions and Diocesses a part were neuerthelesse inferiour vnto S. Peter so might S. Paul be notwithstanding his distinct charge Thirdly S. Paul resisted S. Peter to his face and reprehended him for walking amisse therefore he was rather his superiour Answere Not so for an inferiour by vvay of brotherly correction may in decent sort reprehend his superiour if he see him not to take good courses I knowe vvell that S. Hierome following the opinion of most of the Greeke Fathers doth cleare S. Peter of all fault holding it to haue beene but a set match betweene the two great Apostles that one of them for the instruction of others should reprehend the other But admitting with S. Augustine that S. Peter was worthy blame and therefore justly reprehended by S. Paul yet thence will followe no derogation to S. Peters dignity but great commendation of his humility as the holy Fathers of that opinion doe gather Of it thus writeth S. Cyprian Epist 71. ad Quintum Neyther did Peter whome our Lord chose the first and vpon whome he built his Church when Paul disputed with him about circumcision arrogate to himselfe any thing saying that he bad primacy and therefore the latter disciple ought rather to obey him but tooke it in good part S. Augustine saith Peter gaue to his posterity a more rare and holy example Epist 19. ad HieroÌ„ that they should not disdayne to be corrected of their juniours then Paul that inferiours sauing their charity might confidently resist their superiours for the defence of truth And S. Gregory the great speaking of S. Peter saith Hom. 18. in Ezech. He yeelded vnto his inferiour brother and in that matter became a follower of his juniour to the end he might excell in this point that he who chiefest in the toppe of the Apostleship might be chiefest also in humility Thus much of S. Peters supremacy Nowe that the Popes of Rome doe succeede him in the same authority First that this Monarchy and soueraigne authority of one ouer all the rest vvas not to expire and end with S. Peter as M. PER. dreameth but to continue in Christes Church vntill the end of the world is cleare and euident to them vvho consider that this Supremacy was not giuen vnto S. Peter principally for his owne honour and aduancement but for the benefit of the Church to preserue and maintayne vnity and peace among all her louing and obedient children according vnto that of S. Hierome Among the twelue Apostles one is chosen L. 1. cont Iouinian that a head being established the occasion of schisme and diuision might be preuented and taken away If therefore it vvas thought necessary vnto the vvisdome of God Christ IESVS to appoint one head among the Apostles and a fewe of the best Christians vvho had the first fruites of his holy spirit to cut off dissention and to maintayne peace how much more neede hath there beene euer sithence of one supreme Pastor and moderatour of controuersies vvhen the number of Christians is so greatly increased and such variety of nations are ingrafted incorporated into it when through the diuersity of wits and judgements and the decay of charity there must needes be a thousand times more neede of the supreme authority of some one to hold all the rest together in the vnity of faith and religion Againe in the old Testament and lawe of Moyses which was a figure of the new the same forme of gouernement by one head and finall judge in spirituall matters vvas at the first established and continued euer after vvithout alteration till Christes first comming Euen so must the same Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy which our blessed Sauiour hath demised framed and founded stand alwaies firme and inviolable vntil his second comming for he hath built it vpon so firme a Rocke that hell gates shall not preuaile against it vvhich may be further confirmed if we vveigh vvell of vvhat moment and importance it is to alter and change the forme of gouernement For it is of no lesse moment then to alter the whole estate of Christs common-weale the very essence forme and vnity of a publike state consisting principally in the manner and order of ruling of it vvhich alteration and variety to imagine to haue hapned in Christs Church is to make many seames in his vnsowed garments or rather to rippe it and rent the vnity thereof into many peeces It being therefore a most certayne truth that the same supreme gouernement vvhich S. Peter had ouer the rest vvas to continue alwayes in Christes Church it followeth as plainely that the Bishops of Rome vvere to succeede him in that