〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal in honour to Saint Peter as we before shewed The like we declared of St. Hierome St. Cyril c. And as for St. Cyprian who did allow a Primacy to Saint Peter nothing can be more evident than that he took the other Apostles to be equal to him in power and honour The like we may conceive of St. Austin who having carefully perused those Writings of St. Cyprian and frequently alledging them doth never contradict that his sentiment Even Pope Gregory himself acknowledgeth Saint Peter not to have been properly the Head but onely the first member of the universal Church all being members of the Church under one head 6. If Pope Leo I. or any other ancient Pope do seem to mean farther we may reasonably except against their Opinion as being singular and proceeding from partial affection to their See such affection having influence on the mind of the wisest men according to that certain maxime of Aristotle every man is a bad Judge in his own case 7. The Ancients when their subject doth allure them do adorn other Apostles with the like titles equalling those of Saint Peter and not well consistent with them according to that rigour of sense which our adversaries affix to the commendations of Saint Peter The Epistle of Clemens Rom. to Saint James an Apocryphal but ancient Writing calleth St. James our Lord's Brother The Bishop of Bishops the Clementine Recognitions call him the Prince of Bishops Ruffinus in his translation of Eusebius The Bishop of the Apostles St. Chrysost. saith of him that he did preside over all the Jewish believers Hesychius Presbyter of Jerusalem calleth him the chief Captain of the New Jerusalem the Captain of Priests the Prince of the Apostles the top among the Heads c. The same Hesychius calleth Saint Andrew the first-born of the Apostolical Choire the first setled pillar of the Church the Peter before Peter the foundation of the foundation the first-fruits of the beginning c. St. Chrysostome saith of Saint John that he was a pillar of the Churches through the world he that had the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven c. But as occasion of speaking about Saint Paul was more frequent so the elogies of him are more copious and indeed so high as not to yield to those of Saint Peter He was saith St. Chrysostome the ringleader and guardian of the Choire of all the Saints He was the tongue the teacher the Apostle of the world He had the whole world put into his hands and took care thereof and had committed to him all men dwelling upon Earth He was the light of the Churches the foundation of Faith the pillar and ground of Truth He had the patronage of the World committed into his hands He was better than all men greater than the Apostles and surpassing them all Nothing was more bright nothing more illustrious than he None was greater than he yea none equal to him Pope Gregory I. saith of Saint Paul that he was made head of the Nations because he obtained the principate of the whole Church These Characters of Saint Paul I leave them to interpret and reconcile with those of Saint Peter 8. That the Fathers by calling Saint Peter Prince Chieftain c. of the Apostles do not mean Authority over them may be argued from their joining Saint Paul with him in the same appellations who yet surely could have no Jurisdiction over them and his having any would destroy the pretended Ecclesiastical Monarchy St. Cyril calleth them together Patrons or Presidents of the Church St. Austin or St. Ambr. or Max. calleth them Princes of the Churches The Popes Agatho and Adrian in their General Synods call them the ring-leading Apostles The Popes Nicholas I. and Gregory VII c. call them Princes of the Apostles St. Ambrose or St. Austin or St. Maximus Taur chuse you which doth thus speak of them Blessed Peter and Paul are most eminent among all the Apostles excelling the rest by a kind of peculiar prerogative but whether of these two be preferred before the other is uncertain for I count them to be equal in merit because they are equal in suffering c. To all this discourse I shall onely adde that if any of the Apostles or Apostolical men might claim a presidency or authoritative headship over the rest Saint James seemeth to have the best title thereto for Jerusalem was the mother of all Churches the fountain of the Christian Law and Doctrine the See of our Lord himself the chief Pastour He therefore who as the Fathers tell us was by our Lord himself constituted Bishop of that City and the first of all Bishops might best pretend to be in special manner our Lord's Vicar or Successour He saith Epiphanius did first receive the Episcopal Chair and to him our Lord first did entrust his own Throne upon Earth He accordingly did first exercise the Authority of presiding and moderating in the first Ecclesiastical Synod as St. Chrysostome in his Notes thereon doth remark He therefore probably by Saint Paul is first named in his report concerning the passages at Hierusalem and to his orders it seemeth that Saint Peter himself did conform for 't is said there that before certain came from Saint James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew Hence in the Apostolical Constitutions in the Prayer prescribed for the Church and for all the Governours of it the Bishops of the principal Churches being specified by name Saint James is put in the first place before the Bishops of Rome and of Antioch Let us pray for the whole Episcopacy under Heaven of those who rightly dispense the word of thy Truth and let us pray for our Bishop James with all his Parishes let us pray for our Bishop Clemens and all his Parishes let us pray for Evodius and all his Parishes Hereto consenteth the Tradition of those ancient Writers afore cited who call Saint James the Bishop of Bishops the Bishop of the Apostles c. SUPPOSITION II. I proceed to examine the next Supposition of the Church Monarchists which is That Saint Peter's Primacy with its Rights and Prerogatives was not personal but derivable to his Successours AGainst which Supposition I do assert that admitting a Primacy of Saint Peter of what kind or to what purpose soever we yet have reason to deem it merely personal and not according to its grounds and its design communicable to any Successours nor indeed in effect conveyed to any such It is a rule in the Canon Law that a personal Privilege doth follow the Person and is extinguished with the Person and such we affirm that of St. Peter for 1. His Primacy was grounded upon personal acts such as his chearfull following of Christ his faithfull confessing of Christ his resolute adherence to Christ his embracing
A TREATISE OF THE POPE'S SUPREMACY To which is added A DISCOURSE Concerning the Unity of the Church By ISAAC BARROW D. D. Late Master of Trinity College in Cambridge and one of His MAJESTY'S Chaplains in Ordinary The Second Edition Corrected With a TABLE to the Whole LONDON Printed by M. Flesher and J. Heptinstall for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons over against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1683. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE HENEAGE Earl of Nottingham Lord High CHANCELLOUR OF ENGLAND And one of His MAJESTY'S most Honourable PRIVY COUNCIL THOMAS BARROW the Authour's Father Humbly Dedicateth this TREATISE The Publisher TO THE READER THIS excellent and elaborate Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy which I here present thee withall the learned Authour of it upon his Death-bed gave me particular permission to publish with this modest Character of it that he hoped it was indifferent perfect though not altogether as he intended it if God had granted him longer life He designed indeed to have transcribed it again and to have fill'd up those many spaces which were purposely left in it for the farther confirmation and illustration of several things by more Testimonies and Instances which probably he had in his thoughts And it would certainly have added much to the beauty and perfection of this Work had it pleased God that he had lived to finish it to his mind and to have given it his last hand However as it is it is not onely a just but an admirable Discourse upon this Subject which many others have handled before but he hath exhausted it insomuch that no Argument of moment nay hardly any Consideration properly belonging to it hath escaped his large and comprehensive Mind He hath said enough to silence the Controversie for ever and to deâ—er all wise men of both Sides from medling any farther with it And I dare say that whoever shall carefully peruse this Treatise will find that this Point of the Pope's Supremacy upon which Bellarmine hath the confidence to say the whole of Christianity depends is not onely an indeâ—ensible but an impudent Cause as ever was undertaken by learned Pens And nothing could have kept it so long from becoming ridiculous in the judgment of mankind but its being so strongly supported by a worldly interest For there is not one tolerable Argument for it and there are a thousand invincible Reasons against it There is neither from Scripture nor Reason nor Antiquity any evidence of it The past and the present state of Christendom the Histories and Records of all Ages are a perpetual Demonstration against it And there is no other ground in the whole world for it but that now of a long time it hath been by the Pope's Janizaries boldly asserted and stiffly contended for without reason So that any one might with as much colour and evidence of truth maintain that the Grand Seignior is of right and for many Ages hath been acknowledg'd Sovereign of the whole World as that the Bishop of Rome is of right and in all Ages from the beginning of Christianity hath been own'd to be the Universal Monarch and Head of the Christian Church To this Treatise of The Pope's Supremacy I have for the affinity of the Argument added by way of Appendix another Discourse of the same Authour 's concerning The Unity of the Church which he so explains as quite to take away the necessity of a Visible Head over the whole Church for the preservation of its Unity which is the onely specious but yet a very remote pretence for the Pope's Supremacy For if a Visible Monarch of the Church were granted necessary many things more must be supposed which neither yet are nor ever can be proved to make the Bishop of Rome the Man The Testimonies relating to both Parts were very few of them translated by the Authour which he certainly intended having left spaces for it and is since done with great care by two of his Worthy and Learned Friends of his own College This is all the Advertisement I thought necessary J. Tillotson THE CONTENTS THE Introduction Page 1. The Suppositions upon which the Pope's Supremacy is grounded p. 29. I. That Saint Peter had a Primacy over the Apostles p. 30. II. That Saint Peter's Primacy with its Rights and Prerogatives was not personal but derivable to his Successours p. 76. III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome p. 82. IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease p. 88. V. That the Bishops of Rome according to God's institution and by original right derived thence should have an Vniversal Supremacy and Jurisdiction over the Christian Church p. 94. VI. That in fact the Roman Bishops continually from Saint Peter's time have enjoyed and exercised this Sovereign Power p. 185. VII That this Power is indefectible and unalterable p. 271. IMPRIMATUR Ex Aedibus Lamb. Febr. 27. 1678 9. Geo. Thorp Rmo in Christo Patri D no D no Gulielmo Archiep. Cant. à Sacris Domesticis A TREATISE OF THE Pope's Supremacy INTRODUCTION § I. THE Roman Party doth much glory in Unity and Certainty of Doctrine as things peculiar to them and which no other men have any means to attain Yet about divers matters of notable consideration in what they agree or of what they are certain it is hard to descry They pretend it very needfull that Controversies should be decided and that they have a special knack of doing it Yet do many Controversies of great weight and consequence stick on their hands unresolved many Points rest in great doubt and debate among them The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Roman Sect concerning Doctrine Practice Laws and Customs of Discipline Rites and Ceremonies are of divers sorts or built on divers grounds 1. Some established by pretended general Synods 2. Some founded on Decrees of Popes 3. Some entertained as upon Tradition Custom common Agreement 4. Some which their eminent Divines or Schoolmen do commonly embrace 5. Some prevailing by the favour of the Roman Court and its zealous Dependents Hence it is very difficult to know wherein their Religion consisteth for those Grounds divers times seem to clash and accordingly their Divines some building on these some on others disagree This being so in many Points of importance is so particularly in this For instance The Head of their Church as they call it is one would think a Subject about which they should thoroughly consent and which they by this time should have cleared from all disputes so that so far as their decisive faculty goeth we might be assured wherein his Authority consisteth and how far it doth extend seeing the resolution of that Point so nearly toucheth the heart of Religion the Faith and Practice of all Christians the good of the Church and peace of the world seeing that no one Question perhaps not all Questions together hath created so many tragical Disturbances in Christendom as that concerning the
pretence or under what distinction soever these pompatick foolish proud perverse wicked profane words these names of singularity elation vanity blasphemy to borrow the Epithets with which Pope Gregory I. doth brand the Titles of Vniversal Bishop and Oecumenical Patriarch no less modest in sound and far more innocent in meaning than those now ascribed to the Pope are therefore to be rejected not onely because they are injurious to all other Pastours and to the People of God's heritage but because they do encroach upon our onely Lord to whom they do onely belong much more to usurp the things which they do naturally signifie is a horrible invasion upon our Lord's Prerogative Thus hath that great Pope taught us to argue in words expressly condemning some and consequently all of them together with the things which they signifie What saith he writing to the Bishop of Constantinople who had admitted the title of Vniversal Bishop or Patriarch wilt thou say to Christ the Head of the Vniversal Church in the trial of the last judgment who by the appellation of VNIVERSAL dost endeavour to subject all his Members to thee whom I pray dost thou mean to imitate in so perverse a word but him who despising the Legions of Angels constituted in fellowship with him did endeavour to break forth unto the top of Singularity that he might both be subject to none and alone be over all who also said I will ascend into heaven and will exalt my throne above the stars for what are thy brethren all the Bishops of the Vniversal Church but the stars of heaven to whom while by this haughty word thou desirest to prefer thy self and to trample on their name in comparison to thee what dost thou say but I will climb into heaven And again in another Epistle to the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch he taxeth the same Patriarch for assuming to boast so that he attempteth to ascribe all things to himself and studieth by the elation of pompous speech to subject to himself all the members of Christ which do cohere to One Sole Head namely to Christ. Again I confidently say that whoever doth call himself Universal Bishop or desireth to be so called doth in his elation forerun Antichrist because he pridingly doth set himself before all others If these argumentations be sound or signifie any thing what is the pretence of Vniversal Sovereignty and Pastourship but a piece of Luciferian arrogance who can imagine that even this Pope could approve could assume could exercise it if he did was he not monstrously senseless and above measure impudent to use such discourses which so plainly without altering a word might be retorted upon him which are built upon suppositions that it is unlawfull and wicked to assume Superiority over the Church over all Bishops over all Christians the which indeed seeing never Pope was of greater repute or did write in any case more solemnly and seriously have given to the pretences of his Successours so deadly a wound that no balm of Sophistical interpretation can be able to heal it We see that according to St. Gregory M. our Lord Christ is the one onely Head of the Church to whom for company let us adjoin St. Basil M. that we may have both Greek and Latin for it who saith that according to Saint Paul we are the body of Christ and members one of another because it is manifest that the one and sole truly head which is Christ doth hold and connect each one to another unto concord To decline these allegations of Scripture they have forged distinctions of several kinds of Churches and several sorts of Heads the which evasions I shall not particularly discourse seeing it may suffice to observe in general that no such distinctions have any place or any ground in Scripture nor can well consist with it which simply doth represent the Church as one Kingdom a Kingdom of Heaven a Kingdom not of this world all the Subjects whereof have their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in heaven or are considered as members of a City there so that it is vain to seek for a Sovereign thereof in this world the which also doth to the Catholick Church sojourning on earth usually impart the name and attributes properly appertaining to the Church most universal comprehensive of all Christians in heaven and upon earth because that is a visible representative of this and we by joining in offices of piety with that do communicate with this whence that which is said of one concerning the Unity of its King its Head its Pastour its Priest is to be understood of the other especially considering that our Lord according to his promise is ever present with the Church here governing it by the efficacy of his Spirit and Grace so that no other corporeal or visible Head of this Spiritual Body is needfull It was to be sure a visible Headship which St. Gregory did so eagerly impugn and exclaim against for he could not apprehend the Bishop of Constantinople so wild as to affect a Jurisdiction over the Church mystical or invisible 2. Indeed upon this very account the Romish pretence doth not well accord with Holy Scripture because it transformeth the Church into another kind of Body than it was constituted by God according to the representation of it in Scripture for there it is represented as a spiritual and heavenly Society compacted by the bands of one faith one hope one Spirit of Charity but this pretence turneth it into a worldly frame united by the same bands of interest and design managed in the same manner by terrour and allurement supported by the same props of force of policy of wealth of reputation and splendour as all other secular Corporations are You may call it what you please but it is evident that in truth the Papal Monarchy is a temporal Dominion driving on worldly ends by worldly means such as our Lord did never mean to institute so that the Subjects thereof may with far more reason than the People of Constantinople had when their Bishop Nestorius did stop some of their Priests from contradicting him say We have a King a Bishop we have not so that upon every Pope we may charge that whereof Anthimus was accused in the Synod of Constantinople under Menas that he did account the greatness and dignity of the Priesthood to be not a spiritual charge of souls but as a kind of politick rule This was that which seeming to be affected by the Bishop of Antioch in encroachment upon the Church of Cyprus the Fathers of the Ephesine Synod did endeavour to nipp enacting a Canon against all such invasions lest under pretext of holy discipline the pride of worldly authority should creep in and what pride of that kind could they mean beyond that which now the Popes do claim and exercise Now do I say after that the Papal Empire hath swollen to such a
do belong although really Hypocrites and bad men do not belong to the Church nor are concerned in its Vnity as St. Austin doth often teach The places therefore of Scripture which do represent the Church one as unquestionably they belong in their principal notion and intent to the true universal Church called the Church mystical and invisible so may they by analogy and participation be understood to concern the visible Church Catholick here in Earth which professeth Faith in Christ and Obedience to his Laws And of this Church under due reference to the other the question is Wherein the Unity of it doth consist or upon what grounds it is called one being that it compriseth in it self so many Persons Societies and Nations For resolution of which Question we may consider that a Community of men may be termed one upon several Accounts and Grounds as For special Unity of nature or as Vnum genus so are all men one by participation of common rationality 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Humanum genus For Cognation of bloud as Gens una so are all Jews however living dispersedly over the World reckoned one Nation or People so all Kinsmen do constitute one Family and thus also all Men as made of one Bloud are one People For Commerce of language so Italians and Germans are esteemed one People although living under different Laws and Governments For Consent in opinion or Conformity in manners and practices as Men of the same Sect in Religion or Philosophy of the same Profession Faculty Trade so Jews Mahometans Arians so Oratours Grammarians Logicians so Divines Lawyers Physicians Merchants Artizans Rusticks c. For Affection of mind or Compacts of good-will or for Links of peace and amicable correspondence in order to mutual interest and aid as Friends and Confederates For being ranged in order under one Law and Rule as those who live under one Monarchy or in one Commonwealth as the People in England Spain France in Venice Genoa Holland c. Upon such Grounds of Unity or Union a Society of men is denominated One and upon divers such accounts it is plain that the Catholick Church may be said to be One. For I. It is evident that the Church is One by Consent in faith and opinion concerning all principal matters of Doctrine especially in those which have considerable influence upon the Practice of Piety toward God Righteousness toward Men and Sobriety of Conversation to teach us which the Grace of God did appear As he that should in any principal Doctrine differ from Plato denying the Immortality of the Soul the Providence of God the natural difference of Good and Evil would not be a Platonist so he that dissenteth from any Doctrine of importance manifestly taught by Christ doth renounce Christianity All Christians are delivered into one form of doctrine to which they must stiffly and stedfastly adhere keeping the Depositum committed to them They must strive together for the faith of the Gospel and earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the Saints They must hold fast the form of sound words in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus that great salvation which at first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto them by his hearers God also bearing them witness with signs and wonders and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to his own will They are bound to mind or think one and the same thing to stand fast in one spirit with one mind to walk by the same rule to be joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment with one mind and mouth to glorify God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are obliged to disclaim Consortship with the Gain-sayers of this Doctrine to stand off from those who do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or who do not consent to the wholsome Words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to Godliness to mark those who make divisions and scandals beside the Doctrine which Christians had learnt and to decline from them To reject Hereticks To beware of false Prophets of Seducers of those who speak perverse things to draw disciples after them To pronounce Anathema upon whoever shall preach any other Doctrine Thus are all Christians one in Christ Jesus thus are they as Tertullian speaketh confederated in the society of a Sacrament or of one Profession This preaching and this faith the Church having received though dispersed over the world doth carefully hold as inhabiting one house and alike believeth these things as if it had one soul and the same heart and consonantly doth preach and teach and deliver these things as if it had but one mouth As for Kings though their Kingdoms be divided yet he equally expects from every one of them one dispensation and one and the same sacrifice of a true Confession and Praise So that though there may seem to be a diversity of temporal ordinances yet an Vnity and Agreement in the right Faith may be held and maintained among them In regard to this Union in Faith peculiarly the body of Christians adhering to it was called the Catholick Church from which all those were esteemed ipso facto to be cut off and separated who in any point deserted that Faith such a one saith Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is turned aside or hath left the Christian way of life He in reality is no Christian nor is to be avowed or treated as such but is to be disclaimed rejected and shunned He saith Saint Cyprian cannot seem a Christian who doth not persist in the Vnity of Christ's Gospel and Faith If saith Tertullian a man be a Heretick he cannot be a Christian. Whence Hegesippus saith of the old Hereticks that they did divide the Vnity of the Church by pernicious speeches against God and his Christ. The Vertue said the Pastour Hermes cited by Clemens Alexan. which doth keep the Church together is Faith So the Fathers of the Sixth Council tell the Emperour that they were members one of another and did constitute the one body of Christ by consent in opinion with him and one another and by faith We ought in all things to hold the Vnity of the Catholick Church and not to yield in any thing to the enemies of faith and truth In each part of the world this faith is one because this is the Christian faith He denies Christ who confesses not all things that are Christ's Hence in common practice whoever did appear to differ from the common Faith was rejected as an Apostate from Christianity and unworthy the communion of other Christians There are Points of less moment more obscurely delivered in which Christians without breach of Unity may dissent about which they may dispute in which they may err without breach of Unity
occasion did invite and circumstances of things did permit interdicting Princes absolving Subjects from their Allegeance raising or encouraging Insurrections as appeareth by their transactions not long since against our Princes and those of France which shews the very See imbued with those Notions 7. They do oblige all Bishops most solemnly to avow this Doctrine and to engage themselves to practise according to it For in the Oath prescribed to all Bishops they are required to avow that they will observe the Apostolical commands with all their power and cause them to be observed by others that they will aid and defend the Roman Papacy and the Royalties of Saint Peter against every man that they will to their power persecute and impugn Hereticks Schismaticks and Rebels to the Pope or his Successours without any exception which was I suppose chiefly meant against their own Prince if occasion should be together with divers other points importing their acknowledgment and abetting the Pope's universal Domination These horrible Oaths of Bishops to the Pope do seem to have issued from the same shop with the high Hildebrandine dictates for the Oath in the Decretals is ascribed to Pope Gregory I suppose Greg. VII And in the sixth Roman Synod under Greg. VII there is an Oath of like tenour exacted from the Bishop of Aquileia perhaps occasionally which in pursuance of that example might be extended to all And that before that time such Oaths were not imposed doth appear from hence that when P. Paschal II. did require them from some great Bishops the Bishop of Palermo and the Archbishop of Poland they did wonder and boggle at it as an uncouth Novelty nor doth the Pope in favour of his demand alledge any ancient precedent but onely proposeth some odd reasons for it You have signified unto me most dear Brother that the King and his Nobles did exceedingly wonder that an Oath with such a condition should be every-where offered you by my Commissioners and that you should take that Oath which I had written and they tendered to you § VI. All Romanists in consistence with their Principles do seem obliged to hold this opinion concerning the Pope's Universal Power For seeing many of their standing Masters and Judges of Controversies have so expresly from their Chair declared and defined it all the Row for many Ages consenting to it and countenancing it not one of them having signified any dissent or dislike of it And considering that if in any thing they may require or deserve belief it is in this point for in what are they more skilfull and credible than about the nature of their own Office What saith Bellarmine wisely may they be conceived to know better than the Authority of their own See Seeing it hath been approved by their most great and famous Councils which they hold Universal and which their adored Synod of Trent doth alledge for such the Laterane under P. Innocent III. that of Lions under P. Innocent IV. the other Laterane under P. Leo X. Seeing it hath been current among their Divines of greatest vogue and authority the great Masters of their School Seeing by so large a consent and concurrence during so long a time it may pretend much better than divers other Points of great importance to be confirmed by Tradition or Prescription Why should it not be admitted for a Doctrine of the Holy Roman Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches How can they who disavow this Notion be true Sons of that Mother or faithfull Scholars of that Mistress How can they acknowledge any Authority in their Church to be infallible or certain or obliging to assent How can they admit the Pope for authentick Judge of Controversies or Master of Christian Doctrine or in any Point credible who hath in so great a matter erred so foully and seduced the Christian world whom they desert in a Point of so great consideration and influence on practice whom they by virtue of their dissent from him in this Opinion may often be obliged to oppose in his proceedings How can they deny that bad Doctrines might creep in and obtain sway in the Church by the interest of the Pope and his Clients How can they charge Novelty or Heterodoxy on those who refuse some Dictates of Popes of Papal Councils of Scholastick Divines which stand upon no better grounds than those on which this Doctrine standeth Why hath no Synod of the many which have been held in all parts of Christendom clearly disclaimed this Opinion but all have let it slip or have seemed by silence to approve it Yea how can the Concord and Unity of that Church well consist with a Dissent from this Doctrine For No man apprehending it false seemeth capable with good conscience to hold Communion with those who profess it for upon supposition of its falshood the Pope and his chief adherents are the teachers and abettours of the highest violation of Divine Commands and most enormous sins of Usurpation Tyranny Imposture Perjury Rebellion Murther Rapine and all the villanies complicated in the practical influence of this Doctrine It seemeth clear as the Sun that if this Doctrine be an Errour it is one of the most pernicious Heresies that ever was vented involving the highest Impiety and producing the greatest Mischief For If he that should teach Adultery Incest Simony Theft Murther or the like Crimes to be lawfull would be a Heretick how much more would he be such that should recommend Perjury Rebellion Regicide things inducing Wars Confusions Slaughters Desolations all sorts of Injustice and Mischief as Duties How then can any man safely hold Communion with such persons May we not say with P. Symmachus that to communicate with such is to consent with them with P. Gelasius that it is worse than ignorance of the truth to communicate with the enemies of truth and that He who communicateth with such an Heresie is worthily judged to be removed from our society § VII Yet so loose and slippery are the Principles of the Party which is jumbled in adherence to the Pope that divers will not allow us to take this Tenent of Infinite Power to be a Doctrine of their Church for divers in that Communion do not assent to it For there is a sort of Hereticks as Bellarmine and Baronius call them sculking every-where in the bosome of their Church all about Christendom and in some places stalking with open face who restrain the Pope's Authority so far as not to allow him any Power over Sovereign Princes in Temporal affairs much less any power of depriving them of their Kingdoms and Principalities They all are branded for Hereticks who take from the Church of Rome and the See of Saint Peter one of the two Swords and allow onely the Spiritual This Heresie Baronius hath nominated the Heresie of the Politicks This Heresie a great Nation otherwise sticking to the Roman Communion doth stiffly maintain not enduring the
Papal Sovereignty over Princes in Temporals to be preached in it There were many persons yea Synods who did oppose Pope Hildebrand in the birth of his Doctrine condemning it for a pernicious Novelty and branding it with the name of Heresie as we before shewed Since the Hildebrandine Age there have been in every Nation yea in Italy it self divers Historians Divines and Lawyers who have in elaborate Tracts maintained the Royal Sovereignty against the Pontifical This sort of Hereticks are now so much encreased that the Hildebrandine Doctrine is commonly exploded Which by the way sheweth that the Roman Party is no less than others subject to change its sentiments Opinions among them gaining and losing vogue according to circumstances of time and contingencies of things § VIII Neither are the adherents to the Roman Church more agreed concerning the extent of the Pope's Authority even in Spiritual matters For although the Popes themselves plainly do claim an absolute Supremacy in them over the Church although the stream of Divines who do flourish in favour with them doth run that way although according to their principles if they had any principles clearly and certainly fixed that might seem to be the Doctrine of their Church Yet is there among them a numerous party which doth not allow him such a Supremacy putting great restraints to his Authority as we shall presently shew And as the other party doth charge this with Heresie so doth this return back the same imputation on that § IX That their Doctrine is in this matter so various and uncertain is no great wonder seeing Interest is concerned in the question and Principles are defective toward the resolution of it 1. Contrary Interests will not suffer the Point to be decided nor indeed to be freely disputed on either hand On one hand the Pope will not allow his Prerogatives to be discussed according to that maxime of the great Pope Innocent III. When there is a question touching the Privileges of the Apostolick See we will not that others judge about them Whence as we before touched the Pope did peremptorily command his Legates at Trent in no case to permit any dispute about his Authority On the other hand the French will not permit the Supremacy of their King in Temporals or the Privileges of their Church in Spirituals to be contested in their Kingdom Nor we may suppose would any Prince admit a Decision prejudicial to his Authority and welfare subjecting and enslaving him to the will of the Roman Court. Nor we may hope would any Church patiently comport with the irrecoverable oppression of all its rights and liberties by a peremptory establishment of Papal Omnipotency 2. Nor is it easie for their Dissentions to be reconciled upon Theological grounds and authorities to which they pretend deference For not onely their Schools and Masters of their Doctrine do in the case disagree but their Synods do notoriously clash § X. Yea even Popes themselves have shifted their pretences and varied in style according to the different circumstances of time and their variety of humours designs interests In time of prosperity and upon advantage when they might safely doe it any Pope almost would talk high and assume much to himself but when they were low or stood in fear of powerfull contradiction even the boldest Popes would speak submissly or moderately As for instance Pope Leo I. after the second Ephesine Synod when he had to doe with Theodosius II. did humbly supplicate and whine pitifully but after the Synod of Chalcedon having got the Emperour favourable and most of the Bishops complacent to him he ranted bravely And we may observe that even Pope Gregory VII who did swagger so boisterously against the Emperour Henry was yet calm and mild in his contests with our William the Conquerour who had a spirit good enough for him and was far out of his reach And Popes of high spirit and bold face such as Leo I. Gelasius I. Nic. I. Gregory II. Gregory VII Innocent III. Boniface VIII Julius II. Paul IV. Sixtus V. Paulus V. c. as they did ever aspire to scrue Papal authority to the highest peg so would they strain their language in commendation of their See as high as their times would bear But other Popes of meeker and modester disposition such as Julius I. Anastasius II. Gregory I. Leo II. Adrian VI. c. were content to let things stand as they found them and to speak in the ordinary style of their times yet so that few have let their Authority to goe backward or decline We may observe that the pretences and language of Popes have varied according to several periods usually growing higher as their State grew looser from danger of opposition or controll In the first times while the Emperours were Pagans their pretences were suted to their condition and could not soar high they were not then so mad as to pretend to any Temporal Power and a pittance of Spiritual eminency did content them When the Empire was divided they could sometimes be more haughty and peremptory as being in the West shrowded under the wing of the Emperours there who commonly did affect to improve their Authority in competition to that of other Bishops and at distance from the reach of the Eastern Emperour The cause of Athanasius having produced the Sardican Canons concerning the Revision of some causes by the Popes by colour of them they did hugely enlarge their Authority and raise their style especially in the West where they had great advantages of augmenting their Power When the Western Empire was fallen their influence upon that part of the Empire which came under protection of the Eastern Emperours rendring them able to doe service or disservice to those Emperours they according to the state of Times and the need of them did talk more big or more tamely Pope Boniface III. having by compliance with the Usurper Phocas obtained a declaration from him concerning the Headship of the Roman Church did make a considerable step forward toward the height of Papal Greatness After that Pope Greg. II. had withdrawn Italy from the Oriental Empire and Rome had grown in a manner loose and independent from other secular powers in the confusions of the West the Pope interposing to arbitrate between Princes trucking and bartering with them as occasion served for mutual aid and countenance did grow in Power and answerably did advance his pretences The spurious Decretal Epistles of the ancient Popes which asserted to the Pope high degrees of Authority being foisted into mens hands and insensibly creeping into repute did inspire the Pope with confidence to invade all the ancient Constitutions Privileges and Liberties of Churches and having got such interest every-where he might say what he pleased no Clergy-man daring to check or cross him Having drawn to himself the final decision of all Causes having got a finger in disposal of all Preferments having by Dispensations Exemptions and Grants of privileges tyed
from a stupid Easiness in admitting such a Lieutenancy to our Lord if we do not see exhibited to us manifest and certain Patents assuring its Commission to us We should love the Church better than to yield up its Liberty to the will of a Pretender upon slight or no ground Their boldly claiming such a Power their having sometime usurped such a Power will not excuse them or us Nor will precarious Assumptions or subtile Distinctions or blind Traditions or loose Conjectures serve for probations in such a case § XIX Such demands they cannot wholly balk wherefore for satisfaction to them not finding any better plea they hook in Saint Peter affirming that on him by our Lord there was instated a Primacy over his brethren all the Apostles and the Disciples of our Lord importing all the Authority which they claim and that from him this Primacy was devolved by succession to the Bishops of Rome by right indefectible for all future Ages Which Plea of theirs doth involve these main Suppositions I. That Saint Peter had a Primacy over the Apostles II. That Saint Peter 's Primacy with its Rights and Prerogatives was not personal but derivable to his Successours III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease V. That the Bishops of Rome according to God's institution and by original right derived thence should have an Vniversal Supremacy and Jurisdiction over the Christian Church VI. That in fact the Roman Bishops continually from Saint Peter's time have enjoyed and exercised this Sovereign Power VII That this Power is indefectible and unalterable The truth and certainty of these Propositions we shall in order discuss so that it may competently appear whether those who disclaim these Pretences are as they are charged guilty of Heresie and Schism or they rather are liable to the imputations of Arrogancy and Iniquity who do obtrude and urge them A TREATISE OF THE Pope's Supremacy MATTH 10.2 Now the names of the twelve Apostles were these the first Simon who is called Peter AMONG the Modern Controversies there is scarce any of greater consequence than that about Universal Supremacy which the Bishop of Rome claimeth over the Christian Church the assertion whereof on his side dependeth upon divers Suppositions namely these I. That Saint Peter by our Lord's appointment had a Primacy implying a Sovereignty of Authority and Jurisdiction over the Apostles II. That the Rights and Prerogatives of this Sovereignty were not personal but derivable and transmitted to Successours III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his translation and was so at his decease V. That hence of Right to the Bishops of Rome as Saint Peter 's Successours an Vniversal Jurisdiction over the whole Church of Christ doth appertain VI. That in Fact the said Bishops continually from Saint Peter 's time have enjoyed and exercised this Power VII That this Power is indefectible such as by no means can be forfeited or fail In order to the discussion and resolution of the first Point I shall treat upon the Primacy of Saint Peter endeavouring to shew what Primacy he was capable of or might enjoy what he could not pretend to nor did possess SUPPOSITION I. The first Supposition of those who claim Universal Jurisdiction to the Pope over the Church is That Saint Peter had a primacy over the Apostles IN order to the resolution of this Point we may consider that there are several kinds of Primacy which may belong to a person in respect of others for there are 1. A Primacy of Worth or Personal Excellency 2. A Primacy of Reputation and Esteem 3. A Primacy of Order or bare Dignity and Precedence 4. A Primacy of Power or Jurisdiction To each of these what title Saint Peter might have let us in order examine I. As for the first of these a Primacy of Worth or Merit as some of the Ancients call it we may well grant it to Saint Peter admitting that probably he did exceed the rest of his Brethren in personal endowments and capacities both natural and moral qualifying him for the discharge of the Apostolical Office in an eminent manner particularly that in quickness of apprehension in boldness of spirit in readiness of speech in charity to our Lord and zeal for his Service in resolution activity and industry he was transcendent may seem to appear by the tenour of the Evangelical and Apostolical Histories in the which we may observe him upon all occasions ready to speak first and to make himself the mouth as the Fathers speak of the Apostles in all deliberations nimble at propounding his advice in all undertakings forward to make the onset being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 always hot and eager always prompt and vigorous as S. Chrysostome often affirmeth concerning him these things are apparent in his demeanour and it may not be amiss to set down some instances When our Lord observing the different apprehensions men had concerning him asked the Apostles but whom say ye that I am up starteth he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he skippeth forth and preventeth the rest crying Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God The other Apostles were not ignorant of the Point for they at their Conversion did take Jesus for the Messias which even according to the common Notion of the Iews did imply his being the Son of God Nathanael that is Saint Bartholomew as is supposed had in terms confessed it the whole company upon seeing our Lord walk on the Sea had avowed it Saint Peter before that in the name of them all had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have believed and have known that thou art the Christ the Son of the living God They therefore had the same Faith but he from a special alacrity of spirit and expedition in utterance was more forward to declare it He was more hot saith St. Greg. Naz. than the rest at acknowledging Christ. When our Saviour walked on the Sea who but He had the Faith and the Courage to venture on the Waters towards him When our Lord was apprehended by the Souldiers presently up was his spirit and out went his Sword in defence of him When our Lord predicted that upon his coming into trouble all the Disciples would be offended and desert him he was ready to say Though all men shall be offended because of thee yet will I never be offended and Though I should dye with thee yet will I not deny thee such was his natural courage and confidence When our Lord was discoursing about his Passion he suddenly must be advising in the case and urging him to spare himself upon which St. Chrysostome biddeth us to consider not that his answer was unadvised but that it came from a genuine and fervent affection And at the Transfiguration he
It may also by any prudent considerer easily be discerned that if Saint Peter had really been as they assert him so in Authority superiour to the other Apostles it is hardly possible that Saint Paul should upon these occasions express nothing of it 16. If Saint Peter had been appointed Sovereign of the Church it seemeth that it should have been requisite that he should have outlived all the Apostles for then either the Church must have wanted a Head or there must have been an inextricable Controversie about who that Head was Saint Peter dyed long before Saint John as all agree and perhaps before divers others of the Apostles Now after his departure did the Church want a Head then it might before and after have none and our Adversaries lose the main ground of their pretence did one of the Apostles become Head which of them was it upon what ground did he assume the Headship or who conferred it on him who ever did acknowledge any such thing or where is there any report about it was any other person made Head suppose the Bishop of Rome who onely pretendeth thereto then did Saint John and other Apostles become subject to one in degree inferiour to them then what becometh of Saint Paul's first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers what do all the Apostolical privileges come to when St. John must be at the command of Linus and Cletus and Clemens and of I know not who beside was it not a great absurdity for the Apostles to truckle under the Pastours and Teachers of Rome The like may be said for Saint James if he as the Roman Church doth in its Liturgicks suppose were an Apostle who in many respects might claim the preeminence Who therefore in the Apostolical Constitutions is preferred before Clement Bishop of Rome 17. Upon the same grounds on which a Supremacy of power is claimed to Saint Peter other Apostles might also challenge a Superiority therein over their Brethren but to suppose such a difference of power among the rest is absonous and therefore the grounds are not valid upon which Saint Peter's Supremacy is built I instance in Saint James and Saint John who upon the same probabilities had after Saint Peter a preference to the other Apostles For to them our Saviour declared a special regard to them the Apostles afterwards may seem to have yielded a particular deference they in merit and performances seem to have surpassed they after St. Peter and his Brother were first called to the Apostolical Office they as Saint Peter were by our Lord new Christned as it were and nominated Boanerges by a name signifying the efficacy of their endeavour in their Master's service they together with Saint Peter were assumed to behold the transfiguration they were culled out to wait on our Lord in his agony they also with Saint Peter others being excluded were taken to attest our Lord's performance of that great Miracle of restoring the Ruler's Daughter to life they presuming on their special favour with our Lord did pretend to the chief places in his Kingdom To one of them it is expressed that our Saviour did bear a peculiar affection he being the disciple whoâ— Jesus loved and who leaned on his bosome to the other he particularly discovered himself after his Resurrection and first honoured him with the Crown of Martyrdom They in bloud and cognation did nearest touch our Lord being his Cousin Germans which was esteemed by the Ancients a ground of preferment as Hegesippus reporteth Their industry and activity in propagation of the Gospel was most eminently conspicuous To them it was peculiar that Saint James did first Suffer for it and Saint John did longest persist in the faithfull Confession of it whose Writings in several kinds do remain as the richest magazines of Christian Doctrine furnishing us with the fullest Testimonies concerning the Divinity of our Lord with special Histories of his Life and with his divinest Discourses with most lively incitements to Piety and Charity with propheâ—ical Revelations concerning the state of the Church He therefore was one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chief Pillars and props of the Christian Profession one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Superlative Apostles Accordingly in the Rolls of the Apostles and in reports concerning them their names usually are placed after Saint Peter Hence also some of the Fathers do take them as Saint Peter was to have been preferred by our Lord Peter saith Saint Gregory Nazianzene and James and John who both were indeed and were reckoned before the others so indeed did Christ himself prefer them and Peter James and John saith Clemens Alex. did not as being preferred by the Lord himself contest for honour but did chuse James the Just Bishop of Jerusalem or as Ruffinus read Bishop of the Apostles Hence if by designation of Christ by the Concession of the Apostolical College by the prefulgency of his excellent worth and merit or upon any other ground Saint Peter had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first place the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or next place in the same kind by like means upon the same grounds seem to have belonged unto them and if their advantage did imply difference not in Power but in Order onely not authoritative Superiority but honorary Precedence then can no more be allowed or concluded due to him 18. The Fathers both in express terms and implicitly or by consequence do assert the Apostles to have been equal or co-ordinate in Power and Authority What can be more express than that of St. Cyprian The other Apostles were indeed that which Peter was endowed with equal consortship of honour and power and again Although our Lord giveth to all the Apostles after his resurrection an equal power and saith As the Father sent me so I send you What can be more plain than that of St. Chrysostome Saint Paul sheweth that each Apostle did enjoy equal dignity How again could St. Chrysostome more clearly signifie his Opinion than when comparing Saint Paul to Saint Peter he calleth Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equal in honour to him adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for I will not as yet say any thing more as if he thought Saint Paul indeed the more honourable How also could St. Cyril more plainly declare his sense to be the same than when he called Saint Peter and Saint John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equâ—â— to one another in honour Did not St. Hierome also sufficiently declare his mind in the case when he saith of the Apostles that the strength of the Church is equally settled upon them Doth not Dionysius the supposed Areopagite call the decad of the Apostles co-ordinate with their foreman Saint Peter in conformity I suppose to the current judgment of his Age. What can be more full than that of Isidore whose words shew how long this sense continued in the
Church The other Apostles did receive an equal share of honour and power who also being dispersed in the whole world did preach the Gospel and to whom departing the Bishops did succeed who are constituted through the whole world in the Sees of the Apostles By consequence the Fathers do assert this equality when they affirm as we before did shew the Apostolical Office to be absolutely Supreme when also they affirm as afterwards we shall shew all the Apostles Successours to be equal as such and particularly that the Roman Bishop upon account of his succeeding Saint Peter hath no prâ—-eminence above his Brethren for wherever a Bishop be whether at Rome or at Eugubium at Constantinople or at Rhegium at Alexandria or at Thanis he is of the same worth and of the same Priesthood the force of wealth and lowness of poverty doth not render a Bishop more high or more low for that all of them are Successours of the Apostles 19. Neither is it to prudential esteem a despicable consideration that the most ancient of the Fathers having occasion sometimes largely to discourse of Saint Peter do not mention any such Prerogatives belonging to him 20. The last Argument which I shall use against this Primacy shall be the insufficiency of those Arguments and Testimonies which they alledge to warrant and prove it If this Point be of so great consequence as they make it if as they would persuade us the subsistence order unity and peace of the Church together with the Salvation of Christians do depend on it if as they suppose many great points of truth do hang on this pin if it be as they declare a main Article of Faith and not onely a simple errour but a pernicious heresie to deny this primacy then it is requisite that a clear revelation from God should be producible in favour of it for upon that ground onely such points can firmly stand then it is most probable that God to prevent controversies occasions of doubt and excuses for errour about so grand a matter would not have failed to have declared it so plainly as might serve to satisfie any reasonable man and to convince any froward gainsayer but no such revelation doth appear for the places of Scripture which they alledge do not plainly express it nor pregnantly imply it nor can it by fair consequence be inferred from them No man unprepossessed with affection to their side would descry it in them without thwarting Saint Peter's Order and wresting the Scriptures they cannot deduce it from them This by examining their allegations will appear I. They alledge those words of our Saviour uttered by him upon occasion of Saint Peter's confessing him to be the Son of God Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church here say they Saint Peter is declared the Foundation that is the sole Supreme Governour of the Church To this I answer 1. Those words do not clearly signifie any thing to their purpose for they are metaphorical and thence ambiguous or capable of divers interpretations whence they cannot suffice to ground so main a point of Doctrine or to warrant so huge a Pretence these ought to stand upon down-right evident and indubitable Testimony It is pretty to observe how Bellarmine proposeth this Testimony Of which words saith he the sense is plain and obvious that it be understood that under two metaphors the principate of the whole Church was promised as if that sense could be so plain and obvious which is couched under two metaphors and those not very pat or clear in application to their sense 2. This is manifestly confirmed from that the Fathers and Divines both ancient and modern have much differed in exposition of these words Some saith Abulensis say that this rock is Peter others say and better that it is Christ others say and yet better that it is the confession which Peter maketh For some interpret this rock to be Christ himself of whom Saint Paul saith Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid which is Jesus Christ. St. Austin telleth us in his Retractations that he often had expounded the words to this purpose although he did not absolutely reject that interpretation which made Saint Peter the rock leaving it to the Readers choice which is the most probable Others and those most eminent Fathers do take the rock to be Saint Peter's faith or profession Vpon the Rock saith the Prince of Interpreters that is upon the faith of his profession and again Christ said that he would build his Church on Peter's confession and again he or another ancient Writer under his name upon this rock he said not upon Peter for he did not build his Church upon the man but upon his faith Our Lord saith Theodoret did permit the first of the Apostles whose confession he did fix as a prop or foundation of the Church to be shaken Whence Origen saith that every disciple of Christ is the rock in virtue of his agreement with Peter in that holy confession This sense even Popes have embraced Others say that as Saint Peter did not speak for himself but in the name of all the Apostles and of all faithfull people representing the Pastours and people of the Church so correspondently our Lord did declare that he would build his Church upon such faithfull Pastours and Confessours Others do indeed by the rock understand Saint Peter's person but do not thereby expound to be meant his being Supreme Governour of the Apostles or of the whole Church The Divines Schoolmen and Canonists of the Roman Communion do not also agree in exposition of the words and divers of the most learned among them do approve the interpretation of St. Chrysostome Now then how can so great a Point of Doctrine be firmly grounded on a place of so doubtfull interpretation how can any one be obliged to understand the words according to their interpretation which Persons of so good sense and so great Authority do understand otherwise with what modesty can they pretend that meaning to be clear which so perspicacious eyes could not discern therein why may not I excusably agree with St. Chrysostome or St. Austin in understanding the place may I not reasonably oppose their judgment to the Opinion of any Modern Doctours deeming Bellarmine as fallible in his conceptions as one of them why consequently may I not without blame refuse their Doctrine as built upon this place or disavow the goodness of this proof 3. It is very evident that the Apostles themselves did not understand those words of our Lord to signify any grant or promise to Saint Peter of Supremacy over them for would they have contended for the chief place if they had understood whose it of right was by our Lord 's own positive determination would they have disputed about a question which to their knowledge by their Master was
the Apostles in any sense 6. If some privileges of Saint Peter were derived to Popes why were not all why was not Pope Alexander VI. as holy as Saint Peter why was not Pope Honorius as found in his private judgment why is not every Pope inspired why is not every Papal Epistle to be reputed Canonical why are not all Popes endowed with power of doing miracles why doth not the Pope by a Sermon convert thousands why indeed do Popes never preach why doth not he cure men by his shadow he is say they himself his shadow what ground is there of distinguishing the privileges so that he shall have some not others where is the ground to be found 7. If it be objected that the Fathers commonly do call Bishops Successours of the Apostles to assoil that objection we may consider that whereas the Apostolical Office virtually did contain the functions of Teaching and ruling God's people the which for preservation of Christian doctrine and edification of the Church were requisite to be continued perpetually in ordinary standing Offices these indeed were derived from the Apostles but not properly in way of succession as by univocal propagation but by Ordination imparting all the power needfull for such Offices which therefore were exercised by persons during the Apostles lives concurrently or in subordination to them even as a Dictatour at Rome might create inferiour Magistrates who derived from him but not as his Successours for as Bellarmine himself telleth us there can be no proper succession but in respect of one preceding but Apostles and Bishops were together in the Church The Fathers therefore so in a large sense call all Bishops Successours of the Apostles not meaning that any one of them did succeed into the whole Apostolical Office but that each did receive his power from some one immediately or mediately whom some Apostle did constitute Bishop vesting him with Authority to feed the particular Flock committed to him in way of ordinary charge according to the sayings of that Apostolical person Clemens Rom. The Apostles preaching in Regions and Cities did constitute their first Converts having approved them by the Spirit for Bishops and Deacons of those who should afterward believe and having constituted the foresaid Bishops and Deacons they withall gave them farther charge that if they should dye other approved men successively should receive their Office thus did the Bishops supply the room of the Apostles each in guiding his particular charge all of them together by mutual aid conspiring to govern the whole Body of the Church 8. In which regard it may be said that not one single Bishop but all Bishops together through the whole Church do succeed Saint Peter or any other Apostle for that all of them in union together have an universal Sovereign Authority commensurate to an Apostle 9. This is the notion which St. Cyprian doth so much insist upon affirming that the Bishops do succeed Saint Peter and the other Apostles by vicarious ordination that the Bishops are Apostles that there is but one chair by the Lord's word built upon one Peter One undivided Bishoprick diffused in the peacefull numerosity of many Bishops whereof each Bishop doth hold his share One Flock whom the Apostles by unanimous agreement did feed and which afterward the Bishops do feed having a portion thereof allotted to each which he should govern So the Synod of Carthage with St. Cyprian So also St. Chrysostome saith that the Sheep of Christ were committed by him to Peter and to those after him that is in his meaning to all Bishops 10. Such and no other power Saint Peter might devolve on any Bishop ordained by him in any Church which he did constitute or inspect as in that of Antioch of Alexandria of Babylon of Rome The like did the other Apostles communicate who had the same power with Saint Peter in founding and settling Churches whose Successours of this kind were equal to those of the same kind whom St. Peter did constitute enjoying in their several precincts an equal part of the Apostolical power as St. Cyprian often doth assert 11. It is in consequence observable that in those Churches whereof the Apostles themselves were never accounted Bishops yet the Bishops are called Successours of the Apostles which cannot otherwise be understood than according to the sense which we have proposed that is because they succeeded those who were constituted by the Apostles according to those sayings of Irenaeus and Tertullian we can number those who were instituted bishops by the Apostles and their Successours and All the Churches do shew those whom being by the Apostles constituted in the Episcopal Office they have as continuers of the Apostolical seed So although Saint Peter was never reckoned Bishop of Alexandria yet because 't is reported that he placed Saint Mark there the Bishop of Alexandria is said to succeed the Apostles And because Saint John did abide at Ephesus inspecting that Church and appointing Bishops there the Bishops of that See did refer their Origine to him So many Bishops did claim from Saint Paul So St. Cyprian and Firmilian do assert themselves Successours of the Apostles who yet perhaps never were at Carthage or Caesarea So the Church of Constantinople is often in the Acts of the Sixth General Council called this great Apostolick Church being such Churches as those of whom Tertullian saith that although they do not produce any of the Apostles or Apostolical men for their authour yet conspiring in the same faith are no less for the consanguinity of doctrine reputed Apostolical Yea hence St. Hierome doth assert a parity of merit and dignity Sacerdotal to all Bishops because saith he all of them are Successours to the Apostles having all a like power by their ordination conferred on them 12. Whereas our Adversaries do pretend that indeed the other Apostles had an extraordinary charge as Legates of Christ which had no succession but was extinct in their persons but that Saint Peter had a peculiar charge as ordinary Pastour of the whole Church which surviveth To this it is enough to rejoyn that it is a mere figment devised for a shift and affirmed precariously having no ground either in Holy Scripture or in ancient Tradition there being no such distinction in the Sacred or Ecclesiastical Writings no mention occurring there of any Office which he did assume or which was attributed to him distinct from that extraordinary one of an Apostle and all the Pastoral charge imaginable being ascribed by the Ancients to all the Apostles in regard to the whole Church as hath been sufficiently declared 13. In fine If any such conveyance of power of power so great so momentous so mightily concerning the perpetual state of the Church and of each person therein had been made it had been for general direction and satisfaction for voiding all doubt and debate about it for stifling these pretended Heresies
was at Rome may well be collected from St. Paul's Writings for he writing at different times one Epistle to Rome and divers Epistles from Rome that to the Galatians that to the Ephesians that to the Philippians that to the Colossians and the Second to Timothy doth never mention him sending any salutation to him or from him Particularly Saint Peter was not there when Saint Paul mentioning Tychicus Onesimus Aristarchus Marcus and Justus addeth these alone my fellow-workers unto the Kingdom of God who have been a comfort unto me He was not there when Saint Paul said at my first defence no man stood with me but all men forsook me He was not there immediately before Saint Paul's death when the time of his departure was at hand when he telleth Timothy that all the brethren did salute him and naming divers of them he omitteth Peter Which things being considered it is not probable that Saint Peter would assume the Episcopal Chair of Rome he being little capable to reside there and for that other needfull affairs would have forced him to leave so great a Church destitute of their Pastour 7. It was needless that he should be Bishop for that by virtue of his Apostleship involving all the power of inferiour degrees he might whenever he should be at Rome exercise Episcopal Functions and Authority What need a Sovereign Prince to be made a Justice of Peace 8. Had he done so he must have given a bad example of Non-residence a practice that would have been very ill relished in the Primitive Church as we may see by several Canons interdicting offences of kin to it it being I think then not so known as nominally to be censured and culpable upon the same ground and by the sayings of Fathers condemning practices approaching to it Even latter Synods in more corrupt times and in the declension of good Order yet did prohibit this practice Epiphanius therefore did well infer that it was needfull the Apostles should constitute Bishops resident at Rome It was saith he possible that the Apostles Peter and Paul yet surviving other Bishops should be constituted because the Apostles often did take journeys into other Countries for preaching Christ but the City of Rome could not be without a Bishop 9. If Saint Peter were Bishop of Rome he thereby did offend against divers other good Ecclesiastical Rules which either were in practice from the beginning or at least the reason of them was always good upon which the Church did afterward enact them so that either he did ill in thwarting them or the Church had done it in establishing them so as to condemn his practice 10. It was against Rule that any Bishop should desert one Church and transfer himself to another and indeed against Reason such a relation and endearment being contracted between a Bishop and his Church which cannot well be dissolved But Saint Peter is by Ecclesiastical Historians reported and by Romanists admitted to have been Bishop of Antioch for seven years together He therefore did ill to relinquish that Church that most ancient and truly Apostolick Church of Antioch as the Constantinopolitan Fathers call'd it and to place his See at Rome This practice was esteemed bad and of very mischievous consequence earnestly reproved as heinously criminal by great Fathers severely condemned by divers Synods Particularly a transmigration from a lesser and poorer to a greater and more wealthy Bishoprick which is the present case was checked by them as rankly savouring of selfish ambition or avarice The Synod of Alexandria in Athanasius in its Epistle to all Catholick Bishops doth say that Eusebius by passing from Berytus to Nicomedia had annulled his Episcopacy making it an adultery worse than that which is committed by marriage upon divorce Eusebius say they did not consider the Apostle's admonition Art thou bound to a wife do not seek to be loosed for if it be said of a woman how much more of a Church of the same Bishoprick to which one being tyed ought not to seek another that he may not be found also an adulterer according to the Holy Scripture Surely when they said this they did forget what Saint Peter was said to have done in that kind as did also the Sardican Fathers in their Synodical Letter extant in the same Apology of Athanasius condemning translations from lesser Cities unto greater Dioceses The same practice is forbidden by the Synods of Nice I. of Chalcedon of Antioch of Sardica of Arles I. c. In the Synod under Mennas it was laid to the charge of Anthimus that having been Bishop of Trabisond he had adulterously snatched the See of Constantinople against all Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons Yea great Popes of Rome little considering how peccant therein their Predecessour Pope Peter was Pope Julius and Pope Damasus did greatly tax this practice whereof the latter in his Synod at Rome did excommunicate all those who should commit it In like manner Pope Leo I. These Laws were so indispensable that in respect to them Constantine M. who much loved and honoured Eusebius acknowledging him in the common judgment of the world deserving to be Bishop of the whole Church did not like that he should accept the Bishoprick of Antioch to which he was invited and commended his waving it as an act not onely consonant to the Ecclesiastical Canons but acceptable to God and agreeable to Apostolical Tradition so little aware was the good Emperour of Saint Peter being translated from Antioch to Rome In regard to the same Law Gregory Nazianzene a person of so great worth and who had deserved so highly of the Church at Constantinople could not be permitted to retain his Bishoprick of that Church to which he had been call'd from that small one of Sasima The Synod saith Sozomen observing the ancient laws and the Ecclesiastical rule did receive his Bishoprick from him being willingly offered no-wise regarding the great merits of the person the which Synod surely would have excluded Saint Peter from the Bishoprick of Rome and it is observable that Pope Damasus did approve and exhort those Fathers to that proceeding We may indeed observe that Pope Pelagius II. did excuse the translation of Bishops by the example of Saint Peter for who ever dareth to say argueth he that Saint Peter the Prince of the Apostles did not act well when he changed his See from Antioch to Rome But I think it more adviseable to excuse Saint Peter from being Authour of a practice judged so irregular by denying the matter of Fact laid to his charge 11. It was anciently deemed a very irregular thing contrary saith St. Cyprian to the Ecclesiastical disposition contrary to the Evangelical Law contrary to the unity of Catholick Institution a Symbol saith another Ancient Writer of dissention and disagreeable to Ecclesiastical Law which therefore was condemned by the Synod of Nice
of Ecclesiastical Affairs concerning the publick state of the Church the defence of the common Faith the maintenance of order peace and unity jointly to belong unto the whole body of Pastours according to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephanus himself Therefore most dear brother the body of Priests is copious being joined together by the glue of mutual concord and the bond of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to make heresie and to tear or waste the flock of Christ the rest may come to succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may recollect the sheep into the flock And again Which thing it concerns us to look after and redress most dear brother who bearing in mind the divine clemency and holding the scales of the Church-government c. So even the Roman Clergy did acknowledge For we ought all of us to watch for the body of the whole Church whose members are digested through several Provinces Like the Trinity whose power is one and undivided there is one Priesthood among divers Bishops So in the Apostolical Constitutions the Apostles tell the Bishops that an universal Episcopacy is entrusted to them So the Council of Carthage with St. Cyprian Clear and manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ sending his Apostles and affording to them alone the power given him of the Father in whose room we succeeded governing the Church of God with the same power Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father commended his Spouse to us A very ancient Instance of which administration is the proceeding against Paulus Samosatenus when the Pastours of the Churches some from one place some from another did assemble together against him as a pest of Christ's flock all of them hastning to Antioch where they deposed exterminated and deprived him of communion warning the whole Church to reject and disavow him Seeing the Pastoral charge is common to us all who bear the Episcopal Office although thou fittest in a higher and more eminent place Therefore for this cause the Holy Church is committed to you and to us that we may labour for all and not be slack in yielding help and assistence to all Hence Saint Chrysostome said of Eustathius his Bishop For he was well instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit that a President or Bishop of a Church ought not to take care of that Church alone wherewith he is entrusted by the Holy Ghost but also of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world They consequently did repute Schism or Ecclesiastical Rebellion to consist in a departure from the consent of the body of the Priesthood as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express it in his Epistles to Pope Stephen and others They deem all Bishops to partake of the Apostolical Authority according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose The Lord himself hath translated thee from the Judges of the Earth unto the Prelacy of the Apostles They took themselves all to be Vicars of Christ and Judges in his stead according to that of St. Cyprian For Heresies are sprung up and Schisms grown from no other ground nor root but this because God's Priest was not obeyed nor was there one Priest or Bishop for a time in the Church nor a Judge thought on for a time to supply the room of Christ. Where that by Church is meant any particular Church and by Priest a Bishop of such Church any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenour of Saint Cyprian's discourse will easily discern They conceive that our Saviour did promise to Saint Peter the Keys in behalf of the Church and as representing it They suppose the combination of Bishops in peaceable consent and mutual aid to be the Rock on which the Church is built They alledge the Authority granted to Saint Peter as a ground of claim to the same in all Bishops jointly and in each Bishop singly according to his rata pars or allotted proportion Which may easily be understood by the words of our Lord when he says to blessed Peter whose place the Bishops supply Whatsoever c. I have the sword of Constantine in my hands you of Peter said our great King Edgar They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be Successours of Saint Peter that his power is derived to them all and that the whole Episcopal Order is the Chair by the Lord's voice founded on Saint Peter thus St. Cyprian in divers places before touched discourseth and thus Firmilian from the Keys granted to Saint Peter inferreth disputing against the Roman Bishop Therefore saith he the power of remitting sins is given to the Apostles and to the Churches which they being sent from Christ did constitute and to the Bishops which do succeed them by vicarious ordination 4. The Bishops of any other Churches founded by the Apostles in the Fathers style are Successours of the Apostles in the same sense and to the same intent as the Bishop of Rome is by them accounted Successour of Saint Peter the Apostolical power which in extent was universal being in some sense in reference to them not quite extinct but transmitted by succession yet the Bishops of Apostolical Churches did never claim nor allowedly exercise Apostolical Jurisdiction beyond their own precincts according to those words of St. Hierome Tell me what doth Palestine belong to the Bishop of Alexandria This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse for in like manner the Pope might be Successour to Saint Peter and Saint Peter's universal power might be successive yet the Pope have no singular claim thereto beyond the bounds of his particular Church 5. So again for instance Saint James whom the Roman Church in her Liturgies doth avow for an Apostle was Bishop of Jerusalem more unquestionably than Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome Jerusalem also was the root and the mother of all Churches as the Fathers of the Second General Synod in their Letter to Pope Damasus himself and the Occidental Bishops did call it forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that Title Yet the Bishops of Jerusalem Successours of Saint James did not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive Jurisdiction yea notwithstanding their succession they did not so much as obtain a metropolitical Authority in Palestine which did belong to Caesarea having been assigned thereto in conformity to the Civil Government and was by special provision reserved thereto in the Synod of Nice whence St. Jerome did not stick to affirm that the Bishop of Jerusalem was subject to the Bishop of Caesarea for speaking to John Bishop of Jerusalem who for compurgation of himself from errours imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he saith Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears possessed than render honour to thy Metropolitan that is to the Bishop of Caesarea By which
the authority of a Church especially then when no Church did appear to have either Principality or Puissance And that sense may clearly be evinced by the context wherein it doth appear that St. Irenaeus doth not alledge the judicial Authority of the Roman Church but its credible Testimony which thereby became more considerable because Christians commonly had occasions of recourse to it Such a reason of precedence St. Cyprian giveth in another case Because saith he Rome for its magnitude ought to precede Carthage For this reason a Pagan Historian did observe the Roman Bishop had a greater authority that is a greater interest and reputation than other Bishops This reason Theodoret doth assign in his Epistle to Pope Leo wherein he doth highly complement and cajole him for this city saith he is the greatest and the most splendid and presiding over the world and flowing with multitude of people and which moreover hath produced the Empire now governing This is the sole ground upon which the greatest of all ancient Synods that of Chalcedon did affirm the Papal eminency to be founded for to the throne say they of ancient Rome because that was the royal city the Fathers reasonably conferred the privileges the fountain of Papal eminence was in their judgment not any divine Institution not the Authority of Saint Peter deriving it self to his Successours but the concession of the Fathers who were moved to grant it upon account that Rome was the Imperial City To the same purpose the Empress Placidia in her Epistle to Theodosius in behalf of Pope Leo saith It becometh us to preserve to this city the which is mistress of all lands a reverence in all things This reason had indeed in it much of equity of decency of conveniency it was equal that he should have the preference and more than common respect who was thence enabled and engaged to do most service to Religion It was decent that out of conformity to the State and in respect to the Imperial Court and Senate the Pastour of that place should be graced with repute it was convenient that he who resided in the centre of all business and had the greatest influence upon affairs who was the Emperour's chief Counsellour for direction and Instrument for execution of Ecclesiastical affairs should not be put behind others Hence did the Fathers of the Second General Synod advance the Bishop of Constantinople to the next privileges of honour after the Bishop of Rome because it was new Rome and a Seat of the Empire And the Fathers of Chalcedon assigned equal privileges to the most Holy See of Rome with good reason say they judging that the city which was honoured with the Royalty and Senate and which otherwise did enjoy equal privileges with the ancient Royal Rome should likewise in Ecclesiastical affairs be magnified as it being second after it Indeed upon this score the Church of Constantinople is said to have aspired to the supreme Principality when it had the advantage over old Rome the Empire being extinguished there and sometimes was styled the Head of all Churches It is also natural and can hardly be otherwise but that the Bishop of a chief City finding himself to exceed in wealth in power in advantages of friendships dependencies c. should not affect to raise himself above the level it is an ambition that easily will seise on the most moderate and otherwise religious minds Pope Leo objected it to Anatolius and Pope Gregory to John from his austere life called the Faster Upon the like account it was that the Bishops of other Cities did mount to a preeminency Metropolitane Primatical Patriarchal Thence it was that the Bishop of Alexandria before Constantine's time did acquire the honour of second place to Rome because that City being head of a most rich and populous Nation did in magnitude and opulency as Gregory Nazianzene saith approach next to Rome so as hardly to yield the next place to it Upon that account also did Antioch get the next place as being the most large flourishing commanding City of the East the which as Josephus saith for bigness and for other advantages had without controversie the third place in all the world subject to the Romans and the which St. Chrysostome calleth the head of all cities seated in the East Saint Basil seemeth to call the Church thereof the principal in the world for what saith he can be more opportune to the Churches over the world than the Church of Antioch the which if it should happen to be reduced to concord nothing would hinder but that as a sound head it would supply health to the whole body Upon the same account the Bishop of Carthage did obtain the privilege to be standing Primate of his Province although other Primacies there were not fixed to places but followed Seniority and a kind of Patriarch over all the African Provinces Hence did Caesarea as exceeding in temporal advantages and being the Political Metropolis of Palestine o'ertop Jerusalem that most ancient noble and venerable City the source of our Religion It was indeed the general Rule and practice to conform the privileges of Ecclesiastical dignity in a proportion convenient to those of the secular Government as the Synod of Antioch in express terms did ordain the ninth Canon whereof runneth thus The Bishops in every Province ought to know that the Bishop presiding in the Metropolis doth undertake the care of all the Province because all that have business do meet together in the Metropolis whence it hath been ordained that he should precede in honour and that the Bishops should doe nothing extraordinary without him according to a more ancient Canon holding from our Fathers that is according to the 34th Canon of the Apostles It is true that the Fathers do sometimes mention the Church of Rome being founded by the two great Apostles or the succession of the Roman Bishop to them in Pastoral charge as a special ornament of that Church and a congruous ground of respect to that Bishop whereby they did honour the memory of Saint Peter but even some of those who did acknowledge this did not avow it as a sufficient ground of preeminence none did admit it for an argument of authoritative Superiority St. Cyprian did call the Roman See the chair of Saint Peter and the principal Church yet he disclaimed any authority of the Roman Bishops above his brethren Firmilian did take notice that Pope Stephanus did glory in the place of his Bishoprick and contend that he held the succession of Peter yet did not he think himself thereby obliged to submit to his authority or follow his judgment but sharply did reprehend him as a favourer of Hereticks an authour of Schisms and one who had cut himself off from the communion of his brethren The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did confess that in writings all did willingly honour the Roman
Church as having been from the beginning the School of the Apostles and the Metropolis of Religion although yet from the East the instructours of the Christian Doctrine did go and reside there but from hence they desired not to be deemed inferiours because they did not exceed in the greatness and numerousness of their Church They allowed some regard though faintly and with reservation to the Roman Church upon account of their Apostolical foundation they implied a stronger ground of pretence from the grandeur of that City yet did not they therefore grant themselves to be inferiours at least as to any substantial Privilege importing Authority If by Divine right upon account of his succession to Saint Peter he had such preeminence why are the other causes reckoned as if they could add any thing to God's Institution or as if that did need humane confirmation The pretence to that surely was weak which did need corroboration and to be propp'd by worldly considerations Indeed whereas the Apostles did found many Churches exercising Apostolical authority over them eminently containing the Episcopal why in conscience should one claim privileges on that score rather than or above the rest Why should the See of Antioch that most ancient and truly Apostolical Church where the Christian name began where Saint Peter at first as they say did sit Bishop for seven years be postponed to Alexandria Especially why should the Church of Jerusalem the Seat of our Lord himself the mother of all Churches the fountain of Christian Doctrine the first Consistory of the Apostles enobled by so many glorious performances by the Life Preaching Miracles Death Burial Resurrection Ascension of our Saviour by the first preaching of the Apostles the effusion of the Holy Spirit the Conversion of so many people and Constitution of the first Church and Celebration of the first Synods upon these considerations not obtain preeminence to other Churches but in honour be cast behind divers others and as to Power be subjected to Caesarea the Metropolis of Palestine The true reason of this even Baronius himself did see and acknowledge for that saith he the Ancients observ'd no other rule in instituting the Ecclesiastical Sees than the division of Provinces and the Prerogative before established by the Romans there are very many examples Of which examples that of Rome is the most obvious and notable and what he so generally asserteth may be so applied thereto as to void all other grounds of its preeminence X. The truth is all Ecclesiastical presidencies and subordinations or dependencies of some Bishops on others in administration of spiritual affairs were introduced merely by humane Ordinance and established by Law or Custome upon prudential accounts according to the exigency of things Hence the Prerogatives of other Sees did proceed and hereto whatever Dignity Privilege or Authority the Pope with equity might at any time claim is to be imputed To clear which point we will search the matter nearer the quick propounding some observations concerning the ancient forms of Discipline and considering what interest the Pope had therein At first each Church was settled apart under its own Bishop and Presbyters so as independently and separately to manage its own concernments each was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 governed by its own head and had its own Laws Every Bishop as a Prince in his own Church did act freely according to his will and discretion with the advice of his Ecclesiastical Senate and with the consent of his people the which he did use to consult without being controllable by any other or accountable to any farther than his obligation to uphold the verity of Christian profession and to maintain fraternal communion in charity and peace with neighbouring Churches did require in which regard if he were notably peccant he was liable to be disclaimed by them as no good Christian and rejected from communion together with his Church if it did adhere to him in his misdemeanours This may be collected from the remainders of State in the times of St. Cyprian But because little disjointed and incoherent Bodies were like dust apt to be dissipated by every wind of external assault or intestine faction and peaceable union could hardly be retained without some ligature of discipline and Churches could not mutually support and defend each other without some method of entercourse and rule of confederacy engaging them Therefore for many good purposes for upholding and advancing the common interests of Christianity for protection and support of each Church from inbred disorders and dissentions for preserving the integrity of the faith for securing the concord of divers Churches for providing fit Pastours to each Church and correcting such as were scandalously bad or unfaithfull it was soon found needfull that divers Churches should be combined and linked together in some regular form of Discipline that if any Church did want a Bishop the neighbour Bishops might step in to approve and ordain a fit one that if any Bishop did notoriously swerve from the Christian rule the others might interpose to correct or void him that if any errour or schism did peep up in any Church the joint concurrence of divers Bishops might avail to stop its progress and to quench it by convenient means of instruction reprehension and censure that if any Church were oppressed by persecution by indigency by faction the others might be engaged to afford effectual succour and relief for such ends it was needfull that Bishops in certain precincts should convene with intent to deliberate and resolve about the best expedients to compass them And that the manner of such proceeding to avoid uncertain distraction confusion arbitrariness dissatisfaction and mutinous opposition should be settled in an ordinary course according to rules known and allowed by all In defining such precincts it was most natural most easie most commodious to follow the divisions of Territory or Jurisdiction already established in the Civil State that the Spiritual administrations being in such circumstances aptly conformed to the Secular might go on more smoothly and expeditely the wheels of one not clashing with the other according to the judgment of the two great Synods that of Chalcedon and the Trullane which did ordain that if by Royal authority any city be or should hereafter be re-established the order of the churches shall be according to the civil and publick form Whereas therefore in each Nation or Province subject to one Political Jurisdiction there was a Metropolis or Head-city to which the greatest resort was for dispensation of Justice and dispatch of principal Affairs emergent in that Province it was also most convenient that also the determination of Ecclesiastical matters should be affixed thereto especially considering that usually those places were opportunely seated that many persons upon other occasions did meet there that the Churches in those Cities did exceed the rest in number
immediately subjected to his Patriarchal Jurisdiction Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this Canon affirming that by the Primate of the Diocese is understood the Pope Diocese being put by a notable figure for Dioceses and that an appeal is to be made to the Bishop of Constantinople onely by permission in case the Party will be content therewith We may note that some Provincial Churches were by ancient custome exempted from dependence on any Primacy or Patriarchate Such an one the Cyprian Church was adjudged to be in the Ephesine Synod wherein the privileges of such Churches were confirmed against the invasion of greater Churches and to that purpose this general Law enacted Let the same be observ'd in all Dioceses and Provinces every where that none of the Bishops most beloved of God invade another Province which did not formerly belong to him or his Predecessours and if any one have invaded one and violently seiz'd it that he restore it Such a Church was that of Britain anciently before Austin did introduce the Papal Authority here against that Canon as by divers learned Pens hath been shewed Such was the Church of Africk as by their Canons against transmarine appeals and about all other matters doth appear It is supposed by some that Discipline was scrued yet one peg higher by setting up the Order of Patriarchs higher than Primates or Diocesan Exarchs but I find no ground of this supposal except in one case that is of the Bishop of Constantinople being set above the Bishops of Ephesus Caesarea and Heraclea which were the Primates of the three Dioceses It is a notable fib which Pope Nicholas II. telleth as Gratian citeth him That the Church of Rome instituted all Patriarchal Supremacies all Metropolitan Primacies Episcopal Sees all Ecclesiastical Orders and Dignities whatsoever Now things standing thus in Christendom we may concerning the interest of the Roman Bishop in reference to them observe 1. In all these transactions about modelling the spiritual Discipline there was no Canon established any peculiar Jurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome onely the 2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he by custome did enjoy some Authority within certain precincts of the West like to that which it did confirm to the Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt and the Countries adjacent thereto 3. The Synods of Constantinople did allow him honourary privileges or precedence before all other Bishops assigning the next place after him to the Bishop of Constantinople 4. In other privileges the Synod of Chalcedon did equall the See of Constantinople to the Roman 5. The Canons of the two First and Fourth General Synods ordering all affairs to be dispatched and causes to be determined in Metropolitan or Diocesan Synods do exclude the Roman Bishop from meddling in those concerns 6. The Popes out of a humour natural to them to like nothing but what they did themselves and which served their Interests did not relish those Canons although enacted by Synods which themselves admitted for Oecumenical That subscription of some Bishops made above sixty years since as you boast does no whit favour your persuasion a subscription never transmitted to the knowledge of the Apostolick See by your Predecessours which from its very beginning being weak and long since ruinous you endeavour now too late and unprofitably to revive So doth Pope Leo I. treat the Second Great Synod writing to Anatolius and Gregory speaking of the same says That the Roman Church has not the acts of that Synod nor receiv'd its Canons 7. Wherefore in the West they did obtain no effect so as to establish Diocesan Primacies there The Bishops of Cities which were Heads of Dioceses either did not know of these Canons which is probable because Rome did smother the notice of them or were hindred from using them the Pope having so winded himself in and got such hold among them as he would not let go 8. It indeed turned to a great advantage of the Pope in carrying on his Encroachments and enlarging his worldly Interests that the Western Churches did not as the Eastern conform themselves to the Political frame in embracing Diocesan Primacies which would have engaged and enabled them better to protect the Liberties of their Churches from Papal Invasions 9. For hence for want of a better the Pope did claim to himself a Patriarchal authority over the Western Churches pretending a right of calling to Synods of meddling in Ordinations of determining Causes by appeal to him of dictating Laws and Rules to them against the old rights of Metropolitans and the later Constitutions for Primacies Of this we have an Instance in St. Gregory where he alledging an Imperial Constitution importing that in case a Clergy-man should appeal from his Metropolitan the cause should be referred to the Archbishop and Patriarch of that Diocese who judging according to the Canons and Laws should give an end thereto doth consequentially assume an appeal from a Bishop to himself adjoyning If against these things it be said that the Bishop had neither Metropolitan nor Patriarch it is to be said that this cause was to be heard and decided by the Apostolical See which is the head of all Churches 10. Having got such advantage and as to extent stretched his Authority beyond the bounds of his sub-urbicarian precincts he did also intend it in quality far beyond the privileges by any Ecclesiastical Law granted to Patriarchs or claimed or exercised by any other Patriarch till at length by degrees he had advanced it to an exorbitant omnipotency and thereby utterly enslaved the Western Churches The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch or Primate to call a Synod of the Bishops in his Diocese and with them to determine Ecclesiastical Affairs by majority of suffrages but he doth not doe so but setting himself down in his Chair with a few of his Courtiers about him doth make Decrees and Dictates to which he pretendeth all must submit The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch to ordain Metropolitans duly elected in their Dioceses leaving Bishops to be ordained by the Metropolitans in their Provincial Synods but he will meddle in the Ordination of every Bishop suffering none to be constituted without his confirmation for which he must soundly pay The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch with the advice and consent of his Synod to make Canons for the well ordering his Diocese but he sendeth about his Decretal Letters composed by an infallible Secretary which he pretendeth must have the force of Laws equal to the highest Decrees of the whole Church The ancient Order did suppose Bishops by their Ordination sufficiently obliged to render unto their Patriarch due observance according to the Canons he being liable to be judged in a Synod for the transgression of his duty but he forceth all Bishops to take the most slavish oaths of obedience to him that can be imagined The ancient Order did appoint that Bishops accused for
voluntary deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allowed none presuming to stand in competition with them every one rather yielding place to them than to their equals The same conduct of things upon the same accounts and by reason of their possession doth continue fast in their hands so long as they do retain such advantages Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an opinion or a pretence of right thereto they are apt to assume a title and others ready to allow it Men naturally do admire such things and so are apt to defer extraordinary respect to the possessours of them Advantages of wealth and might are not onely instruments to attain but incentives spurring men to affect the getting authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours for men will not be content with bare eminency but will desire real power and sway so as to obtain their wills over others and not to be crossed by any Pope Leo had no reason to wonder that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople was not content with dry honour Men are apt to think their honour is precarious and standeth on an uncertain foundation if it be not supported with real power and therefore they will not be satisfied to let their advantages lie dead which are so easily improveable to power by inveigling some and scaring or constraining others to bear their yoke and they are able to benefit and gratifie some and thereby render them willing to submit those afterwards become serviceable to bring others under who are disaffected or refractory So the Bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem at first had onely privileges of honour but afterward they soon hooked in power Now the Roman Bishops from the beginning were eminent above all other Bishops in all kinds of advantages He was seated in the Imperial City the place of general resort thence obvious to all eyes and his name sounding in all mouths He had a most numerous opulent splendid flock and Clergy He had the greatest income from liberal oblations to dispose of He lived in greatest state and lustre He had oportunities to assist others in their business and to relieve them in their wants He necessarily thence did obtain great respect and veneration Hence in all common affairs the conduct and presidence were naturally devolved on him without contest No wonder then that after some time the Pope did arrive to some pitch of authority over poor Christians especially those who lay nearest to him improving his eminency into power and his pastoral charge into a kind of Empire according to that observation of Socrates that long before his time the Roman Episcopacy had advanced it self beyond the Priesthood into a Potentacy And the like he observeth to have happened in the Church of Alexandria upon the like grounds or by imitation of such a pattern 2. Any small power is apt to grow and spread it self a spark of it soon will expand it self into a flame it is very like to the grain of mustard seed which indeed is the least of all seeds but when it is grown it is the greatest among herbs and becometh a tree so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof Encroaching as Plutarch saith is an innate disease of Potentacies Whoever hath any pittance of it will be improving his stock having tasted the sweetness of having his will which extremely gratifieth the nature of man he will not be satisfied without having more he will take himself to be straitned by any bounds and will strive to free himself of all restraints Any pretence will serve to ground attempts of enlarging power and none will be balked For Power is bold enterprizing restless it always watcheth or often findeth never passeth opportunities of dilating it self Every accession doth beget farther advantages to amplifie it as its stock groweth so it with ease proportionably doth encrease being ever out at use As it groweth so its strength to maintain and enlarge it self doth grow it gaining more wealth more friends more associates and dependents None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and manifold disadvantages for as its adherents are deemed loyal and faithfull so its opposers are branded with the imputations of rebellion contumacy disloyalty and not succeeding in their resistence they will be undone None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its careir so that it seldom loseth by opposition and it ever gaineth by composition If it be checked at one time or in one place it will like the Sea at another season in another point break in If it is sometimes overthrown in a Battel it is seldom conquered in the War It is always on its march forward and gaineth ground for one encroachment doth countenance the next and is alledged for a precedent to authorize or justifie it It seldom moveth backward for every Successour thinketh he may justly enjoy what his Predecessour did gain or which is transmitted into his possession so that there hardly can ever be any restitution of ill-gotten power Thus have many absolute Kingdoms grown the first Chief was a Leader of Volunteers from thence he grew to be a Prince with stated Privileges after he became a Monarch invested with high Prerogatives in fine he creepeth forward to be a Grand Seigniour usurping absolute dominion so did Augustus Caesar first onely assume the style of Prince of the Senate demeaning himself modestly as such but he soon drew to himself the administration of all things and upon that foundation his Successours very suddenly did erect a boundless power If you trace the foot-steps of most Empires to the beginning you may perceive the like So the Pope when he had got a little power continually did swell it The puny pretence of the succeeding Saint Peter and the name of the Apostolical See the precedence by reason of the Imperial City the honorary Privileges allowed him by Councils the Authority deferred to him by one Synod of revising the Causes of Bishops the countenance given to him in repressing some Heresies he did improve to constitute himself Sovereign Lord of the Church 3. Spiritual power especially is of a growing nature and more especially that which deriveth from Divine Institution for it hath a great awe upon the hearts and consciences of men which engageth them to a firm and constant adherence It useth the most subtile arms which it hath always ready which needeth no time or cost to furnish which cannot be extorted from its hand so that it can never be disarmed And its weapons make strong impression because it proposeth the most effectual encouragements to its abettours and discouragements to its adversaries alluring the one with promises of God's favour and eternal happiness terrifying the other with menaces of vengeance from heaven and endless misery the which do ever quell religious superstitious weak people and often daunt men of knowledge and courage It is presumed unchangeable
judgment as this even humane affairs are not to be trusted much less the integrity of the divine Law It is not reasonable that any person should have such a Prerogative which would be an engine of mischief for thereby bearing sway in general Assemblies of Bishops he would be enabled and irresistibly tempted to domineer over the world to abuse Princes and disturb States to oppress and enslave the Church to obstruct all Reformation to enact Laws to promote and establish Errours serviceable to his Interest the which effects of such power exercised by him in the Synod of Trent and in divers other of the later General Synods experience hath declared III. If the Pope were Sovereign of the Church the Legislative power wholly or in part would belong to him so far at least that no Synod or Ecclesiastical Consistory could without his consent determine or prescribe any thing His approbation would be required to give life and validity to their Decrees He should at least have a negative so that nothing might pass against his will This is a most essential ingredient of Sovereignty and is therefore claimed by the Pope who long hath pretended that no Decrees of Synods are valid without his consent and confirmation But the Decrees made by the Holy Popes of the chief See of the Roman Church by whose authority and sanction all Synods and holy Councils are strengthened and established why do you say that you do not receive and observe them Lastly as you know nothing is accounted valid or to be receiv'd in universal Councils but what the See of Saint Peter has approv'd so on the other side whatever she alone has rejected that onely is rejected We never read of any Synod that was valid unless it were confirm'd by the Apostolick authority We trust no true Christian is now ignorant that no See is above all the rest more oblig'd to observe the Constitution of each Council which the consent of the universal Church hath approv'd than the prime See which by its authority confirms every Synod and by continued moderating preserves them according to its principality c. But this pretence as it hath no ground in the Divine Law or in any old Canon or in primitive Custom so it doth cross the sentiments and practice of Antiquity for that in ancient Synods divers things were ordained without the Pope's consent divers things against his pleasure What particular or formal confirmation did Saint Peter yield to the Assembly at Jerusalem That in some of the first General Synods he was not apprehended to have any negative voice is by the very tenour and air of things or by the little regard expressed toward him sufficiently clear There is not in the Synodical Epistles of Nice or of Sardica any mention of his confirmation Interpretatively all those Decrees may be supposed to pass without his consent which do thwart these pretences for if these are now good then of old they were known and admitted for such and being such we cannot suppose the Pope willingly to have consented in derogation to them Wherefore the Nicene Canons establishing Ecclesiastical administrations without regard to him and in authority equalling other Metropolitans with him may be supposed to pass without his consent The Canons of the Second General Council and of all others confirming those as also the Canons of all Synods which advanced the See of Constantinople his Rival for Authority above its former state first to a proximity in Order then to an equality of Privileges with the See of Rome may as plainly contrary to his interest and spirit be supposed to pass without his consent And so divers Popes have affirmed if we may believe Pope Leo as I suppose the Canons of the Second Council were not transmitted to Rome they did therefore pass and obtain in practice of the Catholick Church without its consent or knowledge Pope Gregory I. saith that the Roman Church did not admit them wherein it plainly discorded with the Catholick Church which with all reverence did receive and hold them and in despight to the Canon of that Synod advancing the Royal City to that eminency Pope Gelasius I. would not admit it for so much as a Metropolitan See O proud insolency O contentious frowardness O rebellious contumacy against the Catholick Church and its peace Such was the humour of that See to allow nothing which did not sute with the interest of its Ambition But farther divers Synodical Decrees did pass expresly against the Pope's mind and will I pass over those at Tyre at Antioch at Ariminum at Constantinople in divers places of the East the which do yet evince that commonly there was no such Opinion entertained of this privilege belonging to the Pope and shall instance onely in General Synods In the Synod of Chalcedon equal privileges were assigned to the Bishop of Constantinople as the Bishop of Rome had this with a general concurrence was decreed and subscribed although the Pope's Legates did earnestly resist clamour and protest against it The Imperial Commissioners and all the Bishops not understanding or not allowing the Pope's negative voice And whereas Pope Leo moved with a jealousie that he who thus had obtained an equal rank with him should aspire to get above him did fiercely dispute exclaim inveigh menace against this Order striving to defeat it pretending to annull it labouring to depress the Bishop of Constantinople from that degree which both himself and his Legates in the Synod had acknowledged due to him In which endeavour divers of his Successours did imitate him Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum said I have willingly subscrib'd because I have read this Canon to the most holy Pope of Rome the Clergy of Constantinople being present and he receiv'd it Yet could not he or they accomplish their design the veneration of that Synod and consent of Christendom overbearing their opposition the Bishop of Constantinople sitting in all the succeeding General Synods in the second place without any contrast so that at length Popes were fain to acquiesce in the Bishop of Constantinople's possession of the second place in dignity among the Patriarchs In the Fifth General Synod Pope Vigilius did make a Constitution in most express terms prohibiting the condemnation of the three Chapters as they are called and the anathematization of persons deceased in peace of the Church We dare not our selves says he condemn Theodorus neither do we yield to have him condemn'd by any other and in the same Constitution he orders and decrees That nothing be said or done by any to the injury or discredit of Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus a man most approv'd in the Synod of Chalcedon and the same says he have the Decrees of the Apostolical See determined that no man pass a new judgment upon persons dead but leave them as death found them Lastly by that Constitution he specially provides that as he had before said nothing might
Bishop might alledge all having a like right and common interest to Vote in those Assemblies 3. Accordingly the dissent of other Bishops particularly of those eminent in dignity or merit is also alledged in exception which had been needless if his alone dissent had been of so very peculiar force 4. The Emperour and many other Bishops did not know of any peculiar necessity of his confirmation Again it may be objected that Popes have voided the Decrees of General Synods as did Pope Leo the Decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon concerning the Privileges of the Constantinopolitan See in these blunt words But the agreements of Bishops repugnant to the Holy Canons made at Nice your faith and piety joyning with us we make void and by the authority of the Blessed Apostle Saint Peter by a general determination we disanull and in his Epistle to those of that Synod For however vain conceit may arm it self with extorted compliances and think its wilfulness sufficiently strengthened with the name of Councils yet whatever is contrary to the Canons of the above-nam'd fathers will be weak and void Lastly in his Epistle to Maximus Bishop of Antioch he says He has such a reverence for the Nicene Canons that he will not permit or endure that what those holy fathers have determined be by any novelty violated This behaviour of Pope Leo although applauded and imitated by some of his Successours I doubt not to except against in behalf of the Synod that it was disorderly factious and arrogant proceeding indeed from ambition and jealousie the leading act of high presumption in this kind and one of the seeds of that exorbitant ambition which did at length overwhelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian Republick Yet for somewhat qualifying the business it is observable that he did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that Decree or of Decrees concerning Discipline not so much upon his authority to cross General Synods as upon the inviolable firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene Canons the which he although against the reason of things and rules of Government did presume no Synod could abrogate or alter In fine this opposition of his did prove ineffectual by the sense and practice of the Church maintaining its ground against his pretence It is an unreasonable thing that the opinion or humour of one man no wiser or better commonly than others should be preferred before the common agreement of his brethren being of the same Office and Order with him so that he should be able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their meetings and consultations when it did not square to his conceit or interest especially seeing there is not the least appearance of any right he hath to such a Privilege grounded in Holy Scripture Tradition or Custom for seeing that Scripture hath not a syllable about General Synods seeing that no Rule about them is extant in any of the first Fathers till after 300 years seeing there was not one such Council celebrated till after that time seeing in none of the First General Synods any such Canon was framed in favour of that Bishop what ground of right could the Pope have to prescribe unto them or thwart their proceedings Far more reason there is in conformity to all former Rules and Practice that he should yield to all his Brethren than that all his Brethren should submit to him and this we see to have been the judgment of the Church declared by its Practice in the cases before touched IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute Sovereignty immediately and immutably constituted by God with no terms or rules limiting it that its will declared in way of Precept Proclamations concerning the Sanction of Laws the Abrogation of them the Dispensation with them should be observed This Privilege therefore in a high strein the Pope challengeth to himself asserting to his Decrees and Sentences the force and obligation of Laws so that the body of that Canon Law whereby he pretendeth to govern the Church doth in greatest part consist of Papal Edicts or Decretal Epistles imitating the Rescripts of Emperours and bearing the same force In Gratian we have these Aphorisms from Popes concerning this their Privilege No person ought to have either the will or the power to transgress the precepts of the Apostolick See Those things which by the Apostolick See have at several times been written for the Catholick faith for sound doctrines for the various and manifold exigency of the Church and the manners of the faithfull how much rather ought they to be preferr'd in all honour and by all men altogether upon all occasions whatsoever to be reverently received Those Decretal Epistles which most holy Popes have at divers times given out from the City of Rome upon their being consulted with by divers Bishops we decree that they be received with veneration If ye have not the Decrees of the Bishops of Rome ye are to be accused of neglect and carelesness but if ye have them yet observe them not ye are to be chidden and rebuk'd for your temerity All the Sanctions of the Apostolick See are so to be understood as if confirm'd by the voice of Saint Peter himself Because the Roman Church over which by the will of Christ we do preside is proposed for a mirrour and example whatsoever it doth determine whatsoever that doth appoint is perpetually and irrefragably to be observed by all men We who according to the plenitude of our power have a right to dispense above Law or right This See that which it might doe by its sole authority it is often pleased to define by consent of its Priests But this power he doth assume and exercise merely upon Usurpation and unwarrantably having no ground for it in original right or ancient practice Originally the Church hath no other General Law-giver beside our one Lord and one Law-giver As to practice we may observe 1. Anciently before the First General Synod the Church had no other Laws beside the Divine Laws or those which were derived from the Apostles by Traditional custom or those which each Church did enact for it self in Provincial Synods or which were propagated from one Church to another by imitation and compliance or which in like manner were framed and setled Whence according to different Traditions or different reasons and circumstances of things several Churches did vary in points of Order and Discipline The Pope then could not impose his Traditions Laws or Customs upon any Church if he did attempt it he was liable to suffer a repulse as is notorious in the case when Pope Victor would although rather as a Doctour than as a Law-giver have reduced the Churches of Asia to conform with the Roman in the time of celebrating Easter wherein he found not onely stout resistence but sharp reproof In St. Cyprian's time every Bishop had a free power according to his discretion
then so expresly forbidden by the Canons as afterward Theognis and Theodorus did make Macedonius Bishop of Constantinople Theophilus of Alexandria did ordain St. Chrysostome The Egyptian Bishops surreptitiously did constitute Maximus the Cynick Philosopher Bishop of Constantinople Acacius who had as little to doe there as the Pope did thrust Eudoxius into the throne of Constantinople Meletius of Antioch did constitute St. Gregory Nazianzene to the charge of Constantinople Acacius and Patrophilus extruding Maximus did in his room constitute Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem Pope Leo doth complain of Anatolius that against the Canonical rule he had assumed to himself the Ordination of the Bishop of Antioch 2. To obviate these irregular and inconvenient proceedings having crept in upon the dissensions in Faith and especially upon occasion of Gregory Nazianzene being constituted Bishop of Constantinople by Meletius and Maximus being thrust into the same See by the Egyptians whose Party for a time the Roman Church did countenance the second General Synod did ordain that no Bishop should intermeddle about Ordinations without the bounds of his own Diocese 3. In pursuance of this Law or upon the ground of it the Pope was sometimes checked when he presumed to make a sally beyond his bounds in this or the like cases As when Pope Innocent I. did send some Bishops to Constantinople for procuring a Synod to examine the cause of St. Chrysostome those of Constantinople did cause them to be dismissed with disgrace as molesting a government beyond their bounds 4. Even in the Western parts after that the Pope had wrigled himself into most Countries there so as to obtain sway in their transactions yet he in divers places did not meddle in Ordinations we do not says Pope Leo I. arrogate to our selves a power of ordaining in your Provinces Even in some parts of Italy it self the Pope did not confirm Bishops till the times of Pope Nicholas I. as may be collected from the submission then of the Bishop of Ravenna to that condition that he should have no power to consecrate Bishops canonically elected in the Regio Flaminia unless it were granted him by letters from the Apostolick See And it was not without great opposition and struggling that he got that power other-where than in his original precincts or where the juncture of things did afford him special advantage 5. If Examples would avail to determine Right there are more and more clear Instances of Emperours interposing in the Constitution of Bishops than of Popes As they had ground in Reason and authority in Holy Scripture And Zadock the Priest did the King put in the room of Abiathar Constantine did interpose at the designation of a Bishop at Antioch in the room of Eustathius Upon Gregory Nazianzene's recess from Constantinople Theodosius that excellent Emperour who would not have infringed right did command the Bishops present to write in paper the names of those whom each did approve worthy to be ordained and reserved to himself the choice of one and accordingly they obeying he out of all that were nominated did elect Nectarius Constantius did deliver the See of Constantinople to Eusebius Nicomediensis Constantius was angry with Macedonius because he was ordain'd without his licence He rejecting Eleusius and Sylvanus did order other to be substituted in their places When before St. Ambrose the See of Milain was vacant a Synod of Bishops there did intreat the Emperour to declare one Flavianus said to the Emperour Theodosius Give forsooth O King the See of Antioch to whom you shall think good The Emperour did call Nestorius from Antioch to the See of Constantinople and he was saith Vincentius Lir. elected by the Emperour's judgment The favour of Justinian did advance Menas to the See of Constantinoâ—â—â— and the same did prefer Eutychius thereto He did put in Pope Vigilius In Spain the Kings had the Election of Bishops by the Decrees of the Council of Toledo That the Emperour Charles did use to confirm Bishops Pope John VIII doth testifie reproving the Archbishop of Virdun for rejecting a Bishop whom the Clergy and people of the City had chosen and the Emperour Charles had confirmed by his consent When Macarius Bishop of Antioch for Monothelitism was deposed in the sixth Synod the Bishops under that throne did request the Presidents of the Synod to suggest another to the Emperour to be substituted in his room In Gratian there are divers passages wherein Popes declared that they could not ordain Bishops to Churches even in Italy without the Emperour's leave and licence As indeed there are also in later times other Decrees made by Popes of another kidney or in other junctures of affairs which forbid Princes to meddle in the elections of Bishops as in the seventh Synod and in the eighth Synod as they call it upon occasion of Photius being placed in the See of Constantinople by the power of the Court. And that of Pope Nicholas I. By which discordance in practice we may see the consistence and stability of Doctrine and Practice in the Roman Church The Emperours for a long time did enjoy the privilege of constituting or confirming the Popes for says Platina in the Life of Pelagius II. nothing was then done by the Clergy in electing a Pope unless the Emperour approv'd the election He did confirm P. Gregory I. and P. Agatho Pope Adrian with his whole Synod did deliver to Charles the Great the right and power of electing the Pope and ordaining the Apostolick See He moreover defined that Archbishops and Bishops in every Province should receive investiture from him and that if a Bishop were not commended and invested by the King he should be consecrated by none and whoever should act against this Decree him he did noose in the band of anathema The like privilege did Pope Leo VIII attribute to the Emperour Otho I. We give him says he for ever power to ordain a successour and Bishop of the chief Apostolick See and change Archbishops c. And Platina in his Life says That being weary of the inconstancy of the Romans he transferr'd all authority to chuse a Pope from the Clergy and people of Rome to the Emperour Now I pray if this power of confirming Bishops do by Divine Institution belong to the Pope how could he part with it or transfer it on others Is not this a plain renunciation in Popes of their Divine pretence 6. General Synods by an authority paramount have assumed to themselves the constitution and confirmation of Bishops So the Second General Synod did confirm the Ordination of Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople and of Flavianus Bishop of Antioch this Ordination say they the Synod generally have admitted although the Roman Church did not approve the Ordination of Nectarius and for a long time after did oppose that of Flavianus So the Fifth Synod it seemeth did confirm the Ordination of
as well in the places and bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as of Secular Empire Wherefore Saint Peter's Monarchy reason requiring might be cantonized into divers spiritual Supremacies and as other Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions have been chopp'd and chang'd enlarged or diminished removed and extinguished so might that of the Roman Bishop The Pope cannot retain power in any State against the will of the Prince he is not bound to suffer correspondences with Foreigners especially such who apparently have interests contrary to his honour and the good of his people 5. Especially that might be done if the continuance of such a Jurisdiction should prove abominably corrupt or intolerably grievous to the Church 6. That power is defectible which according to the nature and course of things doth sometime fail But the Papal Succession hath often been interrupted by contingencies of Sedition Schism Intrusion Simoniacal Election Deposition c. as before shewed and is often interrupted by Vacancies from the death of the Incumbents 7. If leaving their dubious and false suppositions concerning Divine Institution Succession to Saint Peter c. we consider the truth of the case and indeed the more grounded plea of the Pope that Papal preeminence was obtained by the wealth and dignity of the Roman City and by the collation or countenance of the Imperial authority then by the defect of such advantages it may cease or be taken away for when Rome hath ceased to be the Capital City the Pope may cease to be Head of the Church When the Civil powers which have succeeded the Imperial each in its respective Territory are no less absolute than it they may take it away if they judge it fit for whatever power was granted by humane Authority by the same may be revoked and what the Emperour could have done each Sovereign power now may doe for it self An indefectible power cannot be settled by man because there is no power ever extant at one time greater than there is at another so that whatever power one may raise the other may demolish there being no bounds whereby the present time may bind all posterity However no humane Law can exempt any Constitution from the providence of God which at pleasure can dissolve whatever man hath framed And if the Pope were devested of all adventitious power obtained by humane means he would be left very bare and hardly would take it worth his while to contend for Jurisdiction 8. However or whencesoever the Pope had his Authority yet it may be forfeited by defects and defaults incurred by him If the Pope doth encroach on the rights and liberties of others usurping a lawless domination beyond reason and measure they may in their own defence be forced to reject him and shake off his yoke If he will not be content to govern otherwise than by infringing the Sacred Laws and trampling down the inviolable Privileges of the Churches either granted by Christ or established by the Sanctions of General Synods he thereby depriveth himself of all Authority because it cannot be admitted upon tolerable terms without greater wrong of many others whose right out-weigheth his and without great mischief to the Church the good of which is to be preferred before his private advantage This was the Maxime of a great Pope a great stickler for his own dignity for when the Bishop of Constantinople was advanced by a General Synod above his ancient pitch of dignity that Pope opposing him did say that whoever doth affect more than his due doth lose that which properly belonged to him the which Rule if true in regard to another's case may be applied to the Pope for with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged and with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again On such a supposition of the Papal encroachment we may return his words upon him It is too proud and immoderate a thing to stretch beyond ones bounds and in contempt of antiquity to be willing to invade other mens right and to oppose the Primacies of so many Metropolitans on purpose to advance the dignity of one For the privileges of Churches being instituted by the Canons of the holy Fathers and fixt by the Decrees of the venerable Synod of Nice cannot be pluckt up by any wicked attempt nor altered by any innovation Far be it from me that I should in any Church infringe the Decrees of our Ancestours made in favour of my Fellow-priests for I do my self injury if I disturb the rights of my brethren The Pope surely according to any ground of Scripture or Tradition or ancient Law hath no Title to greater Principality in the Church than the Duke of Venice hath in that State Now if the Duke of Venice in prejudice to the publick right and liberty should attempt to stretch his power to an absoluteness of command or much beyond the bounds allowed him by the constitution of that Common-wealth he would thereby surely forfeit his Supremacy such as it is and afford cause to the State of rejecting him the like occasion would the Pope give to the Church by the like demeanour 9. The Pope by departing from the Doctrine and Practice of Saint Peter would forfeit his Title of Successour to him for in such a case no succession in place or in name could preserve it The Popes themselves had swerved and degenerated from the example of Peter They are not the Sons of the Saints who hold the places of the Saints but they that doe their works Which place is rased out of St. Hierome They have not the inheritance of Peter who have not the faith of Peter which they tear asunder by ungodly division So Gregory Nazianzene saith of Athanasius that he was Successour of Mark no less in piety than presidency the which we must suppose to be properly succession otherwise the Mufti of Constantinople is Successour to St. Andrew of St. Chrysostome c. the Mufti of Jerusalem to St. James If then the Bishop of Rome instead of teaching Christian Doctrine doth propagate Errours contrary to it If instead of guiding into Truth and Godliness he seduceth into Falshood and Impiety If instead of declaring and pressing the Laws of God he delivereth and imposeth Precepts opposite prejudicial destructive of God's Laws If instead of promoting genuine Piety he doth in some instances violently oppose it If instead of maintaining true Religion he doth pervert and corrupt it by bold Defalcations by Superstitious additions by Foul mixtures and alloys If he coineth new Creeds Articles of Faith new Scriptures new Sacraments new Rules of Life obtruding them on the Consciences of Christians If he conformeth the Doctrines of Christianity to the Interests of his Pomp and Profit making gain godliness If he prescribe Vain Profane Superstitious ways of Worship turning Devotion into Foppery and Pageantry If instead of preserving Order and Peace he fomenteth Discords and Factions in the Church being a Make-bate and Incendiary among
be disposed to live innocently quietly and lovingly together so that they should not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain for that would be a Duty incumbent on the Disciples of this Institution which all good Christians would observe The Evangelical Covenant as it doth ally us to God so it doth confederate us together The Sacraments of this Covenant are also symbols of Peace and Amity between those who undertake it Of Baptism it is said that so many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and thence Ye are all one in Christ Jesus All in one Spirit have been baptized into one Body And in the Eucharist by partaking of one individual Food they are transmuted into one Body and Substance We saith Saint Paul being many are one bread one body for all of us do partake of one bread By which Sacraments also our people appears to be united for as many grains collected and ground and mingled together make one bread so in Christ who is the bread of heaven we may know our selves to be one body that our company or number be conjoined and united together With us there is both one Church and one mind and undivided concord Let us hold the peace of the Catholick Church in the unity of concord The bond of concord remaining and the individual Sacrament of the Catholick Church continuing c. He therefore that keeps neither the unity of the Spirit nor the conjunction of Peace and separates himself from the bond of the Church and the college or society of Priests can have neither the power of a Bishop nor the honour Thus in general But particularly All Christians should assist one another in the common Defence of Truth Piety and Peace when they are assaulted in the Propagation of the Faith and Enlargment of the Church which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contend together for the faith of the Gospel to be good souldiers of Christ warring the good warfare striving for the Faith once delivered to the Saints Hence if any where any Heresie or bad doctrine should arise all Christians should be ready to declare against it that it may not infect or spread a doubt arising as in the case of celebrating Easter They all with one consent declared by letters the Decree of the Church to all every where Especially the Pastours of the Churches are obliged with consent to oppose it While we laboured here and withstood the force of envy with the whole strength of our faith your Speech assisted us very much Thus did the Bishops of several Churches meet to suppress the Heresie of P. Samosatenus This was the ground of most Synods So they who afterward in all places and several ways were gathered together against the innovations of Hereticks gave their common opinion in behalf of the faith as being of one mind what they had approved among themselves in a brotherly way that they clearly transferred to those who were absent and they who at the Council of Sardis had earnestly contended against the remainders of Arius sent their judgment to those of the Eastern Churches and they who had discovered the infection of Apolinarius made their opinions known to the Western If any Dissention or Faction doth arise in any Church other Churches upon notice thereof should yield their aid to quench and suppress it countenancing the peaceable checking and disavowing the factious Thus did St. Cyprian help to discountenance and quash the Novatian Schism Thus when the Oriental Churches did labour under the Arian Faction and Dissentions between the Catholicks St. Basil with other Orthodox Bishops consorting with him did write to the Western Bishops of Italy and France to yield their succour For this my brother we must earnestly endeavour and ought to endeavour to have a care as much as in us lies to hold the Vnity delivered to us from the Lord and by the Apostles whose successours we are and what lies in us c. All Christians should be ready when opportunity doth invite to admit one another to conjunction in offices of Piety and Charity in Prayer in communion of the Eucharist in brotherly conversation and pious conference for edification or advice So that he who flies and avoids communion with us you in your prudence may know that such a man breaks himself off from the whole Church Saint Chrysostome doth complain of Epiphanius Then when he came to the great and holy City Constantinople he came not out into the Congregation according to custome and the ancient manner he joined not himself with us nor communicated with us in the Word and Prayer and the Holy Communion c. So Polycarp being at Rome did communicate with P. Anicetus If Dissention arise between divers Churches another may interpose to reconcile them as did the Church of Carthage between that of Rome and Alexandria If any Bishop were exceedingly negligent in the discharge of his Office to the common damage of Truth and Piety his neighbour Bishops might admonish him thereto and if he should not reform might deprive him of Communion All Christians should hold friendly correspondence as occasion doth serve and as it is usefull to signifie consent in Faith to recommend Persons to foster Charity to convey Succour and Advice to perform all good offices of Amity and Peace Siricius who is our companion and fellow-labourer with whom the whole world by mutual commerce of canonical or communicatory Letters agree together with us in one common Society The Catholick Church being one body 't is consequent thereto that we write and signifie one to another c. In cases of doubt or difficulty one Church should have recourse to others for Advice and any Church should yield it Both common charity and reason requires most dear brethren that we conceal nothing from your knowledge of those things which are done among us that so there may be common advice taken by us concerning the most usefull way of ordering Ecclesiastical affairs One Church should acquaint others of any extraordinary transaction concerning the common Faith or Discipline requesting their approbation and countenance Thus did the Eastern Churches give account to all other Churches of their proceedings against P. Samosatenus Which letters are sent all the world over and brought to the notice of all the Churches and of all the Brethren When any Church or any Pastour was oppressed or injured he might have recourse to other Churches for their assistence in order to relief Let him who is cast out have power to apply himself to the neighbouring Bishops that his cause may be carefully heard and discussed Thus did Athanasius being overborn and expelled from his See by the Arian faction goe for refuge to the Church of Rome St. Chrysostome had recourse to the Bishop of Rome and to those of the West as also to the Bishop
no more than Humane Thus in effect we see that it hath succeeded from the Pretence of this Unity the which hath indeed transformed the Church into a mere worldly State wherein the Monarch beareth the garb of an Emperour in external splendour surpassing all worldly Princes crowned with a triple Crown He assumeth the most haughty Titles of Our most holy Lord the Vicar general of Christ c. and he suffereth men to call him the Monarch of Kings c. He hath Respects paid him like to which no Potentate doth assume having his Feet kissed riding upon the backs of men letting Princes hold his Stirrup and lead his Horse He hath a Court and is attended with a train of Courtiers surpassing in State and claiming Precedence to the Peers of any Kingdom He is encompassed with armed Guards He hath a vast Revenue supplied by Tributes and Imposts sore and grievous the exaction of which hath made divers Nations of Christendom to groan most lamentably He hath raised numberless Wars and Commotions for the promotion and advancement of his Interests He administreth things with all depth of Policy to advance his Designs He hath enacted Volumes of Laws and Decrees to which Obedience is exacted with rigour and forcible constraint He draweth grist from all Parts to his Courts of Judgment wherein all the formalities of suspence all the tricks of squeezing money c. are practised to the great trouble and charge of Parties concerned Briefly it is plain that he doth exercise the proudest mightiest subtlest Domination that ever was over Christians 8. The Union of the whole Church in one Body under one Government or Sovereign Authority would be inconvenient and hurtfull prejudicial to the main designs of Christianity destructive to the Welfare and Peace of Mankind in many respects This we have shewed particularly concerning the Pretence of the Papacy and those Discourses being applicable to any like Universal Authority perhaps with more advantage Monarchy being less subject to abuse than other ways of Government I shall forbear to say more 9. Such an Union is of no need would be of small use or would doe little good in balance to the great Mischiefs and Inconveniences which it would produce This Point also we have declared in regard to the Papacy and we might say the same concerning any other like Authority substituted thereto 10. Such a Connexion of Churches is not any-wise needfull or expedient to the Design of Christianity which is to reduce Mankind to the Knowledge Love and Reverence of God to a just and loving Conversation together to the practice of Sobriety Temperance Purity Meekness and all other Vertues all which things may be compassed without forming men into such a Policy It is expedient there should be particular Societies in which men may concur in worshipping God and promoting that Design by instructing and provoking one another to good practice in a regular decent and orderly way It is convenient that the Subjects of each temporal Sovereignty should live as in a civil so in a spiritual Uniformity in order to the preservation of Goodwill and Peace among them for that Neighbours differing in opinion and fashions of practice will be apt to contend each for his way and thence to disaffect one another for the beauty and pleasant harmony of Agreement in Divine things for the more commodious succour and defence of Truth and Piety by unanimous concurrence But that all the World should be so joined is needless and will be apt to produce more mischief than benefit 11. The Church in the Scripture sense hath ever continued One and will ever continue so notwithstanding that it hath not had this political Unity 12. It is in fact apparent that Churches have not been thus united which yet have continued Catholick and Christian. It were great no less folly than uncharitableness to say that the Greek Church hath been none There is no Church that hath in effect less reason than that of Rome to prescribe to others 13. The Reasons alledged in proof of such an Unity are insufficient and inconcluding the which with great diligence although not with like perspicuity advanced by a late Divine of great repute and collected out of his Writings with some care are those which briefly proposed do follow together with Answers declaring their invalidity Arg. I. The name Church is attributed to the whole body of Christians which implieth Unity Answ. This indeed doth imply an Unity of the Church but determineth not the kind or ground thereof there being several kinds of Unity one of those which we have touched or several or all of them may suffice to ground that comprehensive Appellation Arg. II. Our Creeds do import the belief of such an Unity for in the Apostolical we profess to believe the Holy Catholick Church in the Constantinopolitan the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church Answ. 1. The most ancient Summaries of Christian Faith extant in the first Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian c. do not contain this Point The word Catholick was not originally in the Apostolical or Roman Creed but was added after Ruffin and Saint Austin's time This Article was inserted into the Creeds upon the rise of Heresies and Schisms to discountenance and disengage from them Answ. 2. We do avow a Catholick Church in many respects One wherefore not the Unity of the Church but the Kind and Manner of Unity being in question the Creed doth not oppose what we say nor can with reason be alledged for the special kind of Unity which is pretended Answ. 3. That the Unity mentioned in the Constantinopolitan Creed is such as our Adversaries contend for of external Policy is precariously assumed and relieth onely upon their interpretation obtruded on us Answ. 4. The genuine meaning of that Article may reasonably be deemed this That we profess our adhering to the Body of Christians which diffused over the World doth retain the Faith taught the Discipline setled the Practices appointed by our Lord and his Apostles that we maintain general Charity toward all good Christians that we are ready to entertain communion in Holy Offices with all such that we are willing to observe the Laws and Orders established by Authority or Consent of the Churches for maintenance of Truth Order and Peace that we renounce all heretical doctrines all disorderly practices all conspiracy with any factious combinations of people Answ. 5. That this is the meaning of the Article may sufficiently appear from the reason and occasion of introducing it which was to secure the Truth of Christian Doctrine the Authority of Ecclesiastical Discipline and the common Peace of the Church according to the Discourses and Arguments of the Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian St. Austin Vincentius Lirinensis the which do plainly countenance our Interpretation Answ. 6. It is not reasonable to interpret the Article so as will not consist with the State of the Church in the Apostolical and
most primitive ages when evidently there was no such a political Conjunction of Christians Arg. III. The Apostles delivered one Rule of Faith to all Churches the embracing and profession whereof celebrated in Baptism was a necessary condition to the admission into the Church and to continuance therein therefore Christians are combined together in one political Body Answ. 1. The Consequence is very weak for from the Antecedent it can onely be inferred that according to the Sentiment of the Ancients all Christians should consent in one Faith which Unity we avow and who denieth Answ. 2. By like reason all Mankind must be united in one political Body because all men are bound to agree in what the Light of nature discovereth to be true and good or because the Principles of natural Religion Justice and Humanity are common to all Arg. IV. God hath granted to the Church certain Powers and Rights as Jura Majestatis namely the Power of the Keys to admit into to exclude from the Kingdom of Heaven a Power to enact Laws for maintenance of its Order and Peace for its Edification and Welfare a Power to correct and excommunicate Offenders a Power to hold Assemblies for God's Service a Power to ordain Governours and Pastours Answ. 1. These Powers are granted to the Church because granted to each particular Church or distinct Society of Christians not to the whole as such or distinct from the Parts Answ. 2. It is evident that by virtue of such Grants particular Churches do exercise those Powers and it is impossible to infer more from them than a Justification of their Practice Answ. 3. St. Cyprian often from that common Grant doth infer the Right of exercising Discipline in each particular Church which Inference would not be good but upon our Supposition nor indeed otherwise would any particular Church have ground for its Authority Answ. 4. God hath granted the like Rights to all Princes and States but doth it thence follow that all Kingdoms and States must be united in one single Regiment the Consequence is just the same as in our Case Arg. V. All Churches were tied to observe the same Laws or Rules of Practice the same Orders of Discipline and Customes therefore all do make one Corporation Answ. 1. That All Churches are bound to observe the same Divine Institutions doth argue onely an Unity of relation to the same Heavenly King or a specifical Unity and Similitude of Policy the which we do avow Answ. 2. We do also acknowledge it convenient and decent that all Churches in principal Observances introduced by humane prudence should agree so near as may be an Uniformity in such things representing and preserving Unity of Faith of Charity of Peace Whence the Governours of the primitive Church did endeavour such an Uniformity as the Fathers of Nice profess in the Canon forbidding of Genu-flexion on Lord's days and in the days of Pentecost Answ. 3. Yet doth not such an agreement or attempt at it infer a political Unity no more than when all men by virtue of a primitive general Tradition were tied to offer Sacrifices and Oblations to God that Consideration might argue all men to have been under the same Government or no more than the usual Agreement of neighbour Nations in divers fashions doth conclude such an Unity Answ. 4. In divers Customes and Observances several Churches did vary with allowance which doth rather infer a difference of Polity than agreement in other Observances doth argue an Unity thereof Answ. 5. St. Cyprian doth affirm that in such matters every Bishop had a Power to use his own discretion without being obliged to comply with others Arg. VI. The Jewish Church was one Corporation and in correspondence thereto the Christian Church should be such Answ. 1. As the Christian Church doth in some things correspond to that of the Jews so it differeth in others being designed to excell it wherefore this argumentation cannot be valid and may as well be employed for our Opinion as against it Answ. 2. In like manner it may be argued that all Christians should annually meet in one place that all Christians should have one Arch-priest on Earth that we should all be subject to one temporal Jurisdiction that we should all speak one Language c. Answ. 3. There is a great difference in the case for the Israelites were one small Nation which conveniently might be embodied but the Christian Church should consist of all Nations which rendreth Correspondence in this particular unpracticable at least without great inconvenience Answ. 4. Before the Law Christian Religion and consequently a Christian Church did in substance subsist but what Unity of Government was there then Answ. 5. The Temporal Union of the Jews might onely figure the spiritual Unity of Christians in Faith Charity and Peace Arg. VII All Ecclesiastical Power was derived from the same Fountains by succession from the Apostles therefore the Church was one political Body Answ. 1. Thence we may rather infer that Churches are not so united because the Founders of them were several Persons endowed with co-ordinate and equal Power Answ. 2. The Apostles did in several Churches constitute Bishops independent from each other and the like may be now either by succession from those or by the constitutions of humane prudence according to emergences of occasion and circumstances of things Answ. 3. Divers Churches were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all were so according to Saint Cyprian Answ. 4. All temporal power is derived from Adam and the Patriarchs ancient Fathers of families Doth it thence follow that all the World must be under one secular Government Arg. VIII All Churches did exercise a Power of Excommunication or of excluding Hereticks Schismaticks disorderly and scandalous people Answ. 1. Each Church was vested with this Power this doth therefore onely infer a resemblance of several Churches in Discipline which we avow Answ. 2. This argueth that all Churches took themselves to be obliged to preserve the same Faith to exercise Charity and Peace to maintain the like Holiness of conversation What then Do we deny this Answ. 3. All Kingdoms and States do punish Offenders against Reason and Justice do banish seditious and disorderly persons do uphold the Principles and Practice of common Honesty and Morality Doth it thence follow that all Nations must come under one civil Government Arg. IX All Churches did maintain entercourse and commerce with each other by formed communicatory pacificatory commendatory synodical Epistles Answ. 1. This doth signifie that the Churches did by Admonition Advice c. help one another in maintenance of the common Faith did endeavour to preserve Charity Friendship and Peace this is all which thence may be concluded Answ. 2. Secular Princes are wont to send Ambassadours and Envoys with Letters and Instructions for settlement of Correspondence and preserving Peace they sometimes do recommend their Subjects to other Princes they expect
fell to proposing about making an abode there not knowing what he said so brisk was he in imagination and speech Upon the good Womans report that our Lord was risen from the dead he first ran to the Sepulchre and so as Saint Paul implieth did obtain the first sight of our Lord after the Resurrection such was his zeal and activity upon all occasions At the Consultation about supplying the place of Judas he rose up proposed and pressed the matter At the Convention of the Apostles and Elders about resolving the debate concerning observance of Mosaical Institutions he first rose up and declared his sense In the Promulgation of the Gospel and Defence thereof before the Jewish Rulers he did assume the conduct and constantly took upon him to be the Speaker the rest standing by him implying assent and ready to avow his word Peter saith Saint Luke standing with the rest lift up his voice and said unto them so did they utter a common voice saith St. Chrys. and he was the mouth of all That in affection to our Lord and zeal for his service Saint Peter had some advantage over the rest that Question Simon Peter dost thou love me more than these may seem to imply although the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bear other interpretations whereby the seeming invidiousness of the Question according to that sense will be removed However that he had a singular zeal for promoting our Lord's service and propagation of the Gospel therein outshining the rest seemeth manifest in the History and may be inferred from the peculiar regard our Lord apparently did shew to him Upon these Premises we may well admit that Saint Peter had a Primacy of Worth or that in personal accomplishments he was most eminent among the twelve Apostles although afterward there did spring up one who hardly in any of these respects would yield to him who could confidently say that he did not come behind the very chief Apostles and of whom St. Ambrose saith Neither was Paul inferiour to Peter being well to be compar'd even to the first and second to none and St. Chrysostome For what was greater than Peter and what equal to Paul This is the Primacy which Eusebius attributeth to him when he calleth him the excellent and great Apostle who for his virtue was the proloquutor of all the rest II. As to a Primacy of Repute which Saint Paul meaneth when he speaketh of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those which had a special reputation of those who seemed to be Pillars of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the supereminent Apostles this advantage cannot be refused him being a necessary consequent of those eminent qualities resplendent in him and of the illustrious performances atchieved by him beyond the rest This may be inferred from that advantageous renown which he hath had propagated from the beginning to all posterity This at least those elogies of the Fathers styling him the Chief Prince Head of the Apostles do signifie This also may be collected from his being so constantly ranked in the first place before the rest of his Brethren III. As to a Primacy of Order or bare Dignity importing that commonly in all meetings and proceedings the other Apostles did yield him the precedence the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or privilege of speaking first whether in propounding matters for debate or in delivering his advice the conduct and moderation of affairs that this was stated on him may be questioned for that this were a kind of womanish privilege and that it doth not seem to befit the gravity of such persons or their condition and circumstances to stand upon ceremonies of respect for that also our Lord's Rules do seem to exclude all semblance of ambition all kinds of inequality and distance between his Apostles for that this practice doth not seem constantly and thoroughly to agree to his being endowed with this advantage especially seeing all that practice which favoureth it may fairly be assigned to other causes for that also the Fathers Authority if that be objected as a main argument of such a Primacy in points of this nature not bordering on essentials of Faith is of no great strength they in such cases speaking out of their own ingeny and conjecture and commonly indulging their imaginations no less freely than other men But yet this Primacy may be granted as probable upon divers accounts of use and convenience it might be usefull to preserve order and to promote expedition or to prevent confusion distraction and dilatory obstruction in the management of things yea to maintain concord and to exclude that ambition or affectation to be formost which is natural to men For seeing all could not goe speak or act first all could not guide affairs it was expedient that one should be ready to undertake it knowing his cue See saith St. Chrysostome noting on Act. 2.14 where Saint Peter speaketh for the rest the concord of the Apostles they yield unto him the speech for they could not all speak and One saith St. Hierome is chosen among the twelve that a head being appointed an occasion of Schism might be removed St. Cyprian hath a reason for it somewhat more subtile and mystical supposing our Lord did confer on him a preference of this kind to his Brethren who otherwise in power and authority were equal to him that he might intimate and recommend unity to us and the other African Doctours Optatus and St. Austin do commonly harp on the same notion I can discern little solidity in this conceit and as little harm However supposing this Primacy at least in respect to the Fathers who generally seem to countenance it divers probable reasons may be assigned why it should especially be conferred on Saint Peter 1. It is probable that Saint Peter was first in standing among the Apostles I mean not that he was the first Disciple or first converted to Faith in Christ but first called to the Apostolical Office or first nominated by our Lord when out of all his Disciples he chose twelve and called them Apostles Simon whom he called Peter and Andrew his Brother He was one of the first Believers at large he was perhaps the first that distinctly believed our Lord's Divinity he was probably the very first Apostle as the fittest Person in our Lord's eye for that employment He saith St. Hilary did first believe and is the Prince or first man of the Apostleship He saith St. Cyprian was the first whom the Lord chose He saith St. Basil was by judgment preferred before all the Disciples He by other Ancients is called the first-fruits of the Apostles And according to this sense St. Hierome I suppose doth call him and his Brother Andrew Principes Apostolorum that is according to frequent usage of the word Princeps in Latin the first of the Apostles So that as in divers Churches perhaps when
time was in all anciently priority in ordination did ground a right to precedence as it is in ours with some exception so might Saint Peter upon this account of being first ordained Apostle obtain such a Primacy 2. Saint Peter also might be the first in age which among Persons otherwise equal is a fair ground of preference for he was a married man and that before he was called as is intimated in Saint Luke and may be inferred from hence that he would not have married after that he had left all and devoted himself to follow our Lord. Upon which account of age St. Hierome did suppose that he was preferred before the beloved Disciple why saith he was not Saint John elected being a Batchelour it was deferred to age because Peter was elder that a youth and almost a boy might not be preferred before men of good age I know that Epiphanius affirmeth St. Andrew to have been the elder Brother but it doth not appear whether he saith it from conjecture or upon any other ground And his Authority although we should suppose it bottomed on tradition is not great tradition it self in such matters being very slippery and often one tradition crossing another 3. The most eminent qualifications of Saint Peter such as we before described might procure to him this advantage They might breed in him an honest confidence pushing him forward on all occasions to assume the former place and thence by custom to possess it for qui sibi fidit Dux regit examen it being in all action as in walking where he that naturally is most vigorous and active doth goe before the rest They might induce others to a voluntary concession thereof for to those who indisputably do excell in good qualities or abilities honest and meek persons easily will yield precedence especially on occasions of publick concernment wherein it is expedient that the best qualified persons should be first seen They probably might also move our Lord himself to settle or at least to insinuate this order assigning the first place to him whom he knew most willing to serve him and most able to lead on the rest in his service It is indeed observable that upon all occasions our Lord signified a particular respect to him before the rest of his Collegues for to him more frequently than to any of them he directed his discourse unto him by a kind of anticipation he granted or promised those gifts and privileges which he meant to confer on them all Him he did assume as Spectatour and Witness of his glorious Transfiguration Him he picked out as Companion and Attendant on him in his grievous Agony His Feet he first washed to him he did first discover himself after his Resurrection as Saint Paul implieth and with him then he did entertain most discourse in especial manner recommending to him the pastoral care of his Church by which manner of proceeding our Lord may seem to have constituted Saint Peter the first in order among the Apostles or sufficiently to have hinted his mind for their direction admonishing them by his example to render unto him a special deference 4. The Fathers commonly do attribute his priority to the merit of his Faith and Confession wherein he did outstrip his Brethren He obtained supereminent glory by the confession of his blessed faith saith St. Hilary Because he alone of all the rest professeth his love John 21. therefore he is preferred above all saith St. Ambrose 5. Constantly in all the Catalogues of the Apostles Saint Peter's name is set in the front and when actions are reported in which he was concerned jointly with others he is usually mentioned first which seemeth not done without carefull design or special reason Upon such grounds it may be reasonable to allow Saint Peter a primacy of order such an one as the Ring-leader hath in a Dance as the primipilar Centurion had in the Legion or the Prince of the Senate had there in the Roman State at least as among Earls Baronets c. and others co-ordinate in degree yet one hath a precedence of the rest IV. As to a Primacy importing Superiority in power command or jurisdiction this by the Roman Party is asserted to Saint Peter but we have great reason to deny it upon the following considerations 1. For such a Power being of so great importance it was needfull that a Commission from God its Founder should be granted in down-right and perspicuous terms that no man concerned in duty grounded thereon might have any doubt of it or excuse for boggling at it it was necessary not onely for the Apostles to bind and warrant their Obedience but also for us because it is made the sole foundation of a like duty incumbent on us which we cannot heartily discharge without being assured of our obligation thereto by clear revelation or promulgation of God's will in the Holy Scripture for it was of old a current and ever will be a true Rule which St. Austin in one case thus expresseth I do believe that also on this side there would be most clear authority of the Divine Oracles if a man could not be ignorant of it without damage of his salvation and Lactantius thus Those things can have no foundation or firmness which are not sustained by any Oracle of God's word But apparently no such Commission is extant in Scripture the allegations for it being as we shall hereafter shew no-wise clear nor probably expressive of any such Authority granted by God but on the contrary divers clearer testimonies are producible derogating from it 2. If so illustrious an Office was instituted by our Saviour it is strange that no-where in the Evangelical or Apostolical History wherein divers acts and passages of smaller moment are recorded there should be any express mention of that Institution there being not onely much reason for such a report but many pat occasions for it The time when Saint Peter was vested with that Authority the manner and circumstances of his Installment therein the nature rules and limits of such an Office had surely well deserved to have been noted among other occurrences relating to our Faith and Discipline by the Holy Evangelists no one of them in all probability could have forborn punctually to relate a matter of so great consequence as the settlement of a Monarch in God's Church and a Sovereign of the Apostolical College from whom so eminent Authority was to be derived to all posterity for compliance wherewith the whole Church for ever must be accountable particularly it is not credible that Saint Luke should quite slip over so notable a passage who had as he telleth us attained a perfect understanding of all things and had undertaken to write in order the things that were surely believed among Christians in his time of which things this if any was one of the most considerable The time of his receiving Institution to such