The triple cord or a treatise proving the truth of the Roman religion, by sacred scriptures taken in the literall sense expounded by ancient fathers. interpreted by Protestant writers. With a discouery of sundry subtile sleights vsed by Protestants, for euading the force of strongest arguments, taken from cleerest texts of the foresaid scriptures.

CHAP. VIII. The true State of the Question, concerning S. Peters Primacy.

Whether Christ our Sauiour ordayned S. Peter Supreme Head or Pastour, not only of the Apostles, but of the Vniuersall Church. SECT. I.

Catholike Doctrine.

HAVING hitherto proued not the Scri∣pture alone, but the Church of Christ, to be our absolute Iudge of all Contro∣uersies in Religion, it seemeth necessary to find out the Head of the said Church, and to inquire somthing into his power & authority: concerning which in the first Nicene Councell it is sayd,(1) He who houldeth the Sea of Rome, is the head and chiefe of all the Patriar∣ches, seeing he is the first (or Chiefe) as Peter, to whome power is giuen ouer all Christian Princes, and all their people, as he who is the Vicar of Christ our Lord, ouer all people, and the Vniuersall Church of Christ: and whosoeuer shall contradict this, is excommuni∣cated by the Synode.

The Fathers of the Councell of Ephesus auouch,(2)

That no man doubteth yea it is knowne to all ages, that holy and most Blessed Peter, Prince and head of the Apostles, Pillar of Fayth, and foundation of the Catholike Church, receyued from our Lord Iesus-Christ &c. the keyes of the Kingdome; and that power of loosing and bynding sinnes was giuen him, who in his Successours liueth and exer∣ciseth iudgement to this very tyme, and alwayes. And agreably to this, we(3) still teach, that S. Peter the Apostle was orday∣ned by Christ, to be in his place the Head and Prince not only of the Apostles, but of the whole Church, that so as Chiefe Pastour vpon Earth, he might gouerne the same in matters Ecclesiasticall.

Points Disputable.

It was a Point much disputed by S. Hierome and S. Austine, whether the thing, for which S. Paul reproued S. Peter, was truly any fault, though not in Doctrine, yet in conuersation or Gouernment. S. Hierome and others thinke it was no fault at all, nor any other thing, then what Saint(4) Paul did himselfe vpon the lyke occasion: But S. Au∣stine houldeth the contrary.

Protestants Vntruthes.

(5)Tindall affirmeth, that,(6) Paul by the testimony of Christ was greater then Peter. But it wilbe impossible to fynd out this Testimony of Christ. D. Whitaker auoucheth that,(7) Wher∣soeuer mention is made of Peter, if we looke diligently into the place, we shall fynd nothing to be giuen to him, which doth not agree to other Apostles. But this in the Sections next following, we shall cleerly see to be most false. And againe,(8) Peter is not a Rocke▪ because Christ doth not build his Church vpon Peter. A saying most direct against sundry playnest textes of the Scriptures themselues. Swinglius maketh our Sauiour to speake con∣trary to himselfe thus,(9) I will build my Church vpon this Rocke, not vpon thee, for thou art not a Rocke &c. Only Christ, not Peter, is the Rocke, vpon which the Church built, remayneth.

Protestant Doctrine.

Most(10) Protestants affirme, that S. Peter was only equall, and fellow with the other Apostles, nor superiour. And that the Gouerment of the whole Church was no more committed to him by Christ, then to the rest.

For the tyme since the Apostles, Protestants greatly dif∣fer among themselues, for(11) some giue the supreme Go∣uerment of the Church to the Ministers and the Laity. Cal∣uin(12) chiefly ascribeth it to the Congregation of Seniors or Ministers. Brentius(13) and sundry others, to secular Princes, men, women, or Children.

Protestants agree with ancient Heretikes.

The Councell of Constance condemned as hereticall this Article of Wiccliffe and Husse,(14) Peter neyther was, nor is the Head of the Holy Catholike Church. And the same error was taught by(15) Marsilius of Padua.

Protestant Errors.

Swinglius affirmeth that,(16) The Papists contend the Church to be built vpon Peter, which is playne Idolatry. Whitaker avoucheth that(17) The Church is not founded vpon Christ, as he was to be seene, but as he could not be seene. And(18) Christ was not a visible Monarch in the Church.

Vallada affirmeth that,(19) It is grosse ignorance to make Iesus-Christ the head of the Church, as he is man. Yea sayth Swin∣glius,(20) It is impossible for a visible man to be head of the Church, seeing it is inuisible.

So that now not only Peter and his Successours, were not head of the Church, but neither Christ himselfe, as he was man, and visible vpon earth. But if visibility and Man∣hood do hinder Christ from being head of the Church, It may seeme strange, that the same Causes should not hinder Princes and Ministers from the sayd Headship, which I thinke few Ministers, or other Prot. dare affirme.

SECT. II. It is proued by Scriptures, that S. Peter was appointed by Christ the Supreme Head, not only of the Apostles, but of the vniuersall Church.

THe often(1) Contention had amongst the Apostles, who should be greatest, argueth that they had some notice, that some one of them was to haue Primacy. And though our Sauiour in sundry places doth forbid ambition in them, and amongst others, where he sayth,(2) Let the greatest amongst you, be as the least, and the chiefest, as he that ser∣ueth; yet euen here he secludeth not Primacy, but affirmeth rather that one is greatest and Chiefest, whom he instructeth to be humble. And this he illustrateth by the different Go∣uerment of the kings of the Gentils, who raigne ouer their Subiects, and of himselfe who was(3) amongst them, as one that serued, and yet was their Superiour.

Now, that this greatest and chiefest was S. Peter, it is playne by Christs directing his speach to him presently af∣ter, saying,(4) Simon, Simon, behould Sathan hath desired you, to winnow you as wheat, but I haue prayed for thee, that thy fayth fayle not, and thou sometymes conuerted, confirme thy Brethren. Here though the danger was common to all, yet Christ prayeth only and particularly for Peter, that his fayth should not fayle, preferring him likewise to be the confirmer of the rest.

Caluin(5) replyeth that, Christ sayth,(6) but you not so, that is, you must not beare rule ouer the Church, which thing the Kings of the Gentiles do. But much more right∣ly may I conclude, if not so, that is, after the manner of the Gentiles, then some of them were to Rule, but after ano∣ther manner, to wit, that he that was greatest, should be as the least, and he that is the leader, as the wayter, to wit, by mild∣nesse, humility &c. he doth not say, none shalbe greater, none shall beare rule, none shalbe leader, but only that he that is such, let him be as lesser; yea he declareth this by e∣xample

of himselfe, saying,(7) Euen as the Sonne of Man is not come to be ministred vnto, but to minister.(8) And, I am in the middest of you, as he that ministreth. And yet he sayth of him∣selfe,(9) You call me Maister and Lord, & you say well, for I am so. By which it appeareth, that nothing is heere said against Primacy in the Church, but only the best manner of vsing the same, is prescribed.

This forme of Gouerment S. Peter himselfe after pres∣cribeth to Bishops,(10) Feed the flock, which is in you, prouiding for it, not by constraint, but willingly, not for filthy lucres sake, but voluntarily: not as though you were Lords in the Clergy, but that yee may be ensamples to the flocke. So cleere it is, that one amongst the Apostles was to be Chiefest and greatest, and this, S. Peter, and other Bishops succeeding him.

And I verily persuade my selfe, that it is not vnwor∣thy of obseruation, that though we search into all Scriptu∣res, Councels, Fathers, and histories, we shall not find that any other of the Apostles but S. Peter, was thought or pre∣tended by any to be the chiefest ouer the rest, and ouer the whole Church.

Another strong proofe of S. Peters Primacy, is taken from this promise of Christ made vnto him,(11) And I say also vnto thee, thou art Peter, and vpon this Rocke I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not preuayle agaynst it: And, I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen, and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon Earth, shalbe bound in heauen, and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on Earth, shal be loosed in heauen. Out of this place foure principall points may be proued; first, that Peter was that Rock or foundation vpon which Christ promised to build his Church. Secondly, that to be the foundation of the Church, is to be the Gouernour of the Church. Thirdly, that the sayd Peter it was, to whome Christ promised to giue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen. And lastly that by those keyes is vnderstood the full power of gouerning the Church.

The first point is proued sundry wayes, as first by the pronowne (this) which demonstrateth some Rocke wherof Christ had spoken a little before: now, immediatly before

Christ had called Peter a Rocke, for he spake in Siriacke, in which language Peter signifieth a Rocke, according to that in S. Iohn,(12) Thou art Simon the sonne of Iona; thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter, or a Rocke, so that our Sauiour said, thou art a Rocke, and vpon this Rocke &c. Now the reason why the Latin Translatour saith, tu es Petrus, and not, tu es Petra, is because translating it out of Greeke, in which both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, signity a Rocke, it was more con∣uenient to translate it by a word of the Masculine gender, as more agreable to a man.

Secondly, as of the exchange of Abrams name to Abra∣ham, God expressed the cause to be(13) for that a Father of many nations he had made him: so our Sauiour hauing changed(14) Simons name to Peter, which signifyeth a Rock, giueth this reason therof, because(15) vpon this Rock I will build my Church: and so to that end Simons name was changed to Peter, ther∣by to signify that Peter was the Rocke vpon which Christ promised to build his Church.

But(16) D. Reinolds replyeth, that by Rocke is meant Christ himselfe, according to that of S. Paul,(17) For other foundation can no man lay, then that which is layd, which is Iesus Christ. But this is insufficient, for though Christ be the first and principall foundation, yet in a secondary manner, both the Prophets & Apostles are called foundations by S. Paul(18) and S. Iohn. And the same is also cleered and answered by S. Basil, who excellently teacheth, that,(19) God imparteth his dignities, not depriuing himselfe of them, but en∣ioying he bestoweth them; he is the light, and yet he sayth, you are the light of the world; he is a Priest, and he annoynteth Priests: he is the Lambe, and he sayth, Behould I send you like lambes amongst the middest of wolues: he is a Rocke, and he maketh a Rock. So plainly doth he teach that there is another Rocke besids Christ. And immediatly before refuting this obiection, he telleth who this other Rock is, saying; Though Peter be a Rock, yet he is not a Rock as Christ is: for Christ is the true Rock, vnmoueable of him∣selfe, Peter vnmoueable by Christ the Rock. What more cleerly can be spoken to make Peter a Rock? And agreably D. Whit∣guift(20) teacheth that, names proper to God, are yet like in a se∣condary

sense, communicable to creatures. Agayn, the pronowne This, must relate to that which is nearer, which is Peter, not to the more remote, which is Christ: & what inconsequēce of speach would this be, Thou art Peter, or a Rock, & vpon my selfe will I build my Church? Lastly, the Church was already builded vpon Christ, and therefore if it had beene meant of himselfe, he would not haue sayd, I will build, which betokeneth a thing to come, but, I do build, himselfe being already a Rock.

Luther and others(21) yet reply, that by Rock is vnder∣stood Peters fayth, or Peters confession, not Peter himselfe: But for the true vnderstanding heereof, we must note, that this fayth or Confession may be considered two wayes, first with reference to Peters person, as if our Sauiour had sayd, vpon thee Peter confessing, and belieuing me to be Christ the son of the liuing God, will I build my Church; so that neither Peters person alone, nor faith & Confessiō alone, but both ioyned togeather do make the forsaid Rock. And this is but agreable with that Catholike Doctrine, which teacheth that Peters fayth in two regards is called the Rocke of the Church: first because for the merit therof, Peter obtained that he was to be the Rock of the Church. Secōdly, in that Peter is therefore chiefly the Rocke of the Church, that seeing his faith could not fayle, he was to strengthen and confirme all others in fayth, for so our Sauiour sayd to him,(22) I haue prayed for thee, that thy fayth fayle not, and thou sometymes conuer∣ted, confirme thy Brethren: Therefore, seeing that Peter by reason of this indefectible fayth, is a most strong Rock, sus∣tayning the whole Church, it is all one then to say, vpon Peter, and vpon his fayth, the Church to be builded, and in those respects, may we truly say, the Church to be builded vpon Peters Faith, or Confession.

Now, the second way wherby Faith and Confession may be vnderstood, is barely of themselues without all refe∣rence to Peters person, and in this sense Protestants vrge it: but it is false, for then our Sauiour would not haue said, v∣pon this Rocke I will build, but, I do, and haue built my Church, for as then already many had belieued him to haue bene the

sonne of the liuing God, as the Old Prophets, the B. Virgin Mary, Simeon, Zacharias, his Apostles and Disciples. Se∣condly, Faith so taken is rightly said (according to(23) S. Austine) to be the foundation of our Iustification, and all vertues, not of the Church; for the foundation and the rest of the building must be both of the same kind. Now the Church is a Congregatiō of men, as it were(24) of liuely stones, therfore the stone which must be the foundation, must be some man, not any vertue. Thirdly, all words of the Text do plainly argue, that some Priuiledge or peculiar authority was giuen to Peter for that his Confession; all which were taken away, if that only fayth of Christ (which was common as then to others with him) were only the Rocke of the Church.

S. Peter then being the Rocke whereupon Christ pro∣mised to build his Church, the next thing to be declared is, that to be the Rocke or foundation of the Church, is to be the chiefe Pastor or Gouernour therof; that the foundation in a building, is as the head in a Body, a gouernour in a Citty, and a king in his kingdome. For the prouing herof we must note, that in holy Scriptures the Church or com∣pany of faithfull, is called(25) the house of Christ, and(26) Gods building; now as the rest of the building in a materiall house, dependeth of the foundation, as vpon that which wholy vphouldeth it; so in that spirituall building of the Church (which Christ promised to found vpon a Rock, & which Rock we haue proued to be Peter) the same depen∣deth vpon that Rock wherupon it is founded. Now what other dependance can be imagined, betweene the rest of the Church, & Peter their foundation, then that vpon him, as a firme Rock, they should wholy rely in all matters of fayth and Religion, to be instructed, gouerned, and confirmed, & so euer vpholden and sustained in true fayth, against all the stormes of false Doctrines, and the Professours therof.

But some reply, that as Peter here, is called the founda∣tion of the Church, so are likewise the Prophets & Apostles in other(27) places. Answ. They are called so indeed in three respects; first, in that they were the first, as well as Pe∣ter, that planted Churches, and conuerted Countryes to

Christ, in which sense they are so called in the(28) Apoca∣lyps. Secondly, in that the faith of the Church dependeth vpon the Reuelarion which the Prophets and Apostles re∣ceiued from God, and which they by their preaching and writing,, haue left to Posterity, and so they are called foun∣dations by S. Paul; and in these two respects all the Apo∣stles were equall. Thirdly in regard of Gouerment, for they were all Rectors and Pastors of the whole Church, but not in the same manner that S. Peter, he being as an Ordinary Pastor, from whom (as shalbe hereafter(29) proued) the or∣derly succession of true Pastors, was to continue vntill the end of the world, they only but as Apostles, or Legates for the tyme. And in this respect (which pertayneth only to the present Controuersy) as also in that Peter was the head or chiefe amongst the Apostles themselues, the Church is said to be built vpon Peter, & not vpon the rest of the Apostles.

The third Principall point therfore remayning to be proued, is, That those words, To thee I will giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, are meant of Peter. And in truth so many words of the Text it selfe do so plainly show it, as a man would more admire, that any should deny it, then much trouble himselfe in seeking to proue it: for who rea∣ding, Blessed art thou Simon, the sonne of Ionas &c. And, I say al∣so vnto thee, thou art Peter &c. And, I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, would not say, that to Simon, who was afterwards called Peter, the said keyes were giuen?

But some conceite, that whatsoeuer is here said to Peter belongeth to the whole Church, which he only at that tyme did represent. But for answere hereto, we must ob∣serue, that two wayes Peter may be said to beare the person of the Church; first historically, which is, when one hauing done a thing himselfe, doth also therin represent a thing to be done by another, as Abraham hauing indeed two sonnes, did therin also represent, that God was to haue two people, as S. Paul(30) expoundeth. Secondly parabolically, when nothing truly done is proposed, but something alike is fey∣gned, to signify another thing, as in the Ghospell, he that sowed good seed, signified Christ preaching. And in the first

sense, it is true, that Peter as then represented the Church, in that to him were giuen the keyes, which after were to be Communicated to the Church: but this maketh not against, but with vs; vnlesse we will say, that Abraham had not two sonnes, because therein he represented God to haue two people. And that it is not to be vnderstood in the second sense, is plaine, aswell that euery circumstance doth (as it were) marke out the very particular person of Peter, as also in that to the same, it is said, To thee I will giue the keyes &c. to whom it is said immediatly after (verse 29.) Go after me Sa∣than, for the name Peter is alike in both places; and that by Sathan, is meant Peters person is playne, and for such(31) acknowledged by the ancient Fathers, and all Protestants (in their knowne loue to Peter) do easily belieue it.

Others obiect that Peter spake in the name of all the Disciples, when he said, Thou art Christ &c. And therfore he likewise heard in the name of all, To thee I will giue the keyes. Answer. Peter spake in the name of the rest, not as a Cryer, foreknowing what would be the answere of the rest, for neither had they giuen him that in charge, no nor(32) con∣sulted with him therof, as many ancient Fathers do obserue; he alone knowing it by reuelation from God, according to that which Christ presently therfore said, Flesh and bloud hath not reueyled it vnto thee, but my Father which is in heauen: he is therfore said to speake in the name of the rest, because to that, which he as chiefe and head had vttered, they by their silence, gaue their assent, which thing maketh wholly for Peters Primacy.

It is further replied, that as to Abraham(33) Fayth was imputed to iustice, so also it is imputed to all others that be∣lieue, therfore if Peter receiued the keyes because he con∣fessed Christ, then all such as confesse Christ, shall likewise receiue them. Answ. Abraham by fayth was not only iusti∣fied, but also made(34) a Father of many Nations, and yet all such as belieue are not made such Fathers. The answere therfore is, that faith of its owne nature doth lead and bring a man to Iustice, if other things necessary thereunto be not wanting, as Hope, Charity &c. But Confession of Christ

doth not of its owne nature lead a man to receiue the keys, for sundry other wayes might Christ haue rewarded Peter worthily for his Confession, if it had so pleased his heauen∣ly wisdome.

Some demaund whether Peter dying, the keyes re∣mayned in the Church, or ceased with him? If the first, then they were giuen to the Church; if the second, then no man now hath authority to loose or bynd. Or thus, When the Pope is chosen, he eyther bringeth the keyes with him, or not; if the first, then he was Pope before he was made; if the second, from whence had he them? Did some Angell bring them from heauen, or rather did he not receyue them from the Church, to whome they were giuen in the begin∣ning? Answ. Peter, or the Pope dying, the keyes do not perish, neyther remayne formally in the Church but only as they are communicated to inferiour Pastours, but they re∣mayne in the hands of Christ: and when a new Pope is chosen, he doth not bring them with him, neyther are they giuen him by the Church, but by Christ, neyther by any new deliuery, but by his auncient Institution. Euen as a King when he doth place a Vice-roy ouer some Country, should withall make knowne, that it is his Royall pleasure, that the sayd Viceroy dying, the Country shall choose and nominate another, to whome he already giueth the same power and authority, as to the former.

Lastly, it is obiected, that as heer to Peter are promi∣sed the keyes, so the same authority to be promised to the(35) rest of the Apostles, Whatsoeuer you shall bynd vpon earth, shalbe bound in heauen, and whatsoeuer you shall loose &c. Answ. As before it is shewed in what sense they are truly called foundations, so heer likewise they are sayd to haue authority to bynd & loose, but that this was giuen to them, not as to ordinary Pastours, but only as to Legates for the tyme, and withall with certayne subordination to Peter, shalbe shewed heerafter. And I wish only, that it may be further obserued, that Christ speaking of one matter, to one person, in one and the same sentence, to whomesoeuer he made the first promise, to him he made the rest. Therefore

if he promised the keies to all the Apostles, vpon them all he promised to build his Church, and not vpon himselfe. Or if he promised to build his Church vpon himselfe, to himselfe he promised the keies of the kingdome of heauen, to him∣selfe he promised all power of bynding and loosing, which had bene as impertinent to our Sauiours discourse, as disso∣nant from truth: for Christ had all that power before giuen by his Father, when he was first sent.

The last principall thing then to be proued, is, that by giuing the keies to Peter, is vnderstood the giuing of the chiefe authority ouer the whole Church vnto him; for by keyes, is vnderstood(36) principality, as where the Institu∣tion of the high Priest Eliachim, being described, it is said, And I will giue the key of the howse of Dauid, vpon his shoulder, and he shall open, and there shalbe none to shut, and he shall shut, & there shalbe none to open: heere, by key is vnderstood Ecclesiasticall principality, whereunto pertayneth that,(37) And his prin∣cipality is vpon his shoulder; for therefore is Principality said to be vpon the shoulder, because the keyes (wherwith it is signified) were accustomed to be layd vpon the shoul∣der. Christs Principality also is plainly signified by keyes,(38) These things sayth he that is holy and true, which hath the key of Dauid; which openeth, and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man openeth. As also it is a common custome in politicke gouer∣ment, that when any Citty is yielded to any Prince, or Go∣uernour, the keyes therof are deliuered withall, in signe of their subiection. So our Sauiour to signify the ample power that he would giue to Peter ouer his Church, promised him the keyes of the kingdome of heauen. So many wayes it is proued cleerly, that by the foresaid words of our Sauiour vnto Peter, he therby promised to make him supreme head of his Church.

To come therefore to the performance of the foresaid promise; S. Iohn telleth vs that,(39) Iesus said to Simon Pe∣ter, Simon of Iona louest thou me more then these? he said vnto him; yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee: he said vnto him, feed my Lambes. He said vnto him againe the second tyme, Symon of Iona louest thou me? he said vnto him yea Lord &c. he said vnto him, feed

my sheep &c. Here our Sauiours speach is so direct to Peter alone (as is manifest by all circumstances, especially by those words, Louest thou me more then these?) as all other speciall proofe therof is needlesse. Now, that by those words, Pasce oues meas, feed my sheep, the chiefe Ecclesiasticall power is gi∣uen to Peter, is proued first by the word Pasce, feed, which in Scriptures signifyeth to gouerne or beare rule; so where it is said, For out of thee shall come a(40) Captaine, or as Prot.(41) translate a Gouernour, which shall gouerne my people of Israel; in the Greeke it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifyeth to feed: Now that there is vnderstood Christs Gouerment, & chiefe power ouer the people, is of it selfe manifest. As also it is said(42) from whence S. Mathew tooke that saying, Out of thee shall come forth vnto me, he that shalbe the Dominatour or Ruler in Israel; where the Hebrew word signifieth not, pascere, to feed, but dominari, to rule. In like sort it is said of our Sauiour,(43) He shall rule them with a rod of Iron: in the Greeke it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, feed. So also Homer (l. 2. Iliad) calleth king Agamemnon 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, pastorem populorum, the Pastour of the people.

Secondly, he is not properly said to feed another which in any respect helpeth another to meat, but he that proui∣deth and procureth meat for another, which is a thing pro∣per to a Maister, or(44) Gouernour, who is a faithfull steward and wise, whom the Maister shall make Ruler ouer his houshould to giue them in season their measure of wheat: So that it is his part to feed, who is appointed ouer the family for Steward and Ruler. Besides, it is not the part of a Pastour or Shepheard, only to giue meat to his flocke, but also to guide them, de∣fend them, gouerne them, and correct them when they go astray.

Thirdly, no reason can be alleadged, why so seuerally it should be said, to Peter, To thee I will giue the keyes: and feed my sheepe, and that for his singular faith and Charity, if therby he had receyued nothing aboue the rest.

Fourthly, by those words, My sheepe is vnderstood the whole Church of Christ, not any one or other part therof: for seeing without all restriction, the Pronowne, Myne, is

ioyned to the Nowne, Sheep, it manifestly followeth, all those sheep to be commended to Peter, to whom the Pro∣nowne Myne, extendeth: now, it is certaine that it exten∣deth to all, for there is not any in the Church, who will not glory himselfe to be Christs sheep. Besides when one dying saith, I leaue my goods to my Children, he excludeth none of his goods, nor any of his Children; further our Sauiour either commended hereby to Peter, all his sheepe, or none, or some determinate company, or some indeterminate: Now none will say, that he commended none, or some determi∣nately, for that is manifestly false; neither any indefinitely, for no wise Prouider doth leaue an vncertain care, when he may determinate the same, seing certaine confusion and per∣turbation ariseth thereby: yea to commend some, and not to determine which, is as much as to cōmend none; for which shall he feed, who knoweth not his flock? It remaineth therfore that Christ assigned to Peter euen all his flock to be fed, and consequently the rest of the Apostles themselues, seing they were part of Christs flock.

D. Whitaker answereth hereto, that,(45) Christ com∣mended his sheep to Peter indefinitely, not to feed these or those sheepe, but sometimes these, sometimes those. Agreable to which sayth Beza,(46) Is the word of God thus to be prophaned? Truly Christ did adde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (that is, all, not vniuersall) and the difference is knowne betwene indefinite, and vniuersall propositions. But all this is friuolous, for Prot. do limit propositions vni∣uersall, aswell as indefinite. And therfore Caluin himselfe shall answere this, telling them, that(47) an indefinite speach importeth as much as an vniuersall. Wherfore if, as Whitaker con∣fesseth, Christ commended his sheepe to Peter indefinitly; he commended all, and euery one of his sheepe.

Another proofe from Scripture for S. Peters Primacy, is taken from the manner of numbring the Apostles, which is commonly by beginning with(48) Peter. Now the na∣mes of the twelue Apostles were these, the first Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his Brother, Iames &c.(49) where∣as the order of the rest is often chāged.(50) Yea where two or three are but named, he is commonly the first,(51) and

so in all other places, one only(52) excepted, where it is sayd, Iames, Cephas, and Iohn. And yet it is not certayne whe∣ther S. Paul so said: for diuers(53) ancient Fathers both in the text and in their Commentaries read, Peter, Iames, and Iohn. But if we admit, that it should be so read, then, it may eyther be sayd, that it was so done, because Iames was Bishop of Hierusalē, where those three Apostles then were, or else that S. Paul did not obserue any order in this place: for that S. Paul knew that Peter was aboue Iames, may ap∣peare, in that in the same Epistle he sayth,(54) He went to Hierusalem to see Peter, not to see Iames, though he were in the same place, as also(55) he proceedeth ascending, and placing Peter next vnto Christ.

Further, Peter is not only placed in the first place, but also is described as a Captayne or Prince of the rest; for as it is said,(56) Michael and his Angels,(57) The Diuell and his An∣gels; so it is sayd,(58) And Simon, and they that were with him, followed him;(59) Peter sayd, and they that were with him;(60) Tell his Disciples and Peter. Neither can it be answered to these, that Peter is thus placed, either because he was first called by Christ, for that was not he, but his brother(61) Andrew, or because he was the eldest in yeares, for Andrew was Elder, which thing our(62) Aduersaries acknowledge for proba∣ble, or else because of his excellent guifts; for eyther that is meant of those guifts which he had in regard of the Church, as that he receyued singularly the keyes, that he was made the foundation of the Church, and Pastour of all Christs sheep &c. or else it is meant of his personall guifts and ver∣tues: if the first, it maketh wholly for vs; not the second, for the Euangelists could not easily know, neyther durst iudge, which of the Apostles was most vertuous, for Iohn was called the Apostle whome Iesus loued, and Iames the lesse was of such sanctity as that he was called the Iust, and the Brother of our Lord. Lastly, it cannot be sayd to be ca∣suall, in that some one was to be put first in the Catalogue, aswell in that, as all the Euangelists euer put Peter first, so yet they keep no one certaine order in placing of the rest, ex∣cepting Iudas, who for vnworthines, they still place last,

as they do S. Peter for his preheminence, first; which argueth a speciall respect of Peters placing: as also in that S. Mathew(63) calleth Peter, primus, the first, not reckoning the rest, one, the second, and another the third &c. but without all ob∣seruation of order: so that betwixt Peter and the rest he ob∣serueth order, because Peter was Superiour, and the rest In∣feriours; but amōgst the rest he obserueth none, because they were all equall amongst themselues: And of the word, Pri∣mus, cometh Primatus, euen as of Princeps, Principatus, of Con∣sul, Consulatus.

This is so conuincing, that Beza(64) for want of bet∣ter answere, barely suspecteth the word, first, to be thrust in∣to the Text by some fauourer of Peters Primacy. What if this word, Primus (sayth he) be added by some, who would establish Peters Primacy? And yet (sayth he) we fynd it so written in all Co∣pies. But if this might suffice for an answere, euery hereticke might euade all Scriprure, though neuer so cleere.

But that you may better know this Beza, here he con∣fesseth that the word, first, is written in all Copies; and yet he will needs suspect, that it is thrust into the text by some friend of Peters. And yet Mar. 3.16. where it is only said; He gaue to Simon the name Peter, here himselfe thrusteth it into the Text, saying, And the first was Simon; and the same Addi∣tion is also made in some of our(65) English Bibles. What a masse of Contrarieties may be found in this man? In the first place, where the word, first, is to be truly seene in all Co∣pies, there will he haue it to be added to the Text by some forger: here where it is not, he will haue it part of the true Text, and that because Matthew readeth so, and yet next before he suspecteth not Mathew, but some late Papist to haue read so. In the first place, there could not be, first Simon, because there is no consequence of second, third &c. here he saith, that is no impediment, because there be many exam∣ples of such speach, and namely in that place of Mathew. There it is not so, though all Greeke Copies haue it so: here it must needs be so, because Beza will haue it so, though it be only found in certaine odd Copies of Erasmus, which Erasmus himselfe, as Beza confesseth, allowed not.

If after Christ had giuen to Peter and the rest of the Apostles, Apostolicall authority in common, saying, Whose sinnes you forgiue &c. Preach the Ghospell &c. he had neuerthe∣lesse said seuerally to Peter, Peter thou art not a Rocke, I will not giue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, Thou shalt not feed my sheepe, Peter is not the first of the Apostles, and the like; what Protestant reading this, would doubt to affirme, but that the chiefe authority ouer the Church, were denied to Peter? Se∣ing then, in these Negatiue Propositions, they doubtles would affirme chiefe authority to be denied to Peter, they must like wise affirme by the contradictory affirmatiue pro∣positions expressed in Scripture, chiefe authority to be giuen to Peter.

Lastly, it is not to be neglected, that diuers Priuiledges and honours were giuen to Peter, which were not giuen to the rest of the Apostles, at that he was the only man a∣mong the Disciples, that(66) walked vpon the waters with Christ: that he was the only man for whom Christ(67) payed tri∣bute: In Peters(68) ship, and not in the other did Christ teach: the Apostles in generall being asked by Christ, who he was, Peter was the only man that(69) answered: for him only Christ prayed,(70) that his faith should not fayle: To him on∣ly he said,(71) Feed my sheep: him only he(72) calleth Peter, or a Rock and accordingly promiseth to build his Church vpon this Rock: Peter is the first that speaketh in the Councell(73) of the Apostles: he prescribeth Election(74) to be made of one in Iudas place: he standing(75) among the Eleuen, taketh vpon him to make the first Sermon to the people: When Ananias had fraudulently left a porion of his riches at(76) the feet of the Apostles, Peter only rebuketh him, & inflicteth vpon him present death: Peter was the only man of all the Apo∣stles(77) whom to see, Paul went to Hierusalem: Lastly he is the only Apostle that hath the vsuall preheminence in the order of being first named, as is before shewed; In so much as when the Apostles are but spoken of in generall, yet of∣ten he only for honour sake is named. All which things be∣ing so peculiar only to Peter, from the other Apostles, could not be casuall to him rather then to the other, but purposely

obserued, and so set downe in regard of his knowne Pri∣macy.

I will only add hereto, that seing the best Gouerment is acknowledged by all, to be Monarchicall, that therfore the Gouerment of the Church is to be by one supreme Pastour vpon Earth. And although Caluin(78) replyeth, this not to follow, because Christ is the King and Monarch of the Church: yet this is insufficient; for though Christ be the true and proper Monarch of the Church, gouerning the same spiritually and inuisibly, yet the Church being corporall & visible, needeth some one visible Iudge, by whom Contro∣uersies in Religion arysing, may be composed, and who may keepe the other inferiour Prelates in vnity & due per∣formance of their offices. Yea this maketh no more against one supreme Pastour, then it doth against all other Bishops, Pastours, and Doctours, who by the same reason were needlesse, for Christ is(79) the Pastour and Bishop of our soule, he is our Maister whom we are commanded(80) to heare; he it is, who baptizeth(81) in the holy Ghost. And therfore, as other Bishops and Pastors do that as Christes Ministers, which himselfe doth principally; so the like may be said of one supreme Pastor. Thus much of the plaine Texts of Scripture in proofe of S. Peters Primacy.

SECT. III. That the Fathers expound the sacred Scriptures agreably with Catholickes, in Proofe of S. Peters Primacy.

NOw, that the ancient Fathers do expound the foresaid Scriptures agreably with vs Catholickes, in b••hal••e of S. Peters Primacy, it shall sundry wayes appeare; as first con∣cerning the change of his name from Simon to Peter, which signifieth a Rock; S. Cvrill affirmeth, that,(1) Christ &c. fore∣tould that his name should not be ••••mon, but Peter, aptly signifying by the very word, that vpon him as vpon Rock and firme stone, he was to build his Church. To the same purpose S. Hilary(2) saith most

eloquently, O happy foundation of the Church, in naming of the new name, and worthy Rock of that building, which should dissolue the infernall Lawes, and gates of Hell &c. O happy Porter of heauen, to whose arbitrement the keyes of Eternall entrance are deliuered &c. S. G••••gory is so confident in this, as that he demaundeth,(3) Who knoweth not that the holy Church is founded vpon the soli∣dity of the Prince of the Apostles seing the firmenes of his mynd he tooke in his name that of a Rock he should be called Peter? to whom by the voyce of Truth it is said: To thee I will giue the keyes of the king∣dome of heauen. These Fa••••ers show from the Scriptures, that therfore the name Simon was changed to Peter, which signifieth a Rock, because he was to be the Rock, vpon which Christ would build his Church.

Now, that S. Peter was the Rock, vpon whom Christ would build his Church, it is taught by S. Chrisostome in these words,(4) Our Lord sayth, Thou art Peter, and vpon thee I will build my Church: what more cleere then, Vpon thee? S. Hie∣rome auoucheth that,(5) According to the Metaphore of a Rock, it is rightly said to him, I will build my Church vpon thee. S. Athana∣sius,(6) As the diuine Scripture sayth truly, Thou art Peter, and vpon thy foundation the Pillars of the Church are strengthened. S. Ambrose,(7) If therfore Peter be the Rock vpon which the Church is built &c. These Fathers expresly teach from the Scriptures, that vpon Peter himselfe, as vpon a Rock, the Church was to be built.

S. Austine maketh not only S. Peter, but euen his Sea after him to be the Rock, saying,(8) Number the Priests from the very Sea of Peter, that is the Rock which the gates of Hell do not ouercome. And againe▪(9) only (Peter) amongst the Apostles deser∣ued to heare, Amen, I say to thee, thou art Peter, and vpon this Rock I will build my Church; worthy truly who to the people, which were to be builded in the howse of God, might be a stone for their foundation, a pillar for their stay, a key to open the gates of the kingdome of hea∣uen. And eis where he sayth,(10) O Church, that is, O Peter, be∣cause vpon this Rock I will build my Church: kill and eate. S. Austines opinion in this was so cleere, that the Prot. Hamelmannus confesseth that,(11) Austine in his booke against the Epistle of Donatus, teacheth that the Church was founded vpon Peter, as vpon

the Rock, and he proueth this his opinion by the verses of Ambrose.

S. Cyprian, no lesse plainly writeth:(12) Our Lord saith to Peter, I say to thee that thou art Peter, and vpon that Rock I will build my Church &c. But to be briefe, the like is taught by the Councell(13) of Calcedon, Origen, Epiphanius, Ba∣sill, and Tertullian.

Now that the Fathers thus expounding S. Peter to be the Rocke, did thereby vnderstand, that the supreme care of the whole Church was committed to him, it is euident by S. Chrysostome, who interpreting those words, Thou art Peter,(14) affirmeth that Christ ordained him Pastour of the Church; And that, the Father placed Hieremy ouer one Nation, but Christ placed Peter ouer the whole world. S. Ambrose auoucheth that,(15) Peter is called a Rock, because as an immoueable stone he sustayneth the ioyning, and wayght of the whole Christian worke or building. S. Gregory teacheth that,(16) It is cleer to all that know the Ghospell, that by our Lords mouth, the care of the whole Church is committed to holy Peter, the Prince of all the Apostles, for to him it is sayd,(17) Peter louest thou me? feed my sheep. To him it is sayd,(18) Behould Sathan hath desired to winnow you as wheat, and I haue prayed for thee Peter, that thy fayth may not fayle, and thou sometymes conuerted, confirme thy Brethren. To whome it is said,(19) Thou art Peter, and vpon this Rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not preuayle agaynst it, and to thee I will giue the keyes &c. Behould he taketh the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen, power of bynding and loosing is giuen him, the care and principality of the whole Church is committed to him &c. These sayings are so pregnant, that if Bellarmine were liuing, he could not speake more fauourably for the Popes Primacy. In like sort whereas Christ sayd to Peter, Simon louest thou me, and Pe∣ter answered, Thou knowest Lord that I loue thee, and then Ie∣sus sayth to him, feed my sheep; S. Ambrose expounding these words, sayth,(20) Therefore is he preferred before all, because a∣mongst them all, he alone professed his loue.

But no man speaketh more expressely in this then S. Cy∣prian,(61) (21) To Peter our Lord after his Resurrection sayd, feed my sheep, and builded his Church vpon him alone, and to him he giueth the charge of feeding his sheep; for although after his Resurrection, he

gaue his power alike to all, saying; As my father sent me, so I send you, take the holy Ghost, If you remit to any their sinnes, they shalbe remit∣ted &c. Yet to manifest vnity, he constituted one Chayre, and so dis∣posed by his authority, that vnity should haue origene of one: The rest of the Apostles were that Peter was in equall fellowship of honour & power, but the beginning cōmeth of vnity: the Primacy is giuen to Pe∣ter, that the Church of Christ may be shewed to be one, & one Chaire.

Let vs heare S. Chrisostome,(22) Why did our Lord sheed his bloud? truly (sayth he) to redeeme those sheepe, the care of which he committed both to Peter, and also to his Successors. And a little after, Christ would haue Peter endued with such authority, and to be farre aboue all his other Apostles; for he sayth, Peter dost thou loue me more then all these do? Whereupon our Maister might haue inferred, if thou loue me Peter, vse much fasting, sleepe on the hard floore, watch much, be Patron to the oppressed, Father to the Orphans, and husband to the widdowes: but omitting all these things, he saith, feed my sheep; for all the foresaid vertues may easily be done by many subiects, not only men, but also women: but when it commeth to the gouerment of the Church, & committing the Charge of so many soules all woman-kind must needs wholy giue place to the burden and greatnesse therof and a great number of men also. And wheras Christ said to S. Peter, feed my sheep.(23) What sheep (sayth S. Bernard?) the people of this or that City? of this or that kingdome? My sheep (quoth he) to whom is it not manifest, he designed not some, but assigned all? no∣thing is excepted where nothing is distinguished. And the like is taught by S. Chrysostome, S. Austine, and S. Cyril, vpon this place, and by S. Leo(24) and Maximus.

S. Austine speaking of our Sauiours paying Tribute for himselfe and Peter, interpreteth the words thus,(25) They that receyued the didrachmes, say to Peter the Apostle: Your maister doth not pay the didrachmes &c. vpon which words they went to the maister, that he might pay for all his Disciples. But our Sauiour when he commandeth to pay for himselfe and Peter, seemeth to haue paid for all: because as in our Sauiour were all the Causes of Superiority, so after him all are contayned in Peter: for he ordayned him the head of them, that he might be the Pastour of our Lords flock. And a little after vpon those words.(26) I haue prayed for thee that thy fayth fayle not, he sayth further: It is euident that all are contayned

in Peter, for asking for Peter he is knowne to aske for all. Alwayes in the Superiour, the people is reproued, or commended.

S. Hilary writing vpon these words, Goe after me Sa∣than, thou art a scandall to me, expoundeth them in this man∣ner,(27) When he had spoken certaine things concerning his Passion to his Disciples, and Peter had detested this as vnworthy the sonne of God, Peter, to whom before he had giuen the keies of the kingdome of heauen, vpon whom he was to build his Church, against whom the gates of hell should nothing preuayle, who what he either loosed or bound v∣pon Earth, those should remayne eyther loosed or bound in heauen; This man detesting this Sacrament of his Passion, he receiued with this re∣proach, Go after me Sathan, thou art a scandall to me: for so great was his Religion (or care) to suffer for the saluation of mankind, as that with the reproach of Sathan he named Peter, the first Confessor of the sonne of God, the foundation of the Church, the Porter of the king∣dome of heauen, and for earthly Iudgment, the Iudge of heauen.

Vpon these words of S. Paul,(28) After three yeares I came to Hierusalem to see Peter, S. Ambrose writeth,(29) It was fitting that he should desire to see Peter, because he was the chiefe a∣mong the Apostles, to whom our Sauiour had committed the care of Churches. Yea according to S. Hierome,(30) Peter was of so great authority, that Paul in his Epistle writeth, Then after three yeares I came to Hierusalem to see Peter &c. Shewing that he had not security of Preaching the Ghospell, vnles it were confirmed by the sen∣tence of Peter, and the rest of the Apostles that were with him. S. Chrysostome saith hereof,(32) Peter was the mouth of the Apo∣stles, and the Prince and top of that Company, and therfore Paul went to see him aboue others.

Lastly, wheras in the numbring of the Apostles it is said,(33) The first Simon, who is called Peter, S. Ambrose sayth hereof;(34) Andrew first followed our Sauiour before Peter, and yet the Primacy Andrew receiued not, but Peter. S. Bernard affirmeth, that,(35) Peter walking vpon the waters, as Christ did, declared himselfe the only Vicar of Christ, which should be ruler not ouer one people, but ouer all, for many waters are many peoples.

But the Fathers are so confessedly cleere in their expoun∣ding of the Scriptures for S. Peters Primacy ouer all the A∣postles, and the whole Church, that Danaeus for his best

answere vnto them, sayth,(36) They are not to be belieued, for the saying of Christ, Mat. 16. thou art Peter, and vpon this Rock I will build my Church, most badly they expound of the Person of Peter. A∣greably also confesseth Caluin(37) The Church to be built v∣pon Peter, because it is said, vpon this Rock &c. Some of the Fathers haue so expounded, but the whole Scripture gainsayeth. And if we will belieue D. Fulke,(38) Many of the Ancient Fathers &c. were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters Prerogatiue, & the Bishop of Romes dignity, then by the word of God was giuen to either of them. The Centuristes affirme that,(39) Leo very painfully goeth about to proue that singular preheminence was giuen to Peter, aboue the other Apostles, and that thence rose the Primacy of the Roman Church.

But Protestants forbeare not to reproue, and charge with affected Primacy euen S. Peter himselfe, and the other next succeding to him Bishops of Rome, for thus write cer∣tayne Caluinists,(40) It may not be denyed, but that Peter was sometymes faulty in ambition and desire of power &c. By which infir∣mity of Peter, doubtles it was signified that those Bishops which bragged of Peters succession, were to be faulty of the like &c. Wherefore this so peruerse ambition of Peter, and ignorance of heauenly things, and ne∣gligence withall &c. did without doubt signify, that the Romane Bi∣shop, because he would be Chiefe, and heire of Peters priuiledges, was to be ignorant and a contemner of heauenly things &c. To the same purpose another Prot. sayth,(41) The affectation of Primacy, was a common Infirmity of the Apostles, as also of the first Bishops of the Citty of Rome.

But that you may see that this clayme was not onely made by Popes, the Centurists confesse that,(42) Tertullian not without Errour (as they dreame) seemeth to thinke the keyes to be committed only to Peter, and the Church to be built vpon him.(43) Cyprian sayth euery where the Church to be founded vpon Peter,(44) Origen sayth Tract. 5. in Matth. Peter by promise deserued to be made the foundation of the Church: and Hom. 17. in Luc. he calleth Peter the Prince of the Apostles.(45) Fulke chargeth Opratus with ab∣surdity for saying of Peter, he deserued to be preferred before all the Apostles, and he alone receyued the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen, to be communicated to the rest. So manifest it is, that all the Fa∣thers

of the Primitiue Church, belieued Peter to be the su∣preme Head of the Church.

SECT. IV. That Protestants also do agree with Catholickes, in the Do∣ctrine of S. Peters Primacy.

IOhn Husse proueth both by Scriptures and Fathers, that S. Peter was head of the Apostles & the whole Church.(1) The saying of B. Dionisius (sayth he) is true, that Peter is Chiefe among the Apostles, and was the foundation of Churches; And the say∣ing of Austine also is true, that he was first among the Apostles, accor∣ding to some Prerogatiue. And the saying of Marcellus is true, that Pe∣ter was the head of the whole Church &c. There were three vertues in which Peter excelled, fayth, humility, and Charity &c. from that fayth Peter receyued the burden of the Rule of the Church: And I say to thee, sayth the Rock, because thou art Peter, and vpon this Rock I will build my Church &c. Peter was the first Vicar of Christ by him chosen, and deputed spiritually to the Church.

Perzibranes Confession in this point is this,(2) I con∣fesse that the keyes of loosing and bynding, of forgiuing and retaining sinnes, were giuen by Christ to the holy Church in B. Peter principally, and in other Apostles.

D. Bilson alledging these words of Christ, He that is greater among you, let him be as the least, affirmeth that,(3) In these words the Lord noteth a manifest distinction of some greater, some lesse, some chiefer, some lower. D. Sarauia saith of the forsaid doubt of the Apostles, and our Sauiours said answere,(4) Farre be it from me, that I should rashly condemne those good men of sacrilegious ambition, seing the Lord did not so much correct, as direct them in their demaund. And the like is taught by D.(5) Whit∣guift.

Caluin speaking of the change of name from Simon to Cephas, or Peter, faith,(6) The Euangelist reciteth as it were this Prophecy, that Simon should haue a new name giuen him. I call it a Prophecy, not only because Christ foresaw the Constancy of faith

which would be in Peter, but because he foresaw what he would giue him: therfore now he commendeth in words the grace which he resol∣ued afterwardes to bestow vpon him. He doth not therfore say that this is his name for the present, but differreth it to the tyme to come, Thou shalt be called Cephas, saith he, It is meet that all the Godly be Peters, who founded in Christ may be made fit to build the Temple of God: but this one is so called for his singular Excellency.

D. Whitaker relating what himselfe and other Prot. thinke heerof, sayth,(7) We do not deny Peter to be the founda∣tion of the Church, and the Gouernour, and we will grant, if they shall require, that to be promised him by Christ in these words. And(8) who doth not confesse Peter to be the Rocke and the foundation of Church? Reynolds acknowledgeth it to be true,(9) That the words of Christ to Peter do contayne this sense, vpon thee I will build my Church. Marcus Antonius de Dominis confesseth that,(10) It is expressely sayd by Christ, speaking to Peter, I will giue to thee the keyes. Let them therefore be gone and depart, whosoeuer offering vio∣lence to this Text, do contend that the keyes are giuen or promised not to Peter immediatly, but Peters person excluded, eyther to the whole Church, or to another which is not Peter. Whitaker likewise saith,(11) I grant, that to him (to wit Peter) the keys were truly pro∣mised, for that the place conuinceth, and I will neuer deny it. Who doubteth (sayth D.(12) Andrews) that the keyes were giuen to him? So free from all doubt is S. Peters Primacy.

D. Whiteguift alledgeth Caluin to say,(13) The twelue Apostles had one among them to gouerne the rest; and he proueth it, in that there is,(14) no Colledge without a Gouernour, no Society without a maister; & hereupon he further concludeth, saying, So should it not be any absurdity, if we should confesse, that the Apo∣stles gaue such preheminence to Peter. Affirming further himselfe, that,(15) Among the Apostles themselues, there was one chiefe &c. that had chiefe authority ouer the rest, that Schismes might be com∣pounded.

Musculus auoucheth, that,(16) Celestiall spirits are not e∣quall &c. The Apostles themselues were not equall, Peter is found in many places to haue bene Chiefe, which we deny not. But D. White∣gui•••• is so full in this, as that he not only answereth(17) cer∣taine places of Scripture, obiected by some against Peters

Primacy, but also expoundeth(18) in behalfe of the same sundry of the said Scriptures before alleadged. And although he would euade something from our Catholicke Doctrine, by affirming that Peter was only as an Archbishop, ouer o∣ther Bishops in one Prouince, hauing Chiefe authority ouer the rest to this end especially, that Schismes and contentions might be com∣pounded: yet Cartwright heerto well replyeth, that by the same reason it necessarily followeth,(19) that, for the keeping of the vniuersall Church in vnity, there is like necessity of one Bishop ouer all Christendome.

Luther thinketh,(20) That Peter was first in order no man denieth &c. We confesse Peter to be the Prince of the Apostles, the first member of the Church, the head of the Colledge of the Apostles, and the rest which holy Fathers haue said of him.

D. Field,(21) We deny not but that B. Peter had a kind of Primacy and honour. D. Couell is so full herein, that he giueth the true reason of this Primacy, for hauing spoken of(22) one aboue the rest to suppresse the seedes of dissension, he sayth fur∣ther,(23) If this were the principall meanes to preuent Schismes and dissentions in the Primitiue Church, when the graces of God were far more aboundant and eminent then now they are: Nay if the twelue, were not like to agree, except there had beene one Chiefe among them; for saith Hierome, among the twelue one was therfore chosen, that a Chiefe being appointed, occcasion of dissention might be preuented &c. and then speaking of Puritanes, he vrgeth well, How can they thinke that equality would keep all the Pastors in the world in peace and vnity &c. For in all Societies, authority (which cannot be where all are equall) must procure vnity and obedience. Thus far in proofe that Protestants do teach from Scriptures, the Primacy of S. Peter.

SECT. V. Obiections from Scripture agaynst S. Peters Pri∣macy answered.

SOme obiect those words of S. Paul,(1) When Cephas was was come to Antioch, I resisted him in face, because he was re∣prehensible. Ergo, Paul was not subiect to him. Answ. An In∣feriour may reprehend his Superiour, so that the matter re∣quire it, and due reuerence be obserued: and as for the fault heer reproued, Tertullian affirmeth that it was,(2) Conuer∣sationis, non Praedicationis vitium, a default in Conuersation, lyfe, or regiment, not in doctrine. And S. Austine, and those that make most of it, thinke no otherwise of it. But S. Hierome and other Fathers deeme it no fault at all, nor any other thing then what(3) S. Paul himselfe did vpon the like occasion, & that this whole combat was a set thing agreed vpon bet∣weene them. It is a schoole point much debated betweene S. Hierome and(4) S. Austine. Howsoeuer the Ancient Fa∣thers do answere this obiection. S. Cyprian sayth, For neyther Peter whome our Lord chose the first, and vpon whome be built the Church, when Paul disputed with him of Circumcision, challen∣ged insolently, or arrogantly tooke any thing to himselfe, saying, That he had the Primacy, and therefore the later Disciples ought rather to obey him. According to S. Austine(6). That which was done of Paul profitably, by the liberty of Charity, the same Peter tooke in good part by holy and benigne godlines of humility, and so he gaue to posterity a more rare and holy Example, if at any tyme perhaps they did amisse, to be content to be directed by their Iuniors, then Paul to be bould and confident: Yea the inferiours to resist their betters for de∣fending the Truth of the Ghospell, brotherly Charity alwayes preser∣ued. And see the like answere in(7) S. Hierome and(8) S. Gregory.

Reynolds vrgeth that,(9) the Apostles(10) Which were at Hierusalem, sent Peter and Iohn to the people of Samaria:(11) The A∣postles and Brethren that were in Iury, called Peter to an account,

when he had preached to Cornelius, which seeme to argue, that he was not head of the rest. Answ. All mission doth not suppose superiority in the sender, for the holy Ghost(12) is sayd to be sent from the Father & the Sonne, and yet is in∣feriour to neyther: so also fellowes in Colledges, and part∣ners in Incorporations, do by Election, send some of their Company, equall in authority to the rest about their affai∣res. And others are sent by aduise and humble intreaty, as the(13) people of the Iewes sent Phinees the high Priest to the sonnes of Ruben and Gad. And thus the Councell may send the King to vndertake some enterprise for the good of the Common wealth. And thus was Peter by intreaty sent to the people of Samaria. And so also of curtesy, or charity ra∣ther, he gaue account why he preached to the Gentiles, by telling the vision he receiued of gods diuine pleasure therin, to instruct such of the Apostles, as doubted whether the ty∣me were yet expedient to admit the Gentils. Or it may be sayd, he gaue that account, to free himselfe from the calum∣niation of his Enemies, and scandall of the Iewes.

It is further vrged, that the first Controuersy arysing in the Church, was not defyned by any one supreme Iudge, but by the Assembly of the Apostles and Seniors,(14) The Apostles and Ancients assembled to consider of this word. Answ. S. Peter, who was the chiefe, was there present, who therfore, though S. Iames Bishop of that Diocesse being then present, did speake first in the Councell; which he durst not haue done, if he had not been the head thereof: neyther doth it impugne a Monarchicall Gouernement, that things be de∣fyned in a publicke assembly, with the common counsaile and consent of the Princes or chiefe Nobles.

In like sort it is obiected, that S. Paul sayth to Bishops,(15) Take heed to your selues, and to the whole flocke, wherin the ho∣ly Ghost hath placed you Bishops, to rule the Church of God &c. And the like sayth(16) S. Peter. Answ. It is not denyed, but that Bishops and Priests are to feed and rule the Church, e∣uery one being to take particular care & charge of the peo∣ple committed vnto him: but the question is, of the chiefe power ouer the whole Church, for which the forsaid places inforce nothing.

Others obiect that Christ alone is a head sufficient for the gouernment of the whole Church, and therefore no ne∣cessity that S. Peter, or any Pope should be esteemed as head of the vniuersall Church vpon Earth. Answ. Christ alone as our Supreme Lord and King, is sufficient to go••erne all Empires, Kingdomes, Cittyes, armies, families, and flocks: and yet therefore we must not inferre, that Emperours are to be driuen out of their Empyres, Kings out of their king∣domes, Gouernours out of Cittyes, Commanders from their Armies, Maysters from their families, and shepheards from their flockes: wherefore in this as in sundry other things, we are to consider the sweet course of Gods Prouidēce, who vseth the concurrence of secondary causes in the productiō, administration, and preseruation of things. So that as he v∣seth the Sunne, the Ayre, the Raine, the Earth, as seconda∣ry causes and instruments for our corporall nourishment; so doth he vse man, as his Instrument, to instruct vs in fayth, to feed vs with his Sacraments, and to be our Gouernour and Commaunder in matters spirituall. And though it be most true, that Christ is the chiefe Head or Rocke of the Church, yet that S. Peter in a good sense might also be a head or Rocke, S. Basil doth teach vs saying,(17) Though Peter be a Rocke, he is not a Rock as Christ is, for Christ is the true immo∣ueable Rocke of himselfe, Peter is vnmoueable by Christ the Rock: for Iesus doth communicate and impart his dignities, not voyding himself of them, but houlding them to himselfe, bestoweth them also vpon others:(18) He is the light, and yet you are the lights, he is the Priest, and yet(19) he maketh Priests, he is the Rocke, and he made a Rock. So weake are the Obiections which Prot. take from Scrip∣tures.

Notes

• (1)

  Can. 39. Arabico.
• (2)

  Part. 2. Act, 3.
• (3)

  Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 10. Rhem. Test. in Io. 21.17.
• (4)

  Aug. ep. 9. 11. 19.
• (5)

  Act. 21.26.
• (6)

  In Foxe Act. Mon. p. 1139.
• (7)

  Controu. 3. q. c. 3. pag. 604.
• (8)

  Controu. 4. q. 2. c. 2. p. 545.
• (9)

  De vera & fal. Relig. c. de clauibus.
• (10)

  Luther in Assert. Art. 25. Calu Inst. l. 4. c. 6. §. 7. Magdeburg. Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 7 fol 524.
• (11)

  Illyricus Cent. 1. l 2. c. 7.
• (12)

  Instit l. 4. c. 11 §. 6.
• (13)

  In Pro∣legom. cont. Petrum à Soto.
• (14)

  Sess 15.
• (15)

  Apologia ad Ludoui∣cum Baua∣rum.
• (16)

  In Ex∣planat. Art. 50.
• (17)

  Controu. 2. q 2. c. 2. p. 455.
• (18)

  Controu. 4. q 1. c. 2. p. 525.
• (19)

  Apol. cont. Epis. Luzon. c. 5. p. 122.
• (20)

  Tom. 4. in Col. 1.
• (1)

  Mat. 20.26. Mar. 9.34. Luc. 9.46.
• (2)

  Luc. 22.26.
• (3)

  Luc. 22.27.
• (4)

  Ib. ver. 13.
• (5)

  Calu. Inst. l. 4. c. 20. §. 7.
• (6)

  Mat. 20.25. Luc. 22.25. Mar. 10.42.
• (7)

  Mat. 20.28.
• (8)

  Luc. 22.27.
• (9)

  Io. 23.13.
• (10)

  1. Pet. 5.
• (11)

  Mat. 16.18.19.
• (12)

  C. 1.42.
• (13)

  Gen. 17.5
• (14)

  Io. 1.42.
• (15)

  Mat. 16.18.
• (16)

  Rey∣nolds in his Conf. c. 2. diuis. 1. Bils. part. 1 pa. 63.
• (17)

  1. Cor. 3.11.
• (18)

  Eph. 2.20. Apoc. 21.14.
• (19)

  Concione de Poeniten∣tia.
• (20)

  De∣fence. p. 300.
• (21)

  De pote∣state Papae. & Cent. 1. l. 1. c. 4. Col. 175.
• (22)

  Luc. 22.32.
• (23)

  Serm. 22. de verb. A∣post.
• (24)

  1. Pet. 2.5.
• (25)

  Heb. 3.6.
• (26)

  1. Cor. 3.9.
• (27)

  Eph. 2.20. Apoc. 21.14.
• (28)

  Apoc. 21.14.
• (29)

  See hereafter.
• (30)

  Gal. 4.24.
• (31)

  Hilar. de Trinit. l. 6. & 10. & in Ps. 131. Aug. l. 2. cont. duas ep. Gaud. c. 23.
• (32)

  Hilar. in hunc locum. & l. 6. de Trinit. Chry∣sost. hom. 55. in Math. Cy∣ril. l. 12. in Ioan. c. 64. Aug. Ser. 114. de Temp. Leo Ser. 11. de pass. Domini. & ser. 2. de SS. Petro & Paulo.
• (33)

  Rom. 4.9
• (34)

  Rom. 4.17.
• (35)

  Mat. 18.18.
• (36)

  Isa. 22.22.
• (37)

  Isa. 9.6.
• (38)

  Apoc. 3.7.
• (39)

  Io. 21.15.
• (40)

  Mat. 2.6.
• (41)

  En∣glish, Bib. of Anno 1578.
• (42)

  Michaeas 5.2.
• (43)

  Apoc. 19.15.
• (44)

  Luc. 11.41.
• (45)

  Controu. 4 q 2. c. 4. p. 573.
• (46)

  In hunc locum
• (47)

  In 1. Ioan. 3.3.
• (48)

  Mat. 10.12.
• (49)

  See also Luc. 22.8. Io. 21 2. Mat. 17.1. Mar 5.37. & 13.3.
• (50)

  Mat. 10.2. Mar. 3.16. Luc. 6.14. Act. 1.13.
• (51)

  Mar. 5.37. Luc. 8.51.
• (52)

  Gal. 2.9.
• (53)

  Ambrose Aug & Hie∣ron. vpon this place, & in the text, & in their Commen∣taries.
• (54)

  C. 1.18.
• (55)

  1. Cor. 1.12.
• (56)

  Apoc. 12.7.
• (57)

  Ib. vers. 9.
• (58)

  Mar. 1.36.
• (59)

  Luc. 8.45.
• (60)

  Mar. 16.7. See also Luc. 9.32. Act. 2.14.5.29. 1. Cor. 9.5.
• (61)

  Io. 1.39, 40.
• (62)

  Cent. 2. l. 2. c. 10.
• (63)

  C. 10.2.
• (64)

  In his annotations vpon the New Test. of Anno 1556. in Mat. 10.2.
• (65)

  Of Anno 1578. 1579.
• (66)

  Mat. 1••.29.
• (67)

  Mat. 17.27.
• (68)

  Luc 5.2.3.
• (69)

  Mat. 16.16.
• (70)

  Luc. 22.31.
• (71)

  Luc. 21.16.
• (72)

  Mat. 16.13.
• (73)

  Act. 1.15. & 5.29. & 15.7.
• (74)

  Act. 1.22.
• (75)

  Act. 2.14.
• (76)

  Act. 5.2 3 5.
• (77)

  Gal. 10.18.
• (78)

  Inst. l. 4. c. 6. §. 9.
• (79)

  1. Pet. 2.25.
• (80)

  Mat. 17.5.
• (81)

  Io. 1.33.
• (1)

  In Ioan. c. 11.
• (2)

  In Math. Can. 16.
• (3)

  L. 6. Ep. 3.
• (4)

  Ho, 55. in Mat.
• (5)

  In. c. 16. Math.
• (6)

  Ep ad Felicem.
• (7)

  Ser. 68. & 47. & see S. Leo Ser. 1. de anniuersa∣rio assumptio∣nis suae ad Pontifi••atum.
• (8)

  ••n psal. cont. part. Donat. & de Bap. cont. Don l. 2. c. 1.
• (9)

  Ser 5. in fest. Pet & Pau & ser. 15. de sanctis. Ep. ad Quint.
• (10)

  In ••sal. 30. Con. 2.
• (11)

  De Tra∣dit. Apost. part. 2. l. 3. Col. 622.
• (12)

  De vnit. Eccles.
• (13)

  Act. 5. Orig. hom. 5. in Exod. Epiph. in Ancorato. Basil l. 2. in Eunom. Ter∣tul. l. de Praes∣cript.
• (14)

  Ho. 55. in Mat.
• (15)

  Ser. 47.
• (16)

  L. 4. Ep. 32.
• (17)

  Io. 21.15,
• (18)

  Luc. 22.31.
• (19)

  Mat. 16.18.
• (20)

  Ad cap. 24. Lucae.
• (61)

  De vnit. Eccl.
• (22)

  L. 2. de Sacerdoti••.
• (23)

  L. 2. de Consider.
• (24)

  Ep. 89. ad Episcopos Viennensis Prouinciae. Max. ser. de S. Pet. & Pau.
• (25)

  Quaest. vet. & nou. Test. q. 75.
• (26)

  Luc. 22.
• (27)

  In Ps. 13. multo ante med.
• (28)

  Gal. 1.18.
• (29)

  In Gal. 1.
• (30)

  Ep. 89. ad Aug. c. 2.
• (32)

  Ho. 87. in Ioan. 21. See also Oecumenius in Gal. 1.
• (33)

  Mat. 10.12.
• (34)

  In 2. Cor. 11.
• (35)

  L 2. de Confid. c. 8.
• (36)

  Resp. ad Bell. disp. part. 1. p. 277.
• (37)

  Instit. l. 4. c. 6. Sec. 6.
• (38)

  Confut. of the Pa∣pists Quar∣rels. p 4.
• (39)

  C••nt. 5. Col. 1262.
• (40)

  Catalo∣gus testium veritatis. to. 1. p. 27.
• (41)

  Philip∣pus Nicolai in Comment. de regno Dei. p. 221.
• (42)

  Cent. 3. Col. 84.
• (43)

  Cent. 3. Col. 84.
• (44)

  Cent. 3. Col. 85.
• (45)

  Reten∣tiue p. 248.
• (1)

  De Eccle∣sia. c. 9.
• (2)

  In pro∣fessione fidei. cap. 38.
• (3)

  Perpet. Gouern. c. 6. p. 53.
• (4)

  Diuers degrees of Ministers. l. 2. c. 21. p. 173. 174.
• (5)

  Def. pag. 70.
• (6)

  In Ioan. 1. 42.
• (7)

  Controu. 4. q. 2. pag. 544.
• (8)

  Con. Dur. l. 5. sect. 4.
• (9)

  Confer. Cap. 2. sec. 1.
• (10)

  L 1. de Repub. c. 7. mum. 1.
• (11)

  Controu. 4 q. 2. c. 4 p. 557.
• (12)

  Resp. ad Apol. Bellar. c. 8.
• (13)

  Whiteg. Def. p. 373.
• (14)

  Ibid. p. p. 469.
• (15)

  Ibid.
• (16)

  In Whiteg. Def. p. 66. 68.
• (17)

  Ibid. p. 62. 63 65. 68. 70. 395.
• (18)

  Ibid. p. 70. 304.
• (19)

  In whi∣teg. Def. p. 380.
• (20)

  In reso∣lutionibus.
• (21)

  Of the Church, l. 5. c. 32.
• (22)

  Ag. the Plea of the Innoc. c. 9. p. 106.
• (23)

  Ib. p. 107.
• (1)

  Gal. 2.11.
• (2)

  De Praes∣cript. num. 7.
• (3)

  Art. 21.26.
• (4)

  Aug. Ep. 9.11.19.
• Ep 71. ad Quint.
• (6)

  Ep. 19. c. 2. & l. 2. de Bap. c. 1.
• (7)

  In Gal. 2.
• (8)

  Ho. 18. in Ezech.
• (9)

  Conf. c. 4. diuis. 3.
• (10)

  Act. 8.14.
• (11)

  Act. 31.35.
• (12)

  Io. 14.26. & 15.26.
• (13)

  Iosue. 22.
• (14)

  Act. 15.6.
• (15)

  Act. 20.28.
• (16)

  1. Pet. 5.1.2.
• (17)

  L. de Poenit.
• (18)

  Mat. 5.14.
• (19)

  Luc. 22.19.