A Retentive to Stay Good Christians, Chapter 12
The 12. chapter.
THat S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the other Apostles, is most manifestly seen… by his chiefe Bishoply power. Howe Sander.Christ loued Peter aboue others.
M. Sander fantasying that he hath proued Peter superior Fulke.to the Apostles, not in their Apostleship, but in his Byshoply degree, doth yet againe distinguish the order and office of a Byshop from the authoritie and iurisdiction of the same. And in order and office he confesseth that all Byshopps of the worlde, are equall as Hierome sayeth, ad Euagrium, and Cyprian De vnitate eccles…e, but not in authoritie. But seeing he rehearseth the testimonie of Hierome imperfectly, I will set it downe at large, that you may see whether it will beare his distinction. He writeth against a custome of the Church of Rome, by which the Deacons were preferred abooue the Priestes, whome hee proueth by the Scripture to be equall with Byshoppes, excepte onelyonly in ordaining. Quid enim facit exempta ordinatione Episcopus &c. For what doth a Bishop excepting ordination which a Priest or Elder doth not? Neither is it to be thought, that there is one church of the city of Rome and an other of the whole worlde. Both Fraunce, and Britayn, & Africa, and Persia, and the East, and India, & all barbarous nations, worship one Christ, obserue one rule of truth. If auctoritie be sought, the world is greater then a citie. Wheresoeuer a Bishop be either at Rome, or at Eugubium, or at Constantinople, or at Rhegium, or at Alexandria, or at Tunis, he is of the same worthines & of the same Priesthoode. Power of riches & basenes of pouerty make not the Bishop higher or inferior. But they are all successors of the Apostles. And lest you should thinke he speaketh onelyonly of equalitie in order & office, & not in authority. He doth in an other place shew that the authoritie of eueryevery Priest is equall with eueryevery Bishop by Gods disposition, & that the excelling of one Bishop aboue other Priests, came only by custom. In Titum cap. 1. Sieut ergo presbyteri sciunt se ex Ecclesiae consuetudine, ei qui sibi praepositus fuerit, esse subiectos: it a Episcopi nouerint, se magis consuctudine, quam dispositionis Dominicae veritate, presbyteris esse maieres. Therefore as Priestes do know, that by custom of the Church, they are subiect to him that is set ouer them: so let Bishops know, that they are greater then Priests, rather by custom then by truth of the Lordes appoyntment. If the authoritie then & iurisdiction of Bishops dependeth vponupon custō, & not vponupon gods appointment, Peter was not by our lords appointmēt preferred in bishoplik authority before the rest of ye Apostles, nor the Bishop of Rome, before other Bishops & Priestes, but only by custom. as Hierom saith. S. Cyprians wordes also inferre the same. Episcopatus vnus est, cuius à singulis in solidum pars tenetur. The Bishops office is one, whereof eueryevery man doth partake the Bishops office wholy. Now if authoritie & iurisdiction doe pertayne to the Bishops office, eueryevery Bishop hath it wholy, as (to follow M. Sanders example) whatsoeuer is incident to the nature or kind of a man, is equally in eueryevery man.
But now the greatest matter resteth, to proue how S. Peter had more committed to his charge then the rest of the Apostles, and that he taketh on him to proue, by this reason. Peter loued Christ more then all the rest of the Apostles, therefore he gaue him greater authoritie in feeding his sheepe, then to the rest, But I deny the argument. For Peter loued Christ more then the rest, because Christ had forgiuen him greater sin…es, then to the rest, Luc. 7. 47. In consideration whereof, he required greater diligence in doing his office, but gaue him not a greater charge or authoritie.
Now where M. Sander reasoneth, that Peter loued Christ most, because Christ first loued him most, and Christ loued him most, because he would make him gouernour of his Church, it is a shamefull petition or begging of that which is in question. For the nearest cause of Peters greater louelove, was the greater mercy which he founde, which mercy proceeding from the louelove of God as the first & infinite cause, can hauehave no higher, superior, or former cause. But Peter in respect of greater louelove shewed to him, in that greater sinne was forgiuen him, was bound to shewe greater louelove toward Christ, which he required to be shewed in feeding his sheepe, yet this proueth not, that greater authoritie was giuen him, or that he did feede more then all men. For S. Paule sayth truly of him selfe, I hauehave labored more then they all, 1. Cor. 15. 10. wherby it appeareth, that Peter as a man, was not equall with Christ in the effect of excellent louelove, which was in him in comparable. And whereas M. Sander talketh so much of his commission of feeding, I say these words feede my sheepe &c. be not wordes of a newe commission, but words of exhortation, that he shew exceeding diligence in the commission equally deliuered to all the Apostles: As my father hath sent me, so I send you. Ioan. 20 21.
But the auncient fathers expound it so, that it might seeme to be a singular commission to Peter. It can not be denyed but diuers of the auncient fathers, otherwise godly and learned, were deceyued in opinion of Peters prerogatiue, which appeareth not in the Scriptures, but was chalenged by the Bishops of Rome, which seemed to hauehave a shew of some benefit of vnitye to the Church, so long as the Empire cōtinued at Rome, & the Bishops of that …ie retayned the substance of Catholike religion: yet did they neuer imagine, that such blasphemous & tyrannicall authoritie, yea such false & hereticall doctrine, as afterward was mayntayned vnderunder the pretēce of that prerogatiue, shoulde or ought to hauehave bene defended thereby. But let vsus see what M. Sander can saye, out of the aun…ient writers. August in Hom. de past. cap. 13. writeth: Dominus &c. Our Lord hath commended vnitie in Peter him selfe. There were many Apostles, and it is sayde to one, feede my sheepe. God forbid there should now lacke good pastors, but all good pastors are in one, they are one. This maketh nothing for Peters authority ouer the rest, but only the author supposeth the vnitie of all Pastors to be allegorically signified, in that Christ speaketh that to one, which is common to all good sheepeheardes, namely to feede his sheepe. And againe de sanct hom. 24 In vno Petro &c. The vnitie of all pastors was figured in one Peter. So might it wel be without giuing Peter authoritie ouer all Pastors. Chrysostom is the next: lib. 2. de sacerdotio. who sayth that Christ did aske whether Peter loued him, not to teache vsus yt Peter loued him, but to enforme vsus quanti sibi curae sit gregis huius praefectura. howe great care he taketh of the gouernment of this flock. Here he would hauehave vsus marke, that Chrysostom calleth it a rule & gouernment of the flock, which Christ intendeth. Yea sir, we see it very wel, but you would make vsus blind, if we could not see, that Chrysostom speaketh not of a general rule, graunted to Peter only, but of the gouernment of eueryevery Churche by eueryevery Pastor. And therefore you daunce naked in a net, when you alledge the words following absolutely, as though they pertayned to Peter onelyonly. Petrum Christus auctoritate praeditum esse voluit, &c. whereas Chrysostom speaking to eueryevery Priest, & shewing how careful he ought to be in his office, in respect of his high calling & the excellent dignitie thereof, sayth: Etiam ne nune nobisium contendes fraudemistam tibi non bene ac foeliciter cessisse, quiper eam vniuersis Dei optimi maximi bonis administrandis sis praeficiendus, quūpraesertim ea agas, quecū Petrus ageret, illū Christus auctoritate preditū esse voluit, ac reliquos item Apostolos longē praecellere. Wilt thou then stil contend with vsus, that this fraude hath not happened well & luckely to thee, which by it, art to be made ouerseer of all the goods of God almightye, especially when thou doest those thinges, which when Peter did, Christ would hauehave him to be endued with authoritie, & also farre to excel the other Apostles. Here M. Sander wil hauehave vsus note 3. things, 1, Peters authoritie, 2. passing the Apostles, 3. farre passing. We marke them all, that they are directly ouerthrowing M. Sanders rocke of the popish Churche. For they declare, that Peter in doing those things, was endued with authoritie, & farre passed the other Apostles, euen as eueryevery Priest (to whō Chrysostom speaketh) when he doth the same thinges, is endued with the same authoritie, & farre passeth all other men. So that here is none other authority, nor excellēce of Peter then such as is common to all ministers in executing their charge, and was common to all the Apostles when they did the same things that Peter did. For Chrysostom proueth to Basil, that he did him no hurt, when by pollicie he caused him to be called to the ministery against his will, seeing that thereby he was made partaker of the reward of the faithfull & wise seruaunt, and equall in authoritie with Peter, if of louelove towardes Christ he would diligently feede his flocke. So that Leo had no iust cause to saye that in respect of any greater authoritie, Peter had a speciall care of feeding the sheepe committed to him. but rather in respect that he had greater cause to louelove Christ, which had so mercifully forgiuen him so shamefull a fall.
But Arnobius is a lesse partiall witnes then Leo a Bishop of Rome, & he vponupon the Psal. 138. writeth thus. Nullus Apostolorum nomen &c. None of the Apostles receiued the name of a Pastor. For our Lord Iesus Christ alone saide. I am the good pastor, & againe my sheepe follow me. Therefore this holy name, & the power of this name, after his resurrection he graunted to Peter repenting. And he that was thryse denyed, gaue to his denyer, that power which he had alone. Arnobius (saith he) noteth none of the Apostles euer to hauehave had the name of a pastor giuen to him by Christ, beside S. Peter alone. But I demaund of M. S. where he hath in Arnobius this word euer? For he sayth, yt Peter had this name after ye resurrection wc none of ye Apostles had before. He writeth against the Nouatians wc denied helpe to such as repented after baptisme, prouing by exāple of Peter, that they are to be receyued, seeing Christ gaue him greater dignitie after his repentance, then he had before his fal. But that Peter had greater authoritie thē the rest of the Apostles he neuer thought or sayde. M. Sander cutteth of both the head and the tayle. In this discourse lest the meaning of Arnobius might appeare, for thus he writeth: Dicis cert… baptizatis non debere poenitentibus subueniri Ecce Apostolo poenitenti succurritur, qui est Episcoporum Episcopus, & mai…r gradus additur ploranti, quam sublatus est deneganti. Quod vt doceam, illud est endo, quod nullus Apostolorū nomen Pasioris accepit. &c. In deede thou sayst that such as repent being baptised ought not to be helped. Beholde the Apostle repenting is helped, which is a Bishop of Bishops, and a greater degree is restored to him weeping then was taken from him denying. Which that I may teach, this I shew, that none of the Apostles receyued the name of a sheepeheard, &c. Againe in the ende following the wordes before cited by M. Sander he sayth, vt non s…lum recuperasse quod amiserat, probaretur, verum etiam & multo amplius poenitendo, quam negand… perdiderat acquisisse. He gaue his denyer that power which before his resurrection he alone had: That he might be proued not onelyonly to hauehave recouered that which he lost, but also to hauehave gotten much more by repenting, then he lost by denying. This speaketh Arnobius of the general authoritie which Peter had ouer all the Church, as eueryevery Apostle had likewise, & was a Bishop and ouerseer of Bishops as well as Peter, and a Pastor of the vniuersal Church, which thing Arnobius neuer did deny. These therfore be M. Sanders arguments, none of the Apostles had the name of a Pastor before Christes resurrection, ergo they neuer had it. Peter was called to greater dignitie after his fall then he had before, ergo he was greater then his fellow Apostles. Again Peter was a Bishop or an ouerseer of Bishops, ergo he was Bishop ouer the Apostles.
Next Arnobius is cited Ambrose in 24. Luc. Who first ayd, that Peter was eueryevery where, ether alone or first And thē vponupon these words, Peter doost thou louelove me, sayth: Dominus interrogat &c. Our Lord asked net to learne, but to teach whō he beeing to be l…fted vpp into heauen, did leaue to vsus as the Vicare of his louelove. For so thou hast …. Simon thou sonne of Iohn, doest thou l…ue me? Yea Lord thou knowest that I louelove thee. Iesus sayth to him, feede my lambes. Peter being priuy of a good conscience, doth testifie his owne affection, not taken for the time, but already well knowen to God. For who else were able to professe this thing of him selfe. A…d because he alone amongst all professeth, he is preferred before all. M. Sander omitteth the conclusion. Maior enim omnibus charitas. For the greatest of all is Chari…ie.
So Peter is heereby declared to hauehave the greateste louelove, but not to hauehave the greatest authoritie. M. Sander vrgeth that he is the Vicar of Christes louelove and pastorall office. The one indeede Ambrose sayth, the other Sander sayeth but is not able to proue: no not by that which followeth in the same place of Ambrose, that Peter had committed to him to feede, not onelyonly the Lambes with milke, as at the first, nor yet the little sheepe, as at the seconde time, but the sheepe, to the end that he beeing more perfect, might gouerne the more perfecte. For eueryevery one of the Apostles hadde the same charge to feede the sheepe of Christe, and not the Lambes or little sheepe onelyonly. Neither doth the woorde of gouernment helpe him. For eueryevery Apostle had the like gouernment ouer the whole flock wc Peter hath, and there is an ordinary gouernment in eueryevery particular church, 1. Co. 12. wc proueth not the gouernors to be rulers one ouer another, wherefore this collection is not only vaine, but also ridiculus, that Peter should hauehave authoritie to gouerne Patriarches, Archbishops and Bishops aswell as Parishe priests, because he must feed ye sheep of Christ, I wil not here stand to discus how properly ye distinctiō of lambs litle sheep & sheep, is obserued by Ambrose, but taking it according as he distinguisheth it, yet heere is nothing giuen to Peter but primacie of louelove, or as else where he sayth of order, but of authoritie singular, he…re is nothing at al. And that his conclusiō declareth sufficiently Et idio quasi perfecto in omnibus, quem caro iamreue… are non posset a gloria passionis, corona decernitur. And therfore a crown is decreed to him as to one perfect in all things whome the fleshe could not call back from the glory of suffering. This conclusion M. S. (as his manner is) hath left out, by which it is apparant, that Ambrose inferreth no singularitie of authoritie in Peter, as more perfet thē the rest of the Apostles, but as perfect in such degre, as the rest of the Apostles which were likewise prepared to martyrdō, were equal wt him therin. The testimony of Bernard a late w…iter, though he were no flatterer, yet I receiue not, as of one which was deceiued with the common error of his time.
But in signe that Peter was generall Shepheard, saith M. San. it is not read that he was ordained bishop of any other then of Christ, yet did he with two other Apostles ordaine S. Iames byshop of Ierusalem as Eus. lib. 2. cap. … writeth. There is no dout but Iames was acknowl…dged by the Apostles to be appointed by the holy ghoste to remaine at Ierusalem, though not as a p…rticuler bishop, but as an Apostle of the whole Church. But as we read not that Peter was made Bishop by any man, so we read not that he was made Byshop by Christ.
Yet Ar…obius in Psa. 138. saith he was made a Bishop of Bishops. Ecce Apostolo p. enitenti succurritur qui est episcoporum episcopus. Behold the Apostle beeing penitent is succoured, which is a Bishop of Bishops. He asketh if any thing could be spoken more plainly? yes verely, you had need of plainer speaches then this, to proue that hee was byshop of the Apostles. For admit that he was an ouerseer of particular bishops, as the word foreign doth signi…ie, yet it followeth not that he was …n ouerseer or Byshop of the Apostles. In which sense Clemens also (if the Epistle were not counterfaite) might iustly call Iames a Byshop of Byshops, & not as M. Sand. aunsweareth that he was an Archbishop of inferior Byshops, but an Apostle ouerseer of particuler Bishops.
That Cyprian ad Quintum sayth: Neque quisquam &c Neither doeth any of vsus make him selse a Byshoppe of Byshops. He aunsweareth that although no man may make himselfe, yet Christe may make a man Bishop of Byshopes, but where findeth he that Christe maketh the Pope a Byshop of Byshoppes? Howe Peter might bee called a Byshop of Byshoppes, I hauehave shewed before But the Councell of Carth. 3. Cap. 26. forbiddeth that the Byshop of Rome, or any other Primate shoulde be called the Prince of Priests, or highest Priest, or by any such lyke name, but only the Byshop of the first seate.
Yet Optatus feared nor to write thus, lib. 7. de schism. of S. Peter. Preferri apostolis omnibus meruit &c. He deserued to be preferred before all the Apostles, and he alone receiued the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen to be communicated vntounto the reste. Ma…ster Sander confessing and truely, that the Apostles tooke the Keyes belonging to their Apostolike office immediatly of Christe, saith they receiued the Keyes of their Byshoplike office of Peter. But what lock was there, that they could not open and shut by their Aopstolike Key? When Christe sayth, Whatsoeuer you binde or loose, & whose sinnes soeuer you forgiue or retayne, which was the power of their Apostolike Keyes? If the Apostolike Keyes were so sufficient, what neede they any Byshoplike Keyes? Into these absurdities both he & Optatus doe followe, whiles the one will vrge a prerogatiue of Peter, the other will forge a Byshoplike office in the Apostles, whereof the Scripture giueth vsus no instruction.
As for Leo and Gregorye Byshoppes of Rome, although they were not come to the full pryde of Antichrist, yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seate, neere fiue or sixe hundreth yeeres before them, and then greatly increased, they were so deceiued with the longe continuaunce of error, that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the reste of his fellowe Apostles, then the holy Scriptures of God, (against which no continuaunce of error cann prescribe) doth either allow or beare with all. Wherefore although he hauehave some shewe out of the olde writers, yet hath he nothing directly to prooue that Peter did excell the other Apostles in Byshoplike authoritie, and out of the worde of God no one …ote or tytle, that Peter as a Byshop excelled the other Apostles, not as Apostles, but as Byshops.