Conference Between Rainolds and Hart, Chapter 2
The second Chapter. The promise of the supremacie pretended to be made by Christ vntounto Peter, 1 in the wordes, Thou art Peter, and vponupon this rocke will I build my church: 2 &, to thee wil I giuegive the keyes of the kingdome of heauen. Of expounding the scriptures: how the right sense of them may be known, and who shall iudge therof. 3 what is meant by the keyes, the power of binding and loosing, promised by Christ to Peter, and (in Peter) to all the Apostles.
HART.
How large and great soeuer this power and supremacie doth séeme in your eyes:The first Diuision. it belongeth properlie to the Bishop of Rome. And that is alreadie prooued by the reason which before I made. S. Peter was head of all the Apostles. The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles. The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of all Bishops, and by consequent of their dioceses, that is of all the church of Christ.
Rainoldes.
Remember in what sense you take the name of head: and I denie both the propositions of this argument.
Hart.
I will proue them both: and first the former. Christ did promise Peter that he would make him head: therefore hee did make him.
Rainoldes.
He did not promise him.
Hart.
*Staplet. pri… cip. doctrin. lib▪ 6. cap. 2.Christ did say vntounto him, nMat. 16.18.Tu es Petrus, & super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam: Thou art Peter, and vponupon this peter will I build my church. Therefore he did promise him.
Rainoldes.
The reason doth not folow. But why do you english it so, Thou art Peter, and vponupon this peter? oSanders rocke of the church. Bristow Me…tin. 47.Your doctors were wont to cite it, Thou art Peter, & vponupon this rocke: and to that rocke you tyed all. Doo you feare shipwracke there now?
Hart.
No syr. But to make our anker-holde the surer, the which is fastned on S. Peter, Doctor Allen thought good that in the translation of the new testament into our tongue, which wée were about at Rhemes, As in their Annotations on Mat. 16.18. they say it should be by Christs words speaking in the Syriake tongue: yea, and by the meaning of the greeke wordes too. Though they keepe the name of rocke in their text, because of the latin.it should be thus englished; Thou art Peter and vponupon this peter. The which I rather folow, then the other of the rocke, because it is agréeable vntounto the originall.
Rainoldes.
It is not. For the originall is the Gréeke text: and that hath, foreign. wherto your latin olde translation agreeth, with Petrus and petra: as your selfe alleaged it. The wordes of both which though they differ not so much as Peter and rocke: yet they are not one, as your Peter and peter.
Hart.
Although the Gréeke wordes foreign and foreign differ in termination: yet they are one in meaning, and signify the same thing. For as foreign signifyeth a rocke, so doth foreign in the Athenian language. And it must be noted that Christ spake in Hebrue, or rather in the Syriake tongue: wherein the name, that hée gaue Peter, is pIoh. 1.42.Cephas. Now, in the Syriake translation of the testament, that word is the same without difference in both places. *Staplet. princ. doctr. li. 6. ca. 3.For thus are the words, foreign: as if a man would say, Thou art Cephas, and vponupon this Cephas; or, Thou art Rocke, and vponupon this rocke. For Cephas in the Syriake doth signifie a rocke: as qIn dictionar. Syro-chald. Regior. Biblior. Tom. 6.Guido Fabricius a learned linguist sheweth. wherfore the meaning of the word foreign must be the same in greeke. And so we may kéepe it well in both places, Thou art Peter and vponupon this peter.
Rainoldes.
The wordes which you alleage are not of the Syriake translation: they are Hebrue. But as the Hebrue foreign is one in both places: so the Syriake I graunt hath foreign in thē both. And I gladlie take it (because our Sauiour Christ spake in that tongue) as an exposition of his wordes to Peter. Yet I note by the way, that although your rSession. 4.councell of Trent hath allowed the latin olde trāslation alone as authenticall, and hath decréed thereof that no man shall dare or presume vnderunder any pretense to reiect it: notwithstanding, you your selues will depart from it, and that not onelie to the originall (which wee should not bee suffred) but also to translations, if they maye séeme to make for you in any point more then your olde doth.
Hart.
We do not reiect that authenticall translation, but open the sense of it, by comparing it with the greeke, and the gréeke with the Syriake.
Rainoldes.
But if we should doo so in any point against you, this answere would not serue vsus: it would be accounted a colour or pretense, such as your Councell hath condemned.
Hart.
You doe vsus great iniurie, in that you séeme to make it all one to reiect the authenticall Latin, and to take aduantage for our selues out of the originall textes.
Rainoldes.
For your selues? Nay, I make not that all one. I sayd, If we should doo so, not, If you should do so. For doo you what you list: and all must be soothed as agréeing with your Latin, and opening the sense of it. But if we should take aduantage for our selues by the originall textes: our aduantage would be nipped on the head as a pretense. For example, Andreas Masius, a learned man of yours, hath written a Commentarie on the booke of Iosua: in the which he launceth your authenticall Latin, almost in euerie Chapter: yea, sS. Andr. Mas. cō mentar. in Iosu. cap. 14. ver. 15.he saith that S. Jerom, (if hee be the Authour of it) doeth seeme to hauehave translated *Sciens.wittingly a place against the meaning of the Hebrue, that he might vouch a fansy of his owne thereby. Yet tIoh. Molanus Louaniensis.the Popish Censour, who allowed it to the print, witnesseth of that Commentarie that aMultúm elucidat veterem & vulgatam editionem.it lighteneth and openeth the common olde translation greatly. Let vsus doe much lesse, let vsus but raze the credite of it: and will you giuegive that Censure of vsus? Nay, if wée do note that uGen. 8.21.where your old translation hath of the frame or imagination of mans hart, that it is 1Lat. in malum prona.prone to euill, the Hebrue text hath, not prone to euill, but 2Hebr. foreigneuill: xCensura Colon. in Dialog. 2.the Censure of Coolein will answere that it is farre *Longé consultius.better to say (as your olde translation saith) prone to euill: and will fetch in also the Rabbins of the Iewes, not to expounde the Latin according to the Hebrue, but to alaye the Hebrue according to the Latine. Wherefore in that I saide that if we should goe from your authenticall Latin to the originall textes, it would be misliked of: I doo you no iniurie. Yet I mislike it not in your plea for Peter, that you take aduantage not of the originall, but of a translation: nay, I like it well. Though I like not that which you adde to proue it: that foreign in the Greeke toong dooth signifie a rocke, as Cephas in the Syriake, and so the wordes foreign, and foreign, hauehave one meaning. For they hauehave one meaning, not because foreign doth signifie a rocke, as foreign: but because foreign doth signifie a stone, as foreign. For, that foreign sometimes signifieth a stone: qIn Lexie. gra…. ad Sacri appar. instruct. Reg. B…blior. Tom. 6.your owne learned linguists (as you call them) note, and examples thereof are rife. But that foreign any where signifieth a rocke: neither doo they shew, nor hauehave rThesaur. ling… Graec…e cong…t. ab Henr. Stephan.other skilfu…l of that toong obserued. You say, that it is so in the Athenian language: but you bring no Athenian nor any Grecian else to witnesse it. And the French toong (which foloweth the Gréeke, Hen. Stephan. de similit. ling. Graecae & Gallicae lib. 3.as in many other words, so in this,) hath *Pierre.the same word (you know) for a stone, and for the name of Peter. Wherein there is a print of the true originall & meaning of that name in the Gréeke toong. But Christ did call him Cephas in the Syriake toong: and Cephas (you say) doth signifie a rocke, as Fabricius sheweth. But tIn Dictionar. Syro-chaldaico.Fabricius sheweth further that Cephas doth signifie a stone also. And though he, or rather uElias Leuita in Thisbi.the Iewe (whom he citeth) reporteth their saying who expounde the name as taken from that worde in signification of a rocke: yet, hauing mentioned the other of a stone, he saith therevpon that so his name is Peter in the Romane toong, and in the Italian a stone is called *As Elias writeth it. He meaneth pietra: which word in the Italian keepeth that meaning of petra, from which the name of Peter grew.pereda. Whereunto I might adde that xAber. Ezra in Daniel. cap. 11. vers. 37.an other learned writer of the Iewes, and auncienter then he, doeth likewise say (as opening the sense of Peters name) that he is called stone. But, that Christ did meane a stone, not a rocke, in naming him Cephas: your stoutest champion, D. Sanders, may serue in stéed of many witnesses. For he, wanting no will to go as far as the boldest, and hauing many yeares aduised of the matter, durst say no more for Cephas, but y1. De visib. Monarchia eccles. l. 6. c. 7.that it signifieth a stone, at the most, a great stone: euen petra it selfe zlib. 6. ca. 2.he doeth expound in this maner, Super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam, Thou shalt bee the first stone (next me) of that church, which I will build on earth. In the which iudgement he doeth deserue the greater credite at your handes, because he was contented to hazard his life with the Pope against his Prince in that aAs him selfe termeth it in his letters written to Vllick Burck an Irish Gentleman.holy quarell: and hauing spent his chiefest studie in the point bIn his booke entitled, the rocke of the church.he had before times expounded it a rocke; the which exposition so fit for the Papacy he would hauehave neuer left, had not the truth enforced him to retire from it. A thing so much the likelier, because when hee laboured first to infect men with the Popes supremacie by the name of rocke, and therfore both in the title and course of all his booke did sound the rocke of the church: euen then cIn the chap. 1.he did expound Cephas and Peter doubtfully, a rocke, or a stone; and yelding the reason why Christ did name him so, he mentioned a stone onelyonly, because what place a stone hath in holding vp the house which is built vponupon it, the same should Peter hauehave in vpholding the frame of Christes militant church. Wherefore you must let go your holde of the rocke, (whereon dPrinc. doctrin. lib. 6. cap. 5.D. Stapleton doth beast your house is built) and be content to lay a stone in stéed of it. Let our Sauiour Christ alone be the rocke. If you dash your selfe against him therein, he will breake you in péeces.
Hart.
It is a disputable point. You sée that learned men are of sundrie iudgements in expounding of it: some thinking, it betokeneth a stone, some a rocke. Wherefore you can not force me to take the one and leaue the other.
Rainoldes.
Not by mens wordes: but by the word of God I can. For Christ in the Syriake toong did name him Cephas, and eIoh. 1.4….Cephas in the Gréeke is expounded foreign, and foreign in English signifieth a stone. And sure you had done better, if, as the Gréeke text hath foreign and foreign, the Syriake translation Cephas & Cephas: so you had made it in English, stone and stone. For Peter and peter doth not expresse the force of the Syriake word. Rocke and rocke is strong, but the text doth not beare it. Stone and stone is fit, had you not thought it too slender. Now, sith you doo presse the Syriake translation, to shew thereby the meaning of the Latin, as you say: you must giuegive me leaue to tell you that the wordes should be rather Englished after the Syriake thus, Thou art stone, and vponupon this stone will I build my church.
Hart.
Rocke or stone, if I should giuegive you leaue to choose whither of them you list: what gaine you thereby?
Rainoldes.
The truth, which I deale for, shall gaine thus much by it, that although you construe those words (that Christ would build his church vponupon Peter) for your most aduantage, euen as Sanders doth: yet is it not proued thereby that Christ did promise him a supreme-headship ouer the Apos…les. For the church of Christ, which is the company of Gods elect and chosen, isresembled in Scripture to a materiall temple, such as was the temple which Salomon built. So, as that was called a house, fMa… ▪ 22.1….the house of prayer: in like sort the church is called a house too, but g1. Pet. 2.5.a spirituall house, to distinguish it from that: which house because it must be made of all ye godly, as it were of stones, grounded on Christ by faith, though the doctrine of the Apostles: therefore Christ is called hEsai. 2….….the chiefe corner stone in respect of the Iewes and Gentiles (as of walls) 1Eph. 2.14.which are ioyned in him: *1. Cor. 3.11.the foundation, in respect of the whole house, yea hEsai. 28.16.the foundation of foundation, as the Prophet termeth him: the twelue Apostles laid next vponupon Christ are called iReu. 21.14.twelue foundations: the faithfull laide on them, or rather after them on him, are called k1. Pet. 2.5.stones, not dead ones (such as the temple had) but liuing: the working and framing of them to this purpose is called building and l1. Cor. 12.26.edifying: which is done by preaching of mEph. 2. ver. 20.the word of truth, nver. 21.coupling them togither betwéene them selues and with Christ, that they may grow to bee a holie temple in the Lord, over. 22.for God to dwell in by his spirite. Wherefore if the wordes of Christ be so taken, that he meant the laying of Peter as a principall stone next to him selfe, and others vponupon him, whē he sayd, Thou art stone, and vponupon this stone will I build my church: this sheweth that Peter was in the first ranke (as I may say) of stones, I meane he was in order with the first who beléeued: and amongst those first he had a marke of honour, in that he was named stone, aboue his brethren. But it sheweth not, that he should be head of the rest of the Apostles. For, as he, so they are called foundations: and Christ did build his church as well on them as on him.
Hart.
Then you grant, that Christ did promise to build his church vponupon Peter.
Rainoldes.
I doo so.
Hart.
Not vponupon his doctrine onelyonly, but his person.
Rainoldes.
After a sort. What then?
Hart.
What then? What say you then to Doctors of your owne side, namely to pIn sophismatis Turrian. loc. 2.Sadeel and qThe treatise of the church chap. 7.Mornay: whom you praised so greatly, and brought them me to reade? They write that the church was builded, not vponupon the person of Peter, but vponupon his doctrine preaching Christ vntounto vsus. You graunt the contrarie.
Rainoldes.
What say you to the auncient Doctors whom they follow: chiefly to S. Austin? He writeth that the rocke, (which our Sauior promised to build his church vponupon) is Christ, and not Peter. You hold the cōtrary. rAugustin. de verb. Dom. Se…m. 1….Thou art Peter, saith he, and vponupon this rock which thou hast confessed, vponupon this rock which thou hast knowne (saying, Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God,) will I build my church. I will build thee vponupon mee, not me vponupon thee. For men entending to build on men, said, I hold of Paul, I of Apollos, I of Cephas, (that is Peter:) and others who would not be builded vponupon Peter, but vponupon the rocke, said, I hold of Christ. For the rocke was Christ: vponupon the which foundation Peter him selfe was builded: sith no man can lay an other foundation beside that which is laide, which is Iesus Christ. What say you to the rest, namely, to tIn testimon. …a vet. Testam de Trinitat contr. Iud.Gregorie Nys…en, to uDe Trinitat. lib 4.Cyril, to xIn Matth. hom…l. 55.Chrysostome, to yIn epist. ad Ephe. cap. 2.Ambrose, to zDe Trinitat. lib. 2. & 6.Hilarie? They write that this rocke is the consession of Peter. They say not, it is Peters person.
Hart.
That exposition of S. Austin, denying Peter to be the rocke, was *That is to say, an …ersight such as happeneth to men.lapsus humanus (as D. aStaplet. princip. doctr. lib. 6. cap. 3.Stapleton calleth it) caused by the diuersitie of the Gréeke and Latin toong, which either he was ignorant of, or marked not. Howbeit neuerthelesse it hath a true meaning: though not the full & proper sense of this place. Besides that, him selfe doth bRetractation. lib. 1. cap. 21.other-where expound it as vnderstood of Peter: according to the famous verses of S. Ambrose, in which he calleth Peter the rocke of the Church. The rest of the Fathers, who apply the rocke to Peters confession, imply his person in it. For, to say, that the Church is built on the confession and beliefe of Peter, is all one in déed, and to say, it is built on Peter confessing and beleeuing in Christ. Wherefore in as much as they affirme the former, they prooue withall the later by it.
Rainoldes.
S. Austin, and the Fathers, are beholding to you: whose wordes (though not answering well to your fansies) are handled so gentlie. If you were as fauourable to Sadeel and Mornay: that, which they write of Peter, would hauehave a true meaning. Though, if they (with greater zeale vntounto his doctrine then vntounto his person, that is, to Christ then to Peter) had giuen a litle lesse to him then is due: the faulte were not so much to bée …aide on their restraint, as on your excesse, who say a great deale more of him then you ought. For example, Father cReuerendi patris Roberti Bellarmini praelectiones Romae, ann. Dom. 1577. In praefat. Controuers. de summo Pontisice.Robert, the Prince of the Iesuites (in his Diuinitie lectures read publikelie at Rome about seuen yeares agoe) handling this same point of the foundation of the Church, did ground him selfe on a sentence of the Prophet Esay to proue it to be Peter, and Peters see, the see of Rome. Whereof to make his proofe strong by the wordes which God doth speake of Christ, dEsai. 28.… ▪Behold, I lay in Sion a tried pretious corner stone, a sure foundation: he affirmed that Esay did therein prophecie not of Christ, but of Peter, a stumbling stone to heretikes, & a rock of offense, but to Catholikes a tried, a pretious, a corner stone. S. e1. Pet. 2. ver. 6. & 8.Peter the Apostle expoundeth those wordes not of himselfe, but of Christ. Father Robert the Iesuit sayth that they agrée not to Christ, but to him. So to aduaunce the Popes dignitie by Peter: he maketh Peter himselfe, nay, the holy Ghost a lier. Such blasphemous outrages of your chéefe professors giuing more to Peter then stādeth with the truth and honor of the Sonne of God, might prouoke the godly spirites of his seruantes to bend to the contrarie: as husbandmen, when they would straighten a young plant that groweth crooked one way, do bow it to the other. But in the discourse of Sadeel and Mornay ▪ that the Church is built vponupon the confession of Peter not his person, there is no straining of ought beyond the truth (for the meaning of it) by your owne iudgement. For they approue and folow the exposition of S. Austin: and *Expositio Augustini habet …ententiam veram. Staplet. …. 6. c. 3.that (you affirme) hath a true meaning. As for the maner of S. Austins spéech, I graunt it séemeth somewhat tough to expound those wordes of Christ as if he sayd, Thou art Peter and vponupon me, not, Thou art Peter and vponupon thee will I build my Church. But, if the circumstances of his spéeche bée weighed: you shal find, not only the meaning of it, true; but the maner, good. For, as fNumb. 28.….it is writen that God commaunded the Iues to offer burnt offerings & sacrifices vntounto him, yet God sayth in gIere. 7.22.Ieremie that he spake not to them, neither commaunded them touching burnt offerings and sacrifices, not as though he had not commanded the things, but because he did not commaund them in that sort and respect as they vsed them: so, though it be true that Christes wordes to Peter doe import this sense, VponUpon thee will I build my Church, yet, because hée spake them in respect of Peters profession and faith (vponupon, hMat. 16.16.Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God) not in respect of Peters person, (which they built on, who sayd, i1. Cor. 1.12.I hold of Paul, I of Apollos, I of Cephas;) S. Austin might expound them well, as he doth, that Christ sayd to Peter, I wil build my church, not vponupon thee, but vponupon me. In the which conclusion, the rest of the Fathers, who expound it of Peters confession, doe ioyne with S. Austin. Neither can your shuffling of Peters cōfession, with Peter confessing, inueigle their consent. For they doo expound and vnderstand it plainelie, 1As Gregorie Nyssen doth, and Hilarie.some, of him whom Peter confessed, that is, Christ, the Sonne of the liuing God: 2As Ambrose, Chrysostom, & Cyrill.some, of Peters faith wherwith he confessed him, as by which the faithfull are builded on Christ. And this is their meaning, in saying that (which kSander. de …isib. monar. Eccles. lib. 7. Torren. confes…. August. lib. 1. cap. 9. tit. 2.your men doo vainelie triumph at) the church is built on Peter: as it appeareth by S. Hilarie. Who giuing him lHilar. in Ma… thaeum can. 16. Felix ecclesiae fundamentum.the title of the foundatiō of the church, expoundeth it some times of his mDe Trinit. l…b. 6. Christum Dei …i…ium non solum n… cupare, sed etiam credere: haecsides ecclesiae fundamentum ….faith in Christ, some times of nDe Trinit. lib. 2. vn… haec est …aelix side… p…tra, Petri ore confessa, Tu es filius Dei viui.Christ himselfe in whom he beléeued. But admitte that Christ had meant Peters person, when he promised him that he would build his church vponupon him. What conclude you of it?
Hart.
This I do conclude, that séeing the church was built vponupon Peter, and the Apostles themselues were part of the Church: therefore the Apostles were built vponupon him; and so was he their foundation. By consequent whereof, séeing the foundation is the same to a house which a head is to a bodie: I do conclude againe that Peter was the head of all the Apostles. And so my purpose is proued.
Rainoldes.
This conclusion hath neither foundation, nor head. For by as good reason you may conclude also, that, séeing the Church was built vponupon Peter, and Peter him selfe is a part of the church: therefore was Peter built vponupon him selfe, and so was he his own foundatiō. And because a foundation is the same to a house, which a head is to a bodie: therefore S. Peter was S. Peters head. Or, if you sée not either the necessitie or folly of this consequence, as it is made of Peter: you may frame the lyke of any other of the Apostles, and you will espy it. For the church of Christ, is the great Citie, that holie Ierusalem, whereof oReu. 2….….the wall had twelue foundations, and in them the names of the Lambs twelue Apostles. Then séeing that the church was built vponupon euerie one of those twelue, as vponupon Iames by name, and Peter was a part of the church: it foloweth that Peter was built vponupon Iames; and so was Iames his foundation. And séeing a foundation is the same to a house, which a head is to a bodie: it followeth againe that Iames was Peters head. which if your self denie: you must denie that wherof it doth folow by force of like reason. And so your purpose is not proued.
Hart.
But we do imagine, that in this building of the church and laying the foundations of it, Christ did laie Peter next vponupon himselfe (as the foundation of the rest) and other Apostles vponupon him.
Rainoldes.
Indéede you doo imagin it. And you consider not that your imagination is crossed by it selfe, not onelye by the truth. For, if the twelue Apostles of the Lambe (on whom hee built his church) were laid as twelue foundations, one vponupon an other, & Peter lowest of them: then, as Peter was foundation of eleuen, so the next to him must be of ten, the next to him of nine, and likewise ech of the next, vntill the last of none. A thing flatte repugnant to your imagination, wherein you make Peter (onelyonly) head of the rest, the rest of them equall all amongst themselues. Neither doth it stand with that proportion of the building which the scripture maketh, reseruing the prerogatiue of p1. Cor. 3.11.the onelyonly singular foundation to Christ, and ioyning the Apostles all in equall honour of qReu. 21.14.the twelue foundations, as I hauehave shewed. For Christ (in this house) is as it were *Mat. 7.24.a rocke, a rockie sure and firme ground, on which both the Apostles, and all his church is built: as r2. Sam. 5.9.the citie of Dauid was on the mount Sion. The Apostles are as stones, as twelue most pretious stones, which being laid ioyntlie one by an other, all on Christ, are as twelue foundations: and walles (of chosen stones) are raysed vp on them, *2. Pet. 3.9.vntill the whole number of the elect be laid on, and the building finished. One of these foundations might excell an other in pretiousnes of graces. For, the first foundation, (saith sReu. 21.19.Iohn) was a Iasper; the second, a Sapphire; the third, a Chalcedonie; the fourth, an Emeraude; and so forth the rest. Or (because I know not the vertues of these stones) tMarc. 13.1.the stones, which the Disciples of Christ did meruaile at in the temple of Ierusalem for the fairenes and greatnes of them, were (as uAntiquitat. Iudaic. lib. 15. cap. 14.Iosephus writeth) fiue and twentie cubites long, eight cubites hie, and twelue cubites broad. Now as among such stones one might be fairer or better wrought then other: so might one Apostle of Christ excell his felowes in zeale or other giftes, as namelie S. Peter. Unlesse perhaps S. Paul, whom Christ did adde to the twelue, excelled both him and them: which I do thinke rather; for x1. Cor. 15.10.he labored more then they all, and (by yStaplet. princ. doc…. l. 6. c. 12.your owne confession) conuerted more vntounto the faith. But neither Paule nor Peter were foundations of the rest: they were altogither ioint-foundations of the church, laid on Christ, the onelyonly and singular foundation, to speake of a foundation properly. UUherefore though our Sauiour in saying to Peter, Thou art stone, and vponupon this stone will I build my church, had meant that he would build it vponupon Peters person (which serueth best your fansy:) yet doth not that saying inferre a supreme-headship. But doubtles (if your fansy can yéeld vntounto the truth) he meant not Peters person, but his faith, and function in preaching of the faith. For the onelyonly person that the church is built on, as on a foundation (by the strength and vertue whereof it is vpholden) is the sonne of God, our Sauiour Iesus Christ: beside whom z1. Cor. 3.11.no other foundation may be laid: aEph. 2.21.in whom all the building being coupled togither groweth vntounto an holy temple in the Lord. Now because that faith in the sonne of God doth make the liuing stones whereof the building is compact and knitte vp on Christ, a stone of which sort bMat. 16.16.Peter had shewed himselfe to be *Thou art Christ, the Sonne of the liuing God.by beleeuing and professing that faith: Christ told him that he was (according to his name, stone) a stone indeede; and hauing chosen him to preach the same faith, whereby there shoulde be laide more stones on that building, hee saide, vponupon this stone will I build my church. UUherin as he shewed that whosoeuer should be members of his church must be members of it by felowship with Peters faith: so he shewed withall that hee would impart that faith to his church by the ministerie of Peter. As appeareth farther by that which he added, To thee will I giuegive the keyes of the kingdome of heauen.
Hart.
Yet euen this doth argue still the same prerogatiue which we giuegive to Peter. For séeing Christ said that he woulde build his Church vponupon that stone, or rocke, (as I take it) and that, which a church is builded vponupon, must needes be a foundation; it foloweth that Peter was a foundation of the church. Not a principall foundation, for that is Christ onelyonly, of whom it is true that c1. Cor. 3.…other foundation no man can laye beside that which is laid, which is Christ Iesus: but (as wee terme it) a ministeriall foundation. UUhich, by the proportion of a foundation to a house and a head to a bodie, is enough to proue that Christ would make Peter head of the Apostles, I meane a ministeriall head.
Rainoldes.
But here againe you fal into your former fault: and that which was common to all the Apostles by the meaning of Christ, you chalenge as proper vntounto Peter onelyonly. For, as the confession of Peter touching Christ shewed their common faith by the mouth of one: so the answere of Christ directed vntounto one conteined that blessing that should be common to them all. And this is declared by the holy scripture: which to the Ephesians (mē bers of the church) saith, that dEphe. 2.20.they are built vpō the foundatiō of the Apostles & Prophets. Not of Peter onelyonly, but of the Apostles; who lay the same foundation (all) that Peter did, and thereupon are called (all of them) eReu. 21.14.foundations. And the church relying vponupon their doctrine, that is the Christian faith, (the onelyonly and sure foundatiō of the church, as the truth hath forced fIn the Councell of Trent, which (Session. …) speaking of the articles of the Christian faith, (commonly named the Creede) saith, it is the sure and onelyonly foundation, against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile. Symbolum fidei, fundamentum …irmum & vnicum, contra quod portae in…e…i nunquam praeualebunt.your owne mouthes to witnesse) may bee iustly saide to be built on them, euen as well on all of them as on Peter. Wherfore by the proportion (that you grate vponupon) of a foundation to a house, and a head to a bodie: as Christ is head onelyonly, so is he the onelyonly foundation of the Church; as the name of foundation is giuen to the Apostles, so the twelue foundations doth proue them twelue heads. You must séeke therefore some other foundation of Peters headship ouer them. For neither the name of stone that Christ gaue him, nor the wordes of building his church vponupon that stone, proue that he promised him to make him head of all the Apostles.
Hart.
The second Diuision.Not in your iudgement: but in mine they doo. And so dooth the other part of the promise also which Christ made vntounto him; aMat. 16.19.To thee will I giuegive the keyes of the kingdome of heuen. *Staplet. princ. doctr. l. 6. c. 1.For by the name of keyes is signified the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power. But to giuegive the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power, is to make him head. Therefore Christ did promise to make him head of the church.
Rainoldes.
These keyes will not open more in the house, then did the foundation lay in the building. For if you meane by fulnes of ecclesiasticall power, the lawfull power of the Apostleship, then the which no greater was euer giuen to anie ministers of the church: Christ gaue it both to Peter and to euerie Apostle. If you meane such power as the Pope claimeth by bBu…la Pii Quinti contra Reginam Angliae.fulnes of power, a cPope Sixtus The fourth. Sacrar. ceremoniar. eccles. Rom. lib. 1. Sect. 7. tit. De ense. Potestas summa temporalis (a Christo) Pon…is…ci, eius in terris Vicario collata est: iuxta illud, Data est mihi omnis potestas in caelo & in terra.soueraine power not onelyonly spirituall but also temporall: Christ gaue it neither to Peter, nor to anie Apostle. So that in the former sense, al were heads; in the latter, none: and thus your headship proued by neither. But what soeuer you meane by fulnes of power: this is cleere and certaine that our Sauiour promised no more power to Peter, then he meant and performed to all the Apostles. And therefore, what soeuer he promised to him, he promised in him to them. For, as amongst them, when they were all asked, dMat. 16. ver. 15.Whom say ye that I am, Peter answered alone, ever. 16.Thou art Christ, the Sonne of the liuing God: so Christ said to him alone, fver. 19.I will giuegive thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, as though he had alone receaued power to bind and loose: whereas he made that answere one in stead of them all; and receiued this power, one togither with them all. Wherefore sith no more was promised then giuen, and equall power was giuen to all the Apostles: this promise proueth not your headship. You must bring vsus foorth some better euidence: or else your title will be naught.
Hart.
The euidence is good. For it saith in plaine and expresse termes, that Christ would giuegive the keyes to Peter. Then the which what could be more manifestly spoken?
Rainoldes.
In shew, to the simple. Chiefely when they sée the matter set forth, as that is at Rome: *In a booke of pictures, entitled, Non rocedat volumen legis huius ab ore tuo. Printed at Rome 1577.where Christ is painted out, not as promising Peter that he would giuegive him keyes, but as giuing them to him at that present; and giuing them to him alone, not to all the Apostles; with the wordes of Christ, paraphrased feately thereto by some poet;