Run from Rome, Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII.
Of the Aſſumption of Bellarmines ſyll… giſme. c. 3. n. 5.
HItherto I hauehave ſhewed, what little ſhew of reaſon there is for that interpretation of Iohn 21. 15. whereon the ſtrength of Bellarmines concluſion principally dependeth. I will now ſet my ſelfe to the ſifting of the aſſumption or ſecond part of his ſyllogiſme, which is.
To Peter and his ſucceſſors that feeding Iohn 21. 15. is committed.
As the propoſition, ſo the aſſumption alſo, containeth foure ſeuerall points, diſtinctly to be conſidered, that
1 Thoſe words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter.
2 The office of ſeeding is committed to Peter.
3 Peter hath his ſucceſſours.
4 The office of ſeeding is committed to Peters ſucceſſors.
The firſt of theſe foure …entences or points is rather ſuppoſed then expreſſed in the aſſumption; but it is plainly deliuered by Bellarmin. It is ſaid to Peter only, Feed my ſheepe. Bel de Rom. Po…. l c. 14. Sect. Hacten….Who denyeth this, if it be …ightly vnderunder?
The ſpeech was directed immediately to Peter with whom our Lord then talked: but not ſo to Peter, as if the duty, to which he is exhorted, belonged to none but to Inſtitut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4.him. Therefore Calvin truely ſaith, that as Peter receiued mandem…m of … Iohn 21. 15. ſo all other miniſters are exhorted to feed the ſheepe, 1. Pet. 5. 2. and by ſo ſaying hee granteth, that thoſe words were ſpoken to Peter, but hee telleth the Papiſts withall, that if they will proue, that they auouch, they muſt ſhew that whoſoeuer are commanded …o feed Chriſts ſ…eepe, to them the power ouer the whole Church is committed: In which words he denieth the conſequence of the propoſition, which he doth not expreſſe; but acknowledgeth the aſſumption contained in thoſe words, To Peter Bellar. de Rom. ponl. lib. 1. c. 14. Sect. Sed co…tra.onelyonly Chriſt ſaid, feed my ſheepe. By which it is manifeſt, that Bellarmine doth Caluin great wrong, in charging him with the denying, that thoſe words Iohn 21. are ſpoken to Peter onelyonly: and ſpendeth his time and ſtrength in vaine to proue by ſeuen arguments againſt Caluin, that which Caluin neuer denyed.
But Bellarmines meaning is, that the words are ſo ſpoken to Peter, that the thing ſignified by them belongeth not to the reſt of the Apoſtles. And in this ſenſe we ſay it is falſe, that thoſe words were spoken to Peter onelyonly. If Bellarmine can not proue them true in this ſenſe (as I am ſure he cannot) his argument is nothing worth. For how ſhall that proue for Peter and his ſucceſſors, againſt the reſt of the Apoſtles, which was ſpoken to them, as well as to him: yet it is not to be wondred at, that Bellarmin goeth not about to proue it in that ſenſe. For indeed there is no ſhew or colour of proofe for it, becauſe the Word of God no where maketh any diſtinction betwixt this feeding, Iohn 21. 15. and that teaching, Mat. 16. 16. Iohn 20. 21. which was enioyned Peter, and the reſt of the Apoſtles equally and alike, as Bellarmine De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. …ices.confeſſeth. The keyes were giuen, Iohn 20. and 21. For when our Lord ſaid, (Iohn 20. 19.) Peace, be vntounto you, as my Father ſent me, ſo ſend I you, then hee gaue them the power or key of iuriſdiction. For by thoſe words hee made them as it were Legates and Gouernors of the Church, in his name. But in the words following, Receiue ye the holy Ghoſt: whoſe ſinnes yee remit, &c. he gaue them the power of order: And thus much of the firſt propoſition of the foure.
The ſecond followeth, namely:
The office of feeding, Ioh. 21. is committed to Peter. This is affirmed in plaine words; and muſt bee vnderſtood of Peter alone, not of him and the other Apoſtles. For that will not ſerue Bellarmines turne, becauſe it proues nothing for the Popes power, or againſt that wee defend. Beſides, Bellarmine ſtriues here for an office proper to Peter, becauſe he cals it a ſingular office. But how can that be proper to Peter which is cominon to the reſt of the Apoſtles with him? This alſo we deny, as Caluin did long ſince; In this word Inſtitut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4.feed (ſaith he) nothing is giuen to Peter, more then to the other. Bellarmine ſhould hauehave proued that this conueyeth a proper office to the Pope, and not hauehave taken that for granted, which he knoweth we alwayes deny. But hee doth not ſo much as offer to make any proofe of it, either de verbo Lib. 3. cap. 5. Lib. 1. cap. 14.Dei, or de Roman. Pontif. in both which places he profeſſedly diſputeth the point. Indeed in the latter place, hee proueth that the words, Feed my ſheepe, were ſpoken to Peter only. But what is that to proue that feeding, Iohn 21. is committed to Peter onelyonly.
Some man perhaps will imagine, that the latter dependeth vponupon the former, but he wil quickly change his mind, if he doe but looke vponupon them both together in one propoſition.
If thoſe words, feed my ſheepe, were spoken to Peter onelyonly, then the feeding is commited to Peter onelyonly; as if it were all one,
To require or exhort Peter to feed, and
To commit the feeding to Peter onelyonly?
Put caſe a man that hath many ſeruants to goe about a peece of worke, reaping, or the like, ſhould ſay to ſome one of them whom he might ſuſpect of idleneſſe, Looke that you reape cleane and faire: Will any wiſe man conclude hereupon, that by theſe words hee giueth him an office to ouer-ſee and iudge of his other fellowes worke, or maketh him the onelyonly worke-man? And yet it cannot be denyed that he ſpeaketh to him onelyonly.
But it will peraduenture bee replyed in defence of the conſequence of the forme propoſition, that if Chriſt required Peter onelyonly to feed, and did not commit that feeding onelyonly to him, then there was no end or reaſon of his ſpeaking to him onelyonly; but it were abſurd, yea blaſphemous, to ſay of our Sauiour, that there was no end or reaſon of his ſpeech. It were certainely blaſphemous for any man to ſay of the Lord Ieſus, that any action or ſpeech of his was without reaſon, or not to good purpoſe. But it were alſo a bold and blind preſumption, for any man to affirme, that there is no reaſon or end of our Sauiours ſpeech at all, becauſe there is none knowne to men. What if I know not the end or reaſon of it, may I conclude, that therefore there is none? So then if wee ſhould grant, that there can no reaſon bee giuen by vsus, of our Sauiours ſpeech, vnleſſe thereby ſuch an office bee beſtowed vponupon Peter; yet it might well bee, there was ſome reaſon thereof though vnknowne to vsus.
But we can aſſigne good reaſon of that ſpeech: that is, we can ſhew, that there was good reaſon, why our Sauiour Chriſt ſhould direct his ſpeech in that ſort to Peter onelyonly, though he meant not to place him in any office thereby. Firſt therefore wee ſay, that our Lord ſpeake to Peter thus particularly, that hee might giuegive him occaſion to make profeſſion of his louelove to him, which hee had brought into queſtion, by denying his Maſter with ſwearing and curſing. And becauſe there was no meanes more effectuall to proue the continuance or renuing of Peter; louelove to our Sauiour, then the feeding of his ſheepe, therefore our Sauiour preſſeth him with this duty aboue the reſt, becauſe there was more need to hauehave his louelove ſhewed, then the others, who had not made their louelove to him ſo doubtfull. Let me adde to theſe two a third, that it was needfull for Peter himſelfe, that the execution of the commiſſion formerly giuen ſhould bee viged on Peter, becauſe it might ſeeme, that by ſo ſoule a fall, hee had wholly beene put out of commiſſion: which doubt is fully remoued by our Sauiours charging him to goe forward in the execution thereof. We ſhall not need then to make any ſuch conſtruction of the Lord Ieſus words, as if hee had intended by them to ſeale a commiſſion to Peter for an office to bee newly erected; for feare it ſhould be ſuſpected that thoſe words were to no purpoſe, or without reaſon. Nay rather moſt vnreaſonable is that conſequence, that would hauehave thoſe things inferre each other, betwixt which there is no kinde of agre…ment.