Run from Rome, Chapter 9
CHAP. IX.
Of Peters ſucceſſours.
NOw in the next place, the third propoſition offereth it ſelfe to be conſidered, although it bee but implyed, not expreſſed, that
Peter hath his ſucceſſours, which is manifeſtly implyed, For he that ſaith, The office is committed to Peters ſucceſſors, ſuppoſeth that Peter hath ſucceſſors. This ſentence is thus to be vnderſtood; Peter onelyonly hath his ſucceſſors, ſo as none of the other Apoſtles hauehave. For ſo Bellarmine expoundeth himſelfe. De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9. Sect. Reſpondeo, Pontificatum.The chiefe eccleſiaſticall power was giuen to Peter, as to the ordinary paſtour, who was alwaies to hauehave ſucceſſors: to the other Apoſtles as to the delegates, who were not to hauehave ſucceſſors. And he ſaith, that The Biſhop of Rom… ſuccedeth Peter properly L. 4. c. 25. Sect. Reſpondeo, magnum.as the ordinary paſtour of the whole Church, but the Apoſtles were extraordinary, and as it were delegated paſtors, and ſuch hauehave no ſucceſſors.
That Peter hath ſucceſſors in the miniſtery of the Goſpell, wee confeſſe, and profeſſe: but wee adde, that this is common to him with the reſt of the Apoſtles. For the farther explication whereof wee ſay, that to ſucceed the Apoſtles, is either to ſucceed them properly, as one King ſucceedeth another, or in ſimilitude or proportion, as Bellarmine truely ſaith. Wee grant that all the Apoſtles hauehave De Rom Pon. l. c. 15. Sect. Dicun…ur.ſucceſſors in a proportion; namely, ſuch as preach the Goſpell, as they did, though not by reuelation; and that alſo hauehave power of ordination and iuriſdiction fit for the good gouernment of the Church. But we ſay none of the Apoſtles hauehave any ſucceſſors of the ſecond kind. Therefore Bellarmine might hauehave ſaued his labor in prouing that the Apoſtles De Rom. Pont. l 4 c. 25. Sect. ſta vero.hauehave no ſuch ſucceſſors.
Let vsus ſee how he proueth that which we deny, that Peter hath ſucceſſors properly. This hee propoundeth in theſe tearmes.
Some muſt ſucceed Peter in the Biſhopricke of the whole De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Primum ergo.Church.
Which he doth more plainly declare, where he ſaith, that the Biſhop of Rome ſucceeds Peter properly, not as an Apoſtle, lib. 4 c. 25. Sect. Reſpond…, magnum.but as an ordinary Paſtor ouer the whole Church. This we vtterly deny, that Peter was to hauehave any ſuch ſucceſſor in the Biſhopricke of the whole Church. Our reaſon is, that Peter himſelfe had no ſuch office. But let vsus ſee how Bellarmine would proue, that he had ſuch ſucceſſors.
Bellarmines proofe of this point is ſet downe, and is thus De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Nos ergo …tramque.to be framed.
Either Peter hath ſucceſſors in Epiſcopall office ouer the whole Church, or that office periſhed at Peters death.
But that office periſhed not at Peters death; for that office was ordained for the good of the Church, and the Church hath had, and ſhall alwaies hauehave no leſſe need of it, then it had while Peter liued.
Therefore Peter hath ſucceſſors in the Epiſcopall office, ouer the whole Church.
Who ſeeth not, that in this argument Bellar. taketh that for granted, which he ſhould proue, namely that Peter had ſuch an office while he liued? For he was not ignorant that all Proteſtants deny it? What is this elſe, according to Ariſtotles Topicorum l. 8. cap. 13.Philoſophy, but to beg the queſtion? He (ſaith Aristotle) that takes that as granted which he ought to proue, manifeſtly beggeth the queſtion. As for the proofes hee hath formerly brought, touching this office of Peter, I hauehave ſhewed, that they are weake and vaine, ſo that the point is ſtill as queſtionable as it was before. Therfore Bellarmine is alſo guilty of a ſecond begging of the queſtion, becauſe his proofes are by-matters, as doubtfull, or more doubtfull then that is which he would proue by them. And of this manner of begging the queſtion, ſpeaketh the forenamed Ariſtole, Begging of the queſtion is, when the proofe is from things leſſe Prio. Analyt. l. 2. Cap. 16.knowne, or equally vnknowne. And this is not (ſaith Ariſtotle) to demonſtrate the queſtion.
But what if we graunt Bellarmine that which he cannot proue, that there was ſuch an office: yet may wee neuertheleſſe deny his aſſumption, and ſay that;
The Epiſcopall authority ouer the whole Church, periſhed at Peters death.
Will he tell vsus that it was ordained for the good of the Church? What then? It will not follow thereupon that it muſt be perpetuall, vnleſſe he can ſhew, that our Lord appointed it ſhould continue for euer by ſucceſſion. For the whole courſe of publiſhing the Goſpell, and bringing men to true faith in Chriſt, dependeth wholly vponupon the ordinance of God, who being able to make any meanes effectuall to his purpoſe, is not tyed to vſe any, but what pleaſe him. Therefore if Bellarmine cannot ſhew that it was the ordinance of God, that ſuch an Epiſcopall function as he imagineth Peter had, ſhould be continued alwaies in the Church, it is no inconuenience to hold, that it periſhed with Peters death. And of this firſt argument enough.
His ſecond Argument is in the ſaid twel…th Chapter, Sect. ſecundo, and it is thus to be diſpoſed.
If in the time of the Apoſtles there was one ſupreame Gouernour of the church, then there ought to be ſo now, becauſe the forme of the Church may not be changed, ſeeing it is one and the ſame at all times.
But in the time of the Apoſtles there was one ſupreame duplicate page duplicate page Gouernour and head of the Church.
Therefore there ought to be ſo now.
The aſſumption, or ſecond part of this Syllogiſme, is as doubtfull as the concluſion inferred vponupon it, and therefore it is a begging of the queſtion, not a proofe of the former Syllogiſme. But were it neuer ſo true, he were neuer the nearer; for the conſequence of the propoſition is naught, becauſe there is no neceſſity, that the Church ſhould alwaies hauehave that office, which at any time it hath had. For, this neceſſity (if there were any ſuch) muſt ſpring out of the nature, either of God himſelfe, or of the Church, or depend vponupon the decree of Gods will. To ſay there is any neceſſity in the nature of God, or of the Church, which may enforce the continuall being of that which once was, were abſurd. It remaineth then, that there muſt be ſome act of Gods will, by which it is decreed, that whatſoeuer office hath once been in the Church, ſhall be in it for euer, as I anſwered numb. 5. Wherefore Bellarmine muſt ſhew vsus ſome ordinance of God, for the continuance of ſuch gouernment (ſuppoſing there was once ſuch an one) or giuegive vsus leaue to reiect it.
He would make good the conſequence of the propoſition, and the proofe of it, againſt our exception, by this argument.
If the Church be one and the ſame at all times, then the forme of it may not be changed.
But the Church is one and the ſame at all times.
Therefore the forme of it may not be changed.
In the antecedent part of the propoſition, and in the aſſumption, by One, Bellarmine meaneth eſſentially one: by forme in the conſequent part, he vnderſtandeth, forme of gouernment. According to this ſenſe wee ſay, the conſequence of the propoſition is naught: for the forme of the gouernment of the church, is not of the eſſence of the church, as Bellarmine here vainly ſuppoſeth, and falſly affirmes in his *D… Eccleſ lib. 3. cap 2 Sect. Noſtra autem.definition of the church. The aſſumption rightly vnderſtood is true. The Church indeed is alwaies one with Chriſt the head, becauſe of one and the ſame ſpirit in him, and eueryevery particular member of it. It is alſo one in faith, becauſe the true faith is one. But Bellarmine meaneth that the church is one and the ſame, in reſpect of the gouernment and officers thereof. This we deny, and looke for better proofe of it from him, then his bare affirmation, in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vponupon paine of damnation.
There followeth a third proofe in the ſome twelfth chapter, Sect. tertio, after this ſort.
If the Sheepe-fould endure to the end of the world, then ſucceſſors to Peter in that his chiefe paſtorall office muſt endure to the end of the world: For the office of the Paſtors in the nature of the thing, muſt endure as long as the Sheepe-fould continueth, becauſe it is an ordinary and perpetuall office.
But the Sheepe-fold endureth to the end of the world.
Therefore ſucceſſours to Peter in that chiefe Paſtorall office muſt endure to the end of the world.
Bellarmine kepeth his cuſtome to beg the queſtion. For here againe he taketh it for granted, that Peter was Paſtor of the whole church. But ſay it were ſo, what getteth he by it? For, the conſequence of his propoſition is naught, neither can the proofe hee bringeth make it good. The Sheepe-fold may endure to the end of the world, and yet that paſtorall Office not continue. Becauſe they doe not goe together in their nature; for if they did, then the one muſt be of the eſſence or being of the other, as a reaſonable ſoule and man are: or ariſe out of the principles of the nature of the other, as ſpeech doth from the re…ſon…ble ſoule, which no man will ſay. Neither is there any ordinance of God for the ioynt continuance of them together. Bellarm. ſeemeth to tell vsus, that there is ſome ordinance of God for the knitting of them together. For he ſaith in proofe of his conſequence, that, That paſtorall Office is an ordinary & perpetual office: as no office can be in the church, but by the diuine ordination. If he had ſhewed vsus withall, where we may finde that ordinance, he had ſaid ſomewhat to purpoſe: Since neither he hath, nor we can finde any ſuch in the word of God, he muſt giuegive vsus leaue to take it for no article of faith.
Touching his aſſumption, I anſwer; that, If by Sheepefold, he meane a company of people ſeparated from the world by the profeſſion of Chriſtian Religion, and vnited together in obedience to the diuine reuelation: Wee graunt that there is, and ſhall alwaies be ſuch a Sheepe-fold. But, if he dreame of any other Sheepe-fold, he muſt proue his aſſumption, ore we can beleeue it.
Yet Bellarmine hath not done, but ſetteth vponupon vsus with a freſh charge, in the ſame twelfth chapter, Sect, quinto: which is thus in due forme.
Either ſome muſt ſucceed Peter in his Paſtorall office ouer the whole church, or the church muſt bee without an head at Peters death and after.
But the Church muſt not be without an head at Peters death, and after.
Therefore ſome muſt ſucceed Peter in his paſtorall office.
Here Bellarmine perceiued, that we were like enough to deny the propoſition, becauſe the diſiunction in it is naught, for that Chriſt the head of the church, continued to be the head thereof at Peters death, and ſhall do ſo for euer. Therfore he telleth vsus, it is not ſufficient for the Church to hauehave Chriſt for head; but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church, his reaſon lyeth thus:
The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Chriſt, for that head 1 Cor. 12. 12.hath need of the members, which is not true of Chriſt.
The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church:
Therefore there is ſome head of the Church which is not Chriſt.
Wee eaſily yeeld the propoſition is true: and therfore Bellarmine needed not hauehave troubled himſelfe to proue it; eſpecially ſince his proofe is no better. For, our Sauiour, conſidered as the Mediatour, the head of the Church, cannot ſay to the Members, which make the body, I hauehave no neede of you, although, as he is God, he hath abſolutely no need of any of them.
The aſſumption, that the head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church, we refuſe, as falſe. And how doth Bellarmine proue it? As he doth many other points, by ſaying ſo. But this will not ſerue our turne in a matter of faith: Belike he looketh we ſhould diſproue it. Though it be no orderly courſe of diſputation, yet I ſay in a word, the head in that 21 verſe. in which the words quoted by Bellarmine, ſignifies the naturall head, to which the principall members in the church are reſembled; which, as principall as they are, cannot be without the feet, that is, the meaneſt members: And this interpretation is warranted by Chryſoſtome and Theophilact, who by head, vnderſtand, thoſe which had receiued greater gifts. So that indeed, the place containeth a compariſon, wherein the coniunction of the parts of the myſticall body, is declared by the like in the naturall body.
There are two other arguments in the ſame chapter, Sect. Sexto, and Sect. Denique: the one is drawne from the ſucceſſion of the high Prieſts in the old Teſtament: the other from the neceſſity of monarchicall gouernment in the church. But they are ſo ſleight and idle, that I ſhould but waſt time, labour, and paper to meddle with them: where-I thus end this third point and this Chapter.