Faith Grounded Upon the Holy Scriptures Against the New Methodists, Part 3 · Chapter 11
CHAP. XI. That the Scripture teacheth not that the Biſhop of Rome is the Pontifical Spouſe, and Monarch of the Ʋniverſal Church, nor Authorizes any thing which is founded only upon the Authorities of the Pope.
1. THe great and principal Article follows, which they eſteem alone capable and needful to maintain all the reſt, viz. the Monarchy and infallibility of the Pope of Rome. They endeavour to prove by Scripture, that he is the Head, Spouſe, and Monarch of the Univerſal Church, but by reaſons ſo ſtrange and far from all appearance, that 'tis very eaſie to finde that 'tis their Paſſion and not their Judgment which hath conceived them.
For firſt, they aſſert the Sovereign Pontifex which precided over all the Church of Iſrael, during the time of the Old Teſtament; and that this Type may have its accompliſhment under the new Covenant, they conclude that there is a Sovereign Pontifex in the Chriſtian Church, Heb. 3.2. & 4.14. & 5.5, 6. & 7.26, 27. & 8.1, 2. & 9, to the 11.and add that the Pope of Rome is the Monarch of it, as if St. Paul the Apoſtle had not taught us that Jeſus Chriſt is the Sovereign High Prieſt of his Church; or as if this his Prieſthood alone had not body and truth enough to accompliſh all the figure of the Ancient; and as if on the contrary the Unity of the Antient Pontifex did not evidently exclude the pretenſions of Rome, it being clear that if they have place, there will be two High-Prieſts in the Chriſtian Church againſt that which was figured in the Judaical, where they had but one; and finally, as if this High-Prieſthood ought to belong to the Biſhop of Rome rather than to any other, ſuppoſing that there was one in the Chriſtian Church beſides that of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt.
They have alſo recourſe to that which the Lord promiſed St. Peter, Matth. 16.18.19.to build his Church upon him, and to give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the power of binding and unbinding; and that which he commanded him three times after his Reſurrection, John 21.15, 16, 17.to feed his ſheep, and to ſome advantages which he ſeemeth to have had above the other Apoſtles, Matth. 10.2. Matth. 17.24.as, that he is called the firſt, and that the Lord payed Tribute-Money for him; and from all this conclude, that the Biſhop of Reme is the Prince and Sovereign Monarch of the Catholick Church: an ill and impertinent reaſoning, which ſuppoſeth falſities, and concludes ill. For to begin with the laſt, that St. Peter was the Foundation and Monarch of the Church, the Prince and King of the Apoſtles; and in ſum, what you will; what is this in common to the Pope at preſent, or with any of his Bredeceſſours, to conclude from one to the other, Peter was the Head of the Church, the Pope ſitting now at Rome is therefore ſo? How many Seas and Abyſſes muſt be filled before theſe two can joyn? for they muſt firſt prove that St. Peter was at Rome. Secondly, that he was Biſhop of the Roman Church. Thirdly, that he left the Biſhop of Rome all the dignities that he had. Now 'tis evident that they cannot prove any one of theſe three Articles by the Holy Scriptures; not ſo much as the firſt of theſe, which is the important. For let Rome be this Babylon from whence St. Peter dated his firſt Epiſtle, 1 Pet. 5.13.there is no neceſſity obligeth us to believe it; ſo that to be able to prove a Theſis by Scripture, one muſt not (according to them) enter into any Propoſition in the proof of it, which is not in the Scripture; it is perfectly clear that the power of the Pope cannot be found in the Scriptures. And as for the other two Propoſitions, one that St. Peter was the Biſhop of Rome: the other, that he left all his Dignity to the Biſhop of Rome, they are infinitely far from all appearance of truth and reaſon. But it ſufficeth us for the deſigne of this Treatiſe, that it cannot be founded upon the Scriptures. So then although it ſaith, Thou art Peter, and feed my ſheep, one cannot draw from thence the Monarchy of the Pope. But I ſay moreover, that what they preſuppoſe in their diſcourſe, viz. that St. Peter was the Maſter and Prince of the other Apoſtles is falſe, and cannot be proved by any of thoſe paſſages which they alledge. The Lord ſaid to him, Thou art Peter, and upon this ſtone will I build my Church. But in what Logick doth that ſignifie that he ſhould be the Monarch of the Church, and the Prince of the Apoſtles? I ſhall paſs by the belief which the moſt part of the Ancient Fathers, and ſome of our Adverſaries have of taking this Stone upon which our Lord promiſed to build his Church; for the Lord himſelf, the Rock or Stone of Ages confeſſed by St. Peter, a Auguſt. de verbis Dom. See Mat. Serm. 13. Tract. 124. in John.for his Faith and Confeſſion, b. Tract. 13. in Epiſt. John. D. T. 9. Serm. 22. ex 40. Serm. edit a Serm. p 248. primals. l. 2. in Apoc. p. 13.84. c. & l. 5. p. 1456. C. Bibi. pp. T. 1. Anſelm. in eum loc. Gloſs. interlin. Lyran. Joan. Arbor. Theoſophia l. 5. c. 5. Alliac concord. l. 2. c. 13. c. Hilar. l. 6. de Trin fol. 30. b. col. 2. Ambroſ. 6. de Incar. Dom. Sacram. c. 5. in it. Aug. tract. 10. in ep. John. l. tom. 9. Auctor.and not for the perſon of St. Peter. I will ſuppoſe that theſe words, and upon this ſtone I will build my Church, be applied to St. Peter. What is it that gives him ſo much advantage about the foundation of it, and upon the Prophets themſelves which God raiſed up at the beginning of Chriſtianity, following that which St. Paul ſaith, That we are built upon the foundation of the Apoſtles and Prophets, Jeſus Chriſt himſelf being the chief corner ſtone; and what other thing doth it ſignifie, except that in preaching the Goſpel they have aboliſhed the Synagogue and founded the Chriſtian Church, the new Republike of the Lord his Celeſtial Kingdom: All the advantage which St. Peter had over the other in this reſpect was, that he preached the firſt of them all, and was the firſt that layed the foundation of the Church, as well among the Jews as Gentiles? for it was by his preaching that the three thouſand Jews at Jeruſalem, and the family of the Centurion Cornelius in Ceſarea believed, the one being the firſt-fruits of Iſrael, and the other the firſt fruits of the Gentiles? who knoweth not but that is an advantage purely perſonal proper to St. Peter, and incommunicable to any other, conſiſting only in this, that he had the honour to preach firſt the Goſpel of Chriſt, and to put his hand firſt to the building of this Celeſtial houſe? That which he adds, that he would give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and that what he ſhould bind on earth ſhould be bound in Heaven, and what he ſhould unbinde on earth ſhould be unbound in Heaven, is but reaſon, Serm. in Pentic. inter opera Chryſoſt. T. 6. p. 233. a. Chryſoſt. Hom. 54. in Mat. p. 483. e. & Hom. 21. (lat. 20.) in Joh. p. 106. d. & in Gal. 1. p. 961. f. Bazil. Seleuc. Orat. 25. p. 142. 6. Vict. Atioch. in Mark. c. 3. p. 417. c. Bibl. PP. T. 1. John. Aurel. l 3. contr. Claud. Taurin. Bibl. t. 4. PP. part. 1. p. 586. à Carthuſan. Ferus. Titelman. Gorran. in eum locum. Apoc. 21.14.becauſe he promiſed him For the honour of building the Church of Chriſt was founded upon the Apoſtleſhip, which is writ in theſe words, the which (in my judgment) ſignifieth only, that he will eeſtabliſh Teachers in the Chriſtian Church, Eph. 2.20. Acts 2.14.41. Acts 10.5. 34, 47.to teach men what is truly lawful or unlawful, commanded, permitted, or denied. For the Key was the mark of Doctorſhip amongſt the Jews; and the Lord makes alluſions to it, where he ſaith, Luke 11.52.That the Doctors of the Law entertained the Key of Knowledge, and the Kingdom of Heaven, ſignifieth every where in the Evangeliſts the Church of the Meſſias, which is alſo the ſenſe, where this word is uſed by the *foreignHebrews both Antient and Modern: So that theſe words, I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, promiſeth to St. Peter the Charge and Dignity of Doctor or Maſter (as the Jews ſpeak) not in the Synagogue, but in the Church; not in the earthly and carnal Iſrael, but in the Spiritual and Heavenly. This binding and unbinding, which he adds, are the functions of this new and heavenly Doctorſhip which he promiſed him. For the ſtyle in which the Judaical Language runs (in which our Saviour then ſpoke) to binde, ſignifieth to forbid ſomething, and to unbinde, on the contrary to permit and declare that it is lawful; from whence it comes, that to ſay a thing is to defend, or permit it; the Maſters of the Jews ſaying only, *foreignthat is bound, and, that is unbound; the Lord promiſed then (in ſum) to St. Peter, that he ſhould have in the Kingdom of Heaven, that is to ſay in his Church, the Dignity of Doctor, to proclaim and declare to the Nations what is truly lawful or unlawful, holy or profane, unbinding many things which Moſes, or the Prieſts of the Gentiles had bound, and binding many other things which the vices and follies of men had unbound; and all with a wiſdom and Authority ſo ample, that Heaven approved all his Doctrines, and was the Protector of it. Now this dignity is not the Power and Authority of a Monarch, nor is it particular to St. Peter, the other Apoſtles having had ſhare with him, as it appears clearly both by their Acts and Epiſtles; and namely by the 18th of St. Matthew, where the Lord ſaid to them all that which he here ſaid to St. Peter, Mat. 18.19.Verily I ſay unto you, all that you ſhall binde on earth ſhall be bound in Heaven, and all things that you ſhall unbinde on earth ſhall be unbound in Heaven. Neither can they pretend any particular for St. Peter, in that which was commanded him of feeding the ſheep of the Lord. For had not the other Apoſtles alſo as well as he the charge of feeding, common by his teſtimony to all the Miniſters of the word, and the commiſſion of all the ſheep of the Lord? 1 Pet. 5.2. Mark 16.15. 2 Cor. 11.28.Preach the Goſpel to all Creatures, and the care of all the Churches comes upon me from day to day: 'tis true, that the Lord made towards him and repeated this command three times, Cyril upon St. John l. 12 64.but (as ſome of the Fathers have very well obſerved) to aboliſh the failing of his three denials, very far from thinking by this means to eſtabliſh the Monarchy of others.
Secondly, As to this, that the Lord being at Capernaum payed the Tribute-money for St. Peter and not for the other of the Apoſtles; that doth not infer any Authority of St. Peters above them. For it may be that it proceeded from ſome other conſideration, as, that the others had already payed it, or that they were not preſent when the Tribute money was demanded of our Saviour, or that they were not Inhabitants of Capernaum, as St. Peter was, who had his family there. In brief, whatever it be, 'tis a wonderful Conſequence to ſay, Chriſt hath payed the Tribute-mony for St. Peter, therefore St Peter was the Monarch of the Univerſal Church, and the Prince and Lord of the Apoſtles.
Thirdly, Neither can this be inferred out of that place, where Saint Matthew numbring the Apoſtles, ſaith, The firſt is Simon, who is called Peter. For a Preſident is the firſt in his Chamber, and a Dean the firſt in his Aſſembly, nevertheleſs none can conclude that the Preſident is Lord of the Counſellors in his Chambers, or the Dean the Prince of his Brethren. I grant that St. Peter, either for his age, his capacity, his zeal, or ſome other conſideration hath had the like advantage in the Company of the Apoſtles. he might have been the firſt of them, but yet not the Maſter, much leſs the Monarch of them.
Fourthly, And that ſufficeth to ſhew, that they cannot prove by the Scriptures this marvellous quality which they attribute to the Pope, of not being able to err in matters of faith. For ſince all the things which they alledge are grounded upon thoſe things which regard St. Peter, who ſeeth not that they infer nothing for the advantage of the Pope, except they prove by the Scriptures that all the right of St. Peter belongs to the Pope, that which I think they dare not ſo much as attempt to ſhew by the Scriptures?
Fifthly, I ſay as much of the Opinion of thoſe amongſt them, who attribute the Infallibility and Sovereignity, not to the Pope (as at this time the greateſt part of their Doctors do) but to the Roman Church aſſembled in the Univerſal Councel. For all which they can draw from the Scriptures in favour of their Opinion, ſpeaks of the true Church of Jeſus Chriſt, without amuſing our ſelves than to conſider the juſt value of that which is attributed to the Church in theſe places, whether that this Infallibility and Sovereignty be pretended or real, it is enough to reſolve their Reaſons, to ſay, that they can conclude nothing for themſelves, until they have proved that the Chriſtians of Rome are the true Church of Jeſus Chriſt, which they can never prove by the Scriptures.
6ly, Now this Sovereign Authority which they give to the Pope and to the Church wch acknowledgeth him being impoſſible to be proved by the Scriptures, it followeth that all the things which depend on it are not grounded there. Such for Example is that diſtinction which they make between meats at certain days, permitting the Chriſtians to eat fiſh and not fleſh in Lent and other-like times; the eſtabliſhing of Feaſts, the ſingle life of the Miniſters of their Religion, the retrenchment of the Sacred Cup to all thoſe who communicate, except to him who hath conſecrated the Euchariſt, and otherlike things, for which they alledge, for the moſt part no other ſoundation than the Authority of the Pope, and of the Church, which depends upon him. At leaſt it is clear that they cannot prove by the Scriptures, all that which any one of them affirm. eth or uſeth for this purpoſe, it being ſo ſlight and ſo far from their purpoſe, that I do not think it worthy the relating.