Peter alone, but every apostle, and, therefore, every one who succeeds them in their ordinary power, may and must remember the words of St. Paul; "We are ambassadors or legates for Christ:"Christ's vicars,' not the pope's delegates:' and so all the apostles are called in the preface of the mass; "Quos operis tui vicarios eidem contulisti præesse pastores;" they are pastors' of the flock and vicars' of Christ; and so also they are, in express terms, called by St. Ambrose; and, therefore, it is a strange usurpation, that the pope arrogates that to himself by impropriation, which is common to him with all the bishops of Christendom. The consequent of this is, that by the law of Christ, one bishop is not superior to another; Christ gave the power to all alike; he made no head of the bishops; he gave to none a supremacy of power, or universality of jurisdiction. But this the pope hath long challenged, and to bring his purposes to pass, hath, for these six hundred years by-gone, invaded the rights of bishops, and delegated matters of order and jurisdiction to monks and friars; insomuch that the power of bishops was greatly diminished at the erecting of the Cluniack and Cistercian monks about the year ML: but about the year MCC, it was almost swallowed up by privileges granted to the Begging Friars, and there kept by the power of the pope: which power got one great step more above the bishops, when they got it declared, that the pope is above a council of bishops: and at last it was turned into a new doctrine by Cajetan (who for his prosperous invention was made a cardinal), that all the whole apostolic or episcopal power, is radical and inherent in the pope, in whom is the fulness of the ecclesiastical authority; and that bishops received their portion of it from him: and this was first boldly maintained in the council of Trent by the Jesuits; and it is now the opinion of their order; but it is also that which the pope challenges in practice, when he pretends to a power over all bishops, and that this power is derived to him from Christ; when he calls himself the universal bishop, and the vicarial head of the church, the church's monarch, he from whom all ecclesiastical authority is derived, to whose d In epist. 1. ad Corin. cap. 3. et in epist. ad Roman. c. 1, sentence in things Divine, every Christian, under pain of damnation, is bound to be subject e. Now, this is it, which, as it is productive of infinite mischiefs, so it is an innovation, and an absolute deflection from the primitive catholic doctrine, and yet is the great groundwork and foundation of their church. This we shall represent in these following testimonies. Pope Eleutherius, in an epistle to the bishops of France, says, That Christ committed the universal church to the bishops;' and St. Ambrose says, That the bishop holdeth the place of Christ, and is his substitute.' But, famous are the words of St. Cyprian; "The church of Christ is one through the whole world, divided by him into many members, and the bishoprick is but one, diffused in the agreeing plurality of many bishops." -And again; "To every pastor a portion of the flock is given, which let every one of them rule and govern." By which words it is evident, that the primitive church understood no prelation of one, and subordination of another, commanded by Christ, or by virtue of their ordination; but only what was for order's sake introduced by princes, and consent of prelates; and it was to this purpose very full which was said by pope Symmachus 8: "As it is in the holy Trinity, whose power is one and undivided (or, to use the expression in the Athanasian Creed, none is before or after other, none is greater or less than another'); so there is one bishoprick amongst divers bishops; and, therefore, why should the canons of the ancient bishops be violated by their successors? Now these words being spoken against the invasion of the rights of the church of Arles, by Anastasius, and the question being in the exercise of jurisdiction, and about the institution of bishops, does fully declare that the bishops of Rome had no superiority by the laws of Christ, over any bishop in the catholic church, and that his bishoprick gave no more power to him, than Christ gave to the bishop of the smallest diocese. And, therefore, all the church of God, whenever they reckoned the several orders and degrees of ministry in the * Extrav. Com. lib. i. tit. 9. de Major. et Obed. cap. Unam Sanctam. catholic church, reckon the bishops as the last and supreme, beyond whom there is no spiritual power but in Christ. For, "as the whole hierarchy ends in Jesus, so does every particular one in its own bishop"." Beyond the bishop there is no step, till you rest in the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls. Under him every bishop is supreme in spirituals, and in all power, which to any bishop is given by Christ. St. Ignatius, therefore, exhorts, that "all should obey their bishop, and the bishop obey Christ, as Christ obeyed his Father.”There are no other intermedial degrees of Divine institution. But, as Origen teaches, "The apostles, and they, who, after them, are ordained by God, that is, the bishops, have the supreme place in the church, and the prophets have the second place." The same also is taught by Pope Gelasius, by St. Jerome', and Fulgentius m, and indeed by all the fathers who spake any thing in this matter: insomuch, that when Bellarmine is, in this question, pressed, out of the book of Nilus, by the authority of the fathers standing against him, he answers, "Papam patres non habere in ecclesia, sed filios omnes:" "The pope acknowledges no fathers in the church, for they are all his sons." Now although we suppose this to be greatly sufficient to declare the doctrine of the primitive catholic church, concerning the equality of power. in all bishops of Divine right: yet the fathers have also expressly declared themselves, that one bishop is not superior to another, and ought not to judge another, or force another to obedience. They are the words of St. Cyprian to a council of bishops ", " None of us makes himself a bishop of bishops, or, by tyrannical power, drives his colleagues to a necessity of obedience; since every bishop, according to the license of his own liberty and power, hath his own choice, and cannot be judged by another, not yet himself judge another; but let us all expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who only and alone hath the power of setting us in the government of his church, and judging of what we do." This was spoken and intended against pope Stephen, who did then begin dominari in clero,' to h Dionys. Areop. de Eccles. Hierarch. de Sacer. perfect. i Epist. ad Smyrnens. et ad Philadel. 1 In Jerem. hom. 7. et adver. Lucif. k Dist. 97. c. Duo sunt. m In Concil. Paris. lib. i. c. 3. n In Concil. Carthag. lord it over God's heritage,' and to excommunicate his brethren, as Demetrius did in the time of the apostles themselves: but they both found their reprovers; Demetrius was chastised by St. John for his usurpation, and Stephen by St. Cyprian; and this also was approved by St. Austin. We conclude this particular with the words of St. Gregory", bishop of Rome; who, because the patriarch of Constantinople called himself universal bishop, said, it was a “proud title, profane, sacrilegious, and antichristian:" and, therefore, he little thought that his successors in the same see should so fiercely challenge that antichristian title: much less did the then bishop of Rome, in those ages challenge it as their own peculiar; for they had no mind to be, or to be esteemed antichristian. "Romano pontifici oblatum est, sed nullus unquam eorum hoc singularitatis nomen assumpsit." His predecessors, it seems, had been tempted with an offer of that title, but none of them ever assumed that name of singularity, as being against the law of the Gospel, and the canons of the church 9.' Now this being a matter, of which Christ spake not one word to St. Peter, if it be a matter of faith and salvation, as it is now pretended, it is not imaginable he would have been so perfectly silent. But though he was silent of any intention to do this, yet St. Paul was not silent that Christ did otherwise; for he hath set in his church primùm apostolos,? first of all apostles;' not, first, St. Peter, and secondarily, apostles; but all the apostles were first. It is also evident that St. Peter did not carry himself so as to give the least overture or umbrage to make any one suspect he had any such pre-eminence; but he was, as St. Chrysostom truly says, μετὰ κοινῆς πάντα ποιῶν γνώμης, he did all things with the common consent;” οὐδὲν αὐθεντικῶς οὐδὲ ἀρχικῶς, ' nothing by special authority or principality:' and if he had any such, it is more than probable that the apostles who survived him, • De Bapt. contr. Donat. lib. iii. c. 3. P Lib. iv. ep. 76, 78, 31, 34, 38, 39, &c. Lib. vi. ep. 24. q Lib. iv. ep. 32. Quis est iste, qui contra statuta evangelica, contra canonum decreta, novum sibi usurpare nomen præsumit? Videatur epistola S. Hieron. ad Evagrium, Concil. Chalced. action 16. Concil. Nicen. can. 6. et can. 7. et Concil Constantinopol. can. 3. et Novel. Justin. 131. In Act. Apost. hom. 3. had succeeded him in it, rather than the bishop of Rome; and it being certain, as the bishop of Canaries confesses, "That there is, in Scripture, no revelation that the bishop of Rome should succeed Peter in it;" and we being there told that St. Peter was at Antioch, but never that he was at Rome; it being confessed by some of their own parties, by cardinal Cusanus, Soto, Driedo, Canus, and Segovius, that this succession was not addicted to any particular church, nor that Christ's institution of this does any other way appear; that it cannot be proved that the bishop of Rome is prince of the church: it being also certain, that there was no such thing known in the primitive church, but that the holy fathers, both of Africa and the East, did oppose pope Victor and pope Stephen, when they began to interpose with a presumptive authority, in the affairs of other churches; and that the bishops of the church did treat with the Roman bishop as with a brother, not as their superior: and that the general council, held at Chalcedon, did give to the bishops of Constantinople equal rights and pre-eminence with the bishops of Rome; and that the Greek churches are, at this day, and have been a long time, great opponents of this pretension of the bishops of Rome: and after all this, since it is certain that Christ, who foreknows all things, did also know that there would be great disputes and challenges of this pre-eminence", did indeed suppress it in his apostles, and said not it should be otherwise in succession, and did not give any command to his church to obey the bishops of Rome as his vicars, more than what he commanded concerning all bishops; it must be certain, that it cannot be necessary to salvation to do so; but that it is more than probable, that he never intended any such thing, and that the bishops of Rome have, to the great prejudice of Christendom, made a great schism, and usurped a title which is not their due, and challenged an authority to which they have no right, and have set themselves above others, who are their equals, and impose an 8 Canus Loc. lib. vi. c. 8. p. 235. Ed. Salmant. 1563. t Concor. Cath. lib. ii. c. 34. Sent. lib. iv. dist. 24. q. 2. art. 5. De Eccl. Dogm. lib. iv. c. 3. u Luke, xxii, 25. Matt. xx. 26, 27. |