A discourse of the Pope's supremacy. Part I in answer to a treatise intitled, St. Peter's supremacy faithfully discuss'd ... : and to A sermon of S. Peter, preached ... by Thomas Godden ...
but by some learned Men of the Church of Rome, that he had need have a Roman Confidence, who shall now think to impose upon us, by a pretence so miserably baffled;
but by Some learned Men of the Church of Rome, that he had need have a Roman Confidence, who shall now think to impose upon us, by a pretence so miserably baffled;
yet because it is by many still insisted upon with as much Assurance, as if nothing had been said in Confutation of it, it may not be amiss to enquire whether any thing new hath been produc'd in defence of this good old Cause of the Church of Rome, by her late Advocates .
yet Because it is by many still insisted upon with as much Assurance, as if nothing had been said in Confutation of it, it may not be amiss to inquire whither any thing new hath been produced in defence of this good old Cause of the Church of Rome, by her late Advocates.
av c-acp pn31 vbz p-acp d av vvd p-acp p-acp c-acp d n1, c-acp cs pix vhn vbn vvn p-acp n1 pp-f pn31, pn31 vmb xx vbi av pc-acp vvi cs d n1 j vhz vbn vvn p-acp n1 pp-f d j j n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f np1, p-acp po31 j n2.
the two former of them joyntly, because there is no Argument offer'd in the Sermon, that we do not also meet with in the Treaties of St. Peter 's Supremacy; the third (which is a Reply to the Answer to the Nubes Testium) shall be consider'd distinctly and apart.
the two former of them jointly, Because there is no Argument offered in the Sermon, that we do not also meet with in the Treaties of Saint Peter is Supremacy; the third (which is a Reply to the Answer to the Clouds Testimony) shall be considered distinctly and apart.
dt crd j pp-f pno32 av-j, c-acp pc-acp vbz dx n1 vvn p-acp dt n1, cst pns12 vdb xx av vvi p-acp p-acp dt n2 pp-f n1 np1 vbz n1; dt ord (r-crq vbz dt n1 p-acp dt n1 p-acp dt fw-la np1) vmb vbi vvn av-j cc av.
The Discourse of St. Peter 's Supremacy was written (as the Author informs us) in Confutation of some Papers he received from a Protestant Divine: having never seen those Papers,
The Discourse of Saint Peter is Supremacy was written (as the Author informs us) in Confutation of Some Papers he received from a Protestant Divine: having never seen those Papers,
dt n1 pp-f n1 np1 vbz n1 vbds vvn (c-acp dt n1 vvz pno12) p-acp n1 pp-f d n2 pns31 vvd p-acp dt n1 j-jn: vhg av vvn d n2,
and his Abilities, we may presume, were none of the meanest, after he had given the Fathers a due Discussion, and applied himself to the modern Authors of both sides;
and his Abilities, we may presume, were none of the Meanest, After he had given the Father's a due Discussion, and applied himself to the modern Authors of both sides;
cc po31 n2, pns12 vmb vvi, vbdr pix pp-f dt js, c-acp pns31 vhd vvn dt n2 dt j-jn n1, cc vvn px31 p-acp dt j n2 pp-f d n2;
that he himself had no low opinion of his Performance, we may reasonably conclude, in that he thought it worthy the Approbation and Protection of her Majesty the Queen Regent;
that he himself had no low opinion of his Performance, we may reasonably conclude, in that he Thought it worthy the Approbation and Protection of her Majesty the Queen Regent;
but no sooner had I read a few pages, but my Expectation flagg'd, and upon the Perusal of the whole Book, I scarce ever found my self more disappointed.
but no sooner had I read a few pages, but my Expectation flagged, and upon the Perusal of the Whole Book, I scarce ever found my self more disappointed.
cc-acp av-dx av-c vhd pns11 vvn dt d n2, cc-acp po11 n1 vvd, cc p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt j-jn n1, pns11 av-j av vvn po11 n1 av-dc vvn.
The first Part is wholly spent upon other Points (excepting part of chap. 1. concerning St. Peter 's Successor) it being, as he himself tells us, but Prefatory, and introductive to the main Design he aim'd at, which in the second Part he applies himself to,
The First Part is wholly spent upon other Points (excepting part of chap. 1. Concerning Saint Peter is Successor) it being, as he himself tells us, but Prefatory, and introductive to the main Design he aimed At, which in the second Part he Applies himself to,
The Scriptures he produces, he was put to no pains to search for, they being no other than those common Texts, which have, I think, been pressed upon the same Service, by every Romanist that hath ever written upon this Subject, viz. Matth. 16. v. 17, 18, 19. John. 21. 16. In the first he supposes that Christ promised this Supremacy; in the second, that he conferr'd it. SECT. I. I begin with the first, whence he argues, as his Predecessors in this Controversy have ever done, from the double Promise Christ made to St. Peter: The one in these Words, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church:
The Scriptures he produces, he was put to no pains to search for, they being no other than those Common Texts, which have, I think, been pressed upon the same Service, by every Romanist that hath ever written upon this Subject, viz. Matthew 16. v. 17, 18, 19. John. 21. 16. In the First he supposes that christ promised this Supremacy; in the second, that he conferred it. SECT. I. I begin with the First, whence he argues, as his Predecessors in this Controversy have ever done, from the double Promise christ made to Saint Peter: The one in these Words, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I built my Church:
dt n2 pns31 vvz, pns31 vbds vvn p-acp dx n2 pc-acp vvi p-acp, pns32 vbg dx n-jn cs d j n2, r-crq vhb, pns11 vvb, vbi vvn p-acp dt d n1, p-acp d np1 cst vhz av vvn p-acp d j-jn, n1 np1 crd n1 crd, crd, crd np1 crd crd p-acp dt ord pns31 vvz cst np1 vvd d n1; p-acp dt ord, cst pns31 vvd pn31. n1. np1 pns11 vvb p-acp dt ord, c-crq pns31 vvz, c-acp po31 n2 p-acp d n1 vhb av vdn, p-acp dt j-jn vvb np1 vvd p-acp n1 np1: dt crd p-acp d n2, pns21 vb2r np1, cc p-acp d n1 vmb pns11 vvi po11 n1:
the other in these, And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, &c. But before he proceeds to discourse of these, there are two things he supposes as the reason and Foundation of this special Honour conferr'd on St. Peter .
the other in these, And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, etc. But before he proceeds to discourse of these, there Are two things he supposes as the reason and Foundation of this special Honour conferred on Saint Peter.
It hath not without Reason been questioned by some, whether by the Son of the living God, St. Peter meant any more than he did by the Christ; not only because the former Expression is in other Texts of Scripture expounded by the latter,
It hath not without Reason been questioned by Some, whither by the Son of the living God, Saint Peter meant any more than he did by the christ; not only Because the former Expression is in other Texts of Scripture expounded by the latter,
But be it granted, that St. Peter by the Son of the living God, meant that he was the Son of God by Nature, (as the Fathers generally expound it) yet that the other Apostles were not at this time ignorant of this Mystery,
But be it granted, that Saint Peter by the Son of the living God, meant that he was the Son of God by Nature, (as the Father's generally expound it) yet that the other Apostles were not At this time ignorant of this Mystery,
but to all the twelve, though Peter alone returned the Answer (as he did to this other Question) To whom shall we go? Thou hast the Words of eternal Life;
but to all the twelve, though Peter alone returned the Answer (as he did to this other Question) To whom shall we go? Thou hast the Words of Eternal Life;
And that of these two Confessions, this in which he grants St. Peter spake in the Name of them all, was first in time, Dr. G. hath proved to be manifestly evinced from the series of the Acts of our Saviour's Life, recorded by the Evangelists .
And that of these two Confessions, this in which he grants Saint Peter spoke in the Name of them all, was First in time, Dr. G. hath proved to be manifestly evinced from the series of the Acts of our Saviour's Life, recorded by the Evangelists.
cc d pp-f d crd n2, d p-acp r-crq pns31 vvz n1 np1 vvd p-acp dt n1 pp-f pno32 d, vbds ord p-acp n1, n1 np1 vhz vvn pc-acp vbi av-j vvn p-acp dt n2 pp-f dt n2 pp-f po12 ng1 n1, vvn p-acp dt n2.
And that the said Doctor took this Confession before-made, to signify as much as this latter, of which we dispute, appears by the Question he propounds,
And that the said Doctor took this Confessi before-made, to signify as much as this latter, of which we dispute, appears by the Question he propounds,
cc cst dt j-vvn n1 vvd d n1 j, pc-acp vvi p-acp d c-acp d d, pp-f r-crq pns12 vvb, vvz p-acp dt n1 pns31 vvz,
But why was not St. Peter then presently honoured by our Saviour, with a BLESSED ART THOƲ SIMON THE SON OF BARJONA? To this, says he, Theophylact answers, That our Lord suspended praising him then (tho he deserved it) lest being at a time when others deserted him, it might seem done out of design,
But why was not Saint Peter then presently honoured by our Saviour, with a BLESSED ART THOƲ SIMON THE SON OF BARJONA? To this, Says he, Theophylact answers, That our Lord suspended praising him then (though he deserved it) lest being At a time when Others deserted him, it might seem done out of Design,
but in the Name of all, among whom there was one so far from being worthy of Praise, that our Saviour presently after, to rectify Peter's Mistake, told them he was a Devil .
but in the Name of all, among whom there was one so Far from being worthy of Praise, that our Saviour presently After, to rectify Peter's Mistake, told them he was a devil.
And to the same purpose Dr. G. quotes Euthymius. Be it granted that our Saviour excepted one, in that he excepted no more than one, it plainly follows, that all the rest, that is, ten to one, knew him to be the Son of God incarnate.
And to the same purpose Dr. G. quotes Euthymius. Be it granted that our Saviour excepted one, in that he excepted no more than one, it plainly follows, that all the rest, that is, ten to one, knew him to be the Son of God incarnate.
cc p-acp dt d n1 n1 np1 vvz np1. vbb pn31 vvd d po12 n1 vvd pi, p-acp cst pns31 vvd dx dc cs crd, pn31 av-j vvz, cst d dt n1, cst vbz, crd p-acp crd, vvd pno31 pc-acp vbi dt n1 pp-f np1 j.
and he grants, that Joseph, Zachary and Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna the Prophetess, who were honoured with Revelations and Visions, fill'd with the holy Ghost,
and he grants, that Joseph, Zachary and Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna the Prophetess, who were honoured with Revelations and Visions, filled with the holy Ghost,
cc pns31 vvz, cst np1, np1 cc np1, np1 cc np1 dt n1, r-crq vbdr vvn p-acp n2 cc n2, vvn p-acp dt j n1,
and had the Gift of Prophecy, if they did not fully know his Consubstantiality, they had at least some NONLATINALPHABET obscure ways of it I need not make Reflections upon all these:
and had the Gift of Prophecy, if they did not Fully know his Consubstantiality, they had At least Some Obscure ways of it I need not make Reflections upon all these:
cc vhd dt n1 pp-f n1, cs pns32 vdd xx av-j vvi po31 n1, pns32 vhd p-acp ds d j n2 pp-f pn31 pns11 vvb xx vvi n2 p-acp d d:
could he then without Unfaithfulness omit that which above all other Arguments would be of Power to work Faith in them? He who was so careful to confirm his Disciples in the Belief, that he was the true Messiah ;
could he then without Unfaithfulness omit that which above all other Arguments would be of Power to work Faith in them? He who was so careful to confirm his Disciples in the Belief, that he was the true Messiah;
vmd pns31 av p-acp n1 vvi d r-crq p-acp d j-jn n2 vmd vbi pp-f n1 pc-acp vvi n1 p-acp pno32? pns31 r-crq vbds av j pc-acp vvi po31 n2 p-acp dt n1, cst pns31 vbds dt j np1;
can it be supposed, that he would not acquaint them with that, which would above all other things, render them stedfast in this Belief? And if he publish'd this in his popular Discourses, who can imagin that it never came to the Ears of the Apostles?
can it be supposed, that he would not acquaint them with that, which would above all other things, render them steadfast in this Belief? And if he published this in his popular Discourses, who can imagine that it never Come to the Ears of the Apostles?
vmb pn31 vbi vvn, cst pns31 vmd xx vvi pno32 p-acp d, r-crq vmd p-acp d j-jn n2, vvb pno32 j p-acp d n1? cc cs pns31 vvn d p-acp po31 j n2, r-crq vmb vvi cst pn31 av-x vvd p-acp dt n2 pp-f dt n2?
2. The same is clearly inferred from the means, by which the Discussor supposes John the Baptist arriv'd at this Knowledg, viz. the Voice from Heaven, at Jesus's Baptism.
2. The same is clearly inferred from the means, by which the Discusser supposes John the Baptist arrived At this Knowledge, viz. the Voice from Heaven, At Jesus's Baptism.
He who saw the holy Ghost effigiated in the Form of a Dove (that may be question'd) descending from above, and lighting upon him, may very well be imagined to be instructed who he was :
He who saw the holy Ghost effigiated in the From of a Dove (that may be questioned) descending from above, and lighting upon him, may very well be imagined to be instructed who he was:
If so, may it not as well be imagin'd, that the Apostles might be as well instructed, by the Report of this Noise from Heaven, they received from John? May not a Man understand as much by hearing a thing at second hand, (and as firmly believe it too,
If so, may it not as well be imagined, that the Apostles might be as well instructed, by the Report of this Noise from Heaven, they received from John? May not a Man understand as much by hearing a thing At second hand, (and as firmly believe it too,
cs av, vmb pn31 xx c-acp av vbi vvn, cst dt n2 vmd vbi c-acp av vvn, p-acp dt n1 pp-f d n1 p-acp n1, pns32 vvd p-acp np1? vmb xx dt n1 vvb p-acp d p-acp vvg dt n1 p-acp ord n1, (cc c-acp av-j vvi pn31 av,
if he hear it from a Person of unquestionable Credit) as if he heard it at the first? And that John the Baptist bear record of this, St. John the Evangelist hath told us :
if he hear it from a Person of unquestionable Credit) as if he herd it At the First? And that John the Baptist bear record of this, Saint John the Evangelist hath told us:
And can any considering Man perswade himself, that the Apostles of our Saviour should be ignorant of that, which the Baptist openly proclaimed to all the Jews?
And can any considering Man persuade himself, that the Apostles of our Saviour should be ignorant of that, which the Baptist openly proclaimed to all the jews?
cc vmb d vvg n1 vvi px31, cst dt n2 pp-f po12 n1 vmd vbi j pp-f d, r-crq dt n1 av-j vvn p-acp d dt np2?
He bear record, that he was The Son of God, by way of eminency, so as never any other Man was, (NONLATINALPHABET with an Article) if this be not thought enough, he loudly testified, that he had a real being,
He bear record, that he was The Son of God, by Way of eminency, so as never any other Man was, (with an Article) if this be not Thought enough, he loudly testified, that he had a real being,
pns31 vvb n1, cst pns31 vbds dt n1 pp-f np1, p-acp n1 pp-f n1, av c-acp av d j-jn n1 vbds, (p-acp dt n1) cs d vbb xx vvn av-d, pns31 av-j vvd, cst pns31 vhd dt j vbg,
In which Words (as a learned Bishop of this Church hath observed) first, John taketh to himself a Priority of time, speaking of Christ, He that cometh after me.
In which Words (as a learned Bishop of this Church hath observed) First, John Takes to himself a Priority of time, speaking of christ, He that comes After me.
For so he came after him into the Womb at his Conception, into the World at his Nativity, &c. 2dly, He attributeth to Christ a Priority of Dignity, saying, He is perferred before me.
For so he Come After him into the Womb At his Conception, into the World At his Nativity, etc. 2dly, He attributeth to christ a Priority of Dignity, saying, He is perferred before me.
This Man Christ Jesus who came in to the World, and entered upon his Prophetical Office six Months after me, is notwithstanding of far more Worth and greater Dignity;
This Man christ jesus who Come in to the World, and entered upon his Prophetical Office six Months After me, is notwithstanding of Far more Worth and greater Dignity;
d n1 np1 np1 r-crq vvd p-acp p-acp dt n1, cc vvd p-acp po31 j n1 crd n2 p-acp pno11, vbz a-acp pp-f av-j av-dc j cc jc n1;
Again, St. John the Baptist prefers Christ before himself in this, that whereas he himself had his Original from the Earth, Christ came from Heaven, and was above all ;
Again, Saint John the Baptist prefers christ before himself in this, that whereas he himself had his Original from the Earth, christ Come from Heaven, and was above all;
Can it then be in reason supposed, that the Apostles knew not this Mystery, which John so freely publish'd to his Hearers? especially considering, that some of the Apostles were the Disciples of John, before they were the Disciples of Christ. But,
Can it then be in reason supposed, that the Apostles knew not this Mystery, which John so freely published to his Hearers? especially considering, that Some of the Apostles were the Disciples of John, before they were the Disciples of christ. But,
vmb pn31 av vbi p-acp n1 vvn, cst dt n2 vvd xx d n1, r-crq np1 av av-j vvn p-acp po31 n2? av-j vvg, cst d pp-f dt n2 vbdr dt n2 pp-f np1, c-acp pns32 vbdr dt n2 pp-f np1. p-acp,
since besides what they had heard from John concerning it, they had learn'd much more from their Master himself by his private Instructions, and his publick Preaching.
since beside what they had herd from John Concerning it, they had learned much more from their Master himself by his private Instructions, and his public Preaching.
These and many other matters of the like import they had heard from his own Mouth, of the Truth of which they were abundantly satisfied, by seeing him do such Miracles, which no Man before ever did, in confirmation of what he said. The Argument then lies thus;
These and many other matters of the like import they had herd from his own Mouth, of the Truth of which they were abundantly satisfied, by seeing him do such Miracles, which no Man before ever did, in confirmation of what he said. The Argument then lies thus;
np1 cc d j-jn n2 pp-f dt j n1 pns32 vhd vvn p-acp po31 d n1, pp-f dt n1 pp-f r-crq pns32 vbdr av-j vvn, p-acp vvg pno31 vdi d n2, r-crq dx n1 c-acp av vdd, p-acp n1 pp-f r-crq pns31 vvd. dt n1 av vvz av;
because they had not only all the same Arguments that he had, but many more from the Words and Actions of Christ himself to assure them of this great Truth.
Because they had not only all the same Arguments that he had, but many more from the Words and Actions of christ himself to assure them of this great Truth.
c-acp pns32 vhd xx av-j d dt d n2 cst pns31 vhd, cc-acp d dc p-acp dt n2 cc n2 pp-f np1 px31 pc-acp vvi pno32 pp-f d j n1.
and in case he did, yet unless he reveal'd also, that this Jesus of Nazareth was the Man that was exalted to the Hypostatic Union with the Word, it will not reach the Point to be determined.
and in case he did, yet unless he revealed also, that this jesus of Nazareth was the Man that was exalted to the Hypostatic union with the Word, it will not reach the Point to be determined.
cc p-acp n1 pns31 vdd, av cs pns31 vvd av, cst d np1 pp-f np1 vbds dt n1 cst vbds vvn p-acp dt j n1 p-acp dt n1, pn31 vmb xx vvi dt n1 pc-acp vbi vvn.
The third opinion is that of St. Austin, viz. That it was made known to the Devil by the operation of so many Miracles wrought by the Finger of God, which the Devil knew did transcend his, and all Angelical Power.
The third opinion is that of Saint Austin, viz. That it was made known to the devil by the operation of so many Miracles wrought by the Finger of God, which the devil knew did transcend his, and all Angelical Power.
dt ord n1 vbz d pp-f n1 np1, n1 cst pn31 vbds vvn vvn p-acp dt n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f av d n2 vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f np1, r-crq dt n1 vvd vdd vvi po31, cc d j n1.
If then by these means the Devil came to know the Divinity of Christ, might not all the Apostes as well know it, having the same means of knowing it? Let us now see what was the Judgment of the Ancients in this point.
If then by these means the devil Come to know the Divinity of christ, might not all the Apostles as well know it, having the same means of knowing it? Let us now see what was the Judgement of the Ancients in this point.
cs av p-acp d n2 dt n1 vvd pc-acp vvi dt n1 pp-f np1, vmd xx d dt n2 c-acp av vvb pn31, vhg dt d n2 pp-f vvg pn31? vvb pno12 av vvi r-crq vbds dt n1 pp-f dt n2-j p-acp d n1.
The Discussor himself grants, that the Fathers incidently say, that the other Apostles knew Christ to be the Son of God, before St Peter's promulging him so: But then he says, they meant thereby his nominal, not his natural Filiation.
The Discusser himself grants, that the Father's incidently say, that the other Apostles knew christ to be the Son of God, before Saint Peter's promulging him so: But then he Says, they meant thereby his nominal, not his natural Filiation.
He instances only in St. Ambrose, whom he finds in one place to affirm, that the other Apostles knew Christ to be the Son of God as well as St. Peter;
He instances only in Saint Ambrose, whom he finds in one place to affirm, that the other Apostles knew christ to be the Son of God as well as Saint Peter;
whether St. Ambrose in this place meant, that the Apostles knew the Divinity of Christ, which no Man that impartially reads the Text, can so much as question (and therefore it was wisely done of the Discussor, not to tell his Reader where it was to be found) for St. Ambrose there commenting upon St. Peter 's Answer,
whither Saint Ambrose in this place meant, that the Apostles knew the Divinity of christ, which no Man that impartially reads the Text, can so much as question (and Therefore it was wisely done of the Discusser, not to tell his Reader where it was to be found) for Saint Ambrose there commenting upon Saint Peter is Answer,
Can any thing be more plain than 〈 ◊ 〉 what St. Ambrose here saith, the other Apostles knew, was, what was expressed in the Name Christ, viz. his Divinity and Incarnation? And what St. Peter answer'd,
Can any thing be more plain than 〈 ◊ 〉 what Saint Ambrose Here Says, the other Apostles knew, was, what was expressed in the Name christ, viz. his Divinity and Incarnation? And what Saint Peter answered,
vmb d n1 vbi av-dc j cs 〈 sy 〉 q-crq n1 np1 av vvz, dt j-jn n2 vvd, vbds, r-crq vbds vvn p-acp dt n1 np1, n1 po31 n1 cc n1? cc r-crq n1 np1 vvn,
So far was St. Jerom from thinking the Apostles ignorant of it, that he thought the rude Sea-men knew his Divinity, otherwise he spake absurdly in opposing their Confession to that of Arius .
So Far was Saint Jerome from thinking the Apostles ignorant of it, that he Thought the rude Seamen knew his Divinity, otherwise he spoke absurdly in opposing their Confessi to that of Arius.
but for all the Apostles, which, as Maldonate confesses , was the Judgment of St. Chrysostom, Jerom, and St. Austin; and Barradius cites for it St. Augustin, Ambrose, Jerom, Anselm, and St. Thomas .
but for all the Apostles, which, as Maldonate Confesses, was the Judgement of Saint Chrysostom, Jerome, and Saint Austin; and Barradius cites for it Saint Augustin, Ambrose, Jerome, Anselm, and Saint Thomas.
cc-acp p-acp d dt n2, r-crq, c-acp fw-it vvz, vbds dt n1 pp-f n1 np1, np1, cc n1 np1; cc np1 vvz p-acp pn31 n1 np1, np1, np1, np1, cc n1 np1.
That St. Austin fancies, he only answered to preserve Ʋnity, unus pro multis dedit responsum, unitas in multis, &c. And in confessing this, does he not fairly pull down with one hand, what he labours to build up with the other? For what the reason was,
That Saint Austin fancies, he only answered to preserve Ʋnity, Unus Pro multis dedit responsum, unitas in multis, etc. And in confessing this, does he not fairly pull down with one hand, what he labours to built up with the other? For what the reason was,
He here forgot his good Friend Maldonate, who was of the same silly Opinion. But is it indeed silly to think, that Christ should propound a Question to a dozen, which he knew any one of them could answer? That Question which just before this he propounded to the same dozen, (Whom do Men say, that I the Son of Man am?) did he not know, that every one of them could answer it? and so indeed they all did,
He Here forgotten his good Friend Maldonate, who was of the same silly Opinion. But is it indeed silly to think, that christ should propound a Question to a dozen, which he knew any one of them could answer? That Question which just before this he propounded to the same dozen, (Whom do Men say, that I the Son of Man am?) did he not know, that every one of them could answer it? and so indeed they all did,
pns31 av vvd po31 j n1 fw-it, r-crq vbds pp-f dt d j n1. cc-acp vbz pn31 av j pc-acp vvi, cst np1 vmd vvi dt n1 p-acp dt crd, r-crq pns31 vvd d crd pp-f pno32 vmd vvi? cst n1 r-crq av p-acp d pns31 vvd p-acp dt d crd, (r-crq vdb n2 vvi, cst pns11 dt n1 pp-f n1 vbm?) vdd pns31 xx vvi, cst d crd pp-f pno32 vmd vvi pn31? cc av av pns32 d vdd,
That other Question propounded by Christ to all the twelve sometime before this, (Will ye also go back?) did he not know, that every one of them could answer it,
That other Question propounded by christ to all the twelve sometime before this, (Will you also go back?) did he not know, that every one of them could answer it,
cst j-jn n1 vvn p-acp np1 p-acp d dt crd av p-acp d, (vmb pn22 av vvi av?) vdd pns31 xx vvi, cst d crd pp-f pno32 vmd vvi pn31,
and the Reward promised was given to all the Apostles. The Lord saith to Peter, saith St. Cyprian, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church;
and the Reward promised was given to all the Apostles. The Lord Says to Peter, Says Saint Cyprian, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I built my Church;
cc dt n1 vvn vbds vvn p-acp d dt n2. dt n1 vvz p-acp np1, vvz n1 jp, pns21 vb2r np1, cc p-acp d n1 vmb pns11 vvi po11 n1;
Hath Peter received those Keys, says St. Austin, and hath not Paul received them? hath Peter received them, and hath not John and James received them, and the rest of the Apostles ? And that the Promises were made to the other Apostles,
Hath Peter received those Keys, Says Saint Austin, and hath not Paul received them? hath Peter received them, and hath not John and James received them, and the rest of the Apostles? And that the Promises were made to the other Apostles,
vhz np1 vvd d n2, vvz n1 np1, cc vhz xx np1 vvd pno32? vhz np1 vvd pno32, cc vhz xx np1 cc np1 vvd pno32, cc dt n1 pp-f dt n2? cc cst dt vvz vbdr vvn p-acp dt j-jn n2,
as well as to Peter, is not only the Opinion of the ancient Church, (as I shall afterward more fully shew) but of many great Men of the Church of Rome .
as well as to Peter, is not only the Opinion of the ancient Church, (as I shall afterwards more Fully show) but of many great Men of the Church of Room.
c-acp av c-acp pc-acp np1, vbz xx av-j dt n1 pp-f dt j n1, (c-acp pns11 vmb av av-dc av-j vvi) cc-acp pp-f d j n2 pp-f dt n1 pp-f vvb.
did the Suddenness of it render Peter ignorant of what he knew (as I have already shew'd) before the Question was asked? Or needed he to consult the Apostles for that Answer, which he had sometime before, upon occasion of another Question, given in their Name? John 6. 69.
did the Suddenness of it render Peter ignorant of what he knew (as I have already showed) before the Question was asked? Or needed he to consult the Apostles for that Answer, which he had sometime before, upon occasion of Another Question, given in their Name? John 6. 69.
But what then was the true Reason, why Peter is said to answer this Question for the rest? Because his Answer thereto was Orthodox, they were obliged to own and embrace it, as the common Belief of the Church . Wiser yet;
But what then was the true Reason, why Peter is said to answer this Question for the rest? Because his Answer thereto was Orthodox, they were obliged to own and embrace it, as the Common Belief of the Church. Wiser yet;
cc-acp q-crq av vbds dt j n1, q-crq np1 vbz vvn pc-acp vvi d n1 p-acp dt n1? p-acp po31 n1 av vbds n1, pns32 vbdr vvn p-acp d cc vvb pn31, c-acp dt j n1 pp-f dt n1. jc av;
because it is Orthodox, whether they indeed own it, or not? What if the other Apostles had been Heterodox, and disown'd this Answer? Could he then have been said to have answer'd for them? If not,
Because it is Orthodox, whither they indeed own it, or not? What if the other Apostles had been Heterodox, and disowned this Answer? Could he then have been said to have answered for them? If not,
c-acp pn31 vbz n1, cs pns32 av vvi pn31, cc xx? q-crq cs dt j-jn n2 vhd vbn n1, cc vvn d n1? vmd pns31 av vhi vbn vvn pc-acp vhi vvn p-acp pno32? cs xx,
But if he could, then behold here a compendious way of reconciling all Hereticks to the Church of Rome. It is but putting one Romanist in the Head of them,
But if he could, then behold Here a compendious Way of reconciling all Heretics to the Church of Room. It is but putting one Romanist in the Head of them,
cc-acp cs pns31 vmd, av vvb av dt j n1 pp-f n-vvg d n2 p-acp dt n1 pp-f vvi. pn31 vbz p-acp vvg crd np1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f pno32,
for the Romanist returning an Orthodox Answer, he speaks for them all, and so without any more ado, they are all good Catholicks. Had this Expedient been proposed a little sooner, it might have saved the Bishop of Meaux and the Representer a great deal of needless pains.
for the Romanist returning an Orthodox Answer, he speaks for them all, and so without any more ado, they Are all good Catholics. Had this Expedient been proposed a little sooner, it might have saved the Bishop of Meaux and the Representer a great deal of needless pains.
p-acp dt np1 vvg dt n1 n1, pns31 vvz p-acp pno32 d, cc av p-acp d dc n1, pns32 vbr d j njp2. vhd d j vbi vvn dt j av-c, pn31 vmd vhi vvn dt n1 pp-f np1 cc dt jc dt j n1 pp-f j n2.
In answer to a Question he proposes we find indeed afterwards, the Words recited by the Discussor. The Question is this, Why Christ now pronounced Peter alone blessed, when all the Apostles,
In answer to a Question he proposes we find indeed afterwards, the Words recited by the Discusser. The Question is this, Why christ now pronounced Peter alone blessed, when all the Apostles,
or almost all, seem to have had the same Faith, and when he seemed to have answer'd in the Name of them all? To which he returns this Answer, Peter, IF WE SPEAK PROPERLY, did not answer for them all,
or almost all, seem to have had the same Faith, and when he seemed to have answered in the Name of them all? To which he returns this Answer, Peter, IF WE SPEAK PROPERLY, did not answer for them all,
cc av d, vvb pc-acp vhi vhn dt d n1, cc c-crq pns31 vvd pc-acp vhi vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f pno32 d? p-acp r-crq pns31 vvz d n1, np1, cs pns12 vvb av-j, vdd xx vvi p-acp pno32 d,
because he could not search the Secrets of the Heart, &c. If this seems to contradict what he says before, I leave it to the Discussor to reconcile him to himself.
Because he could not search the Secrets of the Heart, etc. If this seems to contradict what he Says before, I leave it to the Discusser to reconcile him to himself.
In the other Passage of Jansenius he leaves out the most material part; he thus recites it, Cum Chrysostomus & alii eum vocant Os, & nomine omnium respondisse;
In the other Passage of Jansenius he leaves out the most material part; he thus recites it, Cum Chrysostom & alii Eum Vocant Os, & nomine omnium respondisse;
p-acp dt j-jn n1 pp-f np1 pns31 vvz av dt av-ds j-jn n1; pns31 av vvz pn31, vvb np1 cc fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, cc fw-la fw-la n1;
& omnium nomine respondisse, non sic accipiendum, quasi id responderit quod omnes sentirent, sed quia CƲM OMNES INTERROGATI ESSENT, ipse solus responderit, QƲOD OMNES SECƲM AƲT PENE OMNES SENTIRE PƲTABAT; & quod omnibus respondendum fuisset.
& omnium nomine respondisse, non sic accipiendum, quasi id responderit quod omnes sentirent, sed quia CƲM OMNES INTERROGATI ESSENT, ipse solus responderit, QƲOD OMNES SECƲM AƲT PENE OMNES SENTIRE PƲTABAT; & quod omnibus respondendum fuisset.
For as much, says he, as it does not appear determinately, whether Peter answered in the name of all, IT SEEMS thence more agreeable to the letter, that Peter answer'd for himself alone .
For as much, Says he, as it does not appear determinately, whither Peter answered in the name of all, IT SEEMS thence more agreeable to the Letter, that Peter answered for himself alone.
If the other Apostles did equally (whether equally or unequally is not now the Question) know it with Peter, and he only spake their Sense for them, I shall with Maldonat ask this Question; What Question? Si pro omnibus Petrus loquebatur, cur non omnibus dictum, Beati estis? Cur non omnibus mutata nomina? cur non omnibus dictum, Vobis dabo, &c. Is all this but one Question? Another Man would have made it three, without the &c. and whosoever consults Maldonat will find, that that contains one,
If the other Apostles did equally (whither equally or unequally is not now the Question) know it with Peter, and he only spoke their Sense for them, I shall with Maldonatus ask this Question; What Question? Si Pro omnibus Peter loquebatur, cur non omnibus dictum, Beati Ye are? Cur non omnibus Mutata nomina? cur non omnibus dictum, Vobis Dabo, etc. Is all this but one Question? another Man would have made it three, without the etc. and whosoever consults Maldonatus will find, that that contains one,
cs dt j-jn n2 vdd av-j (cs av-j cc av-j vbz xx av dt n1) vvb pn31 p-acp np1, cc pns31 av-j vvd po32 n1 p-acp pno32, pns11 vmb p-acp j vvb d n1; r-crq n1? fw-mi fw-la fw-la np1 fw-la, n1 fw-fr fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la? n1 fw-fr fw-la fw-la fw-la? n1 fw-fr fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la, av vbz d d p-acp crd n1? j-jn n1 vmd vhi vvn pn31 crd, p-acp dt av cc r-crq vvz j vmb vvi, cst d vvz pi,
if not two more, viz. Cum omnes Christus interrogasset, cur non omnes responderunt? praesertim, cum paulo ante interrogante eo quem se homines esse dicerent, non solus Petrus, sed omnes, aut quicunque voluerunt, responderint .
if not two more, viz. Cum omnes Christus interrogasset, cur non omnes responderunt? Especially, cum Paul ante interrogante eo Whom se homines esse dicerent, non solus Peter, sed omnes, Or quicunque voluerunt, responderint.
because the reason of it (for Flesh and Blood hath not revealed it unto thee) agreed to them all equally, (as I shall presently shew.) Quest. 2. Why were not all their Names changed?
Because the reason of it (for Flesh and Blood hath not revealed it unto thee) agreed to them all equally, (as I shall presently show.) Quest. 2. Why were not all their Names changed?
c-acp dt n1 pp-f pn31 (p-acp n1 cc n1 vhz xx vvn pn31 p-acp pno21) vvn p-acp pno32 d av-j, (c-acp pns11 vmb av-j vvi.) n1. crd q-crq vbdr xx d po32 n2 vvn?
Whether his Name was changed to Peter, because the other Apostles did not know equally with him, That Christ was the Son of the living God? Quest. 3. Why was it not said to them all, I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS?
Whither his Name was changed to Peter, Because the other Apostles did not know equally with him, That christ was the Son of the living God? Quest. 3. Why was it not said to them all, I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS?
because they had a different Answer to return to it; one, one thing; and another, another thing, according to the different Opinions they had heard of the People. I proceed now,
Because they had a different Answer to return to it; one, one thing; and Another, Another thing, according to the different Opinions they had herd of the People. I proceed now,
They are three, viz. Tostatus, Maldonat, and Jansenius. The two former of which, though they deny, that Peter answered in the name of all the Apostles; yet they as plainly express,
They Are three, viz. Tostado, Maldonatus, and Jansenius. The two former of which, though they deny, that Peter answered in the name of all the Apostles; yet they as plainly express,
as ever any Protestant did, that the other Apostles had the same Faith, and in case they had spoken, would have return'd the same Answer, that Peter did. Tostatus proposes this Question;
as ever any Protestant did, that the other Apostles had the same Faith, and in case they had spoken, would have returned the same Answer, that Peter did. Tostado proposes this Question;
c-acp av d n1 vdd, cst dt j-jn n2 vhd dt d n1, cc p-acp n1 pns32 vhd vvn, vmd vhi vvn dt d n1, cst np1 vdd. npg1 vvz d n1;
That it must be said, that all of them held the same Confession that Peter did; and if Christ had asked their Votes singly, every one of them would have given the same Answer .
That it must be said, that all of them held the same Confessi that Peter did; and if christ had asked their Votes singly, every one of them would have given the same Answer.
cst pn31 vmb vbi vvn, cst d pp-f pno32 vvd dt d n1 cst np1 vdd; cc cs np1 vhd vvn po32 n2 av-j, d crd pp-f pno32 vmd vhi vvn dt d n1.
A little after he says, Peter prevented the rest, and spake what he thought, but the rest seeing that Peter said that which they would have said, held their Peace .
A little After he Says, Peter prevented the rest, and spoke what he Thought, but the rest seeing that Peter said that which they would have said, held their Peace.
And about a dozen lines after he adds, in answer to a Passage of Cyril, When Cyril said that Peter prevented the rest, and was the Mouth of the whole College;
And about a dozen lines After he adds, in answer to a Passage of Cyril, When Cyril said that Peter prevented the rest, and was the Mouth of the Whole College;
Maldonat having before confessed, that some ancient Authors, viz. St. Chrysostom, St Jerome, and St. Augustin, thought that Peter answered not for himself alone,
Maldonatus having before confessed, that Some ancient Authors, viz. Saint Chrysostom, Saint Jerome, and Saint Augustin, Thought that Peter answered not for himself alone,
j vhg a-acp vvn, cst d j n2, n1 n1 np1, zz np1, cc n1 np1, vvd cst np1 vvd xx p-acp px31 av-j,
but for all the Apostles; to refute the opinion of the Calvinists (that is the opinion of these Fathers) he proposes those Questions I have before answered;
but for all the Apostles; to refute the opinion of the Calvinists (that is the opinion of these Father's) he proposes those Questions I have before answered;
cc-acp p-acp d dt n2; pc-acp vvi dt n1 pp-f dt np1 (cst vbz dt n1 pp-f d n2) pns31 vvz d n2 pns11 vhb a-acp vvn;
and then adds, Therefore all other Authors thought better, that Peter answered for himself only; not that the other (Apostles) did not believe the same thing,
and then adds, Therefore all other Authors Thought better, that Peter answered for himself only; not that the other (Apostles) did not believe the same thing,
cc av vvz, av d j-jn n2 vvd av-jc, cst np1 vvd p-acp px31 av-j; xx cst dt n-jn (n2) vdd xx vvi dt d n1,
But then lest the Calvinists should have the Honour of having these famous Fathers, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerom, and St. Austin on their side, the Jesuit adds, And this only is that which these Authors would signify, who have said, that he answered for them all,
But then lest the Calvinists should have the Honour of having these famous Father's, Saint Chrysostom, Saint Jerome, and Saint Austin on their side, the Jesuit adds, And this only is that which these Authors would signify, who have said, that he answered for them all,
p-acp av cs dt np1 vmd vhi dt n1 pp-f vhg d j n2, n1 np1, n1 np1, cc n1 np1 p-acp po32 n1, dt np1 vvz, cc d av-j vbz d r-crq d n2 vmd vvi, r-crq vhb vvn, cst pns31 vvd p-acp pno32 d,
That is, he is said by them to answer for them all, because having a greater Faith, he first burst out into that Confession which they would have made, had not he got the start of them.
That is, he is said by them to answer for them all, Because having a greater Faith, he First burst out into that Confessi which they would have made, had not he god the start of them.
cst vbz, pns31 vbz vvn p-acp pno32 pc-acp vvi p-acp pno32 d, c-acp vhg dt jc n1, pns31 ord vvd av p-acp d n1 r-crq pns32 vmd vhi vvn, vhd xx pns31 vvn dt n1 pp-f pno32.
From this passage of Maldonat, I shall observe three things. 1. That Maldonat makes these two to be distinct Propositions, which the Discussor confounds, viz. (1.) That Peter answer'd for them all. (2.) That what Peter answer'd was the Faith of them all.
From this passage of Maldonatus, I shall observe three things. 1. That Maldonatus makes these two to be distinct Propositions, which the Discusser confounds, viz. (1.) That Peter answered for them all. (2.) That what Peter answered was the Faith of them all.
p-acp d n1 pp-f j, pns11 vmb vvi crd n2. crd cst j vvz d crd pc-acp vbi j n2, r-crq dt n1 vvz, n1 (crd) cst np1 vvn p-acp pno32 d. (crd) d r-crq np1 vvn vbds dt n1 pp-f pno32 d.
which is a notable Instance of his Sincerity. 3. Since Maldonat also thought, that Christ in these Words, Ʋpon this Rock, &c. promised something great and singular to Peter as a Reward of his Confession .
which is a notable Instance of his Sincerity. 3. Since Maldonatus also Thought, that christ in these Words, Ʋpon this Rock, etc. promised something great and singular to Peter as a Reward of his Confessi.
r-crq vbz dt j n1 pp-f po31 n1. crd p-acp j av vvd, cst np1 p-acp d n2, av d n1, av vvd pi j cc j p-acp np1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f po31 n1.
He thought it no childish Fancy, and beneath the conceptions of a Doctor, that Christ should propound a Question to a dozen persons, which he knew any of them could solve,
He Thought it no childish Fancy, and beneath the conceptions of a Doctor, that christ should propound a Question to a dozen Persons, which he knew any of them could solve,
To these cited by the Discussor, I shall add a few more, whose names are famous in the Church of Rome. The other (Apostles) says Salmeron, had the same Faith, otherways they themselves would have declared their Faith,
To these cited by the Discusser, I shall add a few more, whose names Are famous in the Church of Room. The other (Apostles) Says Salmeron, had the same Faith, otherways they themselves would have declared their Faith,
p-acp d vvn p-acp dt n1, pns11 vmb vvi dt d dc, rg-crq n2 vbr j p-acp dt n1 pp-f vvi. dt j-jn (np1) vvz np1, vhd dt d n1, av pns32 px32 vmd vhi vvn po32 n1,
His distinction of nominal and natural Filiation , hath been already considered, and also his Quotations out of S. Ambrose. Of the rest of the Fathers, whom he finds acknowledging, Peter first to know,
His distinction of nominal and natural Filiation, hath been already considered, and also his Quotations out of S. Ambrose. Of the rest of the Father's, whom he finds acknowledging, Peter First to know,
po31 n1 pp-f j-jn cc j n1, vhz vbn av vvn, cc av po31 n2 av pp-f n1 np1. pp-f dt n1 pp-f dt n2, ro-crq pns31 vvz vvg, np1 ord pc-acp vvi,
However I shall bestow a few Lines upon it, that the Discussor may not pretend that he is not answered. SECT. II. The second ground he lays of St. Peter 's Supremacy is, That he knew Christ's Divinity by a special Revelation.
However I shall bestow a few Lines upon it, that the Discusser may not pretend that he is not answered. SECT. II The second ground he lays of Saint Peter is Supremacy is, That he knew Christ's Divinity by a special Revelation.
but because the Father singled him out of the Apostolick Society, illuminating him with a particular Revelation, &c. And again, The Father and the Holy Ghost cull him out of the whole Body of the Apostles,
but Because the Father singled him out of the Apostolic Society, illuminating him with a particular Revelation, etc. And again, The Father and the Holy Ghost cull him out of the Whole Body of the Apostles,
cc-acp c-acp dt n1 vvd pno31 av pp-f dt jp n1, vvg pno31 p-acp dt j n1, av cc av, dt n1 cc dt j n1 vvb pno31 av pp-f dt j-jn n1 pp-f dt n2,
And again, I will never be induc'd to believe otherwise, than that St. Peter 's Revelation did discover to him more than either what he or they knew before, otherwise it had been of no import .
And again, I will never be induced to believe otherwise, than that Saint Peter is Revelation did discover to him more than either what he or they knew before, otherwise it had been of no import.
cc av, pns11 vmb av-x vbi vvn pc-acp vvi av, cs d n1 np1 vbz n1 vdd vvi p-acp pno31 av-dc cs d r-crq pns31 cc pns32 vvd a-acp, av pn31 vhd vbn pp-f dx n1.
I know not any that would induce him to believe otherwise, than that God revealed this to St. Peter; that this Revelation discovered to him more than what he knew before;
I know not any that would induce him to believe otherwise, than that God revealed this to Saint Peter; that this Revelation discovered to him more than what he knew before;
pns11 vvb xx d cst vmd vvi pno31 pc-acp vvi av, cs cst np1 vvd d p-acp n1 np1; cst d n1 vvn p-acp pno31 av-dc cs r-crq pns31 vvd a-acp;
and by consequence had the Revelation of it as well as he. And whereas he says, we may find the Fathers assert this, by the following Quotations. Therefore,
and by consequence had the Revelation of it as well as he. And whereas he Says, we may find the Father's assert this, by the following Quotations. Therefore,
cc p-acp n1 vhd dt n1 pp-f pn31 a-acp av c-acp pns31. cc cs pns31 vvz, pns12 vmb vvi dt n2 vvb d, p-acp dt j-vvg n2. av,
But they do not say, that he only had this Revelation, or use any such Words as exclude the other Apostles. I shall instance in two or three of his Quotations, that the Reader may see how pertinent they are.
But they do not say, that he only had this Revelation, or use any such Words as exclude the other Apostles. I shall instance in two or three of his Quotations, that the Reader may see how pertinent they Are.
cc-acp pns32 vdb xx vvi, cst pns31 av-j vhd d n1, cc vvi d d n2 p-acp vvi dt j-jn n2. pns11 vmb n1 p-acp crd cc crd pp-f po31 n2, cst dt n1 vmb vvi c-crq j pns32 vbr.
For since they all knew it, (as has been prov'd) and since they could no other way attain to this Knowledg than by Revelation, it might therefore as truly be said to James and John; Blessed art thou James, and blessed art thou John, for Flesh and Blood hath not revealed this unto thee,
For since they all knew it, (as has been proved) and since they could no other Way attain to this Knowledge than by Revelation, it might Therefore as truly be said to James and John; Blessed art thou James, and blessed art thou John, for Flesh and Blood hath not revealed this unto thee,
p-acp c-acp pns32 d vvd pn31, (c-acp vhz vbn vvn) cc c-acp pns32 vmd dx j-jn n1 vvi p-acp d n1 cs p-acp n1, pn31 vmd av c-acp av-j vbi vvn p-acp np1 cc np1; j-vvn vb2r pns21 np1, cc j-vvn n1 pns21 np1, p-acp n1 cc n1 vhz xx vvn d p-acp pno21,
and which follow after, as spoken to PETER ? Of the same Judgment must all those Fathers before-mention'd be, who were of Opinion, that the other Apostles had the same Faith,
and which follow After, as spoken to PETER? Of the same Judgement must all those Father's beforementioned be, who were of Opinion, that the other Apostles had the same Faith,
cc r-crq vvb p-acp, c-acp vvn p-acp np1? pp-f dt d n1 vmb d d n2 j vbb, r-crq vbdr pp-f n1, cst dt j-jn n2 vhd dt d n1,
To which I may also add, All those who affirm that the Promise of the Keys was made not only to Peter, but to all the Apostles, which (as I shall afterward shew) was the general Opinion of the Fathers.
To which I may also add, All those who affirm that the Promise of the Keys was made not only to Peter, but to all the Apostles, which (as I shall afterwards show) was the general Opinion of the Father's.
p-acp r-crq pns11 vmb av vvi, d d r-crq vvb cst dt n1 pp-f dt n2 vbds vvn xx av-j p-acp np1, p-acp p-acp d dt n2, r-crq (c-acp pns11 vmb av vvi) vbds dt j n1 pp-f dt n2.
therefore Peter hath supreme Jurisdiction over the Universal Church? Is not this Consequence altogether as good, Andrew knew him to be the Messiah before Peter, therefore Andrew was Peter 's Superior? And this is somewhat better, St. John lay in Christ's Bosom,
Therefore Peter hath supreme Jurisdiction over the Universal Church? Is not this Consequence altogether as good, Andrew knew him to be the Messiah before Peter, Therefore Andrew was Peter is Superior? And this is somewhat better, Saint John lay in Christ's Bosom,
av np1 vhz j n1 p-acp dt j-u n1? vbz xx d n1 av p-acp j, np1 vvd pno31 pc-acp vbi dt np1 p-acp np1, av np1 vbds np1 vbz j-jn? cc d vbz av j, n1 np1 vvb p-acp npg1 n1,
or had the uppermost place next after Christ at Meals, therefore St. John is the Prince of the Apostles? Are not these admirable Consequences? And yet I fear we shall find no better proofs for Peter 's Supremacy.
or had the uppermost place next After christ At Meals, Therefore Saint John is the Prince of the Apostles? are not these admirable Consequences? And yet I Fear we shall find no better proofs for Peter is Supremacy.
cc vhd dt j n1 ord p-acp np1 p-acp n2, av n1 np1 vbz dt n1 pp-f dt n2? vbr xx d j n2? cc av pns11 vvb pns12 vmb vvi dx jc n2 p-acp np1 vbz n1.
The Proofs he produces of St. Peter 's Supremacy are (as I said before) no other than those two Texts of Scripture, commonly press'd by the Romanists to serve in this cause,
The Proofs he produces of Saint Peter is Supremacy Are (as I said before) no other than those two Texts of Scripture, commonly pressed by the Romanists to serve in this cause,
but alas the whole, from the beginning to the end, is so sandy, so incoherent and inconsequent, that I am at a great loss to find any thing that does but look like an Argument.
but alas the Whole, from the beginning to the end, is so sandy, so incoherent and inconsequent, that I am At a great loss to find any thing that does but look like an Argument.
cc-acp uh dt j-jn, p-acp dt n1 p-acp dt n1, vbz av j, av j cc j, cst pns11 vbm p-acp dt j n1 pc-acp vvi d n1 cst vdz p-acp vvi av-j dt n1.
but the Apostles and St. Peter himself is mystically superedified ; (by the way, were not the Apostles and St. Peter true Christians? If they were, does not the Discussor speak absurdly,
but the Apostles and Saint Peter himself is mystically superedified; (by the Way, were not the Apostles and Saint Peter true Christians? If they were, does not the Discusser speak absurdly,
cc-acp dt n2 cc n1 np1 px31 vbz av-j vvn; (p-acp dt n1, vbdr xx dt n2 cc n1 np1 j np1? cs pns32 vbdr, vdz xx dt n1 vvb av-j,
when he says, Not only every true Christian, but the Apostles and St. Peter himself, as if they were not included in the number of true Christians) Need he have quoted St. Austin and St. Cyril for this? Was it ever denied by Protestants? Nay does he not say, that Protestants traduce them,
when he Says, Not only every true Christian, but the Apostles and Saint Peter himself, as if they were not included in the number of true Christians) Need he have quoted Saint Austin and Saint Cyril for this? Was it ever denied by Protestants? Nay does he not say, that Protestants traduce them,
c-crq pns31 vvz, xx av-j d j njp, cc-acp dt n2 cc n1 np1 px31, c-acp cs pns32 vbdr xx vvd p-acp dt n1 pp-f j np1) vvb pns31 vhb vvn n1 np1 cc n1 np1 p-acp d? vbds pn31 av vvn p-acp n2? uh-x vdz pns31 xx vvi, cst n2 vvi pno32,
as if they went about to despoil our Saviour of this Honour? But to shew his reading in the Fathers, he produces their Testimonies for what we affirm,
as if they went about to despoil our Saviour of this Honour? But to show his reading in the Father's, he produces their Testimonies for what we affirm,
But lest his liberal Concessions to our Saviour, should seem to derogate from St. Peter 's Glory, he puts in this caution to secure it, That Peter is not hereby excluded, (by no means,
But lest his liberal Concessions to our Saviour, should seem to derogate from Saint Peter is Glory, he puts in this caution to secure it, That Peter is not hereby excluded, (by no means,
And this also, if it will please him, is granted by Protestants; and therefore he is uncivil to the Fathers, in summoning them again to bear Witness to it.
And this also, if it will please him, is granted by Protestants; and Therefore he is Uncivil to the Father's, in summoning them again to bear Witness to it.
cc d av, cs pn31 vmb vvi pno31, vbz vvn p-acp n2; cc av pns31 vbz j p-acp dt n2, p-acp vvg pno32 av pc-acp vvi n1 p-acp pn31.
2. Three of the four Fathers he quotes, give a reason of this name, and the reason given by two of those three, is as applicable to the other Apostles,
2. Three of the four Father's he quotes, give a reason of this name, and the reason given by two of those three, is as applicable to the other Apostles,
crd crd pp-f dt crd n2 pns31 vvz, vvb dt n1 pp-f d n1, cc dt n1 vvn p-acp crd pp-f d crd, vbz a-acp j p-acp dt j-jn n2,
And so is that of St. Ambrose, Recte quia Petra Christus, Simon nuncupatus est Petrus, ut qui cum Domino fidei societatem habeat, cum Domino habeat et nominis Dominici societatem.
And so is that of Saint Ambrose, Recte quia Petra Christus, Simon nuncupatus est Peter, ut qui cum Domino fidei societatem habeat, cum Domino habeat et Nominis Dominici societatem.
cc av vbz d pp-f n1 np1, fw-la fw-la np1 fw-la, np1 fw-la fw-la np1, fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la np1 fw-la.
Now since the reason they give of it, is common to them all, we may hence reasonably conclude, that they thought this illustrious Title, as truly applicable to the other Apostles, as to St. Peter.
Now since the reason they give of it, is Common to them all, we may hence reasonably conclude, that they Thought this illustrious Title, as truly applicable to the other Apostles, as to Saint Peter.
Upon a Quotation out of St. Basil, Hom. 28. de Poenit. to shew, that Peter 's being the Rock, doth not exclude Christ from being so, he makes this Remark.
Upon a Quotation out of Saint Basil, Hom. 28. de Repent to show, that Peter is being the Rock, does not exclude christ from being so, he makes this Remark.
p-acp dt n1 av pp-f n1 np1, np1 crd fw-fr np1 pc-acp vvi, cst np1 vbz n1 dt n1, vdz xx vvi np1 p-acp vbg av, pns31 vvz d n1.
This Criticism, he adds, may be observed in St. Ambrose, lib. 6. Lucae; Ego sum inquit lux Mundi, &c. And St. Jerome likewise accords herein in his Comments on Abdias, &c. . It is pity this critical Observation should be lost, and yet who can help it? for when these Fathers in the places quoted, express Rock and Disciple in the singular number;
This Criticism, he adds, may be observed in Saint Ambrose, lib. 6. Luke; Ego sum inquit lux Mundi, etc. And Saint Jerome likewise accords herein in his Comments on Abdias, etc.. It is pity this critical Observation should be lost, and yet who can help it? for when these Father's in the places quoted, express Rock and Disciple in the singular number;
d n1, pns31 vvz, vmb vbi vvn p-acp n1 np1, n1. crd np1; fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, av cc n1 np1 av vvz av p-acp po31 n2 p-acp np1, av. pn31 vbz n1 d j n1 vmd vbi vvn, cc av q-crq vmb vvi pn31? p-acp c-crq d n2 p-acp dt n2 vvn, j vvb cc n1 p-acp dt j n1;
The utmost they can mean, is no more than one of these two things, or both together: 1. That these words, Ʋpon this Rock, were directed in particular to St. Peter. Or, 2. That this Title (Rock) was given to him as his proper Name,
The utmost they can mean, is no more than one of these two things, or both together: 1. That these words, Ʋpon this Rock, were directed in particular to Saint Peter. Or, 2. That this Title (Rock) was given to him as his proper Name,
dt j pns32 vmb vvi, vbz dx dc cs crd pp-f d crd n2, cc d av: crd cst d n2, av d n1, vbdr vvn p-acp j p-acp n1 np1. cc, crd cst d n1 (n1) vbds vvn p-acp pno31 c-acp po31 j n1,
For so far was St. Ambrose from denying that the other Apostles were Rocks, that within two lines after the words quoted by the Discussor, he supposes that every Christian may and ought to be a Rock, for the same reason as St. Peter was.
For so Far was Saint Ambrose from denying that the other Apostles were Rocks, that within two lines After the words quoted by the Discusser, he supposes that every Christian may and ought to be a Rock, for the same reason as Saint Peter was.
p-acp av av-j vbds n1 np1 p-acp vvg cst dt j-jn n2 vbdr n2, cst p-acp crd n2 p-acp dt n2 vvn p-acp dt n1, pns31 vvz cst d np1 vmb cc pi pc-acp vbi dt n1, p-acp dt d n1 p-acp n1 np1 vbds.
For having said that Christ gave him this Name, because he had from the Rock solidity of Constancy and firmness of Faith, he adds, Therefore do thou endeavour that thou also mayst be a Rock;
For having said that christ gave him this Name, Because he had from the Rock solidity of Constancy and firmness of Faith, he adds, Therefore do thou endeavour that thou also Mayest be a Rock;
p-acp vhg vvn cst np1 vvd pno31 d n1, c-acp pns31 vhd p-acp dt n1 n1 pp-f n1 cc n1 pp-f n1, pns31 vvz, av vdb pns21 vvi cst pns21 av vm2 vbi dt n1;
St. Jerom expresly says in the plural Number, That Christ is the Rock, who vouchsafed to his Apostles also, that they should be called Rocks, saying, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church .
Saint Jerome expressly Says in the plural Number, That christ is the Rock, who vouchsafed to his Apostles also, that they should be called Rocks, saying, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I built my Church.
Where from these words, Thou art Peter, &c. he infers, that Christ the Rock bestowed not only upon Peter, but upon the other Apostles, that they should be called Rocks. What is now become of this Observable?
Where from these words, Thou art Peter, etc. he infers, that christ the Rock bestowed not only upon Peter, but upon the other Apostles, that they should be called Rocks. What is now become of this Observable?
c-crq p-acp d n2, pns21 vb2r np1, av pns31 vvz, cst np1 dt n1 vvd xx av-j p-acp np1, p-acp p-acp dt j-jn n2, cst pns32 vmd vbi vvn n2. q-crq vbz av vvn pp-f d j?
or whether he were no good Hebrician , is not here pertinent to be enquired. In what sense he calls Peter Head of the Church, shall be afterward shewed.
or whither he were no good Hebrician, is not Here pertinent to be inquired. In what sense he calls Peter Head of the Church, shall be afterwards showed.
cc cs pns31 vbdr dx j n1, vbz xx av j pc-acp vbi vvn. p-acp r-crq n1 pns31 vvz np1 n1 pp-f dt n1, vmb vbi av vvn.
That in most perspicuous terms he acknowledges in several places of his Writings PETER 's SƲPREMACY , has not so much as shadow of proof in any of the places produc'd by the Discussor.
That in most perspicuous terms he acknowledges in several places of his Writings PETER is SƲPREMACY, has not so much as shadow of proof in any of the places produced by the Discusser.
But St. Austin declares them Wretched, and Hereticks that disown him to be the Rock: Thus Agon. Christ. he calls them miseri, dum in Petro Petram non intelligunt.
But Saint Austin declares them Wretched, and Heretics that disown him to be the Rock: Thus Agon. christ. he calls them miseri, dum in Peter Petram non Intelligunt.
or that follow those he hath cited, he might have seen that St. Austin could not by the Rock in this place mean Peter; for he tells us just before, that Peter sustains the Person of the Church,
or that follow those he hath cited, he might have seen that Saint Austin could not by the Rock in this place mean Peter; for he tells us just before, that Peter sustains the Person of the Church,
cc d vvb d pns31 vhz vvn, pns31 vmd vhi vvn d n1 np1 vmd xx p-acp dt vvb p-acp d n1 j np1; c-acp pns31 vvz pno12 j p-acp, cst np1 vvz dt n1 pp-f dt n1,
Now could he bear the Person of the Church built upon the Rock, and at the same time be the Rock it self upon which it is built? St. Austin therefore by the Rock meant Christ himself;
Now could he bear the Person of the Church built upon the Rock, and At the same time be the Rock it self upon which it is built? Saint Austin Therefore by the Rock meant christ himself;
av vmd pns31 vvi dt n1 pp-f dt n1 vvn p-acp dt n1, cc p-acp dt d n1 vbi dt n1 pn31 n1 p-acp r-crq pn31 vbz vvn? n1 np1 av p-acp dt vvb vvd np1 px31;
Again, The Rock was Christ, upon which Foundation even Peter himself is built; for other Foundation can no Man lay, besides that which is laid which is Christ Jesus.
Again, The Rock was christ, upon which Foundation even Peter himself is built; for other Foundation can no Man lay, beside that which is laid which is christ jesus.
The Church therefore which is founded in Christ, received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Peter, that is, the power of binding and of loosing Sins.
The Church Therefore which is founded in christ, received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Peter, that is, the power of binding and of losing Sins.
For that which properly the Church is in Christ, that by signification is Peter in the Rock; BY WHICH SIGNIFICATION CHRIST IS ƲNDERSTOOD TO BE THE ROCK, PETER TO BE THE CHƲRCH .
For that which properly the Church is in christ, that by signification is Peter in the Rock; BY WHICH SIGNIFICATION CHRIST IS ƲNDERSTOOD TO BE THE ROCK, PETER TO BE THE CHƲRCH.
And that this was St. Austin 's notion of the Rock in this place, will farther appear if we consider the Scope of his Discourse, which was to prove that remission of Sins is to be obtained in the Church.
And that this was Saint Austin is notion of the Rock in this place, will farther appear if we Consider the Scope of his Discourse, which was to prove that remission of Sins is to be obtained in the Church.
cc cst d vbds n1 np1 vbz n1 pp-f dt n1 p-acp d n1, vmb av-jc vvi cs pns12 vvb dt n1 pp-f po31 n1, r-crq vbds pc-acp vvi d n1 pp-f n2 vbz pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp dt n1.
Then follow the words quoted by the Discussor, Therefore those wretched Persons, while in Peter (that is, the Church) they do not understand the Rock (that is, Christ) and will not believe that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are given to the Church, they themselves have lost them .
Then follow the words quoted by the Discusser, Therefore those wretched Persons, while in Peter (that is, the Church) they do not understand the Rock (that is, christ) and will not believe that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Are given to the Church, they themselves have lost them.
av vvi dt n2 vvn p-acp dt n1, av d j n2, cs p-acp np1 (cst vbz, dt n1) pns32 vdb xx vvi dt n1 (cst vbz, np1) cc vmb xx vvi cst dt n2 pp-f dt n1 pp-f n1 vbr vvn p-acp dt n1, pns32 px32 vhb vvn pno32.
And why will they not believe this? because in the Church they do not understand Christ in whom the Church is founded, who hath committed the Keys to her.
And why will they not believe this? Because in the Church they do not understand christ in whom the Church is founded, who hath committed the Keys to her.
cc q-crq vmb pns32 xx vvi d? c-acp p-acp dt n1 pns32 vdb xx vvi np1 p-acp ro-crq dt n1 vbz vvn, r-crq vhz vvn dt n2 p-acp pno31.
The next Passage is quoted out of St. Austin contra 5 Haeres. I suppose he means his Oration de quinque Haeresibus, in which there is no such Passage,
The next Passage is quoted out of Saint Austin contra 5 Haeres. I suppose he means his Oration de Quinque Haeresibus, in which there is no such Passage,
dt ord n1 vbz vvn av pp-f n1 np1 fw-la crd fw-la. pns11 vvb pns31 vvz po31 n1 fw-la fw-la fw-la, p-acp r-crq a-acp vbz dx d n1,
It is well for them, that this must silence us, they will then for the future be no more troubled with disputing, which is a Work they are very awkard at.
It is well for them, that this must silence us, they will then for the future be no more troubled with disputing, which is a Work they Are very awkard At.
pn31 vbz av p-acp pno32, cst d vmb vvi pno12, pns32 vmb av p-acp dt j-jn vbi av-dx av-dc vvn p-acp vvg, r-crq vbz dt n1 pns32 vbr av vvn p-acp.
Though if I should deny it, the Discussor will not be able to prove, that by the Rock is here meant the Succession of the Bishops of Rome; yet as I have been all along liberal in my Concessions,
Though if I should deny it, the Discusser will not be able to prove, that by the Rock is Here meant the Succession of the Bishops of Room; yet as I have been all along liberal in my Concessions,
cs cs pns11 vmd vvi pn31, dt n1 vmb xx vbi j pc-acp vvi, cst p-acp dt vvb vbz av vvn dt n1 pp-f dt n2 pp-f vvb; av c-acp pns11 vhb vbn d a-acp j p-acp po11 n2,
yet before the Discussor can hence infer the Bishop of Rome 's, or Peter 's Supremacy, he must prove, that the Foundation of the Building is ever the supreme Lord of it. 2. If it be granted;
yet before the Discusser can hence infer the Bishop of Room is, or Peter is Supremacy, he must prove, that the Foundation of the Building is ever the supreme Lord of it. 2. If it be granted;
av p-acp dt n1 vmb av vvi dt n1 pp-f vvb vbz, cc np1 vbz n1, pns31 vmb vvi, cst dt n1 pp-f dt n1 vbz av dt j n1 pp-f pn31. crd cs pn31 vbb vvn;
yet the Succession of the Roman Bishops, cannot by Virtue of these Words, be the sole Rock, or any more the Rock, than the Succession of Bishops in any other Apostolical Church.
yet the Succession of the Roman Bishops, cannot by Virtue of these Words, be the sole Rock, or any more the Rock, than the Succession of Bishops in any other Apostolical Church.
av dt n1 pp-f dt njp n2, vmbx p-acp n1 pp-f d n2, vbb dt j n1, cc av-d av-dc dt n1, cs dt n1 pp-f n2 p-acp d j-jn j n1.
(1.) That St. Austin here uses the very same Argument against the Donatists, that Irenaeus, Tertullian, and several other Fathers had used before, against the Hereticks of their times, to prove the Catholick Doctrine, viz. The Succession of Bishops in the Apostolical Churches .
(1.) That Saint Austin Here uses the very same Argument against the Donatists, that Irnaeus, Tertullian, and several other Father's had used before, against the Heretics of their times, to prove the Catholic Doctrine, viz. The Succession of Bishops in the Apostolical Churches.
As Irenaeus before had done, who because it would have been tedious to enumerate the Successions of all Churches, brings for an example, that of Rome, which was the greatest and most famous .
As Irnaeus before had done, who Because it would have been tedious to enumerate the Successions of all Churches, brings for an Exampl, that of Room, which was the greatest and most famous.
Numerate Sacerdotes ab ipsa sede beati Petri, &c. But numerate Sacerdotes VEL ab ipsa sede, &c. Which is in effect to say with Irenaeus, Because it would be too long to reckon the Successions of Bishops in all those Churches, in which the Catholick Doctrine hath been preserved ever since the Apostles;
Numerate Sacerdotes ab ipsa sede Beati Petri, etc. But numerate Sacerdotes VEL ab ipsa sede, etc. Which is in Effect to say with Irnaeus, Because it would be too long to reckon the Successions of Bishops in all those Churches, in which the Catholic Doctrine hath been preserved ever since the Apostles;
vvi np1 fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la np1, av p-acp vvi np1 fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, av r-crq vbz p-acp n1 pc-acp vvi p-acp np1, c-acp pn31 vmd vbi av j pc-acp vvi dt n2 pp-f n2 p-acp d d n2, p-acp r-crq dt njp n1 vhz vbn vvn av p-acp dt n2;
3. And consequently, if it be the Succession of the Bishops of Rome, that he here makes the Rock, he implicitely affirms the same of any other Apostolical Church, in which there had been a continued Succession of Catholick Bishops;
3. And consequently, if it be the Succession of the Bishops of Room, that he Here makes the Rock, he implicitly affirms the same of any other Apostolical Church, in which there had been a continued Succession of Catholic Bishops;
crd cc av-j, cs pn31 vbb dt n1 pp-f dt n2 pp-f vvi, cst pns31 av vvz dt n1, pns31 av-j vvz dt d pp-f d j-jn j n1, p-acp r-crq a-acp vhd vbn dt j-vvn n1 pp-f njp n2;
which is further confirmed, in that he elsewhere arguing against the same Donatists, joyns the Church of Jerusalem together with that of Rome, and makes the Chair of the former, no way inferior in Authority to the latter.
which is further confirmed, in that he elsewhere arguing against the same Donatists, joins the Church of Jerusalem together with that of Room, and makes the Chair of the former, no Way inferior in authority to the latter.
r-crq vbz av-jc vvn, p-acp cst pns31 av vvg p-acp dt d n2, vvz dt n1 pp-f np1 av p-acp d pp-f vvi, cc vvz dt n1 pp-f dt j, dx n1 j-jn p-acp n1 p-acp dt d.
yet what hath the Chair of the Church of ROME done, in which Peter sate, and in which at this day Anastasius sits; or of the Church of JERƲSALEM, in which James sat, and in which at this day John sits, with which we are joyned in Catholick Ʋnity,
yet what hath the Chair of the Church of ROME done, in which Peter sat, and in which At this day Anastasius sits; or of the Church of JERƲSALEM, in which James sat, and in which At this day John sits, with which we Are joined in Catholic Ʋnity,
av q-crq vhz dt n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f np1 vdn, p-acp r-crq np1 vvd, cc p-acp r-crq p-acp d n1 np1 vvz; cc pp-f dt n1 pp-f np1, p-acp r-crq np1 vvd, cc p-acp r-crq p-acp d n1 np1 vvz, p-acp r-crq pns12 vbr vvn p-acp njp n1,
If any shall ask, why St. Austin, in case he did not ascribe some preeminence to the Church of Rome, should mention that rather than the Church of Antioch of Jerusalem? Or why he did not chuse to instance in the Church of Carthage, rather than in any other? The Answer is obvious.
If any shall ask, why Saint Austin, in case he did not ascribe Some preeminence to the Church of Rome, should mention that rather than the Church of Antioch of Jerusalem? Or why he did not choose to instance in the Church of Carthage, rather than in any other? The Answer is obvious.
cs d vmb vvi, q-crq n1 np1, p-acp n1 pns31 vdd xx vvi d n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f np1, vmd vvi cst av-c cs dt n1 pp-f np1 pp-f np1? cc c-crq pns31 vdd xx vvi p-acp n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f np1, av-c cs p-acp d j-jn? dt n1 vbz j.
because the Donatists objected against the Church of Carthage, and other African Churches, that the Succession of Bishops had been in them interrupted by Traditors;
Because the Donatists objected against the Church of Carthage, and other African Churches, that the Succession of Bishops had been in them interrupted by Traditors;
whereas they could not pretend this against the Church of Rome . SECT. II. All that the Discussor contends for in the next Chapter is, that those Fathers who assert St. Peter 's Faith to be the Rock, do not thereby exclude his Person .
whereas they could not pretend this against the Church of Room. SECT. II All that the Discusser contends for in the next Chapter is, that those Father's who assert Saint Peter is Faith to be the Rock, do not thereby exclude his Person.
cs pns32 vmd xx vvi d p-acp dt n1 pp-f vvb. n1. crd d d dt n1 vvz p-acp p-acp dt ord n1 vbz, cst d n2 r-crq vvb n1 np1 vbz n1 pc-acp vbi dt n1, vdb xx av vvi po31 n1.
And is it not pity, that so much Labour should be lost, as he hath spent in the Proof of it? That Theophylact, Epiphanius, St. Hilary, St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril, St. Ambrose, St. Basil, St. Jerom, St. Cyprian, Tertullian, should be all summon'd to bear Witness to that, which is not denied?
And is it not pity, that so much Labour should be lost, as he hath spent in the Proof of it? That Theophylact, Epiphanius, Saint Hilary, Saint Chrysostom, Saint Cyril, Saint Ambrose, Saint Basil, Saint Jerome, Saint Cyprian, Tertullian, should be all summoned to bear Witness to that, which is not denied?
cc vbz pn31 xx n1, cst av d n1 vmd vbi vvn, c-acp pns31 vhz vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f pn31? cst vvd, np1, n1 np1, n1 np1, n1 np1, n1 np1, n1 np1, n1 np1, n1 jp, np1, vmd vbi d vvn pc-acp vvi n1 p-acp d, r-crq vbz xx vvn?
than upon his Person, was not to assign the REASON, why our Saviour made choice of him above the rest, to build his Church upon (as Dr. Tho. G. tells us) :
than upon his Person, was not to assign the REASON, why our Saviour made choice of him above the rest, to built his Church upon (as Dr. Tho. G. tells us):
yet because there may be some such Words or Expressions in some of them, as shew these Fathers were of Opinion, not only that the Church was built upon Peter 's Person (which is that,
yet Because there may be Some such Words or Expressions in Some of them, as show these Father's were of Opinion, not only that the Church was built upon Peter is Person (which is that,
av c-acp pc-acp vmb vbi d d n2 cc n2 p-acp d pp-f pno32, c-acp vvb d n2 vbdr pp-f n1, xx av-j d dt n1 vbds vvn p-acp np1 vbz n1 (r-crq vbz d,
for which he alledges them) but (as the Discussor may pretend) infer their Belief of his Supremacy, I shall therefore examine those which make the fairest shew this way;
for which he alleges them) but (as the Discusser may pretend) infer their Belief of his Supremacy, I shall Therefore examine those which make the Fairest show this Way;
p-acp r-crq pns31 vvz pno32) cc-acp (c-acp dt n1 vmb vvi) vvb po32 n1 pp-f po31 n1, pns11 vmb av vvi d r-crq vvb dt js vvi d n1;
which are one Passage of Theophylact, another of St. Chrysostom 's, and those Titles which some of them give to St. Peter, such as Prince and Head of the Apostles, &c. Theophylact, he says, introduces our Saviour, calling St. PETER, the next Rock of the Church after himself .
which Are one Passage of Theophylact, Another of Saint Chrysostom is, and those Titles which Some of them give to Saint Peter, such as Prince and Head of the Apostles, etc. Theophylact, he Says, introduces our Saviour, calling Saint PETER, the next Rock of the Church After himself.
r-crq vbr crd n1 pp-f vvd, j-jn pp-f n1 np1 vbz, cc d n2 r-crq d pp-f pno32 vvi p-acp n1 np1, d c-acp n1 cc n1 pp-f dt n2, av vvd, pns31 vvz, vvz po12 n1, vvg n1 np1, dt ord n1 pp-f dt n1 p-acp px31.
tho he had no Jurisdiction over the rest? That Stone which lies next to the chief Corner-Stone, hath it by virtue of its place, any Dominion over the other Foundation-Stones? Had the Discussor consider'd,
though he had no Jurisdiction over the rest? That Stone which lies next to the chief Corner-Stone, hath it by virtue of its place, any Dominion over the other Foundation stones? Had the Discusser considered,
But methinks the Discussor who quotes St. Chrysostom so often, might have remembred what he says of St. Paul; The care of divers Nations, says he, was committed to the Angels,
But methinks the Discusser who quotes Saint Chrysostom so often, might have remembered what he Says of Saint Paul; The care of diverse nations, Says he, was committed to the Angels,
Can St. Peter 's Diocess be of greater extent? Had Chrysostom thought him Paul 's Superior, would he not only have affirm'd Paul to be of equal Dignity with him,
Can Saint Peter is Diocese be of greater extent? Had Chrysostom Thought him Paul is Superior, would he not only have affirmed Paul to be of equal Dignity with him,
but plainly intimate that he was in honour to be preferr'd before him? as he does in his Comment upon Galat. 1. 18. Had St. Chrysostom taken Peter for the Monarch of the universal Church, would he have set St. James above him in the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem? as every one will see he doth, who will but take the pains to read his 33 Homily on the Acts of the Apostles.
but plainly intimate that he was in honour to be preferred before him? as he does in his Comment upon Galatians 1. 18. Had Saint Chrysostom taken Peter for the Monarch of the universal Church, would he have Set Saint James above him in the Council of the Apostles At Jerusalem? as every one will see he does, who will but take the pains to read his 33 Homily on the Acts of the Apostles.
This is I think enough, to unveil those imposturous Gulleries (to use the Discussor's learned Words) which several misguided Writers (the Discussor for one) obtrude on their easie Readers, under the umbrage of this eminent Author, by depraving his Sense, and contorting his meaning .
This is I think enough, to unveil those imposturous gulleries (to use the Discussor's learned Words) which several misguided Writers (the Discusser for one) obtrude on their easy Readers, under the umbrage of this eminent Author, by depraving his Sense, and contorting his meaning.
As for those honourable Titles, which in some of these Quotations are bestowed upon St. Peter (as Prince of the Apostles, the Head of the Apostolick Quire, &c.) I shall have a more fit occasion of speaking to them in the next Section, to which I shall therefore refer them. SECT. III. I proceed to the sixth Chapter, where (if any where) we have reason to expect something to the purpose:
As for those honourable Titles, which in Some of these Quotations Are bestowed upon Saint Peter (as Prince of the Apostles, the Head of the Apostolic Choir, etc.) I shall have a more fit occasion of speaking to them in the next Section, to which I shall Therefore refer them. SECT. III. I proceed to the sixth Chapter, where (if any where) we have reason to expect something to the purpose:
c-acp p-acp d j n2, r-crq p-acp d pp-f d n2 vbr vvn p-acp n1 np1 (c-acp n1 pp-f dt n2, dt n1 pp-f dt jp n1, av) pns11 vmb vhi dt av-dc j n1 pp-f vvg p-acp pno32 p-acp dt ord n1, p-acp r-crq pns11 vmb av vvi pno32. n1. np1. pns11 vvb p-acp dt ord n1, c-crq (cs d c-crq) pns12 vhb n1 pc-acp vvi pi p-acp dt n1:
For notwithstanding they were all equal Foundations in these Aspects, St. PETER was here the only sole Rock, on which Christ promised to build his Church:
For notwithstanding they were all equal Foundations in these Aspects, Saint PETER was Here the only sole Rock, on which christ promised to built his Church:
c-acp a-acp pns32 vbdr d j-jn n2 p-acp d n2, n1 np1 vbds av dt j j n1, p-acp r-crq np1 vvd pc-acp vvi po31 n1:
But in case he were here the sole Rock, if elsewhere the other Apostles are Rocks too, what Preeminence doth this give him above them? But perhaps he did not intend to lay any Stress upon the word here: Well then, they were equally Foundations, but St. Peter was the only Rock; that is to say, every one of them was a Rock as much as he;
But in case he were Here the sole Rock, if elsewhere the other Apostles Are Rocks too, what Preeminence does this give him above them? But perhaps he did not intend to lay any Stress upon the word Here: Well then, they were equally Foundations, but Saint Peter was the only Rock; that is to say, every one of them was a Rock as much as he;
p-acp p-acp n1 pns31 vbdr av dt j n1, cs av dt j-jn n2 vbr n2 av, q-crq n1 vdz d vvi pno31 p-acp pno32? p-acp av pns31 vdd xx vvi pc-acp vvi d n1 p-acp dt n1 av: av av, pns32 vbdr av-j n2, p-acp n1 np1 vbds dt av-j n1; cst vbz pc-acp vvi, d crd pp-f pno32 vbds dt vvb p-acp d c-acp pns31;
Then the Apostles, it seems, were no Christians, since besides all Christians whatsoever, the Church consisted of the Apostles too; that is, it consisted of such as were Christians, and such as were no Christians.
Then the Apostles, it seems, were no Christians, since beside all Christians whatsoever, the Church consisted of the Apostles too; that is, it consisted of such as were Christians, and such as were not Christians.
av dt n2, pn31 vvz, vbdr dx np1, a-acp p-acp d np1 r-crq, dt n1 vvd pp-f dt n2 av; cst vbz, pn31 vvd pp-f d c-acp vbdr njpg2, cc d c-acp vbdr xx np1.
Christ then as the Foundation of all (even of Peter too) is laid first, Peter is laid next to Christ, the other Apostles are laid upon Peter, and one upon another in their respective order;
christ then as the Foundation of all (even of Peter too) is laid First, Peter is laid next to christ, the other Apostles Are laid upon Peter, and one upon Another in their respective order;
np1 av p-acp dt n1 pp-f d (av pp-f np1 av) vbz vvn ord, np1 vbz vvn ord p-acp np1, dt j-jn n2 vbr vvn p-acp np1, cc crd p-acp j-jn p-acp po32 j n1;
let us suppose, in the order, in which they are mentioned by St. Matthew, Andrew is laid next to Peter, James next to Andrew, John next to James: Now in this order,
let us suppose, in the order, in which they Are mentioned by Saint Matthew, Andrew is laid next to Peter, James next to Andrew, John next to James: Now in this order,
vvb pno12 vvi, p-acp dt n1, p-acp r-crq pns32 vbr vvn p-acp n1 np1, np1 vbz vvn ord p-acp np1, np1 ord p-acp np1, np1 ord p-acp np1: av p-acp d n1,
and so at last, Peter 's being the sole Rock upon which the Church was built, amounts to no more than this, that one Stone more was laid upon Peter than upon Andrew, and two more upon Peter, than upon James. Again;
and so At last, Peter is being the sole Rock upon which the Church was built, amounts to no more than this, that one Stone more was laid upon Peter than upon Andrew, and two more upon Peter, than upon James. Again;
cc av p-acp ord, np1 vbz n1 dt j n1 p-acp r-crq dt n1 vbds vvn, vvz p-acp dx dc cs d, cst pi n1 av-dc vbds vvn p-acp np1 cs p-acp np1, cc crd dc p-acp np1, cs p-acp np1. av;
The Reasons he gives, why Christ made Peter the only Rock are, 1. Because he did HERE engage himself by Promise solely to him, to build his Church on him, upon his peculiar Confession of his Divinity, which the Apostles till they had learnt it of him, were ignorant of.
The Reasons he gives, why christ made Peter the only Rock Are, 1. Because he did HERE engage himself by Promise solely to him, to built his Church on him, upon his peculiar Confessi of his Divinity, which the Apostles till they had learned it of him, were ignorant of.
The Foundations of which reason have been already razed. 2. That what our Saviour repli'd to his Confession (to pass over those Elegancies vicissim NONLATINALPHABET) was reciprocally directed to him only (the Pronouns Tu and Tibi excluding Plurality and Partnership) not only as an Approbation, but as a Reward.
The Foundations of which reason have been already razed. 2. That what our Saviour replied to his Confessi (to pass over those Elegances Vicissim) was reciprocally directed to him only (the Pronouns Tu and Tibi excluding Plurality and Partnership) not only as an Approbation, but as a Reward.
dt n2 pp-f r-crq n1 vhb vbn av vvn. crd cst r-crq po12 n1 vvd p-acp po31 n1 (pc-acp vvi p-acp d n2 vvb) vbds av-j vvn p-acp pno31 av-j (dt n2 fw-la cc fw-la vvg n1 cc n1) xx av-j c-acp dt n1, cc-acp c-acp dt n1.
Though the Promise was here directed to Peter only, yet nothing is more manifest, than that what is here promised, was afterward conferr'd upon the other Apostles.
Though the Promise was Here directed to Peter only, yet nothing is more manifest, than that what is Here promised, was afterwards conferred upon the other Apostles.
cs dt n1 vbds av vvn p-acp np1 av-j, av pix vbz av-dc j, cs d r-crq vbz av vvd, vbds av vvn p-acp dt j-jn n2.
and he must of necessity grant this, when he says, God did destine him to be in a more peculiar excelling manner the THE ROCK, on whom he would build his Church .
and he must of necessity grant this, when he Says, God did destine him to be in a more peculiar excelling manner the THE ROCK, on whom he would built his Church.
For could he be the Rock, in a more excelling manner, unless there were other Rocks whom he excelled? Thus after his bold Advance, he cowardly retreats:
For could he be the Rock, in a more excelling manner, unless there were other Rocks whom he excelled? Thus After his bold Advance, he cowardly retreats:
The sole Rock, is now put the more excelling Rock; Christ promised to build his Church not on him only, but on him more eminently, or on him in a more signal and remarkable manner; as he also expresses it .
The sole Rock, is now put the more excelling Rock; christ promised to built his Church not on him only, but on him more eminently, or on him in a more signal and remarkable manner; as he also Expresses it.
dt j n1, vbz av vvn dt av-dc vvg n1; np1 vvd pc-acp vvi po31 n1 xx p-acp pno31 av-j, p-acp p-acp pno31 av-dc av-j, cc p-acp pno31 p-acp dt av-dc n1 cc j n1; c-acp pns31 av vvz pn31.
1. The Doctor says, That this is every where affirm'd by the same holy Doctor (St. Jerom) giving him the Titles of PRINCE, CHIEF, HEAD, and GREATEST OF THE APOSTLES.
1. The Doctor Says, That this is every where affirmed by the same holy Doctor (Saint Jerome) giving him the Titles of PRINCE, CHIEF, HEAD, and GREATEST OF THE APOSTLES.
crd dt n1 vvz, cst d vbz d c-crq vvn p-acp dt d j n1 (n1 np1) vvg pno31 dt n2 pp-f n1, j-jn, n1, cc js pp-f dt n2.
but absolutely deny, that he meant thereby that Christ built his Church more eminently upon him, that is (as he interprets it) gave him a Preeminence of Power over the other Apostles. The Reasons of my denial are these;
but absolutely deny, that he meant thereby that christ built his Church more eminently upon him, that is (as he interprets it) gave him a Preeminence of Power over the other Apostles. The Reasons of my denial Are these;
1. Because in that very place where he says Peter was constituted the Head, he also says, What is said of Peter (Matth. 16. 17, 18.) is in another Text affirm'd of them all,
1. Because in that very place where he Says Peter was constituted the Head, he also Says, What is said of Peter (Matthew 16. 17, 18.) is in Another Text affirmed of them all,
Yet he tells us, that he was only an Apostle, (and by Consequence had no Jurisdiction over the rest) and that St. John the youngest, was upon several accounts to be preferred before him:
Yet he tells us, that he was only an Apostle, (and by Consequence had no Jurisdiction over the rest) and that Saint John the youngest, was upon several accounts to be preferred before him:
And the utmost he could mean by it, was no more than this, that Peter was the first of the Apostles, Princeps and Primus in ancient Authors, being Words of the same Signification, (as many learned Men have shew'd .) This the Discussor will be forc'd to grant, who once and again renders NONLATINALPHABET (the first of the Apostles) by the Prince of the Apostles .
And the utmost he could mean by it, was no more than this, that Peter was the First of the Apostles, Princeps and Primus in ancient Authors, being Words of the same Signification, (as many learned Men have showed.) This the Discusser will be forced to grant, who once and again renders (the First of the Apostles) by the Prince of the Apostles.
cc dt j pns31 vmd vvi p-acp pn31, vbds dx dc cs d, cst np1 vbds dt ord pp-f dt n2, fw-la cc np1 p-acp j n2, vbg n2 pp-f dt d n1, (c-acp d j n2 vhb vvn.) np1 dt n1 vmb vbi vvn pc-acp vvi, r-crq a-acp cc av vvz (dt ord pp-f dt n2) p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n2.
2. But St. Paul being to prove, that Christ our Lord transcended all the Quires of Angels in the EXCELLENCY OF HIS NATƲRE, thought it a convincing Argument to alledge, that he had obtained a more EXCELLENT NAME THAN THEY,
2. But Saint Paul being to prove, that christ our Lord transcended all the Quires of Angels in the EXCELLENCY OF HIS NATƲRE, Thought it a convincing Argument to allege, that he had obtained a more EXCELLENT NAME THAN THEY,
and to none other of the Apostles, THOƲ ART PETER, AND ƲPON THIS ROCK I WILL BƲILD MY CHƲRCH, can think that some SINGƲLAR PREROGATIVE was not meant by it, to be communicated to him, in which he should EXCEL the rest of his Brethren .
and to none other of the Apostles, THOƲ ART PETER, AND ƲPON THIS ROCK I WILL BƲILD MY CHƲRCH, can think that Some SINGƲLAR PREROGATIVE was not meant by it, to be communicated to him, in which he should EXCEL the rest of his Brothers.
cc p-acp pix j-jn pp-f dt n2, np1 n1 np1, cc av d n1 pns11 vmb vvi po11 n1, vmb vvi cst d j n1 vbds xx vvn p-acp pn31, pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp pno31, p-acp r-crq pns31 vmd vvi dt n1 pp-f po31 n2.
but in some singular Prerogative. But if the Apostle concluded from the excellency of Christ's Name, the transcendent excellency of his Nature, I cannot apprehend (such is my dulness) how by virtue of the Apostle's reasoning from the Excellency of Peter 's Name, follows a singular Prerogative.
but in Some singular Prerogative. But if the Apostle concluded from the excellency of Christ's Name, the transcendent excellency of his Nature, I cannot apprehend (such is my dullness) how by virtue of the Apostle's reasoning from the Excellency of Peter is Name, follows a singular Prerogative.
But be it so, that a singular Prerogative is hereby meant to Peter, (though it does not follow from the Apostle's Argument) must it be this of universal Headship? Why not some other of those twenty eight Prerogatives enumerated by Bellarmine? Particularly,
But be it so, that a singular Prerogative is hereby meant to Peter, (though it does not follow from the Apostle's Argument) must it be this of universal Headship? Why not Some other of those twenty eight Prerogatives enumerated by Bellarmine? Particularly,
p-acp vbi pn31 av, cst dt j n1 vbz av vvn p-acp np1, (cs pn31 vdz xx vvi p-acp dt ng1 n1) vmb pn31 vbb d pp-f j n1? q-crq xx d n-jn pp-f d crd crd n2 vvn p-acp np1? av-jn,
and by that first Sermon converted 3000? Or why not the 14th, that he wrought the first Miracle for the Confirmation of the Christian Faith ? Or why not the 17th, that he first preached to the Gentiles ? Especially considering, that as preparatory to this, he had that Vision, in which it was said to him, Arise Peter, kill and eat, which seems to some Men a plain Proof of his Headship: For it being the Property of the Head to eat,
and by that First Sermon converted 3000? Or why not the 14th, that he wrought the First Miracle for the Confirmation of the Christian Faith? Or why not the 17th, that he First preached to the Gentiles? Especially considering, that as preparatory to this, he had that Vision, in which it was said to him, Arise Peter, kill and eat, which seems to Some Men a plain Proof of his Headship: For it being the Property of the Head to eat,
cc p-acp d ord n1 vvn crd? cc q-crq xx dt ord, cst pns31 vvd dt ord n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt njp n1? cc q-crq xx dt ord, cst pns31 ord vvd p-acp dt n2-j? av-j vvg, cst p-acp n1 p-acp d, pns31 vhd d n1, p-acp r-crq pn31 vbds vvn p-acp pno31, vvb np1, vvb cc vvi, r-crq vvz p-acp d n2 dt j n1 pp-f po31 n1: c-acp pn31 vbg dt n1 pp-f dt n1 pc-acp vvi,
And why must, Thou art Peter, &c. denote some Prerogative to be communicated? Why not some Excellency already communicated? Why must Rock be referred to Dominion,
And why must, Thou art Peter, etc. denote Some Prerogative to be communicated? Why not Some Excellency already communicated? Why must Rock be referred to Dominion,
cc c-crq vmb, pns21 vb2r np1, av vvb d n1 pc-acp vbi vvn? q-crq xx d n1 av vvn? q-crq vmb vvi vbb vvn p-acp n1,
And yet after all, I see no more reason to conclude, that any singular Prerogative was hereby meant to be communicated to Peter, than to James and John, when our Lord surnam'd them, and no other of the Apostles BOANERGES.
And yet After all, I see no more reason to conclude, that any singular Prerogative was hereby meant to be communicated to Peter, than to James and John, when our Lord surnamed them, and no other of the Apostles BOANERGES.
cc av p-acp d, pns11 vvb av-dx dc n1 pc-acp vvi, cst d j n1 vbds av vvn pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp np1, cs p-acp np1 cc np1, c-crq po12 n1 vvn pno32, cc dx j-jn pp-f dt n2 np1.
Again, suppose Christ said here to Simon, and to none other of the Apostles, Ʋpon this Rock I will, &c. Can any singular Prerogative be hence concluded,
Again, suppose christ said Here to Simon, and to none other of the Apostles, Ʋpon this Rock I will, etc. Can any singular Prerogative be hence concluded,
av, vvb np1 vvd av p-acp np1, cc p-acp pix j-jn pp-f dt n2, av d n1 pns11 vmb, av vmb d j n1 vbb av vvn,
but that by this Antonomastical, (I wish this hard word do not fright the Reader) Appropriation of that Word to him, he did destine him to be in a more peculiar excelling manner THE ROCK on whom he would build his Church .
but that by this Antonomastical, (I wish this hard word do not fright the Reader) Appropriation of that Word to him, he did destine him to be in a more peculiar excelling manner THE ROCK on whom he would built his Church.
But the chiefest Reason, says he, (and therefore not the only Reason) why he was called so, was because by that name, Christ discovered his Intention of building his Church on him .
But the chiefest Reason, Says he, (and Therefore not the only Reason) why he was called so, was Because by that name, christ discovered his Intention of building his Church on him.
than on any other of the Apostles. And this he fairly slips over, and of all the Fathers (viz. Cyril, Origen, Jerom, Hilary, Tertullian) whom he here quotes, not one of them hath so much as one Word that gives the least Intimation of it.
than on any other of the Apostles. And this he fairly slips over, and of all the Father's (viz. Cyril, Origen, Jerome, Hilary, Tertullian) whom he Here quotes, not one of them hath so much as one Word that gives the least Intimation of it.
cs p-acp d n-jn pp-f dt n2. cc d pns31 av-j vvz a-acp, cc pp-f d dt n2 (n1 np1, np1, np1, np1, np1) ro-crq pns31 av vvz, xx pi pp-f pno32 vhz av av-d c-acp crd n1 cst vvz dt ds n1 pp-f pn31.
I am the more heartily glad on't, because we have met with nothing hitherto, but what has deserved an Obelus. The other Apostles are call'd NONLATINALPHABET, which is communicable as well to PETER as to any of the rest;
I am the more heartily glad oned, Because we have met with nothing hitherto, but what has deserved an Obelus. The other Apostles Are called, which is communicable as well to PETER as to any of the rest;
But what is it in this Observation, that renders it so considerable? 'Tis this, NONLATINALPHABET signifies a Foundation in general, it may be of Wood, Wool-Sacks, Straw, Hay,
But what is it in this Observation, that renders it so considerable? It's this, signifies a Foundation in general, it may be of Wood, Wool-Sacks, Straw, Hay,
and yielding to the Pollutions of undermining Heresy: But PETER signifies such a Foundation as is fix'd on an inexpugnable. Rock, &c. . In which passage I observe several things, which (to use the Gentleman's own Word's) are not undeserving of an Asterisk.
and yielding to the Pollutions of undermining Heresy: But PETER signifies such a Foundation as is fixed on an inexpugnable. Rock, etc.. In which passage I observe several things, which (to use the Gentleman's own Word's) Are not undeserving of an Asterisk.
cc vvg p-acp dt n2 pp-f j-vvg n1: cc-acp np1 vvz d dt n1 c-acp vbz vvn p-acp dt j. n1, av. p-acp r-crq n1 pns11 vvb j n2, r-crq (pc-acp vvi dt n1|vbz d n1|vbz) vbr xx j pp-f dt j.
1. We have here a Foundation of Straw or Hay. A new sort of Foundation for a House, which he has not borrowed from his Master Bellarmin; let him therefore have the honour of the Invention.
1. We have Here a Foundation of Straw or Hay. A new sort of Foundation for a House, which he has not borrowed from his Master Bellarmin; let him Therefore have the honour of the Invention.
crd pns12 vhb av dt n1 pp-f n1 cc n1. dt j n1 pp-f n1 p-acp dt n1, r-crq pns31 vhz xx vvn p-acp po31 n1 np1; vvb pno31 av vhb dt n1 pp-f dt n1.
2. That all the other Apostles were Foundations of Wood, Straw, or Hay; for he gives this as the Reason why their Sees have been detriumph'd, stooping to the insulting Conqueror.
2. That all the other Apostles were Foundations of Wood, Straw, or Hay; for he gives this as the Reason why their Sees have been detriumphed, stooping to the insulting Conqueror.
This methinks does not well agree with St. John 's Description of the Christian Church, (whose Writings he yet grants are as Canonical as St. Peter 's) for he represents none of the Apostles as a Log of Wood, or a Bundle of Hay, but every one as a Stone, as a precious Stone in the Foundation of the Wall of the New Jerusalem. And if in respect of all other Christians (as he grants) the Apostles were equally Foundations, then St. Peter himself was a Rock in respect of the Apostles only,
This methinks does not well agree with Saint John is Description of the Christian Church, (whose Writings he yet grants Are as Canonical as Saint Peter is) for he represents none of the Apostles as a Log of Wood, or a Bundle of Hay, but every one as a Stone, as a precious Stone in the Foundation of the Wall of the New Jerusalem. And if in respect of all other Christians (as he grants) the Apostles were equally Foundations, then Saint Peter himself was a Rock in respect of the Apostles only,
d vvz vdz xx av vvi p-acp n1 np1 vbz n1 pp-f dt njp n1, (rg-crq n2-vvg pns31 av n2 vbr a-acp j c-acp n1 np1 vbz) p-acp pns31 vvz pix pp-f dt n2 p-acp dt n1 pp-f n1, cc dt n1 pp-f n1, p-acp d pi p-acp dt n1, p-acp dt j n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f dt j np1. cc cs p-acp n1 pp-f d j-jn np1 (c-acp pns31 vvz) dt n2 vbdr av-j n2, av n1 np1 px31 vbds dt vvb p-acp n1 pp-f dt n2 av-j,
3. How can this be the Reason why the Sees of the other Apostles have been detriumph'd, seeing they were not only founded severally upon their respective Apostles, but all of them jointly upon Peter himself? For tho the other Apostles were Foundations with respect to other Christians;
3. How can this be the Reason why the Sees of the other Apostles have been detriumphed, seeing they were not only founded severally upon their respective Apostles, but all of them jointly upon Peter himself? For though the other Apostles were Foundations with respect to other Christians;
But it may perhaps be said, Tho Peter was indeed a Rock, yet a Foundation of Straw being laid upon him, this intermediate Foundation failing, the Superstructure must fall too. True.
But it may perhaps be said, Though Peter was indeed a Rock, yet a Foundation of Straw being laid upon him, this intermediate Foundation failing, the Superstructure must fallen too. True.
p-acp pn31 vmb av vbi vvn, cs np1 vbds av dt n1, av dt n1 pp-f n1 vbg vvn p-acp pno31, d vvb n1 vvg, dt n1 vmb vvi av. j.
But may we not as wisely argue, Though Christ was indeed a Rock, yet Peter was but a Foundation of Straw, laid upon him the primary Foundation, since his See hath been so often detriumph'd, yielding to the Pollutions of undermining Heresy;
But may we not as wisely argue, Though christ was indeed a Rock, yet Peter was but a Foundation of Straw, laid upon him the primary Foundation, since his See hath been so often detriumphed, yielding to the Pollutions of undermining Heresy;
cc-acp vmb pns12 xx p-acp av-j vvi, cs np1 vbds av dt n1, av np1 vbds p-acp dt n1 pp-f n1, vvn p-acp pno31 dt j n1, p-acp po31 vvb vhz vbn av av vvd, vvg p-acp dt n2 pp-f j-vvg n1;
but Peter himself may be as evanid a Foundation as any of his Fellow-Apostles. For, 4. Peter, he says, signifies such a Foundation as is fixed upon an inexpugnable Rock.
but Peter himself may be as evanid a Foundation as any of his Fellow-Apostles. For, 4. Peter, he Says, signifies such a Foundation as is fixed upon an inexpugnable Rock.
5. In the next words Peter is again transubstantiated into a Rock, and such a Rock as is not only able to repel the foaming Surges of the aspiring Sea,
5. In the next words Peter is again Transubstantiated into a Rock, and such a Rock as is not only able to repel the foaming Surges of the aspiring Sea,
crd p-acp dt ord n2 np1 vbz av vvn p-acp dt n1, cc d dt n1 c-acp vbz xx av-j j pc-acp vvi dt j-vvg n2 pp-f dt j-vvg n1,
And upon these words, The Rocks were rent. The Rocks, says he, were the hard Hearts of the Gentiles. Or, the Rocks were the Predictions of the Prophets, who both themselves with the Apostles received the name of a ROCK from the ROCK Christ .
And upon these words, The Rocks were rend. The Rocks, Says he, were the hard Hearts of the Gentiles. Or, the Rocks were the Predictions of the prophets, who both themselves with the Apostles received the name of a ROCK from the ROCK christ.
4thly, I ask, what is the meaning of NONLATINALPHABET, when Peter is so called? Does it signify sometimes a Rock-Foundation, sometimes a Foundation of Wood, sometimes of Straw, or Hay? No surely,
4thly, I ask, what is the meaning of, when Peter is so called? Does it signify sometime a Rock-Foundation, sometime a Foundation of Wood, sometime of Straw, or Hay? No surely,
j, pns11 vvb, q-crq vbz dt n1 pp-f, c-crq np1 vbz av vvn? vdz pn31 vvi av dt n1, av dt n1 pp-f n1, av pp-f n1, cc n1? uh-dx av-j,
when it is absolutely without any lessening adjunct, without any note of distinction, attributed to the other Apostles? When the twelve Sons of Jacob are called the twelve Patriarchs (as the twelve Apostles are called the twelve Foundations) would not he deserve to be laugh'd at, who shall say, that the name Patriarch,
when it is absolutely without any lessening adjunct, without any note of distinction, attributed to the other Apostles? When the twelve Sons of Jacob Are called the twelve Patriarchs (as the twelve Apostles Are called the twelve Foundations) would not he deserve to be laughed At, who shall say, that the name Patriarch,
when attributed to Reuben, signifies a Princely Father, but when ascribed to Simeon, denotes a Subject-Father? And is not he as ridiculous, who shall say, that by this word Foundation, when affirmed of Peter, is meant a Rock, when of James a Wool-sack, when of Andrew a Hay-mow? I need say no more to expose the folly of this groundless fancy.
when attributed to Reuben, signifies a Princely Father, but when ascribed to Simeon, denotes a Subject-Father? And is not he as ridiculous, who shall say, that by this word Foundation, when affirmed of Peter, is meant a Rock, when of James a Woolsack, when of Andrew a Hay-mow? I need say no more to expose the folly of this groundless fancy.
Why not before the coming of the Holy Ghost, if our Saviour meant it by these Words, Thouart Peter? &c. It seems his meaning was so obscurely expressed, that it could not be understood without the help of a Miracle.
Why not before the coming of the Holy Ghost, if our Saviour meant it by these Words, Thou art Peter? etc. It seems his meaning was so obscurely expressed, that it could not be understood without the help of a Miracle.
uh-crq xx p-acp dt n-vvg pp-f dt j n1, cs po12 n1 vvd pn31 p-acp d n2, pns21|vb2r np1? av pn31 vvz po31 n1 vbds av av-j vvn, cst pn31 vmd xx vbi vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1.
But how does it appear, that the Apostles understood it so after the coming of the Holy Ghost? The four Registers left us of their Names, are so many Authentick Testimonies to inform us;
But how does it appear, that the Apostles understood it so After the coming of the Holy Ghost? The four Registers left us of their Names, Are so many Authentic Testimonies to inform us;
the first by St. Matth. c. 10. v. 2. The second by St. Mark, c. 3. v. 16. &c. For although St. ANDREW were before St. PETER in divers respects, &c. Yet PETER by all the foresaid Evangelists, is evermore set before ANDREW,
the First by Saint Matthew c. 10. v. 2. The second by Saint Mark, c. 3. v. 16. etc. For although Saint ANDREW were before Saint PETER in diverse respects, etc. Yet PETER by all the foresaid Evangelists, is evermore Set before ANDREW,
dt ord p-acp n1 np1 sy. crd n1 crd dt ord p-acp n1 vvb, sy. crd n1 crd av p-acp cs n1 np1 vbdr p-acp n1 np1 p-acp j n2, av av np1 p-acp d dt j-vvn n2, vbz av vvn p-acp np1,
But if St. Paul 's Testimony be as Authentick as that of the Evangelists, then this Argument is as good against Peter 's Supremacy, That St. Paul when he names him with other Apostles, never puts him first, but sometimes last; As the Brethren of the Lord and Cephas .
But if Saint Paul is Testimony be as Authentic as that of the Evangelists, then this Argument is as good against Peter is Supremacy, That Saint Paul when he names him with other Apostles, never puts him First, but sometime last; As the Brothers of the Lord and Cephas.
cc-acp cs n1 np1 vbz n1 vbb p-acp j c-acp d pp-f dt n2, av d n1 vbz a-acp j p-acp np1 vbz n1, cst n1 np1 c-crq pns31 vvz pno31 p-acp j-jn n2, av-x vvz pno31 ord, p-acp av ord; c-acp dt n2 pp-f dt n1 cc np1.
For I remember that at PARIS, where they a little better understand Divinity than in SPAIN, a good Bishop and an Abbot that did maintain, that the Passage where it is said that James Peter and John are reputed Pillars of the Church, prov'd well the Primacy of St. PETER:
For I Remember that At PARIS, where they a little better understand Divinity than in SPAIN, a good Bishop and an Abbot that did maintain, that the Passage where it is said that James Peter and John Are reputed Pillars of the Church, proved well the Primacy of Saint PETER:
But St. Matthew not only puts him in the first place, but expresly gives him the Title of PRIMƲS, &c. And there is another remarkable Circumstance in the aforesaid Catalogues, that whereas the other Apostles are never named in order,
But Saint Matthew not only puts him in the First place, but expressly gives him the Title of PRIMƲS, etc. And there is Another remarkable Circumstance in the aforesaid Catalogues, that whereas the other Apostles Are never nam in order,
p-acp n1 np1 xx av-j vvz pno31 p-acp dt ord n1, cc-acp av-j vvz pno31 dt n1 pp-f n2, av cc a-acp vbz j-jn j n1 p-acp dt j n2, cst cs dt j-jn n2 vbr av-x vvn p-acp n1,
but differently, not only by different Evangelists, but by one and the same, &c. Yet PETER is every where set in the Head of the Catalogue, and preferr'd before them all;
but differently, not only by different Evangelists, but by one and the same, etc. Yet PETER is every where Set in the Head of the Catalogue, and preferred before them all;
cc-acp av-j, xx av-j p-acp j n2, cc-acp p-acp crd cc dt d, av av np1 vbz d c-crq vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1, cc vvn p-acp pno32 d;
but this Reason we say, was his Primacy of Order, not any Superiority of Power over the rest of the Apostles. He is Primus who hath the first place in any Society,
but this Reason we say, was his Primacy of Order, not any Superiority of Power over the rest of the Apostles. He is Primus who hath the First place in any Society,
cc-acp d n1 pns12 vvb, vbds po31 n1 pp-f n1, xx d n1 pp-f n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n2. pns31 vbz np1 r-crq vhz dt ord n1 p-acp d n1,
And this place St. Peter enjoy'd while our Saviour lived on Earth, but after his Ascension to Heaven, James the Brother of our Lord was set above him:
And this place Saint Peter enjoyed while our Saviour lived on Earth, but After his Ascension to Heaven, James the Brother of our Lord was Set above him:
For he (as Eusebius and St. Jerom tell us, ) was chosen by the Apostles, yea by Peter himself as well as the rest (as Clemens of Alexandria tells us ) Bishop of Jerusalem, and preferr'd before them all.
For he (as Eusebius and Saint Jerome tell us,) was chosen by the Apostles, yea by Peter himself as well as the rest (as Clemens of Alexandria tells us) Bishop of Jerusalem, and preferred before them all.
c-acp pns31 (c-acp np1 cc n1 np1 vvb pno12,) vbds vvn p-acp dt n2, uh p-acp np1 px31 c-acp av c-acp dt n1 (c-acp np1 pp-f np1 vvz pno12) n1 pp-f np1, cc vvn p-acp pno32 d.
as the Brother of our Lord, and Bishop of Jerusalem; Peter next, as the first of the Apostles under James, as he had been before the first under Christ; and John next; as the beloved Disciple.
as the Brother of our Lord, and Bishop of Jerusalem; Peter next, as the First of the Apostles under James, as he had been before the First under christ; and John next; as the Beloved Disciple.
c-acp dt n1 pp-f po12 n1, cc n1 pp-f np1; np1 ord, c-acp dt ord pp-f dt n2 p-acp np1, c-acp pns31 vhd vbn p-acp dt ord p-acp np1; cc np1 ord; c-acp dt j-vvn n1.
Hence it was, that the Synodical Decree was drawn up in the words of St. James; hence also, that when Peter was deliver'd out of Prison by an Angel, he commanded the Disciples to shew it unto JAMES and the Brethren .
Hence it was, that the Synodical decree was drawn up in the words of Saint James; hence also, that when Peter was Delivered out of Prison by an Angel, he commanded the Disciples to show it unto JAMES and the Brothers.
yet I need not insist upon that, because if it was not he, but another of the second rank of the Apostles, (as some contend) the Argument will be yet the stronger against St. Peter 's Supremacy.
yet I need not insist upon that, Because if it was not he, but Another of the second rank of the Apostles, (as Some contend) the Argument will be yet the Stronger against Saint Peter is Supremacy.
av pns11 vvb xx vvi p-acp d, c-acp cs pn31 vbds xx pns31, cc-acp j-jn pp-f dt ord n1 pp-f dt n2, (c-acp d vvb) dt n1 vmb vbi av dt jc p-acp n1 np1 vbz n1.
It is an Argument that the Fathers ascribed no such Authority to St. Peter, in that what he produces from them for the Proof of it is nothing to the purpose;
It is an Argument that the Father's ascribed no such authority to Saint Peter, in that what he produces from them for the Proof of it is nothing to the purpose;
When St. Paul says of himself, Gal. 1. 18. that he went to Jerusalem on purpose to see PETER, St. AMBROSE, (or the Author of the Commentaries, &c.) gives this reason of it;
When Saint Paul Says of himself, Gal. 1. 18. that he went to Jerusalem on purpose to see PETER, Saint AMBROSE, (or the Author of the Commentaries, etc.) gives this reason of it;
because he was PRIMƲS INTER APOSTOLOS, CƲI DELEGAVERAT SALVATOR CƲRAM ECCLESIARƲM, The FIRST AMONG THE APOSTLES TO WHOM OUR SAVIOUR HAD COMMITTED THE CARE OF THE CHURCHES .
Because he was PRIMƲS INTER APOSTLES, CƲI DELEGAVERAT SALVATOR CƲRAM ECCLESIARƲM, The FIRST AMONG THE APOSTLES TO WHOM OUR SAVIOUR HAD COMMITTED THE CARE OF THE CHURCHES.
Nay, so far was this Author from asserting this, that within six lines after the words quoted, he speaks of St. Paul as (Co-apostolus) fellow-Apostle with St. Peter .
Nay, so Far was this Author from asserting this, that within six lines After the words quoted, he speaks of Saint Paul as (co-apostolus) fellow-Apostle with Saint Peter.
But yet full Authority is acknowledged to be given to Peter in preaching to the Jews, and Paul 's perfect Authority is found in preaching to the Gentiles .
But yet full authority is acknowledged to be given to Peter in preaching to the jews, and Paul is perfect authority is found in preaching to the Gentiles.
Is this spoken like one who took Peter for the Sovereign of the universal Church? I desire the Reader to consult his Comment upon these Words, When James, Cephas, and John who seemed to be Pillars, &c. And, to avoid tediousness, shall recite but one passage upon these Words:
Is this spoken like one who took Peter for the Sovereign of the universal Church? I desire the Reader to consult his Comment upon these Words, When James, Cephas, and John who seemed to be Pillars, etc. And, to avoid tediousness, shall recite but one passage upon these Words:
vbz d vvn av-j crd r-crq vvd np1 p-acp dt n-jn pp-f dt j n1? pns11 vvb dt n1 pc-acp vvi po31 n1 p-acp d n2, c-crq np1, np1, cc np1 r-crq vvd pc-acp vbi n2, av np1, pc-acp vvi n1, vmb vvi p-acp crd n1 p-acp d n2:
But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the Face, &c. Who durst, says he, resist Peter the first Apostle, to whom the Lord gave the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, BƲT ANOTHER SƲCH AS HE, who in confidence of his Election, knowing himself NOT ƲNEQƲAL TO HIM, might constantly blame what he had unadvisedly done ? I leave it now to the impartial Reader to judge,
But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the Face, etc. Who durst, Says he, resist Peter the First Apostle, to whom the Lord gave the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, BƲT ANOTHER SƲCH AS HE, who in confidence of his Election, knowing himself NOT ƲNEQƲAL TO HIM, might constantly blame what he had unadvisedly done? I leave it now to the impartial Reader to judge,
the second that this Primacy gave him no Dominion over the other Apostles. In every Society of Men, saith a learned Sorbonist, some Order ought to be kept,
the second that this Primacy gave him no Dominion over the other Apostles. In every Society of Men, Says a learned Sorbonist, Some Order ought to be kept,
dt ord cst d n1 vvd pno31 dx n1 p-acp dt j-jn n2. p-acp d n1 pp-f n2, vvz dt j np1, d n1 vmd pc-acp vbi vvn,
but the Evangelists testify, that this one was Peter, who when they enumerate the Apostles, not only place Peter, the FIRST IN ORDER, but affirm that he was first . And again;
but the Evangelists testify, that this one was Peter, who when they enumerate the Apostles, not only place Peter, the FIRST IN ORDER, but affirm that he was First. And again;
cc-acp dt n2 vvi, cst d pi vbds np1, r-crq c-crq pns32 vvi dt n2, xx av-j n1 np1, dt ord p-acp n1, cc-acp vvb cst pns31 vbds ord. cc av;
The Question, whether Peter had the FIRST PLACE among the Apostles is Historical, and may be proved by the Testimony of Writers, both of the same, and of following Ages .
The Question, whither Peter had the FIRST PLACE among the Apostles is Historical, and may be proved by the Testimony of Writers, both of the same, and of following Ages.
dt n1, cs np1 vhd dt ord n1 p-acp dt n2 vbz j, cc vmb vbi vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f n2, d pp-f dt d, cc pp-f vvg n2.
They say also, says another Romanist, that he is sometimes nam'd the first, but if it had been always so, this would not prove, that he had Authority over the others, as the Pope assumes it over Bishops:
They say also, Says Another Romanist, that he is sometime named the First, but if it had been always so, this would not prove, that he had authority over the Others, as the Pope assumes it over Bishops:
pns32 vvb av, vvz j-jn np1, cst pns31 vbz av vvn dt ord, cc-acp cs pn31 vhd vbn av av, d vmd xx vvi, cst pns31 vhd n1 p-acp dt n2-jn, p-acp dt n1 vvz pn31 p-acp n2:
But though it doth not appear by what the Doctor hath alledged, That the Apostles after the coming down of the Holy Ghost, understood Christ's words in the Roman Sense;
But though it does not appear by what the Doctor hath alleged, That the Apostles After the coming down of the Holy Ghost, understood Christ's words in the Roman Sense;
yet by many other Passages in the New Testament it is obvious, that neither St. Peter himself, St. Paul, or the other Apostles had any such sense of them.
yet by many other Passages in the New Testament it is obvious, that neither Saint Peter himself, Saint Paul, or the other Apostles had any such sense of them.
av p-acp d j-jn n2 p-acp dt j n1 pn31 vbz j, cst dx n1 np1 px31, n1 np1, cc dt j-jn n2 vhd d d n1 pp-f pno32.
For if St. Paul had, would he have affirm'd, That he was in nothing behind the very chiefest Apostle ? would he have rebuked Peter publickly, before them all .
For if Saint Paul had, would he have affirmed, That he was in nothing behind the very chiefest Apostle? would he have rebuked Peter publicly, before them all.
If the other Apostles had so understood them, would they have taken upon them to send Peter to Samaria ? should not they rather have been sent by him? If S. Peter himself had so understood them, would he have done nothing Authoritatively, and as their Prince, but have acted all by the common consent of the Apostles? as St. Chrysostom observes .
If the other Apostles had so understood them, would they have taken upon them to send Peter to Samaria? should not they rather have been sent by him? If S. Peter himself had so understood them, would he have done nothing Authoritatively, and as their Prince, but have acted all by the Common consent of the Apostles? as Saint Chrysostom observes.
Such Sayings, he imagins, as may be a sufficient Collyrium to open our cieled Eyes, and fetch off those Scales, which have obstructed our visive Faculty .
Such Sayings, he imagins, as may be a sufficient Collyrium to open our Cieled Eyes, and fetch off those Scales, which have obstructed our visive Faculty.
d n2-vvg, pns31 vvz, c-acp vmb vbb dt j n1 pc-acp vvi po12 vvd n2, cc vvb a-acp d n2, r-crq vhb vvn po12 j n1.
yet so far are we from declining their Judgment, in this, or any other matter in dispute, between us and the Church of Rome, that we confidently appeal to them.
yet so Far Are we from declining their Judgement, in this, or any other matter in dispute, between us and the Church of Rome, that we confidently appeal to them.
av av av-j vbr pns12 p-acp vvg po32 n1, p-acp d, cc d j-jn n1 p-acp n1, p-acp pno12 cc dt n1 pp-f np1, cst pns12 av-j vvb p-acp pno32.
The first he produces is St. Jerom, who on Isa. 2. having compared them (viz. the Apostles) to Mountains, says, Super unum montium Christus fundat Ecclesiam, et loquitur ad eum, dicens, Tues Petrus, et super hanc Petram, &c. that is, upon one of the Mountains Christ founds his Church,
The First he produces is Saint Jerome, who on Isaiah 2. having compared them (viz. the Apostles) to Mountains, Says, Super Unum montium Christus fundat Church, et loquitur ad Eum, dicens, Tues Peter, et super hanc Petram, etc. that is, upon one of the Mountains christ founds his Church,
But whosoever shall impartially read the Context, he will conclude it was far from St. Jerom 's meaning, to exclude the other Apostles from what he here attributes to St. Peter, for but six lines before, he says, This House (viz. the Church) is built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, who also themselves are Mountains, as Imitators of Christ .
But whosoever shall impartially read the Context, he will conclude it was Far from Saint Jerome is meaning, to exclude the other Apostles from what he Here attributes to Saint Peter, for but six lines before, he Says, This House (viz. the Church) is built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and prophets, who also themselves Are Mountains, as Imitators of christ.
But why then does he here say, that Christ founds his Church upon one of them? I answer, the plain reason is this, These Words being directed to Peter alone,
But why then does he Here say, that christ founds his Church upon one of them? I answer, the plain reason is this, These Words being directed to Peter alone,
p-acp q-crq av vdz pns31 av vvi, cst np1 vvz po31 n1 p-acp crd pp-f pno32? pns11 vvb, dt j n1 vbz d, d n2 vbg vvn p-acp np1 av-j,
A Case very much in fashion with them, whose Head wears the Triple-Crown; otherwise they could never so impudently outface the Truth, as they daily do.
A Case very much in fashion with them, whose Head wears the Triple-Crown; otherwise they could never so impudently outface the Truth, as they daily do.
dt n1 av av-d p-acp n1 p-acp pno32, rg-crq n1 vvz dt n1; av pns32 vmd av-x av av-j vvi dt n1, c-acp pns32 av-j vdb.
But what is this which must of necessity confound us? That St. Jerom, besides his owning him to be the Rock, he calls his Cathedra at Rome likewise so, in his Epistle to Damasus;
But what is this which must of necessity confound us? That Saint Jerome, beside his owning him to be the Rock, he calls his Cathedra At Room likewise so, in his Epistle to Damasus;
1. Suppose that by the Rock Jerom meant S. Peter 's Chair at Rome, (though Erasmus was of opinion, that he meant thereby the Faith Peter professed ) yet he meant his Chair as then possessed by Damasus, who had hitherto stood firm as a Rock against those Assaults of Heresy which had prevailed over the Eastern Church.
1. Suppose that by the Rock Jerome meant S. Peter is Chair At Room, (though Erasmus was of opinion, that he meant thereby the Faith Peter professed) yet he meant his Chair as then possessed by Damasus, who had hitherto stood firm as a Rock against those Assaults of Heresy which had prevailed over the Eastern Church.
For in case Liberius did not (as some Men in contradiction to the clearest evidence would perswade us) yet it is certain that St. Jerom thought he did;
For in case Liberius did not (as Some Men in contradiction to the Clearest evidence would persuade us) yet it is certain that Saint Jerome Thought he did;
c-acp p-acp n1 np1 vdd xx (c-acp d n2 p-acp n1 p-acp dt js n1 vmd vvi pno12) av pn31 vbz j cst n1 np1 vvd pns31 vdd;
2. That these words (Super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio, Ʋpon this Rock I know the Church is built) are not to be confined to Peter, or his See only, Jerom himself hath also taught us.
2. That these words (Super Illam Petram aedificatam Church scio, Ʋpon this Rock I know the Church is built) Are not to be confined to Peter, or his See only, Jerome himself hath also taught us.
crd cst d n2 (fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, av d n1 pns11 vvb dt n1 vbz vvn) vbr xx pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp np1, cc po31 vvb av-j, np1 px31 vhz av vvn pno12.
And could he have argued the equality of Bishops, from their being the Apostles Successors, had he not taken it for granted, that the Apostles themselves were equal? I shall add this only, That in case Jerom had been of opinion, that Peter had Authority over the other Apostles;
And could he have argued the equality of Bishops, from their being the Apostles Successors, had he not taken it for granted, that the Apostles themselves were equal? I shall add this only, That in case Jerome had been of opinion, that Peter had authority over the other Apostles;
yet that he acknowledged no such Authority in the Pope over other Bishops, we need go no further than this Epistle to prove, in which he calls the Egyptian Confessors his Colleagues .
yet that he acknowledged no such authority in the Pope over other Bishops, we need go no further than this Epistle to prove, in which he calls the Egyptian Confessors his Colleagues.
When I reflect upon the Premises, I cannot but a little wonder, that this Saying of St. Jerom should leave such a deep Incision in this Gentleman's Mind, that he needed to repair to any Doctor, much less, to so great a Doctor as Dr. Stillingfleet, for a NONLATINALPHABET to heal it;
When I reflect upon the Premises, I cannot but a little wonder, that this Saying of Saint Jerome should leave such a deep Incision in this Gentleman's Mind, that he needed to repair to any Doctor, much less, to so great a Doctor as Dr. Stillingfleet, for a to heal it;
And then goes on for more than two Pages together, in shewing to how little Purpose this Testimony is alledged, which the Discussor has the Face to say he would fain shift off, by making it a Piece of Flattery or a Complement to Damasus. Behold the Virtue of triple Brass! And yet had the Doctor insisted upon it, that it was a Complement to Damasus, he had said no more than what one of the learnedest Romanists of this age hath said .
And then Goes on for more than two Pages together, in showing to how little Purpose this Testimony is alleged, which the Discusser has the Face to say he would fain shift off, by making it a Piece of Flattery or a Compliment to Damasus. Behold the Virtue of triple Brass! And yet had the Doctor insisted upon it, that it was a Compliment to Damasus, he had said no more than what one of the Learnedest Romanists of this age hath said.
cc av vvz a-acp p-acp dc cs crd n2 av, p-acp vvg p-acp c-crq j n1 d n1 vbz vvn, r-crq dt n1 vhz dt n1 pc-acp vvi pns31 vmd av-j vvi a-acp, p-acp vvg pn31 dt n1 pp-f n1 cc dt n1 p-acp np1. vvb dt n1 pp-f j n1! cc av vhd dt n1 vvd p-acp pn31, cst pn31 vbds dt n1 p-acp np1, pns31 vhd vvn dx dc cs q-crq pi pp-f dt js np1 pp-f d n1 vhz vvn.
'Tis strange he should think to find any thing for the Pope's Supremacy in St. Cyprian, who (to use the Words of a learned Author ) makes all Bishops equal, to have the same Power in solidum, to be absolute Judges of their own 〈 ◊ 〉,
It's strange he should think to find any thing for the Pope's Supremacy in Saint Cyprian, who (to use the Words of a learned Author) makes all Bishops equal, to have the same Power in Solidum, to be absolute Judges of their own 〈 ◊ 〉,
pn31|vbz j pns31 vmd vvi pc-acp vvi d n1 p-acp dt ng1 n1 p-acp n1 jp, r-crq (pc-acp vvi dt n2 pp-f dt j n1) vvz d ng1 j-jn, pc-acp vhi dt d n1 p-acp fw-la, pc-acp vbi j n2 pp-f po32 d 〈 sy 〉,
How inconsistent is this with that Supremacy, which is challenged by the Pope over all the Bishops of the World? However it is certain, that this Passage also, proves either too much, or it proves nothing.
How inconsistent is this with that Supremacy, which is challenged by the Pope over all the Bishops of the World? However it is certain, that this Passage also, Proves either too much, or it Proves nothing.
q-crq j vbz d p-acp d n1, r-crq vbz vvn p-acp dt n1 p-acp d dt n2 pp-f dt n1? c-acp pn31 vbz j, cst d n1 av, vvz d av av-d, cc pn31 vvz pix.
If when he says the Church is founded upon one, it be understood exclusive of the other Apostles, it proves too much, viz. that the Church is founded not more eminently upon Peter, but upon him alone. If one be not exclusive of the rest, it proves nothing:
If when he Says the Church is founded upon one, it be understood exclusive of the other Apostles, it Proves too much, viz. that the Church is founded not more eminently upon Peter, but upon him alone. If one be not exclusive of the rest, it Proves nothing:
And that Cyprian intended not to exclude the rest, from an equal share with St. Peter, is also manifest, in that he says, The other Apostles doubtless were that which Peter was, endowed with equal Fellowship of Power and Honour .
And that Cyprian intended not to exclude the rest, from an equal share with Saint Peter, is also manifest, in that he Says, The other Apostles doubtless were that which Peter was, endowed with equal Fellowship of Power and Honour.
cc cst jp vvd xx pc-acp vvi dt n1, p-acp dt j-jn n1 p-acp n1 np1, vbz av j, p-acp cst pns31 vvz, dt j-jn n2 av-j vbdr d r-crq np1 vbds, vvn p-acp j-jn n1 pp-f n1 cc n1.
To reconcile St. Cyprian to himself, a learned Romanist gives us this account, why in one place, he saith the Church is founded upon one, and in another place upon many: Cyprian, saith he, in the first Exposition, (viz. that the Church is founded on Peter) seems to exclude the second (that it is founded on all the Apostles) but in Truth he does not exclude it, if his Scope be considered.
To reconcile Saint Cyprian to himself, a learned Romanist gives us this account, why in one place, he Says the Church is founded upon one, and in Another place upon many: Cyprian, Says he, in the First Exposition, (viz. that the Church is founded on Peter) seems to exclude the second (that it is founded on all the Apostles) but in Truth he does not exclude it, if his Scope be considered.
In the first he writes, that the Church is founded on ONE PETER, that against the emergent Discords of Christians in matters of Religion, he might commend the Ʋnity of the Church.
In the First he writes, that the Church is founded on ONE PETER, that against the emergent Discords of Christians in matters of Religion, he might commend the Ʋnity of the Church.
In the second, he says, the Church is constituted on Bishops, that the same Ʋnity of the Church he had commended in ONE PETER, he might commend in the MANY SƲCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES.
In the second, he Says, the Church is constituted on Bishops, that the same Ʋnity of the Church he had commended in ONE PETER, he might commend in the MANY SƲCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES.
he promised to build his Church upon one, to shew that in every particular Church he would have but one, that should be the Principle of Unity, the Foundation upon which all the rest should depend.
he promised to built his Church upon one, to show that in every particular Church he would have but one, that should be the Principle of Unity, the Foundation upon which all the rest should depend.
5. That the Bishops as Successors of St. Peter, are this Principle of Unity, and the Foundation, every one in his own Church, upon which all the rest depend.
5. That the Bishops as Successors of Saint Peter, Are this Principle of Unity, and the Foundation, every one in his own Church, upon which all the rest depend.
crd cst dt n2 p-acp n2 pp-f n1 np1, vbr d n1 pp-f n1, cc dt n1, d pi p-acp po31 d n1, p-acp r-crq d dt n1 vvb.
which doubtless he would have done, had any such Prerogative been then claim'd by Stephen, or granted by Cyprian; since this, without any more ado, must have brought Cyprian to a Submission to him. And therefore,
which doubtless he would have done, had any such Prerogative been then claimed by Stephen, or granted by Cyprian; since this, without any more ado, must have brought Cyprian to a Submission to him. And Therefore,
r-crq av-j pns31 vmd vhi vdn, vhd d d n1 vbn av vvd p-acp np1, cc vvn p-acp jp; p-acp d, p-acp d dc n1, vmb vhi vvn jp p-acp dt n1 p-acp pno31. cc av,
so far was he from finding in them any peculiar Prerogative of the Bishop of Rome. And what is there now of St. Peter 's Soveraignty in all this? or of the Churches being built more eminently upon him,
so Far was he from finding in them any peculiar Prerogative of the Bishop of Room. And what is there now of Saint Peter is Sovereignty in all this? or of the Churches being built more eminently upon him,
av av-j vbds pns31 p-acp vvg p-acp pno32 d j n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f vvi. cc q-crq vbz a-acp av pp-f n1 np1 vbz n1 p-acp d d? cc pp-f dt n2 vbg vvn av-dc av-j p-acp pno31,
I presume he quotes the next words out of Cyprian, Navigare audent & ad Petri Cathedrane, atque ad Ecclesiam principalem, unde Ʋnitas Sacerdotalis exorta est;
I presume he quotes the next words out of Cyprian, Navigare Audent & ad Petri Cathedrane, atque ad Church principalem, unde Ʋnitas Sacerdotalis exorta est;
pns11 vvb pns31 vvz dt ord n2 av pp-f jp, fw-la j cc fw-la np1 np1, fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la;
Not the second, because by Priestly Ʋnity, he means no more than the Presidency of one Bishop in one City, which he says is derived from the Church of Rome, because that was the See of Peter, who was the Pattern of this Unity.
Not the second, Because by Priestly Ʋnity, he means no more than the Presidency of one Bishop in one city, which he Says is derived from the Church of Rome, Because that was the See of Peter, who was the Pattern of this Unity.
And by this he aggravates the crime of Felicissimus and his Complices, who having set up another Bishop at Carthage in opposition to Cyprian, durst make their Appeal to Rome, which was the example of Episcopal Unity to other Churches .
And by this he aggravates the crime of Felicissimus and his Accomplices, who having Set up Another Bishop At Carthage in opposition to Cyprian, durst make their Appeal to Room, which was the Exampl of Episcopal Unity to other Churches.
Nothing can be imagined more directly contrary to that Papal Supremacy he contends for, than this very Epistle of St. Cyprian, out of which this Passage is taken;
Nothing can be imagined more directly contrary to that Papal Supremacy he contends for, than this very Epistle of Saint Cyprian, out of which this Passage is taken;
np1 vmb vbi vvn av-dc av-j j-jn p-acp d j n1 pns31 vvz p-acp, cs d j n1 pp-f n1 jp, av pp-f r-crq d n1 vbz vvn;
in which the good Father most severely condemns Appeals to Rome; asserts that every one's Cause ought to be heard where the Fault is committed, that to every Pastor a portion of the Flock is assign'd, which he rules and governs,
in which the good Father most severely condemns Appeals to Room; asserts that every one's Cause ought to be herd where the Fault is committed, that to every Pastor a portion of the Flock is assigned, which he rules and governs,
His next Testimony from Greg. Nazienzen says, That of all the Disciples of Christ, Peter is called the Rock, and intrusted with the Foundations of the Church .
His next Testimony from Greg. Nazianzen Says, That of all the Disciples of christ, Peter is called the Rock, and Entrusted with the Foundations of the Church.
po31 ord n1 p-acp np1 np1 vvz, cst pp-f d dt n2 pp-f np1, np1 vbz vvn dt n1, cc vvn p-acp dt n2 pp-f dt n1.
Had he look'd back no further than the Oration immediately foregoing , he might have seen, That this Father assigns to every Apostle his particular Province, independently on St. Peter; and by consequence did not suppose that the Church was built more eminently upon him than the rest.
Had he looked back no further than the Oration immediately foregoing, he might have seen, That this Father assigns to every Apostle his particular Province, independently on Saint Peter; and by consequence did not suppose that the Church was built more eminently upon him than the rest.
vhd pns31 vvn av av-dx av-jc cs dt n1 av-j vvg, pns31 vmd vhi vvn, cst d n1 vvz p-acp d n1 po31 j n1, av-j p-acp n1 np1; cc p-acp n1 vdd xx vvi cst dt n1 vbds vvn av-dc av-j p-acp pno31 cs dt n1.
Why did he not quote the 16th Book? he might have done so, as well as the 6th, there being no more than five Books against Eunomius, in St. Basil 's Works:
Why did he not quote the 16th Book? he might have done so, as well as the 6th, there being no more than five Books against Eunomius, in Saint Basil is Works:
If the Reader please to compare the words cited by the Discussor, with those in St. Basil, he will further see that he is not wont to consult the Authors he quotes.
If the Reader please to compare the words cited by the Discusser, with those in Saint Basil, he will further see that he is not wont to consult the Authors he quotes.
As 1. Because by his preaching especially, the first Christian Church was gathered among the Jews. Peter standing up with the eleven, lift up his Voice,
As 1. Because by his preaching especially, the First Christian Church was gathered among the jews. Peter standing up with the eleven, lift up his Voice,
And by this Sermon three thousand were converted, which together with the Disciples before-mentioned, made up the first Christian Church. 2. Because he first preached the Gospel to the Gentiles,
And by this Sermon three thousand were converted, which together with the Disciples beforementioned, made up the First Christian Church. 2. Because he First preached the Gospel to the Gentiles,
cc p-acp d n1 crd crd vbdr vvn, r-crq av p-acp dt n2 j, vvd a-acp dt ord np1 n1. crd p-acp pns31 ord vvd dt n1 p-acp dt n2-j,
In the remainder of this Chapter, which is spent in answering several Objections made by his Adversary, I find nothing but what either needs no answer,
In the remainder of this Chapter, which is spent in answering several Objections made by his Adversary, I find nothing but what either needs no answer,
I Think I have said enough to satisfy every impartial considering Reader, that St. Peter 's Supremacy is not founded upon this Rock, and therefore must fall to the Ground,
I Think I have said enough to satisfy every impartial considering Reader, that Saint Peter is Supremacy is not founded upon this Rock, and Therefore must fallen to the Ground,
pns11 vvb pns11 vhb vvn av-d pc-acp vvi d j vvg n1, cst n1 np1 vbz n1 vbz xx vvn p-acp d n1, cc av vmb vvi p-acp dt n1,
1. That this Promise of the Keys was made to Peter alone. II. That he alone immediately receiv'd them, and the other Apostles derivatively from him. III.
1. That this Promise of the Keys was made to Peter alone. II That he alone immediately received them, and the other Apostles derivatively from him. III.
1. Suppose the Reply addressed to Peter only, and the Promise here made to him alone; doth it hence follow, that Christ intended to give the thing promised to none else? Had Christ said to Peter, to thee only will I give the Keys, this would have followed;
1. Suppose the Reply addressed to Peter only, and the Promise Here made to him alone; does it hence follow, that christ intended to give the thing promised to none Else? Had christ said to Peter, to thee only will I give the Keys, this would have followed;
But says the Doctor, however we read, that the Power of binding and loosing, which is an Effect of the Keys, was promised to all the Apostles in common;
But Says the Doctor, however we read, that the Power of binding and losing, which is an Effect of the Keys, was promised to all the Apostles in Common;
and promise to morrow the same Commission to him, and ten more together with him, hath that one any Power given him over the other ten, by having his Commission first promised him? But it is not any where read in Scripture, that the KEYS THEMSELVES the proper TOKEN and BADGE of the supreme Stewardship over the Church, were promised to the rest, but to PETER alone.
and promise to morrow the same Commission to him, and ten more together with him, hath that one any Power given him over the other ten, by having his Commission First promised him? But it is not any where read in Scripture, that the KEYS THEMSELVES the proper TOKEN and BADGE of the supreme Stewardship over the Church, were promised to the rest, but to PETER alone.
cc vvi p-acp n1 dt d n1 p-acp pno31, cc crd av-dc av p-acp pno31, vhz d crd d n1 vvn pno31 p-acp dt j-jn crd, p-acp vhg po31 n1 ord vvd pno31? p-acp pn31 vbz xx d c-crq vvn p-acp n1, cst dt n2 px32 av j n1 cc n1 pp-f dt j n1 p-acp dt n1, vbdr vvn p-acp dt n1, cc-acp p-acp np1 av-j.
And yet doth he not say just before, That the Power of binding and loosing, which is an effect of the Keys, is promised to all the Apostles? And if so,
And yet does he not say just before, That the Power of binding and losing, which is an Effect of the Keys, is promised to all the Apostles? And if so,
cc av vdz pns31 xx vvi av a-acp, cst dt n1 pp-f vvg cc vvg, r-crq vbz dt n1 pp-f dt n2, vbz vvn p-acp d dt n2? cc cs av,
The Church which is founded in Christ, saith St. Austin, received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Peter, that is, the Power of binding and loosing Sins .
The Church which is founded in christ, Says Saint Austin, received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in Peter, that is, the Power of binding and losing Sins.
The spiritual Key, says Biel, is thus described, It is the Power of judging, that is, of loosing and binding, by which an Ecclesiastical Judg ought to receive those that are worthy,
The spiritual Key, Says Biel, is thus described, It is the Power of judging, that is, of losing and binding, by which an Ecclesiastical Judge ought to receive those that Are worthy,
but to him (viz. Peter ) in express words; It may then, it seems, be proved by Consequence; and is not that as well? But unless (as he goes on) you can shew me some place in the New Testament where our Saviour saith to his Disciples JOYNTLY, IWILL GIVE YOƲ THE KEYS , or to any of them in particular, I WILL GIVE THEE THE KEYS ;
but to him (viz. Peter) in express words; It may then, it seems, be proved by Consequence; and is not that as well? But unless (as he Goes on) you can show me Some place in the New Testament where our Saviour Says to his Disciples JOINTLY, I WILL GIVE YOƲ THE KEYS, or to any of them in particular, I WILL GIVE THEE THE KEYS;
for should he have the best Plea, that doth not hinder, but they may have a good Plea, since his Title is no way inconsistent with theirs, it being such a Priviledg as might be equally enjoy'd by them all.
for should he have the best Plea, that does not hinder, but they may have a good Plea, since his Title is no Way inconsistent with theirs, it being such a Privilege as might be equally enjoyed by them all.
And yet I cannot conceive how his Title can be better than theirs, though it be no where said to them jointly, I will give you the Keys, if that be said to them jointly, which necessarily imports the same thing, as it is.
And yet I cannot conceive how his Title can be better than theirs, though it be no where said to them jointly, I will give you the Keys, if that be said to them jointly, which necessarily imports the same thing, as it is.
Not clearly inferred; it's granted then, that it may be truly inferred, tho not clearly. And why not clearly? because the word KEYS is not mentioned there: Very wisely.
Not clearly inferred; it's granted then, that it may be truly inferred, though not clearly. And why not clearly? Because the word KEYS is not mentioned there: Very wisely.
xx av-j vvn; pn31|vbz vvn av, cst pn31 vmb vbi av-j vvn, cs xx av-j. cc q-crq xx av-j? c-acp dt n1 n2 vbz xx vvn a-acp: av av-j.
and of many learn'd Men of the Church of Rome , and is no more than is taught by the Roman Catechism, in citing Mat. 18. 18. & Joh. 20. 23. together with Mat. 16. 19. to prove that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are committed to the Church ;
and of many learned Men of the Church of Room, and is no more than is taught by the Roman Catechism, in citing Mathew 18. 18. & John 20. 23. together with Mathew 16. 19. to prove that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Are committed to the Church;
cc pp-f d j n2 pp-f dt n1 pp-f vvb, cc vbz av-dx av-dc cs vbz vvn p-acp dt njp n1, p-acp vvg np1 crd crd cc np1 crd crd av p-acp np1 crd crd p-acp vvi cst dt n2 pp-f dt n1 pp-f n1 vbr vvn p-acp dt n1;
This Power, saith he, of the Keys which Christ promises here to Peter, he afterwards in the very same words promises to all the Apostles, Mat. 18. 18. and after that gives it to them all, Mat. 28. & John 20. They are very much mistaken who think the Keys were given to Peter alone; but the Antients were not of this Opinion, who with unanimous Consent teach, that these Keys were in the Person of Peter given to the whole Church .
This Power, Says he, of the Keys which christ promises Here to Peter, he afterwards in the very same words promises to all the Apostles, Mathew 18. 18. and After that gives it to them all, Mathew 28. & John 20. They Are very much mistaken who think the Keys were given to Peter alone; but the Ancients were not of this Opinion, who with unanimous Consent teach, that these Keys were in the Person of Peter given to the Whole Church.
d n1, vvz pns31, pp-f dt n2 r-crq np1 vvz av p-acp np1, pns31 av p-acp dt av d n2 vvz p-acp d dt n2, np1 crd crd cc p-acp cst vvz pn31 p-acp pno32 d, np1 crd cc np1 crd pns32 vbr av av-d vvn r-crq vvb dt n2 vbdr vvn p-acp np1 av-j; cc-acp dt n2-j vbdr xx pp-f d n1, r-crq p-acp j vvb vvi, cst d n2 vbdr p-acp dt n1 pp-f np1 vvn p-acp dt j-jn n1.
To his Question, If either or both these Places, were equivalent to dabo tibi Claves, what reason will you give why Peter should have both a particular and general Promise of them? If by a particular Promise, he means a Promise to St. Peter in particular;
To his Question, If either or both these Places, were equivalent to Dabo tibi Claves, what reason will you give why Peter should have both a particular and general Promise of them? If by a particular Promise, he means a Promise to Saint Peter in particular;
p-acp po31 n1, cs av-d cc d d n2, vbdr j p-acp fw-la fw-la n2, r-crq n1 vmb pn22 vvi q-crq np1 vmd vhi d dt j cc j n1 pp-f pno32? cs p-acp dt j n1, pns31 vvz dt n1 p-acp n1 np1 p-acp j;
Or if St. Cyprian 's Authority be thought too little, let him take it from Pope Leo I. That is not in vain commended to one, that is intimated to all;
Or if Saint Cyprian is authority be Thought too little, let him take it from Pope Leo I That is not in vain commended to one, that is intimated to all;
that whatsoever was meant by either of those Texts, they being spoken conjointly to the twelve, Peter had certainly as large a share in them as any (he need not fear,
that whatsoever was meant by either of those Texts, they being spoken conjointly to the twelve, Peter had Certainly as large a share in them as any (he needs not Fear,
cst r-crq vbds vvn p-acp d pp-f d n2, pns32 vbg vvn av-j p-acp dt crd, np1 vhd av-j c-acp j dt n1 p-acp pno32 p-acp d (pns31 av xx n1,
but he is so far in the right) but having (over and above his Portion in this joint Promise) a particular one apart to himself, in which the rest were immediately no Sharers, it cannot be disproved, (but by virtue of this singular separate Promise made to him personally in the Presence of the rest) that he had the Keys either alone,
but he is so Far in the right) but having (over and above his Portion in this joint Promise) a particular one apart to himself, in which the rest were immediately no Sharers, it cannot be disproved, (but by virtue of this singular separate Promise made to him personally in the Presence of the rest) that he had the Keys either alone,
If by this particular, this singular Promise, this Promise made to him personally, he mean a Promise of any particular or singular Power, besides that which was promised to the rest, he supposes that which he should first have proved,
If by this particular, this singular Promise, this Promise made to him personally, he mean a Promise of any particular or singular Power, beside that which was promised to the rest, he supposes that which he should First have proved,
cs p-acp d j, d j n1, d vvb vvn p-acp pno31 av-j, pns31 vvb dt n1 pp-f d j cc j n1, p-acp d r-crq vbds vvn p-acp dt n1, pns31 vvz cst r-crq pns31 vmd ord vhb vvn,
If he means that Promise made to Peter particularly and singly, which was afterwards made to all the Apostles, at what an absurd rate does he talk? A Promise is made to twelve jointly;
If he means that Promise made to Peter particularly and singly, which was afterwards made to all the Apostles, At what an absurd rate does he talk? A Promise is made to twelve jointly;
therefore this one, hath either himself alone, that which is promised to all the twelve; or if the rest have it, he hath it in a higher Degree than they: Or thus;
Therefore this one, hath either himself alone, that which is promised to all the twelve; or if the rest have it, he hath it in a higher Degree than they: Or thus;
av d crd, vhz d n1 av-j, cst r-crq vbz vvn p-acp d dt crd; cc cs dt n1 vhb pn31, pns31 vhz pn31 p-acp dt jc n1 cs pns32: cc av;
and therefore he spae more Truth than perhaps he was aware of, when he said, that Disputation was an Employment, not only discordant to his Temper, but surmounting his Abilities.
and Therefore he spae more Truth than perhaps he was aware of, when he said, that Disputation was an Employment, not only discordant to his Temper, but surmounting his Abilities.
cc av pns31 fw-la av-dc n1 cs av pns31 vbds j pp-f, c-crq pns31 vvd, cst n1 vbds dt n1, xx av-j j p-acp po31 vvi, cc-acp vvg po31 n2.
I have said enough to ruin the first Proposition. Proposition II. The second is this, that Peter received the Keys immediately from Christ, but the other Apostles from or by him;
I have said enough to ruin the First Proposition. Proposition II The second is this, that Peter received the Keys immediately from christ, but the other Apostles from or by him;
The Falseness of which is so manifest, that one would think none but a Man who had never read the New Testament, could have the Face to offer it to those that have;
The Falseness of which is so manifest, that one would think none but a Man who had never read the New Testament, could have the Face to offer it to those that have;
for can any thing be more evident than that these words, Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven, &c. were spoken by Christ himself immediately, to all the Apostles? And when that Power was actually conferr'd, that was here promised, was it Peter or Christ that said to them, As my Father hath sent me,
for can any thing be more evident than that these words, Whatsoever you shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven, etc. were spoken by christ himself immediately, to all the Apostles? And when that Power was actually conferred, that was Here promised, was it Peter or christ that said to them, As my Father hath sent me,
c-acp vmb d n1 vbi av-dc j cs d d n2, r-crq pn22 vmb vvi p-acp n1, vmb vbi vvn p-acp n1, av vbdr vvn p-acp np1 px31 av-j, p-acp d dt n2? cc c-crq cst n1 vbds av-j vvn, cst vbds av vvn, vbds pn31 np1 cc np1 cst vvd p-acp pno32, p-acp po11 n1 vhz vvn pno11,
and preach the Gospel to every Creature? But instead of multiplying Proofs from Scripture, I shall rather send him to his Master Bellarmine, whom in this Point he deserts.
and preach the Gospel to every Creature? But instead of multiplying Proofs from Scripture, I shall rather send him to his Master Bellarmine, whom in this Point he deserts.
cc vvi dt n1 p-acp d n1? p-acp av pp-f vvg n2 p-acp n1, pns11 vmb av-c vvi pno31 p-acp po31 n1 np1, ro-crq p-acp d n1 pns31 vvz.
Which place, says he, the Fathers, Chrysostom and Theophylact, so expound, that they plainly say, that the Apostles were made by these words, the Vicars of Christ; yea, that they received the very Office and Authority of Christ. 2dly. By the choice of Matthias into the place of the Traitor Judas: For we read, Acts 1. that Matthias was not chosen an Apostle by the Apostles, but his Election being begg'd and obtain'd from God, he was numbred among the Apostles.
Which place, Says he, the Father's, Chrysostom and Theophylact, so expound, that they plainly say, that the Apostles were made by these words, the Vicars of christ; yea, that they received the very Office and authority of christ. 2dly. By the choice of Matthias into the place of the Traitor Judas: For we read, Acts 1. that Matthias was not chosen an Apostle by the Apostles, but his Election being begged and obtained from God, he was numbered among the Apostles.
But surely if all the Apostles had their Jurisdiction from Peter, that ought most especially to have been shewn in Matthias. 3dly. It is proved from St. Paul, who professedly teaches, that he had his Authority and Jurisdiction from Christ, and thence proves himself to be a true Apostle, Gal. 1. And that he might shew that he received not his Authority from Peter or the other Apostles, he saith, When it pleased him who separated me from my Mother's Womb,
But surely if all the Apostles had their Jurisdiction from Peter, that ought most especially to have been shown in Matthias. 3dly. It is proved from Saint Paul, who professedly Teaches, that he had his authority and Jurisdiction from christ, and thence Proves himself to be a true Apostle, Gal. 1. And that he might show that he received not his authority from Peter or the other Apostles, he Says, When it pleased him who separated me from my Mother's Womb,
For the Apostles were made by Christ only, as appears Luke 6. He call'd his Disciples, and chose out of them twelve, whom he named Apostles, &c. But that the Apostles had Jurisdiction, is manifest by the Acts of St. Paul, who 1 Cor. 5. excommunicates;
For the Apostles were made by christ only, as appears Lycia 6. He called his Disciples, and chosen out of them twelve, whom he nam Apostles, etc. But that the Apostles had Jurisdiction, is manifest by the Acts of Saint Paul, who 1 Cor. 5. excommunicates;
and 1 Cor. 6, 7, 11, 13. and frequently elsewhere makes Laws; and also because the Apostolical Dignity, is the first and supreme Dignity in the Church,
and 1 Cor. 6, 7, 11, 13. and frequently elsewhere makes Laws; and also Because the Apostolical Dignity, is the First and supreme Dignity in the Church,
cc crd np1 crd, crd, crd, crd cc av-j av vvz n2; cc av c-acp dt j n1, vbz dt ord cc j n1 p-acp dt n1,
as is manifest, 1 Cor. 12. Ephes. 4. &c. I think Bellarmine hath said more than enough for the Confutation of the second Proposition . I therefore proceed. Proposition III. That the Power of the Keys communicated to the other Apostles was inferior, and subordinate to a higher degree of it in St. Peter; so says the Discussor — I shall here only maintain the inequality, inferiority and subordination of this Power in the other Apostles, to an higher, sublimer and compleater degree of it in Peter .
as is manifest, 1 Cor. 12. Ephesians 4. etc. I think Bellarmine hath said more than enough for the Confutation of the second Proposition. I Therefore proceed. Proposition III. That the Power of the Keys communicated to the other Apostles was inferior, and subordinate to a higher degree of it in Saint Peter; so Says the Discusser — I shall Here only maintain the inequality, inferiority and subordination of this Power in the other Apostles, to an higher, sublimer and completer degree of it in Peter.
c-acp vbz j, crd np1 crd np1 crd av pns11 vvb np1 vhz vvn av-dc cs av-d c-acp dt n1 pp-f dt ord n1. pns11 av vvi. n1 np1. cst dt n1 pp-f dt n2 vvn p-acp dt j-jn n2 vbds j-jn, cc j p-acp dt jc n1 pp-f pn31 p-acp n1 np1; av vvz dt n1 — pns11 vmb av av-j vvi dt n1, n1 cc n1 pp-f d n1 p-acp dt j-jn n2, p-acp dt jc, n1 cc jc n1 pp-f pn31 p-acp np1.
But that there was no such inferiority or subordination in the other Apostles, as he vainly fancies, will soon appear, by consulting that place, where the power of the Keys before promised, was actually given to St. Peter: The words by which it was conveyed are these, As my Father sent me, so send I you;
But that there was no such inferiority or subordination in the other Apostles, as he vainly fancies, will soon appear, by consulting that place, where the power of the Keys before promised, was actually given to Saint Peter: The words by which it was conveyed Are these, As my Father sent me, so send I you;
First, That the power of the Keys is here given, all those who own the Doctrine & Authority of the Church of Rome (and by consequence the Discussor himself) will be forced to grant: (1.) Because this is expresly taught by the Fathers. (2.) Because it is also taught by the Roman Catechism, and the Council of Trent.
First, That the power of the Keys is Here given, all those who own the Doctrine & authority of the Church of Room (and by consequence the Discusser himself) will be forced to grant: (1.) Because this is expressly taught by the Father's. (2.) Because it is also taught by the Roman Catechism, and the Council of Trent.
ord, cst dt n1 pp-f dt n2 vbz av vvn, d d r-crq d dt n1 cc n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f vvb (cc p-acp n1 dt n1 px31) vmb vbi vvn pc-acp vvi: (crd) p-acp d vbz av-j vvn p-acp dt n2. (crd) p-acp pn31 vbz av vvn p-acp dt njp n1, cc dt n1 pp-f np1.
1. This is no new Conceit of Hereticks, but it is expresly taught by the Fathers, whose unanimous Judgment in the interpreting of Scripture, every Priest of the Church of Rome (as I said before) is by solemn Oath obliged to follow.
1. This is no new Conceit of Heretics, but it is expressly taught by the Father's, whose unanimous Judgement in the interpreting of Scripture, every Priest of the Church of Room (as I said before) is by solemn Oath obliged to follow.
yet it was afterwards given to all the Apostles, when Christ said to them, WHOSE SINS YE REMIT, THEY ARE REMITTED, &c. Instead of producing more of the Fathers, I challenge the Discussor to produce one ancient Author who hath said the contrary.
yet it was afterwards given to all the Apostles, when christ said to them, WHOSE SINS you REMIT, THEY ARE REMITTED, etc. Instead of producing more of the Father's, I challenge the Discusser to produce one ancient Author who hath said the contrary.
av pn31 vbds av vvn p-acp d dt n2, c-crq np1 vvd p-acp pno32, r-crq n2 pn22 vvb, pns32 vbr vvn, av av pp-f vvg n1 pp-f dt n2, pns11 vvb dt n1 pc-acp vvi crd j n1 r-crq vhz vvn dt n-jn.
2. But if the Fathers should now lose their Authority (as they are wont to do with the Romanists, whensoever they contradict their new Faith) yet unless he put on his triple case, he will not be able to resist that which follows;
2. But if the Father's should now loose their authority (as they Are wont to do with the Romanists, whensoever they contradict their new Faith) yet unless he put on his triple case, he will not be able to resist that which follows;
passing over many private Authors (as they commonly call them, though licensed by the highest publick Authority) I shall produce only the Roman Catechism, composed by the order of the Council of Trent, and the Council of Trent it self.
passing over many private Authors (as they commonly call them, though licensed by the highest public authority) I shall produce only the Roman Catechism, composed by the order of the Council of Trent, and the Council of Trent it self.
And the Council of Trent declares, that all those Opinions are false, and Strangers from the Truth of the Gospel, which perniciously extend to other Men besides Bishops and Priests, the Ministry of the KEYS;
And the Council of Trent declares, that all those Opinions Are false, and Strangers from the Truth of the Gospel, which perniciously extend to other Men beside Bishops and Priests, the Ministry of the KEYS;
cc dt n1 pp-f np1 vvz, cst d d n2 vbr j, cc n2 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1, r-crq av-j vvb p-acp j-jn n2 p-acp n2 cc n2, dt n1 pp-f dt n2;
AND WHOSESOEVER SINSYE RETAIN, THEY ARE RETAINED, to be spoken indiffently to all the faithful, &c. By which it is plain, that the Trent Fathers, took remitting and retaining in St. John, to signify the same thing with loosing and binding in St. Matthew.
AND WHOSESOEVER SINSYE RETAIN, THEY ARE RETAINED, to be spoken indiffently to all the faithful, etc. By which it is plain, that the Trent Father's, took remitting and retaining in Saint John, to signify the same thing with losing and binding in Saint Matthew.
cc av n1 vvb, pns32 vbr vvn, pc-acp vbi vvn av-j p-acp d dt j, av p-acp r-crq pn31 vbz j, cst dt np1 n2, vvd vvg cc vvg p-acp n1 np1, pc-acp vvi dt d n1 p-acp vvg cc vvg p-acp n1 np1.
And accordingly (as an excellent Divine of our own Church observes) when the Holy Ghost descended, it was imparted to each of them alike, without any mark of Distinction.
And accordingly (as an excellent Divine of our own Church observes) when the Holy Ghost descended, it was imparted to each of them alike, without any mark of Distinction.
cc av-vvg (c-acp dt j j-jn pp-f po12 d n1 vvz) c-crq dt j n1 vvn, pn31 vbds vvn p-acp d pp-f pno32 av-j, p-acp d n1 pp-f n1.
and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, Acts 2. 2, 3. The mighty Wind also wherein this Flame came, filled all the House where they were sitting,
and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, Acts 2. 2, 3. The mighty Wind also wherein this Flame Come, filled all the House where they were sitting,
cc pns32 vbdr d vvn p-acp dt j n1, n2 crd crd, crd dt j n1 av c-crq d n1 vvd, vvd d dt n1 c-crq pns32 vbdr vvg,
Secondly, If we consult the Fathers, we may observe in them those two things pertinent to our Purpose. 1. Not one of them intimates, that any thing was to be found in this Text peculiar to Peter, by which he was set above his Brethren;
Secondly, If we consult the Father's, we may observe in them those two things pertinent to our Purpose. 1. Not one of them intimates, that any thing was to be found in this Text peculiar to Peter, by which he was Set above his Brothers;
so do St. Cyprian and Theophylact. 2. The Power here given to all the Apostles, they take to be so full, that a fuller and more ample could not be given to Peter. St. Chrysostom says, He gave them all Heavenly Power,
so do Saint Cyprian and Theophylact 2. The Power Here given to all the Apostles, they take to be so full, that a fuller and more ample could not be given to Peter. Saint Chrysostom Says, He gave them all Heavenly Power,
av vdb n1 jp cc np1 crd dt n1 av vvn p-acp d dt n2, pns32 vvb pc-acp vbi av j, cst dt jc cc av-dc j vmd xx vbi vvn p-acp np1. n1 np1 vvz, pns31 vvd pno32 d j n1,
when he said to them, Whose Sins ye remit, they are remitted, &c. And what Power can be greater than this? The Father hath given all Judgment to the Son,
when he said to them, Whose Sins you remit, they Are remitted, etc. And what Power can be greater than this? The Father hath given all Judgement to the Son,
c-crq pns31 vvd p-acp pno32, rg-crq n2 pn22 vvb, pns32 vbr vvn, av cc r-crq n1 vmb vbi jc cs d? dt n1 vhz vvn d n1 p-acp dt n1,
And Cyril of Alexandria (as I find him quoted by Bellarmine) says, That by these Words, the Apostles were properly created Apostles and Teachers of the whole World;
And Cyril of Alexandria (as I find him quoted by Bellarmine) Says, That by these Words, the Apostles were properly created Apostles and Teachers of the Whole World;
but that Pope Gregory I. by virtue of these Words, ascribes to all the Apostles, superni judicii Principatum, and makes them all to be God's Vicars, in retaining some Men's Sins, and relaxing others . Yea,
but that Pope Gregory I. by virtue of these Words, ascribes to all the Apostles, superni Judicii Principatum, and makes them all to be God's Vicars, in retaining Some Men's Sins, and relaxing Others. Yea,
cc-acp cst n1 np1 np1 p-acp n1 pp-f d n2, vvz p-acp d dt n2, fw-la fw-la fw-la, cc vvz pno32 d pc-acp vbi npg1 np1, p-acp vvg d ng2 n2, cc vvg n2-jn. uh,
because they may serve instead of a thousand Witnesses, two of the three being Jesuits, and two of them also Cardinals. The Jesuit Maldonate in his Comment upon these Words, tells us, That the Power which Christ had received,
Because they may serve instead of a thousand Witnesses, two of the three being Jesuits, and two of them also Cardinals. The Jesuit Maldonate in his Comment upon these Words, tells us, That the Power which christ had received,
c-acp pns32 vmb vvi av pp-f dt crd n2, crd pp-f dt crd vbg np2, cc crd pp-f pno32 av n2. dt np1 fw-it p-acp po31 n1 p-acp d n2, vvz pno12, cst dt n1 r-crq np1 vhd vvn,
Where you see, that the same is given to the Apostles by these Words, I SEND YOƲ, which was promised to Peter by that saying, I WILL GIVE THEE THE KEYS,
Where you see, that the same is given to the Apostles by these Words, I SEND YOƲ, which was promised to Peter by that saying, I WILL GIVE THEE THE KEYS,
What can be more plainly expressed, than that the Power convey'd to the Apostles by these Words, I send you, was equal to that promised to Peter, in the Promise of the Keys?
What can be more plainly expressed, than that the Power conveyed to the Apostles by these Words, I send you, was equal to that promised to Peter, in the Promise of the Keys?
I know Bellaamine tells us, that he hath elsewhere shew'd, that this is no Impediment to Peter 's Primacy; what, not to his Primacy of Power? Can they all be equal in Power,
I know Bellaamine tells us, that he hath elsewhere showed, that this is no Impediment to Peter is Primacy; what, not to his Primacy of Power? Can they all be equal in Power,
pns11 vvb vvi vvz pno12, cst pns31 vhz av vvn, cst d vbz dx n1 p-acp np1 vbz n1; r-crq, xx p-acp po31 n1 pp-f n1? vmb pns32 d vbb j-jn p-acp n1,
and yet Peter be their Superiour? But how doth Bellarmine reconcile this Contradiction? We confess, says he, the Apostles were equal in Apostolical Power,
and yet Peter be their Superior? But how does Bellarmine reconcile this Contradiction? We confess, Says he, the Apostles were equal in Apostolical Power,
cc av np1 vbb po32 j-jn? cc-acp q-crq vdz np1 vvi d n1? pns12 vvb, vvz pns31, dt n2 vbdr j-jn p-acp j n1,
whether they were given to Peter in another sense, or in a sublimer and compleater degree, (as the Discussor speaks) than they were given to the other Apostles?
whither they were given to Peter in Another sense, or in a sublimer and completer degree, (as the Discusser speaks) than they were given to the other Apostles?
if we do but consider that his Friend Maldonat (who was a little better acquainted with their Writings than he is) tells us, that he saw all Authors (except Origen) understood the Words spoken to Peter, Matth. 16. 19. in the same sense, with those spoken to Peter and the rest of the Apostles jointly, Matth. 18. 18. And by consequence, they understood the Keys to be given in the same sense and amplitude to the rest of the Apostles, as to Peter Which being premised, I shall now examine the Testimonies themselves.
if we do but Consider that his Friend Maldonatus (who was a little better acquainted with their Writings than he is) tells us, that he saw all Authors (except Origen) understood the Words spoken to Peter, Matthew 16. 19. in the same sense, with those spoken to Peter and the rest of the Apostles jointly, Matthew 18. 18. And by consequence, they understood the Keys to be given in the same sense and amplitude to the rest of the Apostles, as to Peter Which being premised, I shall now examine the Testimonies themselves.
The first of which he so grosly abuses, that had he to that one line he quotes, added the three next, every Reader would have seen, that it is directly contrary to that,
The First of which he so grossly Abuses, that had he to that one line he quotes, added the three next, every Reader would have seen, that it is directly contrary to that,
dt ord pp-f r-crq pns31 av av-j vvz, cst vhd pns31 p-acp d crd n1 pns31 vvz, vvd dt crd ord, d n1 vmd vhi vvn, cst pn31 vbz av-j j-jn p-acp d,
The Words he quotes are these, An soli Petro dantur a Christo claves? How from hence he can infer, that Origen acknowledges Peter more excelling in the power of the Keys,
The Words he quotes Are these, an soli Peter dantur a Christ claves? How from hence he can infer, that Origen acknowledges Peter more excelling in the power of the Keys,
But if to these we add the words following, the whole Passage is this, Were the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven given by Christ to Peter only, and shall no other Saint receive them? But if that which is said, I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, be common also to the rest,
But if to these we add the words following, the Whole Passage is this, Were the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven given by christ to Peter only, and shall no other Saint receive them? But if that which is said, I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, be Common also to the rest,
why are not all those things which are spoken before, and which follow, common to them all ? In which Words it is plain, that as Origen denies the Keys to be given to Peter only; so in suposing that very Promise, I will give thee the Keys, to be common to the rest, he must of necessity suppose, that the Keys were given to the rest, in the same Degree they were to Peter.
why Are not all those things which Are spoken before, and which follow, Common to them all? In which Words it is plain, that as Origen Denies the Keys to be given to Peter only; so in suposing that very Promise, I will give thee the Keys, to be Common to the rest, he must of necessity suppose, that the Keys were given to the rest, in the same Degree they were to Peter.
In the other Passage I grant, that Origen makes no small difference between the Promise made to Peter, Matth. 16. and that made to the Disciples, Matth. 18. That to Peter were given the Keys, not of ONE HEAVEN, but of MANY HEAVENS;
In the other Passage I grant, that Origen makes no small difference between the Promise made to Peter, Matthew 16. and that made to the Disciples, Matthew 18. That to Peter were given the Keys, not of ONE HEAVEN, but of MANY HEAVENS;
But is not Maldonate himself asham'd of this? and does he not say, that he lost the Truth in proving it too subtilly ? Is not the word used in Scripture in both numbers, without any the least difference in sense? For instance, St. Matthew says,
But is not Maldonate himself ashamed of this? and does he not say, that he lost the Truth in proving it too subtly? Is not the word used in Scripture in both numbers, without any the least difference in sense? For instance, Saint Matthew Says,
cc-acp vbz xx fw-it px31 j pp-f d? cc vdz pns31 xx vvi, cst pns31 vvn dt n1 p-acp vvg pn31 av av-j? vbz xx dt n1 vvn p-acp n1 p-acp d n2, p-acp d dt ds n1 p-acp n1? p-acp n1, n1 np1 vvz,
In the Lord's Prayer the word is plural in the Introduction, singular in the third Petition, both in St. Matthew and Luke, and in both used in the same sense.
In the Lord's Prayer the word is plural in the Introduction, singular in the third Petition, both in Saint Matthew and Lycia, and in both used in the same sense.
p-acp dt ng1 n1 dt n1 vbz j p-acp dt n1, j p-acp dt ord vvb, av-d p-acp n1 np1 cc av, cc p-acp d vvn p-acp dt d n1.
And so far were the Fathers from making any difference between them, that they on the contrary frequently express Matth. 18. 18. in the plural Number,
And so Far were the Father's from making any difference between them, that they on the contrary frequently express Matthew 18. 18. in the plural Number,
cc av av-j vbdr dt n2 p-acp vvg d n1 p-acp pno32, cst pns32 p-acp dt n-jn av-j j np1 crd crd p-acp dt j n1,
But granting his Argument to be nothing, yet it is evident from hence, says the Discussor, that Origen did believe Peter to be more eminent, and to surmount the rest in the Power of the Keys .
But granting his Argument to be nothing, yet it is evident from hence, Says the Discusser, that Origen did believe Peter to be more eminent, and to surmount the rest in the Power of the Keys.
and that grounded upon a childish Error, be of more Authority with us, than the more solid Judgment of all the rest? And why should we value his Judgment in this, more than the Romanists do, in that which immediately follows, viz. That by how much the better any Man is, by so much the greater power he hath of binding and loosing, which in the Church of Rome is no less than Heresy.
and that grounded upon a childish Error, be of more authority with us, than the more solid Judgement of all the rest? And why should we valve his Judgement in this, more than the Romanists do, in that which immediately follows, viz. That by how much the better any Man is, by so much the greater power he hath of binding and losing, which in the Church of Room is no less than Heresy.
cc d vvn p-acp dt j n1, vbb pp-f dc n1 p-acp pno12, cs dt av-dc j n1 pp-f d dt n1? cc q-crq vmd pns12 vvi po31 n1 p-acp d, av-dc cs dt np1 vdb, p-acp d r-crq av-j vvz, n1 cst p-acp c-crq av-d dt av-jc d n1 vbz, p-acp av av-d dt jc n1 pns31 vhz pp-f vvg cc vvg, r-crq p-acp dt n1 pp-f vvb vbz av-dx av-dc cs n1.
For he doth not here compare Peter to the rest of the Apostles (to whom he supposed the Power of the Keys was equally given, Matth. 16.) but to those private Christians only, who should thrice admonish their offending Brother;
For he does not Here compare Peter to the rest of the Apostles (to whom he supposed the Power of the Keys was equally given, Matthew 16.) but to those private Christians only, who should thrice admonish their offending Brother;
p-acp pns31 vdz xx av vvi np1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n2 (p-acp ro-crq pns31 vvd dt n1 pp-f dt n2 vbds av-j vvn, np1 crd) p-acp p-acp d j np1 av-j, r-crq vmd av vvi po32 j-vvg n1;
The next Father he quotes is St. Hilary. And how does it appear, that he gives a larger Portion of the Keys to Peter, than to the other Apostles? Thus, that whereas he calls the other Apostles, Janitores Coeli, the Door-Keepers of Heaven;
The next Father he quotes is Saint Hilary. And how does it appear, that he gives a larger Portion of the Keys to Peter, than to the other Apostles? Thus, that whereas he calls the other Apostles, Janitores Coeli, the Door-Keepers of Heaven;
Is not this Demonstration? It might pass for such with the Discussor, had not St. Hilary in another place unluckily given the same Title (and another too as high) to all the Apostles: You O HOLY AND BLESSED MEN, who for the merit of your Faith have obtained the KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, &c. What is this,
Is not this Demonstration? It might pass for such with the Discusser, had not Saint Hilary in Another place unluckily given the same Title (and Another too as high) to all the Apostles: You Oh HOLY AND BLESSED MEN, who for the merit of your Faith have obtained the KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, etc. What is this,
vbz xx d n1? pn31 vmd vvi p-acp d p-acp dt n1, vhd xx n1 np1 p-acp j-jn n1 av-j vvn dt d n1 (cc j-jn av c-acp j) p-acp d dt n2: pn22 uh j cc j-vvn n2, r-crq p-acp dt n1 pp-f po22 n1 vhb vvn dt n2 pp-f dt n1 pp-f n1, av q-crq vbz d,
But what if the Word (locum) be not in Hilary. What shall I think of his foisting in one Word for another? Was not the Action unworthy and disingenuous? in him especially who pretends so much to Truth and honest Dealing? The best Palliation I can make for him, is, that he found it in Bellarmine .
But what if the Word (locum) be not in Hilary. What shall I think of his foisting in one Word for Another? Was not the Actium unworthy and disingenuous? in him especially who pretends so much to Truth and honest Dealing? The best Palliation I can make for him, is, that he found it in Bellarmine.
St. Hilary 's words are these, Qui in cunctorum Apostolorum silentio Dei silium revelatione Patris intelligens, ultra humanae infirmitatis modum supereminentem Beatae Fidei suae confessione Gloriam promeruit .
Saint Hilary is words Are these, Qui in cunctorum Apostolorum silentio Dei silium Revelation Patris Intelligence, ultra humanae infirmitatis modum supereminentem Beatae Fidei suae Confessi Gloriam promeruit.
How wide is the difference between these words, and those of the Discussor? It was pity he omitted the word Beatae, because from thence he might have observ'd the transcendency of Peter 's Faith.
How wide is the difference between these words, and those of the Discusser? It was pity he omitted the word Beatae, Because from thence he might have observed the transcendency of Peter is Faith.
q-crq j vbz dt n1 p-acp d n2, cc d pp-f dt n1? pn31 vbds n1 pns31 vvn dt n1 np1, c-acp p-acp av pns31 vmd vhi vvn dt n1 pp-f np1 vbz n1.
But that which I observe is, That instead of Locum, St. Hilary hath Gloriam. Now since he was of opinion (though different from all that went before him) that Peter alone at that time knew the Divinity of Christ by a special Revelation from God;
But that which I observe is, That instead of Locum, Saint Hilary hath Gloriam. Now since he was of opinion (though different from all that went before him) that Peter alone At that time knew the Divinity of christ by a special Revelation from God;
But it is observable, that whereas he affirms the other Apostles to have received the Keys of Fidei suae meritum, he asserts in his Comments on Matth. 13. Petrum fide caeteros anteisse. From whence he infers, That he having a greater portion of Faith, consequently had a larger power of the Keys.
But it is observable, that whereas he affirms the other Apostles to have received the Keys of Fidei suae Merit, he asserts in his Comments on Matthew 13. Peter fide Others anteisse. From whence he infers, That he having a greater portion of Faith, consequently had a larger power of the Keys.
but that his Faith was before theirs in time; the words immediately following, being these, For the rest not knowing it, he first answered, Thou art the Son of the living God .
but that his Faith was before theirs in time; the words immediately following, being these, For the rest not knowing it, he First answered, Thou art the Son of the living God.
The five next Testimonies, viz. those of St. Ambrose (though no such words as those he quotes are in Serm. 66.) Cyril, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyprian, are all impertinent,
The five next Testimonies, viz. those of Saint Ambrose (though no such words as those he quotes Are in Sermon 66.) Cyril, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyprian, Are all impertinent,
dt crd ord n2, n1 d pp-f n1 np1 (cs dx d n2 c-acp d pns31 vvz vbr p-acp np1 crd) np1, np1, np1, np1, vbr d j,
What then is the reason why they speak after this manner? Either, 1. Because these words, I will give thee the Keys, were directed to Peter alone, tho meant to all the Apostles (as St. Ambrose.) Or, 2. Because (to represent Unity) the Keys were given first to Peter only, which were afterward given to all the Apostles (as St. Cyprian held.)
What then is the reason why they speak After this manner? Either, 1. Because these words, I will give thee the Keys, were directed to Peter alone, though meant to all the Apostles (as Saint Ambrose.) Or, 2. Because (to represent Unity) the Keys were given First to Peter only, which were afterwards given to all the Apostles (as Saint Cyprian held.)
q-crq av vbz dt n1 c-crq pns32 vvb p-acp d n1? av-d, crd p-acp d n2, pns11 vmb vvi pno21 dt n2, vbdr vvn p-acp np1 av-j, av vvd p-acp d dt n2 (c-acp n1 np1.) cc, crd p-acp (p-acp vvi n1) dt n2 vbdr vvn ord p-acp np1 av-j, r-crq vbdr av vvn p-acp d dt n2 (c-acp n1 jp vvn.)
That Bede cannot mean by the Words he quotes, that Peter had any Degree of Power above the other Apostles, is manifest, in that he expresly attributes to them all, the very same Power of binding and loosing, that was given to Peter. This Power, says he, is without doubt given to all the Apostles, to whom Christ said in general after his Resurrection, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
That Bede cannot mean by the Words he quotes, that Peter had any Degree of Power above the other Apostles, is manifest, in that he expressly attributes to them all, the very same Power of binding and losing, that was given to Peter. This Power, Says he, is without doubt given to all the Apostles, to whom christ said in general After his Resurrection, Receive you the Holy Ghost:
for he must be blind who cannot see, that this is utterly inconsistent with a Supremacy of Power in St. Peter. Not if rightly understood, says he, for if you consult his Writings, you will find the reason which moved him to affirm this, was because Peter represented the Church; now in what Quality he represented it, he discovers himself in his Tract. ult. in Johan.
for he must be blind who cannot see, that this is utterly inconsistent with a Supremacy of Power in Saint Peter. Not if rightly understood, Says he, for if you consult his Writings, you will find the reason which moved him to affirm this, was Because Peter represented the Church; now in what Quality he represented it, he discovers himself in his Tract. ult. in John.
He did bear the Person of the Church, propter Apostolatus sui primatum, propter primatum quem in Discipulis habuit, and Apostolatus principatum tenens; that is, by reason of the Primacy of order,
He did bear the Person of the Church, propter Apostolatus sui primatum, propter primatum Whom in Discipulis Habuit, and Apostolatus Principatum tenens; that is, by reason of the Primacy of order,
But when it is said to him, I will give thee the Keys — he signified the whole Church, &c. In which Words, these two things may be observed, each of which is destructive of the Discussor's Notion.
But when it is said to him, I will give thee the Keys — he signified the Whole Church, etc. In which Words, these two things may be observed, each of which is destructive of the Discussor's Notion.
1. That St. Austin makes him bear the Person of the Church, neither as an Apostle, nor as the prime Apostle; this is evident by the Words sed quando. He was an Apostle, yea the prime Apostle, but when it was said to him, I will give thee the Keys, he signified the Church.
1. That Saint Austin makes him bear the Person of the Church, neither as an Apostle, nor as the prime Apostle; this is evident by the Words said quando. He was an Apostle, yea the prime Apostle, but when it was said to him, I will give thee the Keys, he signified the Church.
And has he that signifies another, Dominion over him whom he signifies? as for instance, the Ambassador over his Prince? The next place will give us a farther Proof of the Discussor's fair dealing.
And has he that signifies Another, Dominion over him whom he signifies? as for instance, the Ambassador over his Prince? The next place will give us a farther Proof of the Discussor's fair dealing.
unless when they are referred to the Church, of which he is acknowledged to have born the Person in a Figure, by reason of the Primacy he had among the Disciples,
unless when they Are referred to the Church, of which he is acknowledged to have born the Person in a Figure, by reason of the Primacy he had among the Disciples,
so Judas after a certain manner sustains the Person of the Jews, the Enemies of Christ, &c. Why did he here omit the Words (in figurâ) unless because they were not favourable to his Design? And why did he cut off all that concerns Judas, but because he saw it was plainly against it? These things are here observable. 1. That I will give thee the Keys, though spoken to Peter, yet cannot have a clear Sense unless it be referr'd to the Church. 2. That there might be other such things said to him. 3. That Christ did not promise him the Primacy,
so Judas After a certain manner sustains the Person of the jews, the Enemies of christ, etc. Why did he Here omit the Words (in figurâ) unless Because they were not favourable to his Design? And why did he Cut off all that concerns Judas, but Because he saw it was plainly against it? These things Are Here observable. 1. That I will give thee the Keys, though spoken to Peter, yet cannot have a clear Sense unless it be referred to the Church. 2. That there might be other such things said to him. 3. That christ did not promise him the Primacy,
av np1 p-acp dt j n1 vvz dt n1 pp-f dt np2, dt n2 pp-f np1, av q-crq vdd pns31 av vvi dt n2 (p-acp fw-la) cs c-acp pns32 vbdr xx j p-acp po31 n1? cc q-crq vdd pns31 vvi a-acp d cst vvz np1, p-acp c-acp pns31 vvd pn31 vbds av-j p-acp pn31? np1 n2 vbr av j. crd cst pns11 vmb vvi pno21 dt n2, c-acp vvn p-acp np1, av vmbx vhi dt j n1 cs pn31 vbb vvn p-acp dt n1. crd d a-acp vmd vbi j-jn d n2 vvd p-acp pno31. crd cst np1 vdd xx vvi pno31 dt n1,
when he promised the Keys, for he had that before. 4. That he did bear the Person of the Church in a Figure. 5. That Judas after a manner sustained the Person of Christ's Enemies;
when he promised the Keys, for he had that before. 4. That he did bear the Person of the Church in a Figure. 5. That Judas After a manner sustained the Person of Christ's Enemies;
It is irksom to insist on these things, I shall therefore pass over his next Quotation from Serm. 23. de verb. Domini (by an error of the Press, I suppose, put for Serm. 13.) which is as little to the purpose, as either of the former;
It is irksome to insist on these things, I shall Therefore pass over his next Quotation from Sermon 23. de verb. Domini (by an error of the Press, I suppose, put for Sermon 13.) which is as little to the purpose, as either of the former;
Nor is this Glory so appropriated by Austin to Peter, but it is by him ascrib'd to the other Apostles together with him (as I have shewed before.) But how bright soever this Glory may be in it self, the Discussor has here drawn a Vail over it, by making him who before received the Keys as their Prince, to receive them now as their Proxy; for so he adds in the same Page;
Nor is this Glory so appropriated by Austin to Peter, but it is by him ascribed to the other Apostles together with him (as I have showed before.) But how bright soever this Glory may be in it self, the Discusser has Here drawn a vail over it, by making him who before received the Keys as their Prince, to receive them now as their Proxy; for so he adds in the same Page;
ccx vbz d n1 av vvn p-acp np1 p-acp np1, p-acp pn31 vbz p-acp pno31 vvn p-acp dt j-jn n2 av p-acp pno31 (c-acp pns11 vhb vvn a-acp.) p-acp c-crq j av d n1 vmb vbi p-acp pn31 n1, dt n1 vhz av vvn dt n1 p-acp pn31, p-acp vvg pno31 r-crq c-acp vvd dt n2 p-acp po32 n1, pc-acp vvi pno32 av p-acp po32 n1; p-acp av pns31 vvz p-acp dt d n1;
He received them immediately — They received them by a Proxy, &c. Now a Proxy, as such, hath not one Ray of Claritude, by which he outshines those whose Proxy he is.
He received them immediately — They received them by a Proxy, etc. Now a Proxy, as such, hath not one Ray of Claritude, by which he outshines those whose Proxy he is.
pns31 vvd pno32 av-j — pns32 vvd pno32 p-acp dt n1, av av dt n1, p-acp d, vhz xx crd n1 pp-f n1, p-acp r-crq pns31 vvz d r-crq n1 pns31 vbz.
When Optatus says, That he alone received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to be COMMUNICATED to the rest, he doth not mean, to be communicated by him, but by Christ (as a Roman Doctor expounds it ) And the preference Optatus there gives to him, consists in this, that he alone received the Promise first, which was afterwards perform'd to all the rest.
When Optatus Says, That he alone received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to be COMMUNICATED to the rest, he does not mean, to be communicated by him, but by christ (as a Roman Doctor expounds it) And the preference Optatus there gives to him, consists in this, that he alone received the Promise First, which was afterwards performed to all the rest.
As to what he adds concerning Matth. 18. 18. That the Fathers expound it of fraternal Correption. If he mean all, or the greater number of the Fathers, it shews either his Ignorance or his Insincerity.
As to what he adds Concerning Matthew 18. 18. That the Father's expound it of fraternal Correption. If he mean all, or the greater number of the Father's, it shows either his Ignorance or his Insincerity.
St. Jerom he palpably abuses, by quoting his Words on ver. 16. whereas he expresly expounds ver. 18. of the Power given to the Church of binding and loosing.
Saint Jerome he palpably Abuses, by quoting his Words on for. 16. whereas he expressly expounds for. 18. of the Power given to the Church of binding and losing.
The remainder of this Chapter is either ridiculous or impertinent, except that he says, St. Jerom in his Comments on Matth. 16. speaking of the Power of Keys, acknowledges Peter to have received it SPECIATIM:
The remainder of this Chapter is either ridiculous or impertinent, except that he Says, Saint Jerome in his Comments on Matthew 16. speaking of the Power of Keys, acknowledges Peter to have received it SPECIATIM:
Which is not, I grant, impertinent, but that which is much worse, a downright Falsity: For in his Comments upon that Chapter, the word Speciatim is not to be found,
Which is not, I grant, impertinent, but that which is much Worse, a downright Falsity: For in his Comments upon that Chapter, the word Speciatim is not to be found,
r-crq vbz xx, pns11 vvb, j, cc-acp cst r-crq vbz av-d jc, dt j n1: c-acp p-acp po31 n2 p-acp d n1, dt n1 av vbz xx pc-acp vbi vvn,
nor any other of a like import, relating to St. Peter. Nor yet those Words he quotes as following after it. Proposition IV. That by the Keys promised and given to PETER, is meant the supreme Power of governing the Ʋniversal Church .
nor any other of a like import, relating to Saint Peter. Nor yet those Words he quotes as following After it. Proposition IV. That by the Keys promised and given to PETER, is meant the supreme Power of governing the Ʋniversal Church.
but then in this sense Supreme Power was given to every Apostle. But as he means thereby a Power superior to that of the other Apostles, by which Peter was constituted their Governour, so it is false.
but then in this sense Supreme Power was given to every Apostle. But as he means thereby a Power superior to that of the other Apostles, by which Peter was constituted their Governor, so it is false.
cc-acp av p-acp d n1 j n1 vbds vvn p-acp d n1. p-acp c-acp pns31 vvz av dt n1 j-jn p-acp d pp-f dt j-jn n2, p-acp r-crq np1 vbds vvn po32 n1, av pn31 vbz j.
For since (as has been already proved, and as the Sorbonist before-quoted, affirms ) the very same Keys promised to Peter, were afterward granted to the rest,
For since (as has been already proved, and as the Sorbonist before-quoted, affirms) the very same Keys promised to Peter, were afterwards granted to the rest,
p-acp a-acp (c-acp vhz vbn av vvn, cc p-acp dt n1 j, vvz) dt j d n2 vvd p-acp np1, vbdr av vvn p-acp dt n1,
St. Chrysostom, he tells us, affirms, that our Saviour by virtue of his Promise of the Donation of the Keys, did not only give S. Peter Power over the whole World,
Saint Chrysostom, he tells us, affirms, that our Saviour by virtue of his Promise of the Donation of the Keys, did not only give S. Peter Power over the Whole World,
And of all the Apostles in common, That not Nations and divers Cities, but the World was committed to them (as we have before heard.) And to rise to the higher Key: Did not Christ give to the other Apostles the same power over things in Heaven,
And of all the Apostles in Common, That not nations and diverse Cities, but the World was committed to them (as we have before herd.) And to rise to the higher Key: Did not christ give to the other Apostles the same power over things in Heaven,
cc pp-f d dt n2 p-acp j, cst xx n2 cc j n2, cc-acp dt n1 vbds vvn p-acp pno32 (c-acp pns12 vhb a-acp vvn.) cc pc-acp vvi p-acp dt jc n1: vdd xx np1 vvb p-acp dt j-jn n2 dt d n1 p-acp n2 p-acp n1,
when he said to them, Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in HEAVEN? And does not the same Chrysostom, speaking of these Words, Matth. 18. 18. say of all the Apostles, They sitting upon Earth, give Sentence,
when he said to them, Whatsoever you shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in HEAVEN? And does not the same Chrysostom, speaking of these Words, Matthew 18. 18. say of all the Apostles, They sitting upon Earth, give Sentence,
c-crq pns31 vvd p-acp pno32, r-crq pn22 vmb vvi p-acp n1, vmb vbi vvn p-acp n1? cc vdz xx dt d np1, vvg pp-f d n2, np1 crd crd n1 pp-f d dt n2, pns32 vvg p-acp n1, vvb n1,
Suppose they do so here, what then? Do the Keys signify as much when attributed to Peter, as when attributed to Christ? Is there no difference between the Keys in the Hands of the Master of the Family,
Suppose they do so Here, what then? Do the Keys signify as much when attributed to Peter, as when attributed to christ? Is there no difference between the Keys in the Hands of the Master of the Family,
but if when given to Peter, they denote the same Supremacy, then there must be two Supreme Powers over the same Family, which is a plain Contradiction.
but if when given to Peter, they denote the same Supremacy, then there must be two Supreme Powers over the same Family, which is a plain Contradiction.
he hath no Authority over the Officers of his Majesty's Chappel, of his Chamber, of his Stable, &c. Now the whole Church in Heaven and Earth is Christ's Family;
he hath no authority over the Officers of his Majesty's Chapel, of his Chamber, of his Stable, etc. Now the Whole Church in Heaven and Earth is Christ's Family;
pns31 vhz dx n1 p-acp dt n2 pp-f po31 ng1 n1, pp-f po31 n1, pp-f po31 j, av av dt j-jn n1 p-acp n1 cc n1 vbz npg1 n1;
That part on Earth is subdivided into particular Churches, as so many lesser Families, over which Christ hath appointed there shall be so many Stewards, one Steward over one part, another over another.
That part on Earth is subdivided into particular Churches, as so many lesser Families, over which christ hath appointed there shall be so many Stewards, one Steward over one part, Another over Another.
cst n1 p-acp n1 vbz vvn p-acp j n2, c-acp av d jc n2, p-acp r-crq np1 vhz vvn a-acp vmb vbi av d n2, crd n1 p-acp crd n1, j-jn p-acp n-jn.
Nor was the Denial of his Master, a Ray of Claritude, but by the Gentleman's own Confession an Eclipse. It was, says he, a short Eclipse, a Trip rather than a Fall, a verbal rather than a real, a labial rather than a mental Abnegation .
Nor was the Denial of his Master, a Ray of Claritude, but by the Gentleman's own Confessi an Eclipse. It was, Says he, a short Eclipse, a Trip rather than a Fallen, a verbal rather than a real, a labial rather than a mental Abnegation.
Of those several Reasons the Fathers alledge, why God permitted him to fall into this Offence, in the fourth (viz. because Christ designing him to be the SƲPREME Ruler of the Church — that he might be compassionate and favourable to poor penitent Sinners in absolving them, &c. ) I desire him to leave out the Word supreme, because it is not found in any of those Fathers he quotes for the proof of it.
Of those several Reasons the Father's allege, why God permitted him to fallen into this Offence, in the fourth (viz. Because christ designing him to be the SƲPREME Ruler of the Church — that he might be compassionate and favourable to poor penitent Sinners in absolving them, etc.) I desire him to leave out the Word supreme, Because it is not found in any of those Father's he quotes for the proof of it.
pp-f d j n2 dt n2 vvb, c-crq np1 vvd pno31 pc-acp vvi p-acp d n1, p-acp dt ord (n1 p-acp np1 vvg pno31 pc-acp vbi dt j n1 pp-f dt n1 — cst pns31 vmd vbi j cc j p-acp j j-jn n2 p-acp vvg pno32, av) pns11 vvb pno31 pc-acp vvi av dt n1 j, c-acp pn31 vbz xx vvn p-acp d pp-f d n2 pns31 vvz p-acp dt n1 pp-f pn31.
I shall not enquire the reason, why he passed over St. Peter 's other Faults, especially considering, that he found an Answer prepared to his hand by Bellarmine, but shall proceed to Chapter 5. We are now come to those Words [ Feed my Sheep ] which the Discussor finds to be strongly urged by Catholick Writers (as he calls them) in Defence of Peter 's supreme Pastoral Jurisdiction; and impugned by Protestant Authors with all their Force, &c. I never before heard of any Protestant that impugn'd the Words, but only that Sense the Papists would wrest them to;
I shall not inquire the reason, why he passed over Saint Peter is other Faults, especially considering, that he found an Answer prepared to his hand by Bellarmine, but shall proceed to Chapter 5. We Are now come to those Words [ Feed my Sheep ] which the Discusser finds to be strongly urged by Catholic Writers (as he calls them) in Defence of Peter is supreme Pastoral Jurisdiction; and impugned by Protestant Authors with all their Force, etc. I never before herd of any Protestant that impugned the Words, but only that Sense the Papists would wrest them to;
He first cites St. Austin, St. Ambrose, and Theophylact; and then interposing a Reason, he proceeds to Suetonius, Dion, Plato, Homer, Hesiod, Cyril, Xenophon, St. Basil. Methink St. Cyril and St. Basil come in a little odly among his Heathen Fathers.
He First cites Saint Austin, Saint Ambrose, and Theophylact; and then interposing a Reason, he proceeds to Suetonius, Dion, Plato, Homer, Hesiod, Cyril, Xenophon, Saint Basil. Methinks Saint Cyril and Saint Basil come in a little oddly among his Heathen Father's.
pns31 ord vvz n1 np1, n1 np1, cc vvd; cc av vvg dt n1, pns31 vvz p-acp np1, np1, np1, np1, np1, np1, np1, n1 np1 vvb n1 np1 cc n1 np1 vvb p-acp dt j av-j p-acp po31 j-jn n2.
and see if any of them denies, that NONLATINALPHABET signifies to rule as well as to feed: To what purpose then is all this waste? I must acknowledg my want of Augury to divine, unless it be to let the World see what a Man of reading he is.
and see if any of them Denies, that signifies to Rule as well as to feed: To what purpose then is all this waste? I must acknowledge my want of Augury to divine, unless it be to let the World see what a Man of reading he is.
cc vvb cs d pp-f pno32 vvz, cst vvz p-acp vvb c-acp av c-acp p-acp vvb: p-acp r-crq n1 av vbz d d n1? pns11 vmb vvi po11 n1 pp-f n1 p-acp j-jn, cs pn31 vbb pc-acp vvi dt n1 vvb r-crq dt n1 pp-f n-vvg pns31 vbz.
for Saint Paul exhorts the Elders of Ephesus, to feed the Church of God (NONLATINALPHABET) the very same word our Saviour here used to Saint Peter. And Saint Peter himself uses the same word in his Exhortation to the Jewish Elders (NONLATINALPHABET) Feed the Flock of God which is among you .
for Saint Paul exhorts the Elders of Ephesus, to feed the Church of God () the very same word our Saviour Here used to Saint Peter. And Saint Peter himself uses the same word in his Exhortation to the Jewish Elders () Feed the Flock of God which is among you.
Yea the Council of Trent (which to a Papist is of as great Authority as the Holy Scripture) after it hath shewed what is the Duty of all those who have the charge of Souls, admonishes and exhorts them all, That being mindful of the Divine Commands,
Yea the Council of Trent (which to a Papist is of as great authority as the Holy Scripture) After it hath showed what is the Duty of all those who have the charge of Souls, admonishes and exhorts them all, That being mindful of the Divine Commands,
How vain then is Cardinal Bellarmin, when he says, That from this word it is easy to demonstrate, That supreme Ecclesiastical Power is given to Peter .
How vain then is Cardinal Bellarmin, when he Says, That from this word it is easy to demonstrate, That supreme Ecclesiastical Power is given to Peter.
Now though it is granted that NONLATINALPHABET signifies to rule as well as to feed, yet I deny the reason he gives for it, viz. To this very intent our Saviour changed the word NONLATINALPHABET, which implies not all the Functions of Pastoral Authority,
Now though it is granted that signifies to Rule as well as to feed, yet I deny the reason he gives for it, viz. To this very intent our Saviour changed the word, which Implies not all the Functions of Pastoral authority,
av cs pn31 vbz vvn cst vvz p-acp vvb c-acp av c-acp p-acp vvb, av pns11 vvb dt n1 pns31 vvz p-acp pn31, n1 p-acp d j n1 po12 n1 vvn dt n1, r-crq vvz xx d dt n2 pp-f n-jn n1,
Will he then stand to whatsoever Erasmus hath observed in his Notes upon the Scripture? If so, he must renounce several Articles of his new Roman Faith.
Will he then stand to whatsoever Erasmus hath observed in his Notes upon the Scripture? If so, he must renounce several Articles of his new Roman Faith.
so far was he from this, that when he presently reckons up the several ways by which the Sheep are to be fed, he doth not so much as mention this of ruling or governing. To let him see of what force his Reason is, suppose a Man should say, that our Saviour by NONLATINALPHABET meant no more than to feed, might he not with as much reason say, that to this intent he changed the word NONLATINALPHABET into NONLATINALPHABET;
so Far was he from this, that when he presently reckons up the several ways by which the Sheep Are to be fed, he does not so much as mention this of ruling or governing. To let him see of what force his Reason is, suppose a Man should say, that our Saviour by meant no more than to feed, might he not with as much reason say, that to this intent he changed the word into;
av av-j vbds pns31 p-acp d, cst c-crq pns31 av-j vvz a-acp dt j n2 p-acp r-crq dt n1 vbr pc-acp vbi vvn, pns31 vdz xx av av-d c-acp vvi d pp-f vvg cc vvg. pc-acp vvi pno31 vvi pp-f r-crq n1 po31 n1 vbz, vvb dt n1 vmd vvi, cst po12 n1 p-acp vvd dx dc cs p-acp vvb, vmd pns31 xx p-acp c-acp d n1 vvb, cst p-acp d n1 pns31 vvd dt n1 p-acp;
for as he first changed NONLATINALPHABET into NONLATINALPHABET, so he again changed NONLATINALPHABET into NONLATINALPHABET being used both in the first and third, and NONLATINALPHABET in the second Interrogation.
for as he First changed into, so he again changed into being used both in the First and third, and in the second Interrogation.
c-acp c-acp pns31 ord vvd p-acp, av pns31 av vvd p-acp vbg vvn av-d p-acp dt ord cc ord, cc p-acp dt ord n1.
And that not five only, but all of them came to Hebron, and spake the words, he mentions, to David, he may find, 2 Sam. 5. 1, 2, 3. 1 Chron. 11. 1, 2, 3. And if he please to consult 1 Chron. 12. from ver. 23. to the end, he may find how many of each Tribe were then present.
And that not five only, but all of them Come to Hebron, and spoke the words, he mentions, to David, he may find, 2 Sam. 5. 1, 2, 3. 1 Chronicles 11. 1, 2, 3. And if he please to consult 1 Chronicles 12. from for. 23. to the end, he may find how many of each Tribe were then present.
cc cst xx crd j, cc-acp d pp-f pno32 vvd p-acp np1, cc vvd dt n2, pns31 n2, pc-acp np1, pns31 vmb vvi, crd np1 crd crd, crd, crd crd np1 crd crd, crd, crd cc cs pns31 vvb pc-acp vvi crd np1 crd p-acp p-acp. crd p-acp dt n1, pns31 vmb vvi c-crq d pp-f d n1 vbdr av j.
For though he grants, that the other Apostles had most full and ample Power to found Churches every where, to convert, baptize, and preach to every Creature;
For though he grants, that the other Apostles had most full and ample Power to found Churches every where, to convert, baptise, and preach to every Creature;
p-acp cs pns31 vvz, cst dt j-jn n2 vhd av-ds j cc j n1 p-acp vvn n2 d c-crq, pc-acp vvi, vvi, cc vvi p-acp d n1;
yet notwithstanding all this, they did not equalize Peter — For he by Virtue of these our Saviour's Words was created, not only chief Pastor of all other Christians,
yet notwithstanding all this, they did not equalise Peter — For he by Virtue of these our Saviour's Words was created, not only chief Pastor of all other Christians,
av p-acp d d, pns32 vdd xx vvi np1 — p-acp pns31 p-acp n1 pp-f d po12 ng1 n2 vbds vvn, xx av-j j-jn n1 pp-f d j-jn np1,
3. He next contends, that these Words, feed my Sheep, contain à Commission, in Opposition to Dr. Hammond, Dr. Stillingfleet, and Dr. Barrow, who affirm them to be an Exhortation:
3. He next contends, that these Words, feed my Sheep, contain à Commission, in Opposition to Dr. Hammond, Dr. Stillingfleet, and Dr. Barrow, who affirm them to be an Exhortation:
crd pns31 ord vvz, cst d n2, vvb po11 n1, vvb fw-fr n1, p-acp n1 p-acp n1 np1, n1 np1, cc n1 np1, r-crq vvb pno32 pc-acp vbi dt n1:
Dr. Hammond, (he tells us) says of this Text, All that can by any Torture be extracted from it, is an Exhortation to a diligent Discharge of that Office to which he was before commissioned .
Dr. Hammond, (he tells us) Says of this Text, All that can by any Torture be extracted from it, is an Exhortation to a diligent Discharge of that Office to which he was before commissioned.
n1 np1, (pns31 vvz pno12) vvz pp-f d n1, d cst vmb p-acp d n1 vbi vvn p-acp pn31, vbz dt n1 p-acp dt j n1 pp-f d n1 p-acp r-crq pns31 vbds a-acp vvn.
Is then every Command of a Lord to his Servant a Commission? A Commission, I thought had ever conveyed some Power, which the Person had not, before he received that Commission.
Is then every Command of a Lord to his Servant a Commission? A Commission, I Thought had ever conveyed Some Power, which the Person had not, before he received that Commission.
vbz av d n1 pp-f dt n1 p-acp po31 n1 dt n1? dt n1, pns11 vvd vhd av vvn d n1, r-crq dt n1 vhd xx, c-acp pns31 vvd cst n1.
His fourth Argument, saith the Doctor, is, that Pasce being expressed imperatively, and spoken by a Lord to his Servant, ought in all reason to signify a Command;
His fourth Argument, Says the Doctor, is, that Paske being expressed imperatively, and spoken by a Lord to his Servant, ought in all reason to signify a Command;
po31 ord n1, vvz dt n1, vbz, cst n1 vbg vvn av-j, cc vvn p-acp dt n1 p-acp po31 n1, vmd p-acp d n1 pc-acp vvi dt n1;
and the Words expressing this Command are in a particular manner spoken to Peter, it follows, that St. Peter had by them a particular Commission given him to feed Christ's Flock.
and the Words expressing this Command Are in a particular manner spoken to Peter, it follows, that Saint Peter had by them a particular Commission given him to feed Christ's Flock.
an hundred perhaps in a Day, and is there any Colour of Probability for each of these Commands, that it should be the giving a Commission? If there be, it must be founded in the Equivocalness of the word Commission,
an hundred perhaps in a Day, and is there any Colour of Probability for each of these Commands, that it should be the giving a Commission? If there be, it must be founded in the Equivocalness of the word Commission,
dt crd av p-acp dt n1, cc vbz pc-acp d n1 pp-f n1 p-acp d pp-f d vvz, cst pn31 vmd vbi dt vvg dt n1? cs pc-acp vbi, pn31 vmb vbi vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1 n1,
so as not only the Conveying the Power and Authority, or Office shall be meant by it (which is the ordinary Notion) but the giving out any Order . Thus the Doctor.
so as not only the Conveying the Power and authority, or Office shall be meant by it (which is the ordinary Notion) but the giving out any Order. Thus the Doctor.
av c-acp xx av-j dt vvg dt n1 cc n1, cc n1 vmb vbi vvn p-acp pn31 (r-crq vbz dt j n1) p-acp dt vvg av d n1. av dt n1.
by those other Words, As my Father sent me, so send I you, &c. The necessary Consequence of which is, that they could not contain a Commission properly so call'd.
by those other Words, As my Father sent me, so send I you, etc. The necessary Consequence of which is, that they could not contain a Commission properly so called.
p-acp d j-jn n2, p-acp po11 n1 vvd pno11, av vvb pns11 pn22, av dt j n1 pp-f r-crq vbz, cst pns32 vmd xx vvi dt n1 av-j av vvn.
But he finds the Fathers looking upon these Words, as a Command, Commission, Injunction, (he still confounds Command and Commission) as a great Trust committed to him:
But he finds the Father's looking upon these Words, as a Command, Commission, Injunction, (he still confounds Command and Commission) as a great Trust committed to him:
p-acp pns31 vvz dt n2 vvg p-acp d n2, c-acp dt vvb, n1, n1, (pns31 av vvz n1 cc n1) p-acp dt j n1 vvn p-acp pno31:
That the words, Pasce oves meas, include Peter 's Restauration to his Apostleship, the Discussor grants to Dr. Barrow: Tho if he fell from it, I think he was restored to it before,
That the words, Paske Owes meas, include Peter is Restauration to his Apostleship, the Discusser grants to Dr. Barrow: Though if he fell from it, I think he was restored to it before,
and had others committed to their Government as well as he? Mark by the way, That he hath chang'd accepit into accipit, seipse into seipsum, and which is very observable, rexit not into rexerat, but regerat, a word for which the Grammar hath neither Mood nor Tense.
and had Others committed to their Government as well as he? Mark by the Way, That he hath changed accepit into accipit, seipse into seipsum, and which is very observable, rexit not into rexerat, but regerat, a word for which the Grammar hath neither Mood nor Tense.
cc vhd ng2-jn vvn p-acp po32 n1 c-acp av c-acp pns31? n1 p-acp dt n1, cst pns31 vhz vvn fw-la p-acp fw-la, n1 p-acp fw-la, cc r-crq vbz av j, fw-la xx p-acp j, p-acp j, dt n1 p-acp r-crq dt n1 vhz dx n1 ccx n1.
but the words, allowing for those alterations he hath made, are in his 48th Sermon de Tempore. As little to the purpose is the other passage of St. Ambrose: Petrus Ecclesiae praeponitur, postquam tentatus à Diabolo est:
but the words, allowing for those alterations he hath made, Are in his 48th Sermon de Tempore. As little to the purpose is the other passage of Saint Ambrose: Peter Ecclesiae praeponitur, Postquam tentatus à Diabolo est:
when it was said to them, Teach all Nations, &c. For before his Fall, their Commission was limited to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel; but now extended to Gentiles as well as Jews. Tho by the way, this is none of St. Austin's, but taken out of a Sermon falsly ascribed to him,
when it was said to them, Teach all nations, etc. For before his Fallen, their Commission was limited to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel; but now extended to Gentiles as well as jews. Though by the Way, this is none of Saint Austin's, but taken out of a Sermon falsely ascribed to him,
c-crq pn31 vbds vvn p-acp pno32, vvb d n2, av c-acp p-acp po31 n1, po32 n1 vbds vvn p-acp dt j-vvn n1 pp-f dt n1 pp-f np1; p-acp av vvn p-acp n2-j c-acp av c-acp np2. av p-acp dt n1, d vbz pix pp-f n1 npg1, p-acp vvn av pp-f dt n1 av-j vvn p-acp pno31,
whereas after his Resurrection, Christ enlarged his Commission, but made it no larger than that of the other Apostles. But St. Chrysostom says — He so wash'd away that Sin,
whereas After his Resurrection, christ enlarged his Commission, but made it no larger than that of the other Apostles. But Saint Chrysostom Says — He so washed away that since,
cs p-acp po31 n1, np1 vvd po31 n1, cc-acp vvd pn31 av-dx jc cs d pp-f dt j-jn n2. p-acp n1 np1 vvz — pns31 av vvn av d n1,
Besides it is observable, that St. Chrysostom presently after his Comment upon Feed my Sheep, says, that St. John as well as St. Peter received the Government of the whole World.
Beside it is observable, that Saint Chrysostom presently After his Comment upon Feed my Sheep, Says, that Saint John as well as Saint Peter received the Government of the Whole World.
His next Assault is upon a Quotation out of S. Austin, and then upon another out of St. Basil produced by his Antagonist to prove that the Words, feed my Sheep were spoken to the rest as well as to Peter; but so feeble is his Attempt that there's no Danger.
His next Assault is upon a Quotation out of S. Austin, and then upon Another out of Saint Basil produced by his Antagonist to prove that the Words, feed my Sheep were spoken to the rest as well as to Peter; but so feeble is his Attempt that there's no Danger.
po31 ord n1 vbz p-acp dt n1 av pp-f n1 np1, cc av p-acp j-jn av pp-f n1 np1 vvn p-acp po31 n1 pc-acp vvi cst dt n2, vvb po11 n1 vbdr vvn p-acp dt n1 c-acp av c-acp pc-acp np1; p-acp av j vbz po31 vvb cst pc-acp|vbz dx n1.
Non sine causa inter omnes Apostolos hujus Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustinet Petrus, huic enim Ecclesiae claves regni Coelorum datae sunt, cum Petro datae sunt;
Non sine causa inter omnes Apostles hujus Ecclesiae Catholic Personam Sustinet Peter, huic enim Ecclesiae claves Regni Coelorum Datae sunt, cum Peter Datae sunt;
& cum ei dicitur, &c. And what now? Here, says he, you are to understand that in his Judgment Peter only of all the Apostles personated the Catholick Church.
& cum ei dicitur, etc. And what now? Here, Says he, you Are to understand that in his Judgement Peter only of all the Apostles personated the Catholic Church.
cc fw-la fw-la fw-la, av cc q-crq av? av, vvz pns31, pn22 vbr pc-acp vvi cst p-acp po31 n1 np1 av-j pp-f d dt n2 vvn dt njp n1.
In this only Sense, those words which were immediately spoken to Peter, are said to be spoken to all the rest, they being all comprised in him, as their Chief.
In this only Sense, those words which were immediately spoken to Peter, Are said to be spoken to all the rest, they being all comprised in him, as their Chief.
p-acp d j n1, d n2 r-crq vbdr av-j vvn p-acp np1, vbr vvn pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp d dt n1, pns32 vbg d vvn p-acp pno31, c-acp po32 n-jn.
What is there here that is so destructive and fatal to our purpose? Does this set Peter above the rest of the Apostles? Had not Christ before created every one of them Pastor of his Church after himself? But see now what follows, And giving henceforth to all Pastors and Teachers an equal Power;
What is there Here that is so destructive and fatal to our purpose? Does this Set Peter above the rest of the Apostles? Had not christ before created every one of them Pastor of his Church After himself? But see now what follows, And giving henceforth to all Pastors and Teachers an equal Power;
q-crq vbz a-acp av cst vbz av j cc j p-acp po12 n1? vdz d j-vvn np1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n2? vhd xx np1 a-acp vvn d crd pp-f pno32 n1 pp-f po31 n1 p-acp px31? p-acp vvi av q-crq vvz, cc vvg av p-acp d ng1 cc n2 dt j-jn n1;
he says in these, that he conferred to all Pastors and Teachers, not a Power subordinate, but equal to that he gave to Peter: Whereof this is a sign, that they do all bind and loose, not in subjection to him,
he Says in these, that he conferred to all Pastors and Teachers, not a Power subordinate, but equal to that he gave to Peter: Whereof this is a Signen, that they do all bind and lose, not in subjection to him,
pns31 vvz p-acp d, cst pns31 vvd p-acp d ng1 cc n2, xx dt n1 j, p-acp j-jn p-acp cst pns31 vvd p-acp np1: c-crq d vbz dt n1, cst pns32 vdb d vvi cc vvi, xx p-acp n1 p-acp pno31,
but that alone which is the main thing in Debate, viz. That Peter as supreme Pastor had Authority of feeding the universal Church, including both the Apostles and other Christians .
but that alone which is the main thing in Debate, viz. That Peter as supreme Pastor had authority of feeding the universal Church, including both the Apostles and other Christians.
The first from the Question, Lovest thou me more than these? The second from the Injunction, Feed MY SHEEP. The Vanity of his Attempt will soon appear.
The First from the Question, Lovest thou me more than these? The second from the Injunction, Feed MY SHEEP. The Vanity of his Attempt will soon appear.
dt ord p-acp dt n1, vv2 pns21 pno11 av-dc cs d? dt ord p-acp dt n1, vvb po11 n1. dt n1 pp-f po31 vvb n1 av vvi.
1. If Christ, says he, had designed him to be no more a Pastor than any of the rest, the Question had been more rationally stated thus, Simon Jona, do you love me AS MƲCH as any of the other do? but our Savior asking him,
1. If christ, Says he, had designed him to be no more a Pastor than any of the rest, the Question had been more rationally stated thus, Simon Jonah, do you love me AS MƲCH as any of the other doe? but our Saviour asking him,
To the same purpose Dr. Tho. G. says, to take away all Suspicion, as if he meant not to give him an Authority above that of the rest of his Brethren, he asked him not only if he loved him,
To the same purpose Dr. Tho. G. Says, to take away all Suspicion, as if he meant not to give him an authority above that of the rest of his Brothers, he asked him not only if he loved him,
p-acp dt d n1 n1 np1 np1 vvz, pc-acp vvi av d n1, c-acp cs pns31 vvd xx pc-acp vvi pno31 dt n1 p-acp d pp-f dt n1 pp-f po31 n2, pns31 vvd pno31 xx av-j cs pns31 vvd pno31,
This, adds the Discussor, seems to me most serenely to be the native and genuine meaning of of our Saviour's Question, disarray'd of all Heretical Depravation (rarely elegant!) otherwise I desire to know to what Purpose and Designment was the Interrogation of a greater Degree of Love.
This, adds the Discusser, seems to me most serenely to be the native and genuine meaning of of our Saviour's Question, disarrayed of all Heretical Depravation (rarely elegant!) otherwise I desire to know to what Purpose and Designment was the Interrogation of a greater Degree of Love.
The Interrogation is of a greater degree of Love, with respect to that Profession Peter had formerly made, tho all should be offended because of thee,
The Interrogation is of a greater degree of Love, with respect to that Profession Peter had formerly made, though all should be offended Because of thee,
dt n1 vbz pp-f dt jc n1 pp-f n1, p-acp n1 p-acp d n1 np1 vhd av-j vvn, av d vmd vbi vvn p-acp pp-f pno21,
Where Peter having professed a Love to Christ above all the rest, and yet when he was put upon the Trial, having failed more than any of them, by thrice denying him;
Where Peter having professed a Love to christ above all the rest, and yet when he was put upon the Trial, having failed more than any of them, by thrice denying him;
q-crq np1 vhg vvn dt n1 p-acp np1 p-acp d dt n1, cc av c-crq pns31 vbds vvn p-acp dt n1, vhg vvn av-dc cs d pp-f pno32, p-acp av vvg pno31;
our Saviour therefore puts the Question comparatively, Lovest thou me more than these? Art thou still as confident as thou wast heretofore, that thou hast a greater Love for me than these have? To which he now returns a more modest Answer, professing only the Sincerity of his Love,
our Saviour Therefore puts the Question comparatively, Lovest thou me more than these? Art thou still as confident as thou wast heretofore, that thou hast a greater Love for me than these have? To which he now returns a more modest Answer, professing only the Sincerity of his Love,
As much as to say, I have now learnt by sad Experience, not to prefer my self before others, I will not therefore say, that I love thee more than any of my fellow-Disciples,
As much as to say, I have now learned by sad Experience, not to prefer my self before Others, I will not Therefore say, that I love thee more than any of my Fellow-disciples,
p-acp d c-acp pc-acp vvi, pns11 vhb av vvn p-acp j n1, xx pc-acp vvi po11 n1 p-acp n2-jn, pns11 vmb xx av vvi, cst pns11 vvb pno21 av-dc cs d pp-f po11 n2,
And therefore that Peter loved Christ more than any of the other Apostles, (though it were certain that he did so) cannot be concluded from this Question, much less, that this his egregious Love was the Motive that induc'd Christ to grant him this Commission, (as the Discussor words it;) and less yet, that Christ by commanding him to feed his Sheep, did declare him to be the greatest Lover.
And Therefore that Peter loved christ more than any of the other Apostles, (though it were certain that he did so) cannot be concluded from this Question, much less, that this his egregious Love was the Motive that induced christ to grant him this Commission, (as the Discusser words it;) and less yet, that christ by commanding him to feed his Sheep, did declare him to be the greatest Lover.
cc av d np1 vvd np1 av-dc cs d pp-f dt j-jn n2, (cs pn31 vbdr j cst pns31 vdd av) vmbx vbi vvn p-acp d n1, av-d av-dc, cst d po31 j n1 vbds dt n1 cst vvd np1 pc-acp vvi pno31 d n1, (c-acp dt n1 n2 pn31;) cc av-dc av, cst np1 p-acp vvg pno31 pc-acp vvi po31 n1, vdd vvi pno31 pc-acp vbi dt js n1.
The feeding of his Sheep being enjoyn'd, as an Expression of his Love only, and not of his greater Love. If thou lovest me as thou professest, give proof of thy Love to me by feeding my Sheep.
The feeding of his Sheep being enjoined, as an Expression of his Love only, and not of his greater Love. If thou Lovest me as thou professest, give proof of thy Love to me by feeding my Sheep.
There is therefore no need to determine, whether Peter 's Love surpassed that of all the other Apostles, since all that is here upon the Profession of his Love required of him,
There is Therefore no need to determine, whither Peter is Love surpassed that of all the other Apostles, since all that is Here upon the Profession of his Love required of him,
pc-acp vbz av dx n1 pc-acp vvi, cs np1 vbz n1 vvn d pp-f d dt j-jn n2, p-acp d cst vbz av p-acp dt n1 pp-f po31 n1 vvd pp-f pno31,
so that supposing him never such a raging, ardent, mad Lover of Christ (as the Discussor very handsomly renders St. Chrysostom 's words) and that this Love was the Ground of the Trust here committed to him, it cannot hence with any colour of Reason be inferr'd, that he was advanc'd to any the least Superiority over them.
so that supposing him never such a raging, Ardent, mad Lover of christ (as the Discusser very handsomely renders Saint Chrysostom is words) and that this Love was the Ground of the Trust Here committed to him, it cannot hence with any colour of Reason be inferred, that he was advanced to any the least Superiority over them.
av cst vvg pno31 av d dt vvg, j, j n1 pp-f np1 (c-acp dt n1 av av-j vvz n1 np1 vbz n1) cc cst d n1 vbds dt n1 pp-f dt n1 av vvn p-acp pno31, pn31 vmbx av p-acp d n1 pp-f n1 vbb vvn, cst pns31 vbds vvn p-acp d dt ds n1 p-acp pno32.
and I may pass over the two next Pages as impertinent, except one Passage which deserves an Asterisk, (had we not met with something like it before) That according to the Proportion and Measure of his Love, was the Extension and Latitude of his Power .
and I may pass over the two next Pages as impertinent, except one Passage which deserves an Asterisk, (had we not met with something like it before) That according to the Proportion and Measure of his Love, was the Extension and Latitude of his Power.
cc pns11 vmb vvi p-acp dt crd ord n2 p-acp j, c-acp crd n1 r-crq vvz dt j, (vhn pns12 xx vvn p-acp pi av-j pn31 a-acp) d vvg p-acp dt n1 cc n1 pp-f po31 n1, vbds dt n1 cc n1 pp-f po31 n1.
If the Pope's Power have the same measure, to what a narrow Compass will it be reduc'd? For if we may judge their Love, by what their own Writers tell us of the Fruits of it, in many of their Lives, there is no honest Curate who will not be admitted, not only to be an equal Sharer, but to be his Superior in this Pastoral Commission.
If the Pope's Power have the same measure, to what a narrow Compass will it be reduced? For if we may judge their Love, by what their own Writers tell us of the Fruits of it, in many of their Lives, there is no honest Curate who will not be admitted, not only to be an equal Sharer, but to be his Superior in this Pastoral Commission.
2. The second Argument is taken from the Injunction, Feed MY SHEEP. The words Oves meas, says the Discussor, do impale and infold all Christ's Sheep in general,
2. The second Argument is taken from the Injunction, Feed MY SHEEP. The words Owes meas, Says the Discusser, do impale and enfold all Christ's Sheep in general,
crd dt ord n1 vbz vvn p-acp dt n1, vvb po11 n1. dt n2 n2 fw-la, vvz dt n1, vdb vvi cc vvi d npg1 n1 p-acp n1,
And he deliver'd to him, says Dr. Tho. G. the supreme Charge or Superintendency of things in order to the feeding of his Flock, not only of his Lambs, but of his Sheep;
And he Delivered to him, Says Dr. Tho. G. the supreme Charge or Superintendency of things in order to the feeding of his Flock, not only of his Lambs, but of his Sheep;
The Discussor hath offer'd two Arguments why Oves meas must be taken in this latitude. (1.) Because the words are deliver'd indefinitely. (2.) Because this was the sense of St. Bernard, and some other Fathers.
The Discusser hath offered two Arguments why Owes meas must be taken in this latitude. (1.) Because the words Are Delivered indefinitely. (2.) Because this was the sense of Saint Bernard, and Some other Father's.
dt n1 vhz vvn crd n2 c-crq vvz fw-la vmb vbi vvn p-acp d n1. (crd) p-acp dt n2 vbr vvn av-j. (crd) p-acp d vbds dt n1 pp-f n1 np1, cc d j-jn n2.
What will not Men say, who are resolved to serve a Cause? Could any unprejudic'd Person have ever so much as dream'd, that by Feed my Sheep Christ meant, be thou Lord over all thy fellow-Apostles? But let us consider the Reasons he gives.
What will not Men say, who Are resolved to serve a Cause? Could any unprejudiced Person have ever so much as dreamed, that by Feed my Sheep christ meant, be thou Lord over all thy fellow-Apostles? But let us Consider the Reasons he gives.
q-crq vmb xx n2 vvi, r-crq vbr vvn pc-acp vvi dt n1? vmd d j n1 vhb av av av-d c-acp vvd, cst p-acp vvb po11 n1 np1 vvd, vbb pns21 n1 p-acp d po21 n2? cc-acp vvb pno12 vvi dt n2 pns31 vvz.
(1.) Whether every indefinite Expression be to be understood universally. For instance, when Christ said to Peter, Thou shalt henceforth catch Men, whether it was meant simply and without exception, all the Men in the World? Who does not know that an indefinite Proposition is equivalent sometimes to an Universal, sometimes to a Particular? That when its parts are not necessarily connected, it is equivalent to a Particular only? But he thinks to defend himself by the great Name of St. Basil, who says, That which is indefinite comprehends all.
(1.) Whither every indefinite Expression be to be understood universally. For instance, when christ said to Peter, Thou shalt henceforth catch Men, whither it was meant simply and without exception, all the Men in the World? Who does not know that an indefinite Proposition is equivalent sometime to an Universal, sometime to a Particular? That when its parts Are not necessarily connected, it is equivalent to a Particular only? But he thinks to defend himself by the great Name of Saint Basil, who Says, That which is indefinite comprehends all.
(crd) cs d j n1 vbb pc-acp vbi vvn av-j. p-acp n1, c-crq np1 vvd p-acp np1, pns21 vm2 av vvi n2, cs pn31 vbds vvn av-j cc p-acp n1, d dt n2 p-acp dt n1? q-crq vdz xx vvi cst dt j n1 vbz j av p-acp dt j-u, av p-acp dt j? cst c-crq po31 n2 vbr xx av-j vvn, pn31 vbz j p-acp dt j-jn av-j? p-acp pns31 vvz pc-acp vvi px31 p-acp dt j n1 pp-f n1 np1, r-crq vvz, cst r-crq vbz j vvz d.
(2.) Whether all Nations, and every Creature be not words of as large extent as my Sheep? Or whether the two former (being expresly universal) do not extend to more than the later? And if so,
(2.) Whither all nations, and every Creature be not words of as large extent as my Sheep? Or whither the two former (being expressly universal) do not extend to more than the later? And if so,
(crd) cs d n2, cc d n1 vbb xx n2 pp-f a-acp j n1 c-acp po11 n1? cc cs dt crd j (vbg av-j j) vdb xx vvi p-acp dc cs dt jc? cc cs av,
2. But this was likewise St. Bernard 's sense, lib. 2. de Conf. ad Eugenium (he was unlucky in adding an f to Con. for I do not yet understand how Conf. should be a contraction of Consideratione) Si me amas Petre, pasce Oves, inquit:
2. But this was likewise Saint Bernard is sense, lib. 2. de Confutation ad Eugenium (he was unlucky in adding an f to Con. for I do not yet understand how Confutation should be a contraction of Consideration) Si me amas Petre, Paske Owes, inquit:
Cui non planum non designâsse aliquas, sed assignâsse omnes? nihil excipitur, ubi nihil distinguitur. Why does he not say, it was the sense of the Infallible Judg of Controversies, Pope Innocent III? His Authority might perhaps have been of weight with some who think St. Bernard 's is too light;
Cui non Planum non designâsse aliquas, sed assignâsse omnes? nihil excipitur, ubi nihil distinguitur. Why does he not say, it was the sense of the Infallible Judge of Controversies, Pope Innocent III? His authority might perhaps have been of weight with Some who think Saint Bernard is is too Light;
Or if he will subscribe to this one Passage in his 6th Sermon on Psal. 90. where after he had complain'd of the monstrous Corruptions of the Church of Rome, It remains, says he, that the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition, not the Day-Devil only,
Or if he will subscribe to this one Passage in his 6th Sermon on Psalm 90. where After he had complained of the monstrous Corruptions of the Church of Rome, It remains, Says he, that the Man of since, the Son of Perdition, not the Day-Devil only,
but the Noonday-Devil, be revealed, which is not only transform'd into an Angel of Light, but is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshipp'd .
but the Noonday-Devil, be revealed, which is not only transformed into an Angel of Light, but is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshipped.
cc-acp dt n1, vbb vvn, r-crq vbz xx av-j vvn p-acp dt n1 pp-f n1, cc-acp vbz vvn p-acp d cst vbz vvn np1, cc d vbz vvn.
But be his Authority never so little, what is wanting in him, will, he may think, be made up by the Testimonies of St. Chrysostom and Theophylact, which he hath added to him.
But be his authority never so little, what is wanting in him, will, he may think, be made up by the Testimonies of Saint Chrysostom and Theophylact, which he hath added to him.
St. Chrysostom says, Christ foretold St. Peter great things, and deliver'd the World into his Hands. Again, Christ deliver'd into his Hands the Government of the Oecumenical Church.
Saint Chrysostom Says, christ foretold Saint Peter great things, and Delivered the World into his Hands. Again, christ Delivered into his Hands the Government of the Ecumenical Church.
So that in their account St. Bartholomew 's, no less than St. Peter 's Power, was not confined within the limited Tropicks of any particular Kingdom or Regions;
So that in their account Saint Bartholomew is, no less than Saint Peter is Power, was not confined within the limited Tropics of any particular Kingdom or Regions;
av cst p-acp po32 n1 n1 np1 vbz, av-dx av-dc cs n1 np1 vbz n1, vbds xx vvn p-acp dt j-vvn np2 pp-f d j n1 cc n2;
but without any Boundary or Horizon to terminate it, without any Shores or Frontiers to restrain it, was stretched and extended over the vast Ʋniverse.
but without any Boundary or Horizon to terminate it, without any Shores or Frontiers to restrain it, was stretched and extended over the vast Ʋniverse.
cc-acp p-acp d j cc n1 pc-acp vvi pn31, p-acp d n2 cc n2 pc-acp vvi pn31, vbds vvn cc vvn p-acp dt j n1.
This is no more that what is affirm'd by the Romanist before quoted, and by him return'd in answer to these places of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and others of the like Nature.
This is no more that what is affirmed by the Romanist before quoted, and by him returned in answer to these places of Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Others of the like Nature.
d vbz av-dx av-dc cst r-crq vbz vvn p-acp dt np1 a-acp vvn, cc p-acp pno31 vvd p-acp n1 p-acp d n2 pp-f np1, vvd, cc n2-jn pp-f dt j n1.
As St. Leo in his 3 d Sermon of the Assumption, Gregory in his 4th Book, and 32. Epist. Theophylact upon the last Chapter of John, and before these Chrysostom, in his 87th Homily upon John, and his 80th to the People of Antioch , also in his 6th against the Jews:
As Saint Leo in his 3 worser Sermon of the Assump, Gregory in his 4th Book, and 32. Epistle Theophylact upon the last Chapter of John, and before these Chrysostom, in his 87th Homily upon John, and his 80th to the People of Antioch, also in his 6th against the jews:
p-acp n1 np1 p-acp po31 crd jc n1 pp-f dt n1, np1 p-acp po31 ord n1, cc crd np1 vvd p-acp dt ord n1 pp-f np1, cc p-acp d np1, p-acp po31 ord n1 p-acp np1, cc po31 ord p-acp dt n1 pp-f np1, av p-acp po31 ord p-acp dt np2:
So Chrysostom does not scruple to call Timothy Bishop of the whole World, and Paul often, especially in his second Homily of the Praises of St. Paul.
So Chrysostom does not scruple to call Timothy Bishop of the Whole World, and Paul often, especially in his second Homily of the Praises of Saint Paul.
np1 np1 vdz xx n1 pc-acp vvi np1 n1 pp-f dt j-jn n1, cc np1 av, av-j p-acp po31 ord n1 pp-f dt n2 pp-f n1 np1.
Therefore the Sheep of the whole World may be said to be committed to Peter, because he received the Sheep, not of any one certain Kingdom or place to be governed by him,
Therefore the Sheep of the Whole World may be said to be committed to Peter, Because he received the Sheep, not of any one certain Kingdom or place to be governed by him,
av dt n1 pp-f dt j-jn n1 vmb vbi vvn pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp np1, c-acp pns31 vvd dt n1, xx pp-f d crd j n1 cc n1 pc-acp vbi vvn p-acp pno31,
And the Discussor , who tells us again and again, that all the Apostles were Heads, Rectors and Pastors of the universal Church, and that the whole World was their Diocess.
And the Discusser, who tells us again and again, that all the Apostles were Heads, Rectors and Pastors of the universal Church, and that the Whole World was their Diocese.
cc dt n1, r-crq vvz pno12 av cc av, cst d dt n2 vbdr n2, n2 cc ng1 pp-f dt j n1, cc d dt j-jn n1 vbds po32 n1.
Having seen that the Testimontes cited by the Discussor are of no force, I would now have proceeded to shew that the Ancients were so far from taking these Words to contain any Power peculiar to St. Peter, that they thought, not only that the other Apostles, but all Christian Bishops were as much concern'd in them, as he was;
Having seen that the Testimontes cited by the Discusser Are of no force, I would now have proceeded to show that the Ancients were so Far from taking these Words to contain any Power peculiar to Saint Peter, that they Thought, not only that the other Apostles, but all Christian Bishops were as much concerned in them, as he was;
vhg vvn d dt np1 vvd p-acp dt n1 vbr pp-f dx n1, pns11 vmd av vhi vvn pc-acp vvi cst dt n2-j vbdr av av-j p-acp vvg d n2 pc-acp vvi d n1 j p-acp n1 np1, cst pns32 vvd, xx av-j d dt j-jn n2, p-acp d njp n2 vbdr c-acp av-d vvn p-acp pno32, c-acp pns31 vbds;
or reserving any Prerogative for St. Peter. This, I say, I would now have proceeded to, had I not found the Work already done not only by Protestants,
or reserving any Prerogative for Saint Peter. This, I say, I would now have proceeded to, had I not found the Work already done not only by Protestants,
cc vvg d n1 p-acp n1 np1. d, pns11 vvb, pns11 vmd av vhi vvn p-acp, vhd pns11 xx vvn dt n1 av vdi xx av-j p-acp n2,
as that Christ said Oves meas, not tuas. That he said, pasce Oves not Pastores. That it was not said, confirma Filios or Servos or Subditos, but Fratres. Now though there be good reason and ground for these Distinctions,
as that christ said Owes meas, not tuas. That he said, Paske Owes not Pastors. That it was not said, confirma Sons or Servos or Subject, but Brothers. Now though there be good reason and ground for these Distinctions,
c-acp cst np1 vvd vvz fw-la, xx vvi. cst pns31 vvd, av-j vvz xx ng1. cst pn31 vbds xx vvn, fw-la n2 cc np1 cc n2, p-acp fw-la. av cs pc-acp vbi j n1 cc n1 p-acp d n2,
He need not prove this, to procure their Exemption, unless the Discussor first prove that every Indefinite is equivalent to a Ʋniversal. But he says, If they were his Sheep, they were under the Denomination of Oves meas, recommended to Peter 's Shepherdly Government. If so,
He need not prove this, to procure their Exemption, unless the Discusser First prove that every Indefinite is equivalent to a Ʋniversal. But he Says, If they were his Sheep, they were under the Denomination of Owes meas, recommended to Peter is Shepherdly Government. If so,
But the Truth is, by Oves meas he meant neither him, nor the other Apostles, who as they are Apostles, are never reckoned as Sheep, but as Shepherds, and therefore not to be fed themselves by any,
But the Truth is, by Owes meas he meant neither him, nor the other Apostles, who as they Are Apostles, Are never reckoned as Sheep, but as Shepherd's, and Therefore not to be fed themselves by any,
Now that I may not be behind-hand with him in Kindness, but may shew my self as fair an Antagonist, as he is, I will make him the like offer, by which he will perceive how concluding his Argument is.
Now that I may not be behindhand with him in Kindness, but may show my self as fair an Antagonist, as he is, I will make him the like offer, by which he will perceive how concluding his Argument is.
He will not yet let the Fathers rest, but summons them again to give in evidence for Peter 's Power over the Apostles, which he will never be able to extort from them.
He will not yet let the Father's rest, but summons them again to give in evidence for Peter is Power over the Apostles, which he will never be able to extort from them.
St. Chrysostom, he says, interprets Oves meas on Peter 's Brethren, which were the Apostles, Hom. 87. on St. John, NONLATINALPHABET, &c. Christ says to him,
Saint Chrysostom, he Says, interprets Owes meas on Peter is Brothers, which were the Apostles, Hom. 87. on Saint John,, etc. christ Says to him,
But why must St. Chrysostom by his Brethren mean the Apostles, and not Christians in common? Why should he not use the word in that sense here, in which he does elsewhere,
But why must Saint Chrysostom by his Brothers mean the Apostles, and not Christians in Common? Why should he not use the word in that sense Here, in which he does elsewhere,
p-acp q-crq vmb n1 np1 p-acp po31 n2 vvb dt n2, cc xx np1 p-acp j? q-crq vmd pns31 xx vvi dt n1 p-acp d n1 av, p-acp r-crq pns31 vdz av,
and in which it is used in the New Testament, and by St. Peter himself in his Epistles? Is there any thing in the Context, that determines it to the Apostles? Nay,
and in which it is used in the New Testament, and by Saint Peter himself in his Epistles? Is there any thing in the Context, that determines it to the Apostles? Nay,
can any one think that he took St. John to be one of Peter 's Flock? But if St. Chrysostom when he speaks of St. Peter 's Brethren, means the Apostles,
can any one think that he took Saint John to be one of Peter is Flock? But if Saint Chrysostom when he speaks of Saint Peter is Brothers, means the Apostles,
Because, says he, (speaking of Peter and John) that great work, the preaching of the Gospel was entrusted to them, it was not fit they should be joined,
Because, Says he, (speaking of Peter and John) that great work, the preaching of the Gospel was Entrusted to them, it was not fit they should be joined,
Again, upon these words, If I will that he tarry till I come, he brings in Christ thus speaking to Peter: I now bring thee forth to the Government of the World, and follow me;
Again, upon these words, If I will that he tarry till I come, he brings in christ thus speaking to Peter: I now bring thee forth to the Government of the World, and follow me;
av, p-acp d n2, cs pns11 vmb cst pns31 vvb c-acp pns11 vvb, pns31 vvz p-acp np1 av vvg p-acp np1: pns11 av vvb pno21 av p-acp dt n1 pp-f dt n1, cc vvb pno11;
Besides this you will find the unanimous Consent of the Fathers, attesting Christ's whole Flock, which must necessarily infold the Apostles, to be recommended to Peter.
Beside this you will find the unanimous Consent of the Father's, attesting Christ's Whole Flock, which must necessarily enfold the Apostles, to be recommended to Peter.
What will not this Man say? If by the Fathers he means all the Fathers (as by the Rules of his Logick he must) is it a sufficient induction to name six, without an & c.? But it is pleasant to observe, that 1. Not one of those he quotes, says the whole Flock was recommended to Peter. 2. Those which say the Flock was committed to him, meant no more to include the other Apostles, than they did Peter himself;
What will not this Man say? If by the Father's he means all the Father's (as by the Rules of his Logic he must) is it a sufficient induction to name six, without an & c.? But it is pleasant to observe, that 1. Not one of those he quotes, Says the Whole Flock was recommended to Peter. 2. Those which say the Flock was committed to him, meant no more to include the other Apostles, than they did Peter himself;
But that I rather observe is this, that in the other Passage, immediately after the Words he quotes concerning Peter, St. Ambrose says all the same things,
But that I rather observe is this, that in the other Passage, immediately After the Words he quotes Concerning Peter, Saint Ambrose Says all the same things,
But now if he was their Head-Pastor, he was not their sole Pastor, they must have another Pastor over them, subordinate to Peter; this shews his Folly. (2.) Nor is the Insincerity less egregious:
But now if he was their Head-Pastor, he was not their sole Pastor, they must have Another Pastor over them, subordinate to Peter; this shows his Folly. (2.) Nor is the Insincerity less egregious:
For it was meet, that the City which before all the World was adorned with the name of Christians, should receive for its Pastor, the first of the Apostles .
For it was meet, that the city which before all the World was adorned with the name of Christians, should receive for its Pastor, the First of the Apostles.
Is not he, think you, a Man well qualified to cry out upon others for culling out here and there a Line without perpending its Relation, either to the foregoing or following matter? Ends without Beginnings, Beginnings without Ends?
Is not he, think you, a Man well qualified to cry out upon Others for culling out Here and there a Line without perpending its Relation, either to the foregoing or following matter? Ends without Beginnings, Beginnings without Ends?
vbz xx pns31, vvb pn22, dt n1 av vvn pc-acp vvi av p-acp n2-jn p-acp vvg av av cc a-acp dt n1 p-acp vvg po31 n1, av-d p-acp dt vvg cc vvg n1? vvz p-acp n2, n2 p-acp n2?
Sixtus Senensis think he was an African ; Oudin, that he was a French-Man . But it matters not whether, since what he says is nothing to our present purpose.
Sixtus Senensis think he was an African; Oudin, that he was a Frenchman. But it matters not whither, since what he Says is nothing to our present purpose.
if they all had the Office and Authority signified by this Title? The truth is, the Title it self is no where given by our Saviour to Peter; he commands him indeed to feed his Flock,
if they all had the Office and authority signified by this Title? The truth is, the Title it self is no where given by our Saviour to Peter; he commands him indeed to feed his Flock,
cs pns32 d vhd dt n1 cc n1 vvn p-acp d n1? dt n1 vbz, dt n1 pn31 n1 vbz dx c-crq vvn p-acp po12 n1 p-acp np1; pns31 vvz pno31 av pc-acp vvi po31 vvb,
2. As none of them say the whole Flock, so those of them which say the Flock was commended to him, meant no more to include the other Apostles, than they did Peter himself;
2. As none of them say the Whole Flock, so those of them which say the Flock was commended to him, meant no more to include the other Apostles, than they did Peter himself;
Though this hath been sufficiently clear'd already, in that they thought there was nothing contained in those Words, feed my Sheep, that was peculiar to St. Peter; but what was applicable in common, not only to all the Apostles, but to all Bishops that succeeded them;
Though this hath been sufficiently cleared already, in that they Thought there was nothing contained in those Words, feed my Sheep, that was peculiar to Saint Peter; but what was applicable in Common, not only to all the Apostles, but to all Bishops that succeeded them;
cs d vhz vbn av-j vvn av, p-acp cst pns32 vvd a-acp vbds pix vvn p-acp d n2, vvb po11 n1, cst vbds j p-acp n1 np1; p-acp r-crq vbds j p-acp j, xx av-j p-acp d dt n2, p-acp p-acp d ng1 cst vvd pno32;
(1.) Within less than three lines after those Words produced from St. Ambrose, for Peter 's Pastorship over the Apostles, follow those words I have put in the margin , in which he says of St. Paul all the same things he had before said of St Peter. As 1. That he was also that blessed Servant.
(1.) Within less than three lines After those Words produced from Saint Ambrose, for Peter is Pastorship over the Apostles, follow those words I have put in the margin, in which he Says of Saint Paul all the same things he had before said of Saint Peter. As 1. That he was also that blessed Servant.
(crd) p-acp dc cs crd n2 p-acp d n2 vvn p-acp n1 np1, p-acp np1 vbz n1 p-acp dt n2, vvb d n2 pns11 vhb vvn p-acp dt n1, p-acp r-crq pns31 vvz pp-f n1 np1 d dt d n2 pns31 vhd a-acp vvn pp-f zz np1. p-acp crd cst pns31 vbds av d j-vvn n1.
whether the Advantage doth not lie rather on Paul 's side? For in saying, he rejects an Heretick, lest the Scab of one wandering Sheep, should infect the WHOLE FLOCK, he seems to imply, that St. Paul had the whole Flock under his care, which is more than he says of S. Peter. But if the Flock must still comprehend the Apostles, it unavoidably follows, that the Apostles were committed to Paul 's shepherdly Government, and to Peter 's too;
whither the Advantage does not lie rather on Paul is side? For in saying, he rejects an Heretic, lest the Scab of one wandering Sheep, should infect the WHOLE FLOCK, he seems to imply, that Saint Paul had the Whole Flock under his care, which is more than he Says of S. Peter. But if the Flock must still comprehend the Apostles, it avoidable follows, that the Apostles were committed to Paul is shepherdly Government, and to Peter is too;
(2.) St. Basil after the Words cited by the Discussor, viz. That Christ constituted Peter Shepherd after himself, adds, giving an equal Power afterward to all Pastors and Teachers .
(2.) Saint Basil After the Words cited by the Discusser, viz. That christ constituted Peter Shepherd After himself, adds, giving an equal Power afterwards to all Pastors and Teachers.
(crd) n1 np1 p-acp dt n2 vvn p-acp dt n1, n1 cst np1 vvn np1 n1 p-acp px31, vvz, vvg dt j-jn n1 av p-acp d ng1 cc ng1.
and other learned Divines of the Church of Rome. Yea, that the Bishops of Rome were so far from taking it to be their peculiar, that scarce any one of them till a thousand Years or more after Christ, called himself by this name;
and other learned Divines of the Church of Room. Yea, that the Bishops of Room were so Far from taking it to be their peculiar, that scarce any one of them till a thousand years or more After christ, called himself by this name;
cc j-jn j n2-jn pp-f dt n1 pp-f vvi. uh, cst dt n2 pp-f vvb vbdr av av-j p-acp vvg pn31 pc-acp vbi po32 j, cst av-j d crd pp-f pno32 p-acp dt crd n2 cc av-dc p-acp np1, vvd px31 p-acp d n1;
Bellarmine, Labbe, and Sixtus Senensis will acquaint him, that the Comment on the Gospel of Saint Mark that passes under Saint Jerom 's name, is none of his .
Bellarmine, Labbe, and Sixtus Senensis will acquaint him, that the Comment on the Gospel of Saint Mark that passes under Saint Jerome is name, is none of his.
Chrysostom, he tells us, affirms, that our Saviour was pleased at his departure out of this World, to entrust the care of his Sheep to Peter, as a faithful and vigilant Guardian,
Chrysostom, he tells us, affirms, that our Saviour was pleased At his departure out of this World, to entrust the care of his Sheep to Peter, as a faithful and vigilant Guardian,
as he had the same reason to intrust them to the other Apostles, so for the contrary reason, few Popes have been found for a thousand years, to whom he would have intrusted them.
as he had the same reason to intrust them to the other Apostles, so for the contrary reason, few Popes have been found for a thousand Years, to whom he would have Entrusted them.
I have now examined the Texts of Holy Scripture, and the Greek and Latin Fathers alledged by the Discussor for the proof of St. Peter 's Supremacy: And upon a review of the whole, I think every unbiass'd Reader will conclude with me, 1. That his Proofs from Scripture are not so full,
I have now examined the Texts of Holy Scripture, and the Greek and Latin Father's alleged by the Discusser for the proof of Saint Peter is Supremacy: And upon a review of the Whole, I think every unbiased Reader will conclude with me, 1. That his Proofs from Scripture Are not so full,
pns11 vhb av vvn dt n2 pp-f j n1, cc dt jp cc jp n2 vvn p-acp dt n1 p-acp dt n1 pp-f n1 np1 vbz n1: cc p-acp dt vvi pp-f dt j-jn, pns11 vvb d j-vvn n1 vmb vvi p-acp pno11, crd d po31 n2 p-acp n1 vbr xx av j,
Christ said to Peter, SIMON SLEEPEST THOƲ? 2. That he hath not steered his Course by the unerring Pharo's of Antiquity (as he promised ) but by new Lights, which have led him quite contrary to that Course the Antients steered.
christ said to Peter, SIMON SLEEPEST THOƲ? 2. That he hath not steered his Course by the unerring Pharo's of Antiquity (as he promised) but by new Lights, which have led him quite contrary to that Course the Ancients steered.
No place therefore is left for the second Inquiry, viz. Whether the Bishop of Rome succeeded PETER in this Supremacy? since Peter can be succeeded by none, in that which he never had.
No place Therefore is left for the second Inquiry, viz. Whither the Bishop of Room succeeded PETER in this Supremacy? since Peter can be succeeded by none, in that which he never had.
dx n1 av vbz vvn p-acp dt ord n1, n1 cs dt n1 pp-f vvb vvd np1 p-acp d n1? p-acp np1 vmb vbi vvn p-acp pix, p-acp d r-crq pns31 av-x vhd.
unless it be proved, first that Peter was in a strict and proper sense Bishop of Rome; and 2. That all the Power Peter was invested with, was to descend to his Roman Successors;
unless it be proved, First that Peter was in a strict and proper sense Bishop of Room; and 2. That all the Power Peter was invested with, was to descend to his Roman Successors;
cs pn31 vbb vvn, ord cst np1 vbds p-acp dt j cc j n1 n1 pp-f vvb; cc crd cst d dt n1 np1 vbds vvn p-acp, vbds pc-acp vvi p-acp po31 np1 n2;
admit he was Bishop of Rome, and that whatsoever Power he had, was derived to his Roman Successors, no such Supremacy could be derived from him to them.
admit he was Bishop of Rome, and that whatsoever Power he had, was derived to his Roman Successors, no such Supremacy could be derived from him to them.
But if he resolve to be as good as his word, and to oblige us with another of his Books, let him first establish Peter 's Supremacy upon a more solid Foundation than he has yet done, otherwise he will but render himself the more ridiculous, in endeavouring to erect the Pope 's Supremacy upon it. FINIS.
But if he resolve to be as good as his word, and to oblige us with Another of his Books, let him First establish Peter is Supremacy upon a more solid Foundation than he has yet done, otherwise he will but render himself the more ridiculous, in endeavouring to erect the Pope is Supremacy upon it. FINIS.
Nubes Testium. St. Peter 's Supremacy faithfully discuss'd, according to holy Scripture, and Greek and Latin Fathers. A Sermon of St. Peter, preached before her Majesty the Queen Dowager, by Thomas Godden, D. D. The Pope's Supremacy asserted from the Considerations of some Protestants, and the Practice of the Primitive Church; in a Dialogue between a Church-Divine and a Seeker, in Vidication of Nubes Testium.
Clouds Testimony. Saint Peter is Supremacy faithfully discussed, according to holy Scripture, and Greek and Latin Father's. A Sermon of Saint Peter, preached before her Majesty the Queen Dowager, by Thomas Godden, D. D. The Pope's Supremacy asserted from the Considerations of Some Protestants, and the Practice of the Primitive Church; in a Dialogue between a Church-Divine and a Seeker, in vindication of Clouds Testimony.
Nam si Paulo Apostolo satis est nihil scire nisi Christum Jesum, & hunc crucifixum, quid amplius mihi desiderandum est seire quam Christum? In uno enim hoc nomine & Divinitatis & Incarnationis expressio, & fides passionis est. Et ideo licet caeteri Apostoli sciant, Petrus tamen respondet prae caeteris, Tu es Christus, filius Dei vivi. Complexus est itaque omnia, qui & naturam & nomen expressit, in quo summa virtutum est. Ambros. Comment. l. 6. in Evang. Luc. c. 9. col. 116. Edit. Paris. 1614.
Nam si Paul Apostle satis est nihil Scire nisi Christ Jesus, & hunc crucifixum, quid Amplius mihi desiderandum est seire quam Christ? In Uno enim hoc nomine & Divinitatis & Incarnationis expressio, & fides passionis est. Et ideo licet Caeteri Apostles sciant, Peter tamen Respondet Prae caeteris, Tu es Christus, filius Dei Vivi. Complexus est itaque omnia, qui & naturam & Nome expressit, in quo summa Virtues est. Ambos Comment. l. 6. in Evangelist Luke c. 9. col. 116. Edit. paris. 1614.
Ad unum signum tranquillitate maris reddita, quae post nimias procellas interdum & casu fieri solet, Nautae atque vectores vere filium Dei confitentur, & Arius in Ecclesia pradicat Creaturam. Hieron. Comment. l. 2. in Matth. c. 15. v. 33. Edit. Bas. 1553.
Ad Unum signum tranquillitate maris reddita, Quae post nimias procellas Interdum & casu fieri Solent, Nautae atque vectores vere Son Dei confitentur, & Arius in Ecclesia pradicat Creaturam. Hieron. Comment. l. 2. in Matthew c. 15. v. 33. Edit. Bas. 1553.
Denique audi dicentem, Tibi dabo claves regni Caelorum; & quodcunque ligaveris super Terram, erit ligatum & in Caelo; & quodcunque solveris — Quod Petro dicitur, Apostolis dicitur. Enarratio in Psal. 38.
Denique audi dicentem, Tibi Dabo claves Regni Caelorum; & quodcunque ligaveris super Terram, erit ligatum & in Caelo; & quodcunque solveris — Quod Peter dicitur, Apostles dicitur. Enarratio in Psalm 38.
Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum: Ego dico tibi inquit, quia tu es Petrus, & super istam Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, & portae Inferorum non vincent eam. Et tibi dabo claves regni Caelorum. — Et quamvis Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat, & dicat, sicut misit me Pater, &c. Cypr. de Unitat. Ecclesiae, p. 254. Edit. Paris.
Loquitur Dominus ad Peter: Ego dico tibi inquit, quia tu es Peter, & super istam Petram Aedificabo Church meam, & portae Inferos non vinncent eam. Et tibi Dabo claves Regni Caelorum. — Et Quamvis Apostles omnibus post resurrectionem suam Parem potestatem tribuat, & dicat, sicut misit me Pater, etc. Cyprus de Unitat. Ecclesiae, p. 254. Edit. paris.
Nunquid istas claves Petrus accepit, & Paulus non accepit? Petrus accepit, & Johannes & Jacobus non accepit, & caeteri Apostoli? August. Serm. 30. de Diversis.
Whether istas claves Peter accepit, & Paulus non accepit? Peter accepit, & Johannes & Jacobus non accepit, & Caeteri Apostles? August. Sermon 30. de Diversis.
fw-la fw-la vvz np1 fw-la, cc np1 fw-fr fw-la? np1 fw-la, cc np1 cc fw-la fw-la fw-la, cc fw-la np1? np1. np1 crd fw-la fw-la.
Ellies du pin de antiq. Eccles. disciplina dissertat. 4. p. 307. Simon vigorii ad respons. Synodal. Concil. Basil. Comment. c. 6. & de Monarch. p. 10, 11, 12, &c.
Ellies du pin de Antique. Eccles. Discipline Dissertation. 4. p. 307. Simon vigorii ad response. Synodal. Council. Basil. Comment. c. 6. & the Monarch. p. 10, 11, 12, etc.
Ex quibus etiam pater, quid ad secundam Questionem Principalem sit respondendum; nimirum Petrum si proprie loquatur, non respondisse pro omnibus, &c. ibid.
Ex quibus etiam pater, quid ad secundam Questionem Principalem sit respondendum; Nimirum Peter si Properly loquatur, non respondisse Pro omnibus, etc. Ibid.
De secundo dicendum, quod determinate non constat, an nomine omnium Petrus responderit, unde videtur magis convenire literae, quòd Petrus pro se solo responderit. In Matth. cap. 16. Quaest. 57.
De secundo Dicendum, quod determinate non constat, an nomine omnium Peter responderit, unde videtur magis Convenire literae, quòd Peter Pro se solo responderit. In Matthew cap. 16. Question 57.
Solus ergo cum loquitur Petrus, nequaquam reliquorum credentium fides excluditur; sed congruus ordo servatur, dum Principi Apostolorum primus loquendi locus jure defertur, ne tumultus quidem magis quam responsio vide retur, si tunc universi certatim ac pariter respondissent. Tractat. quem prima die Ordinat. ipsius quorund. Civ. Not. exceperunt. B. P P. tom. 4. p. 826.
Solus ergo cum loquitur Peter, Nequaquam reliquorum credentium fides Excluditur; sed congruus ordo servatur, dum Principi Apostolorum primus loquendi locus jure defertur, ne tumultus quidem magis quam responsio vide retur, si tunc universi Competitively ac pariter respondissent. Tractate Whom prima die Ordinat. Himself quorund. Civ. Not. exceperunt. B. P P. tom. 4. p. 826.
De primo dicendum, quòd necesse est dici omnes tenuisse eandem confessionem quam Petrus; & si sigillatim Christus vota corum scrutaretur vel peteret; idem singuli responderent, ibid.
De primo Dicendum, quòd Necessary est dici omnes tenuisse eandem confessionem quam Peter; & si Sigillatim Christus vota corum scrutaretur vel peteret; idem Singuli responderent, Ibid.
Cum vero dixit Cyrillus praevenit Petrus caeteros, fitque os totius Collegii. Dicendum, quod suit os totius Collegii, non quidem loquendo pro omnibus, sed loquendo id, quod omnes locuturi erant; quia accidit eandem esse sententiam Petri et caeterorum. ibid.
Cum vero dixit Cyril praevenit Peter Others, fitque os totius Collegii. Dicendum, quod suit os totius Collegii, non quidem Loquendo Pro omnibus, sed Loquendo id, quod omnes locuturi Erant; quia accidit eandem esse sententiam Petri et caeterorum. Ibid.
Melius ergo omnes alii senserunt Auctores, Petrum pro se uno respondisse; non quod alii idem non crederent, ac dicturi etiam fuissent, nisi Petrus praevenisset; sed quod Petrus majore fide in Confessionem primus eruperit. Comment. in Matth. 16. v. 18.
Better ergo omnes alii senserunt Authors, Peter Pro se Uno respondisse; non quod alii idem non crederent, ac dicturi etiam fuissent, nisi Peter praevenisset; sed quod Peter Major fide in Confessionem primus eruperit. Comment. in Matthew 16. v. 18.
Praeterea cui dubium est, Christum his verbis, aliquid magnum et singulare, tanquam fidei confessionis proemium Petro concedere aut promittere voluisse? ibid. col. 349.
Praeterea cui Dubium est, Christ his verbis, Aliquid magnum et singular, tanquam fidei confessionis Proem Peter concedere Or promittere Voluisse? Ibid. col. 349.
Alii tamen eandem fidem habebant; alioqui et ipsi depromerent suam fidem, et Christus quaereret et increparet eos, et non praeciperet omnibus ut tacerent. Salm. tom. 4, 3. a parte tractat. 1. pag. 383.
Alii tamen eandem fidem habebant; Otherwise et ipsi depromerent suam fidem, et Christus quaereret et increparet eos, et non praeciperet omnibus ut tacerent. Salm. tom. 4, 3. a part Tractate. 1. page. 383.
Dicitur tamen pro caeteris Apostolis respondisse, quia quod illi fuerant responsuri, respondet primus. Comment in Concord. Hist. Evangel. Tom. 2. l. 10. c. 22.
Dicitur tamen Pro caeteris Apostles respondisse, quia quod illi fuerant responsuri, Respondet primus. Comment in Concord. Hist. Evangel. Tom. 2. l. 10. c. 22.
Respondeo, fidem five confessionem duobus modis posse considerari; uno modo absolute, secundum se, ac sine relatione ad Personam Petri; altero modo cum relatione ad Petrum &c. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 10.
Respondeo, fidem five confessionem duobus modis posse considerari; Uno modo absolute, secundum se, ac sine Relation ad Personam Petri; altero modo cum Relation ad Peter etc. de Rom. Pontiff l. 1. c. 10.
Petra est Christus, eiam Discipulo suo hujusvocabuli gratiam non negavit, ut et ipse sit Petrus, quòd de Petra habeat soliditatem constantiae fidei firmitatem. Enitere ergo ut & tu Petra sis: itaque non extra te sed intra te Petram require &c. Ambros. lib. 6. in Evang. Luc. c. 9. col. 117. Edit. Paris. 1614.
Petra est Christus, eiam Discipulo Sue hujusvocabuli gratiam non negavit, ut et ipse sit Peter, quòd de Petra habeat soliditatem constantiae fidei firmitatem. Enitere ergo ut & tu Petra sis: itaque non extra te sed intra te Petram require etc. Ambos lib. 6. in Evangelist Luke c. 9. col. 117. Edit. paris. 1614.
Petra Christus est, qui donavit Apostolis suis, ut ipsi quoque Petrae vocentur: Tu es Petrus, et super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. Comment. lib 3. in Amos. c. 7. v. 12. tom. 6. pag. 102. Bas. 1553.
Petra Christus est, qui donavit Apostles suis, ut ipsi quoque Rock vocentur: Tu es Peter, et super hanc Petram Aedificabo Church meam. Comment. lib 3. in Amos. c. 7. v. 12. tom. 6. page. 102. Bas. 1553.
Unde dicit Dominus ad Petrum, Super istam Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, hoc est, in hac Catholicae Fidei confessione statuam fideles ad vitam. Comment. Epist. ad Ephes. c. 2. Tom. 3. col. 498.
Unde dicit Dominus ad Peter, Super istam Petram Aedificabo Church meam, hoc est, in hac Catholic Fidei Confessi statuam fideles ad vitam. Comment. Epistle and Ephesians c. 2. Tom. 3. col. 498.
Petra erat Christus, super quod fundamentum etiam ipse aedificatus est Petrus; fundamentum quippe aliud nemo potest ponere praeter id quod positum est, quod est Christus Jesus. Ecclesia, ergo quae fundatur in Christo, &c. Tractat. 24. in Evang. Johannis.
Petra erat Christus, super quod fundamentum etiam ipse aedificatus est Peter; fundamentum quip Aliud nemo potest ponere praeter id quod positum est, quod est Christus jesus. Ecclesia, ergo Quae fundatur in Christ, etc. Tractate 24. in Evangelist joannis.
Nec eos audiamus qui negant Ecclesiam Dei omnia peccata posse dimittere. Itaque miseri, dum in Petro Petram non intelligunt, et nolunt credere datas Ecclesiae claves regni Coelorum, ipsi eas de manibus amiserunt. De Agone Christiano. c. 31.
Nec eos Let us hear qui negant Church Dei omnia Peccata posse Dimittere. Itaque miseri, dum in Peter Petram non Intelligunt, et Nolunt Believe datas Ecclesiae claves Regni Coelorum, ipsi eas de manibus amiserunt. De Ago Christian. c. 31.
Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maximae & antiquissimae, & omnibus cognitae, &c. Iren. l. 3. c. 3. Is. Casaub. Exercit. 15. p. 310.
said quoniam Valde Longum est in hoc tali volumine omnium Ecclesiarum enumerare Successions, maximae & antiquissimae, & omnibus cognitae, etc. Iren l. 3. c. 3. Is. Casaubon Exercise 15. p. 310.
Veruntamen si omnes per totum orbem tales essent, quales vanissime criminaris, Cathedra tibi quid secit Ecclesia Romanae, in qua Petrus sedit, & in qua hodie Anastasius sedet: vel Ecclesiae Hierosolymitanae, in qua Jacobus sedit, & in qua hodie Johannes sedet, quibus nos in Catholica Unitate connectimur, & a quibus vos nefario furore separastis? Contra Lit. Petiliani, l. 2. c. 51.
Veruntamen si omnes per totum orbem tales essent, quales vanissime criminaris, Cathedra tibi quid secit Ecclesia Romanae, in qua Peter Sedit, & in qua hodie Anastasius sedet: vel Ecclesiae Hierosolymitanae, in qua Jacobus Sedit, & in qua hodie Johannes sedet, quibus nos in Catholica Unitate connectimur, & a quibus vos nefario furore Separastis? Contra Lit. Petiliani, l. 2. c. 51.
Chrysostomus Hom. 55. in Matth. Petrum futurum esse dicit eo sensu fundamentum, qu•d Ecclesiae Pastor futurus sit & Evangelii praedicator: Cum vero idem ait Petrum praepositum esse universo terrarum orbi, sensus non est, quod omnibus omnino Eccles•is. sit praepositus, sed quod non uni Populo, ut Jeremias, sed omni genti Evangelium esset annuntiaturus. Ellies du Pin de antiq. Eccl. Discipl. dissert. 4. p. 307.
Chrysostom Hom. 55. in Matthew Peter Future esse dicit eo sensu fundamentum, qu•d Ecclesiae Pastor Future sit & Evangelii Preacher: Cum vero idem ait Peter praepositum esse universo terrarum Orbi, sensus non est, quod omnibus Omnino Eccles•is. sit praepositus, sed quod non uni Populo, ut Jeremias, sed omni genti Evangelium esset annuntiaturus. Ellies du Pin de Antique. Ecclesiastes Disciple. dissert. 4. p. 307.
Ar dicis, super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia, licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat, & cuncti claves regni Caelorum accipiant, & ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur: tamen propterea inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut capite constituto Schismatis tollatur occasio. Advers. Jovinian. l. 1. c. 27. p. 35. Ed. Basil. 1553.
Are Say, super Peter fundatur Ecclesia, licet id ipsum in Alio loco super omnes Apostles fiat, & Cuncti claves Regni Caelorum Accipiant, & ex Aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur: tamen propterea inter duodecim Unus eligitur, ut capite constituto Schisms Tollatur Occasion. Adverse. Jovinian. l. 1. c. 27. p. 35. Ed. Basil. 1553.
Quid Platoni et Petro? Ut ille enim Princeps Philosophorum, ita hic Apostolorum fuit, super quem Ecclesia Domini stabili mole fundata est. Advers. Pelag. l. 1. c. 2. Tom. 2. p. 265.
Quid Platoni et Peter? Ut Isle enim Princeps Philosophorum, ita hic Apostolorum fuit, super Whom Ecclesia Domini stabili mole found est. Adverse. Pelagius l. 1. c. 2. Tom. 2. p. 265.
Nam capitis est manducare, & per manducationem trajicere cibum in stomachum, et illum sibi incorporare. Significatur enim hac metaphora Petro convenire, ut ipse tanquam Caput Eccesiae Infideles convertat, et efficiat membra Eeclesiae. De Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 22.
Nam capitis est Manducare, & per manducationem trajicere Food in stomachum, et Ilum sibi incorporare. Signify enim hac Metaphor Peter Convenire, ut ipse tanquam Caput Eccesiae Infideles convertat, et efficiat membra Ecclesiae. De Rom. Pontiff l. 1. c. 22.
Et Petrae scissae sunt, dura corda Gentilium; sive Petrae, universa vaticinia Prophetarum qui et ipsi a Petra Christo cum Apostolis Petrae vocabulum acceperunt, &c. Hieron. Hedibiae Quest. 8.
Et Rock scissae sunt, dura Corda Gentilium; sive Rock, universa vaticinia Prophetarum qui et ipsi a Petra Christ cum Apostles Rock Vocabulum acceperunt, etc. Hieron. Hedibiae Quest. 8.
Ainsi c ' est avec bien peu de raison que l'on fait un argument de cela pour prouver sa rogautè dans l'Eglise. En Espagne où les plus honorables marchent les derniers, on ne manqueroit pas de alleguer les lieux où S Pierre est nommé le dernier, commé dans le passage out il est dit. Je suis Disciple de Paul &c. Moyers surs et Honnestes pour la Conversion de tous les Heretiques, p. 16, 17.
Ainsi c ' est avec bien peu de raison que l'on fait un argument de cela pour prouver sa rogautè dans l'Eglise. En Espagne où les plus honorables marchent les derniers, on ne manqueroit pas de alleguer les lieux où S Pierre est nommé le dernier, commé dans le passage out ill est dit. Yes suis Disciple de Paul etc. Moyers surs et Honest pour la Conversion de tous les Heretics, p. 16, 17.
Veniens ergo ad eum, hospitio receptus est, et apud eum mansit dies quindecim, quasi unanimus et Coapostolus. Comment. in Epist. ad Galat. c. 1. v. 18.
Veniens ergo ad Eum, hospitio Receptus est, et apud Eum mansit dies quindecim, quasi unanimus et co-apostolus. Comment. in Epistle ad Galatians c. 1. v. 18.
Petrum solum nominat, et sibi comparat, quia primatum ipse acceperat ad fundandam Ecclesiam: se quoque pari modo electum, ut primatum habeat in fundandis gentium Ecclesiis: ita tamen ut Petrus Gentibus praedicaret, si causa fuisset &c.
Peter solum nominate, et sibi Comparat, quia primatum ipse acceperat ad fundandam Church: se quoque Pair modo electum, ut primatum habeat in fundandis gentium Ecclesiis: ita tamen ut Peter Gentibus praedicaret, si causa fuisset etc.
Nam quis corum auderet Petro primo Apostolo, cui claves regni Coelorum Dominus dedit, resistere; nisi alius talis, qui fiducia electionis suae sciens se non imparem, constanter improbaret, quod ille sine consilio fecerat?
Nam quis corum auderet Peter primo Apostle, cui claves Regni Coelorum Dominus dedit, resistere; nisi alius Talis, qui Fiducia electionis suae sciens se non imparem, Constanter improbaret, quod Isle sine consilio fecerat?
Ils disent aussi qu'il est quelquefois nommé le premier, mais s' il ne l'est pas toûjours cela ne leur peut servir de rien. Mais quand il l'auroit toûjours été, cela ne prouveroit pas qu' il eût authorité sur les autres, comme le Pape en prend sur les eveques, &c. Moyens surs et Honnestes pour la Conversion, &c. p. 14, 15.
Ils dissent aussi qu'il est quelquefois nommé le premier, mais s' il ne l'est pas toûjours cela ne leur peut servir de rien. Mais quand il l'auroit toûjours été, cela ne prouveroit pas qu' il eût authorité sur les autres, comme le Pape en prend sur les eveques, etc. Moyens surs et Honest pour la Conversion, etc. p. 14, 15.
Fundamenta ejus in montibus Sanctis. Quos nos possumus dicere Fundamenta? Apostolos. In illis erant fundamenta; ibi primum posita est fides Ecclesiae, & ibi fundamenta sunt posita. Comment. in Psal. 86.
Fundamenta His in montibus Sanctis. Quos nos possumus dicere Fundamenta? Apostles. In illis Erant Fundamenta; There primum Posita est fides Ecclesiae, & There Fundamenta sunt Posita. Comment. in Psalm 86.
Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus &c. ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est et Sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum & paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum, non facit: caeterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt. Epist. ad Evagrium.
Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus etc. ejusdem Merit, ejusdem est et Sacerdotii. Potentia divitiarum & paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel Inferiorem Bishop, non facit: caeterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt. Epistle and Evagrius.
fw-la fw-la fw-la av fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la fw-la np1. np1 fw-la cc fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la: fw-la fw-la np1 fw-la fw-la. np1 cc np1.
Quod vero ait, Super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio, quicunque extra hanc domum comederit Agnum prophanus est, &c. dictum est officiose, & per exaggerationem. Du Pin. dissertat. 5. c. 2.
Quod vero ait, Super Illam Petram aedificatam Church scio, quicunque extra hanc domum comederit Agnum prophanus est, etc. dictum est officiose, & per exaggerationem. Du Pin. Dissertation. 5. c. 2.
Cyprianus in Expositione prima secundamvideturexcludere, sed revera non excludit, si scopus operis attendatur. In prima super unum Petrum aedificatam esse scribit Ecclesiam, ut adversus emergentes Christianorum in Religione discordias, unitatem Ecclesiae commendaret. In secunda constitutam esse super Episcopos dicit Ecclesiam, ut quam Ecclesiae unitatem in uno Petro commendaverat, eandem in pluribus Apostolorum successoribus commendaret, &c. Launoy Epp. P. 5. Ep. ad Voellum.
Cyprian in Exposition prima secundamvideturexcludere, sed Indeed non excludit, si Scope operis attendatur. In prima super Unum Peter aedificatam esse Scribit Church, ut Adversus emergentes Christians in Religion Discord, unitatem Ecclesiae commendaret. In Secunda constitutam esse super Episcopos dicit Church, ut quam Ecclesiae unitatem in Uno Peter commendaverat, eandem in Pluribus Apostolorum successoribus commendaret, etc. Launoy Epp P. 5. Epistle ad Voellum.
Ecclesia ergo quae fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo regni Caelorum accepit, id est, potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata. In Evang. Johannis, Tractat. 124.
Ecclesia ergo Quae fundatur in Christ, claves ab eo Regni Caelorum accepit, id est, potestatem ligandi solvendique Peccata. In Evangelist joannis, Tractate 124.
Tertul. de pudicitia. c. 21. Cypr. Epist. 23. ad Jubaian. et de Unitat. Eccles. Hilary. l. 6. de Trin. col. 74. Hieron. l. 1. advers. Jovinian. August. Serm. 108. de divers. Bed. Hom. de Sanct. Petro.
Tertulian de Chastity. c. 21. Cyprus Epistle 23. and Jubaian. et de Unitat. Eccles. Hilary. l. 6. de Trin. col. 74. Hieron. l. 1. adverse. Jovinian. August. Sermon 108. the diverse. Bed Hom. de Sanct. Peter.
Barlaam. de Primat. Papae. l. 2. Pet. de Alliaco Qu. in suis Vesp. n. 20. Ejusd. lib. de Eccles. et Cardinal. Authoritate parte 1. c. 1. Tractat. Cancell. Parisiens. de Potestat. Eccl. et Orig. Juris Consid. 5. Richer. de Ecclesiast. et Polit. Potest. n. 2. et 6.
Barlaam. the Primate. Pope. l. 2. Pet. de Alliaco Qu. in suis Vespasian n. 20. Ejusd. lib. de Eccles. et Cardinal. Authoritate parte 1. c. 1. Tractate Cancel. Parisians. de Potestat. Ecclesiastes et Origin Juris Consider 5. Richer. the Ecclesiatest. et Politic Potest. n. 2. et 6.
Hanc enim potestatemclavium quam Christus hic Petro promittit, iisdem deinde verbis omnibus omnino Apostolis promittit, Matth. 18. & deinceps cunctis largitur, Matth. 28. & Johan. 20. Illi igitur oppido falluntur, qui soli Petro datas claves esse autumant. At non ita Antiqui, qui unanimo consensu tradunt claves istas in persona Petri totae Ecclesiae datas. Du Pin dissertat. 4. c. 1. p. 307, 308.
Hanc enim potestatemclavium quam Christus hic Peter Promittit, iisdem Deinde verbis omnibus Omnino Apostles Promittit, Matthew 18. & deinceps cunctis largitur, Matthew 28. & John. 20. Illi igitur oppido falluntur, qui soli Peter datas claves esse autumant. At non ita Antiqui, qui unanimo consensu tradunt claves istas in persona Petri totae Ecclesiae datas. Du Pin Dissertation. 4. c. 1. p. 307, 308.
Nam Petro primum Dominus super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam, & unde unitatis originem instituit & ostendit, potestatem istam dedit, ut id solveretur in Caelis, &c. Epist. 73. ad Jubaian.
Nam Peter primum Dominus super Whom aedificavit Church, & unde unitatis originem Instituit & ostendit, potestatem istam dedit, ut id solveretur in Caelis, etc. Epistle 73. and Jubaian.
fw-la np1 fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la fw-la, cc fw-la fw-la fw-la n1 cc fw-la, fw-la fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la fw-la p-acp fw-la, av np1 crd vvi np1.
Transivit quidem in Apostolos alios vis istius potestatis, sed non frustra uni commendatur, quod omnibus intimetur. Petro ergo singulariter hoc creditur, quia cunctis Ecclesiae Rectoribus Petri forma proponitur.
Transivit quidem in Apostles Alioth vis This potestatis, sed non frustra uni commendatur, quod omnibus intimetur. Peter ergo singulariter hoc creditur, quia cunctis Ecclesiae Rectoribus Petri forma proponitur.
Postea vero pro commisso scelere jam damnato Juda, omnes Apostoli Christo surgente in Petro claves accipiunt. Quinimo cum Petro caelestis regni claves ab ipso Domino accipiunt, quando ait illis, Accipite Spiritum sanctum, &c. Tract. quem prima die ordinat. quorund. Civ. Notarii accep.
Postea vero Pro commisso Scelere jam damnato Juda, omnes Apostles Christ Surgente in Peter claves accipiunt. Quinimo cum Peter caelestis Regni claves ab ipso Domino accipiunt, quando ait illis, Accipite Spiritum sanctum, etc. Tract. Whom prima die ordinat. quorund. Civ. Notarii accept.
Quam potestatem ipse a Patre missus accepisset, eam Apostolis dare quos suo loco mitteret, quos vicarios suos faceret. Hoc apparet ex verbis sequentibus; propterea enim insufflavit in eos, propterea dixit, Quorum remiseritis peccata — ut ostenderet se quantam authoritatem ipse a Patre accepisset, tantara illis dare, &c.
Quam potestatem ipse a Patre missus accepisset, eam Apostles Dare quos Sue loco mitteret, quos Vicars suos faceret. Hoc Appears ex verbis sequentibus; propterea enim insufflavit in eos, propterea dixit, Quorum Remiss Peccata — ut ostenderet se Quantum authoritatem ipse a Patre accepisset, tantara illis Dare, etc.
Scimus quod Petrus nihil plus potestatis Christo a recepit aliis Apostolis. Nihil enim d•ctum est ad Petrum, quod etiam aliis dictum non sit. Nonne sicut Petro dictum est quodcunque super terram, ita aliis, quodcunque ligaveritis, &c. De Concord. Cath. 2. 13.
Scimus quod Peter nihil plus potestatis Christ a recepit Others Apostles. Nihil enim d•ctum est ad Peter, quod etiam Others dictum non sit. Nonne sicut Peter dictum est quodcunque super terram, ita Others, quodcunque ligaveritis, etc. De Concord. Catholic 2. 13.
Ubi vides idem dari Apostolis per illa verba, Ego mitto vos, quod Petro fuerat promissum, per illud, Tibi dabo claves, et postea exhibitum per illud, pasce oves, &c. Lib. 4. De Rom. Pontif. c. 23.
Ubi vides idem dari Apostles per illa verba, Ego mitto vos, quod Peter fuerat Promise, per illud, Tibi Dabo claves, et postea exhibitum per illud, Paske Owes, etc. Lib. 4. De Rom. Pontiff c. 23.
Fatemur enim Apostolos suisse pares in Apostolica Potestate, & habuisse in populos Christianos eandem omnino authoritatem, sed non fuisse pares inter se. De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12.
Fatemur enim Apostles suisse pares in Apostolica Potestate, & habuisse in populos Christians eandem Omnino authoritatem, sed non Fuisse pares inter se. De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12.
— Nec enim codem sensu quo Petro at { que } aliis Apostolis dictum interpretor, Quodcunque solvetis super Terram, erit solutum & in Caelis; etsi video omnes Auctores praeter Origenem in cadem fuisse sententia. Mald. in Matth. 16. 19.
— Nec enim codem sensu quo Peter At { que } Others Apostles dictum Interpreter, Quodcunque solvetis super Terram, erit Loose & in Caelis; Though video omnes Authors praeter Origenem in cadem Fuisse sententia. Mald in Matthew 16. 19.
Vos, O sancti et beati viri, ob fidei vestrae meritum claves regni Coeloruin sortiti, et ligandi atque solvendi in Coelo et in terra jus adepti. de Trinitat. l. 6. Col. 74. Edit. Paris. 1631.
Vos, O sancti et Beati viri, ob fidei Vestrae Merit claves Regni Coeloruin sortiti, et ligandi atque solvendi in Coelo et in terra jus Adepti. de Trinitat. l. 6. Col. 74. Edit. paris. 1631.
— Cujus Ecclesiae Petrus Apostolus propter Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate personam. Quod enim ad ipsum proprie pertinet, natura unus homo erat, gratia unus Christianus, abundantiore gratia, unus idemque primus Apostolus; sed quando ei dictum est, Tibi dabo claves — Universam significabar Ecclesiam. In Evang. Johan. Tractat. 124.
— Cujus Ecclesiae Peter Apostles propter Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate Personam. Quod enim ad ipsum Properly pertinet, Nature Unus homo erat, Gratia Unus Christian, abundantiore Gratia, Unus idemque primus Apostles; sed quando ei dictum est, Tibi Dabo claves — Universam significabar Church. In Evangelist John. Tractate 124.
Sicut enim quaedam dicuntur, quae ad Apostolum Petrum proprie pertinere videantur, nec tamen habent illustrem intellectum, nisi cum referuntur ad Ecclesiam, cujus ille agnoscitur in figura gestâsse personam, sicuti est, Tibi dabo claves regni Caelorum, & siqua ejusmodi: ita Judas personam quodammodo sustinet inimicorum Christi Judaeorum, &c. In Psal. 108.
Sicut enim quaedam dicuntur, Quae ad Apostolum Peter Properly pertinere videantur, nec tamen habent illustrem Intellectum, nisi cum referuntur ad Church, cujus Isle agnoscitur in figura gestâsse Personam, As est, Tibi Dabo claves Regni Caelorum, & Siqua ejusmodi: ita Judas Personam quodammodo Sustinet Enemies Christ Judaeorum, etc. In Psalm 108.
Sicut misit me Pater, et ego mitto vos — ergo si personam gerebant Ecclesiae, & sic eis hoc dictum est, tanquam ipsi Ecclesiae diceretur &c. De Baptismo Contr. Donatist. l. 3. c. 18.
Sicut misit me Pater, et ego mitto vos — ergo si Personam gerebant Ecclesiae, & sic eis hoc dictum est, tanquam ipsi Ecclesiae diceretur etc. De Baptismo Contr Donatist. l. 3. c. 18.
Primum est Petro promissas esse eas ipsas claves, quae postea caeteris concessae sunt, ac proinde per claves hic non intelligi, ut vult Bellarminus, summam potestatem in omnem Ecclesiam. Ellies du Pin. dissertat. 4. c. 1. p. 309.
Primum est Peter promissas esse eas Itself claves, Quae postea caeteris concessae sunt, ac Therefore per claves hic non intelligi, ut vult Bellarminus, summam potestatem in omnem Church. Ellies du Pin. Dissertation. 4. c. 1. p. 309.
Sacrosancta Synodus eos admonet & exhortatur, ut Divinorum Praeceptorum memores, factique forma gregis, in judicio & veritate pascant & regant. Sess. 23. de Reformat. c. 1.
Sacrosancta Synod eos Admonet & exhortatur, ut Divinorum Praeceptorum Memories, factique forma Gregis, in Judicio & veritate pascant & regant. Sess. 23. the Reformat. c. 1.
fw-la np1 fw-la fw-la cc fw-la, fw-la np1 np1 n2, n-jn fw-la fw-la, fw-la fw-la cc fw-la n1 cc j. np1 crd dt n1. sy. crd
Nobis autem in beato Petro sunt oves Christi commissae, dicente Domino, Pasce oves. Non distingu••s inter has oves & alias; ut alienum a suo demonstraret ovili, qui Petrum & successores illius, magistros non recognoscerent & Pastores. Decretal. l. 1. de Majorit. & Obed. Tit. 33. c. 6.
Nobis autem in Beato Peter sunt Owes Christ commissae, Dissent Domino, Paske Owes. Non distingu••s inter has Owes & alias; ut Alienum a Sue demonstraret ovili, qui Peter & successores Illius, magistros non recognoscerent & Pastors. Decretal. l. 1. de Majority. & Obed. Tit. 33. c. 6.
Superest ut, reveletur homo peccati, filius perditionis, Doemonium non modo diurnum, sed & meridianum, quod non solum transfiguratur in Angelum lucis, sed extollitur super omne quod dicitur Deus, aut quod colitur.
Superest ut, reveletur homo peccati, filius perditionis, Doemonium non modo diurnum, sed & meridianum, quod non solum transfiguratur in Angelum lucis, sed extollitur super omne quod dicitur Deus, Or quod colitur.
Nec refert quod nonnulli aiunt Petro totius mundi oves esse commissas. S. Leo Serm. 3. de Assumptione. Gregor. lib. 4. Epist. 32. Theophylact. in cap. ult. Johan. & ante hos Chrysostomus Homil. 87. in Joan. & 80. in Pop. Antioch. — Cum enim Petrus & reliqui Apostoli per totum orbem praedicandi potestatem accepissent, &c. Du Pin dissert. 4. c. 1. p. 311.
Nec refert quod Nonnulli Aiunt Peter totius mundi Owes esse commissas. S. Leo Sermon 3. the Assump. Gregory. lib. 4. Epistle 32. Theophylact in cap. ult. John. & ante hos Chrysostom Homily 87. in Joan. & 80. in Pop. Antioch. — Cum enim Peter & reliqui Apostles per totum orbem praedicandi potestatem accepissent, etc. Du Pin dissert. 4. c. 1. p. 311.
Beatus & ille servus, qui potest dicere; lac vobis potum dedi, non escam; nondum enim poteratis, Novit enim quos quemadmodum pascat. Quis nostrum hoc facere potest? Quis nostrum potest vere dicere; factus sum infirmis infirmus, ut infirmos lucrifaciam? Et tamen ille tantus ad curam gregis electus a Christo, qui sanaret infirmos, curaret invalidos. Haereticum a commisso sibi ovili post unam correptionem repellit, ne unius erraticae ovis scabies serpenti ulcere, totum gregrem contaminet. Proaem. ad 5. l. de fide Edit. Paris. an. 1614.
Beatus & Isle servus, qui potest dicere; lac vobis potum dedi, non escam; Nondum enim poteratis, Novit enim quos quemadmodum pascat. Quis nostrum hoc facere potest? Quis nostrum potest vere dicere; factus sum infirmis infirmus, ut Infirmos lucrifaciam? Et tamen Isle Tantus ad curam Gregis Electus a Christ, qui sanaret Infirmos, curaret invalidos. Hereticum a commisso sibi ovili post unam correptionem Repellit, ne unius erraticae ovis scabies serpenti ulcere, totum gregrem contaminet. Proem. ad 5. l. de fide Edit. paris. nias. 1614.
Bell. de Script. Eccl. p. 137. Edit. Lugd. 1675. Labb. Dissert. Hist. de Script. Eccl. tom. 1. p. 440. Sixt. Senens. Bibl. S. l. 4. p. 247.
Bell. de Script. Ecclesiastes p. 137. Edit. Lyon 1675. Labb. Dissert. Hist. de Script. Ecclesiastes tom. 1. p. 440. Sixt. Siena. Bible S. l. 4. p. 247.
