Hereupon they questioned which of them it should be;and withal,seeing the next Passover their master would celebrate should be when he was king,entered into a contention who should then be the greatest man.Our Saviour therefore told them that the kings of the nations had dominion over their subjects,and are called by a name in Hebrew that signifies bountiful;"but I cannot be so to you;you must endeavour to serve one another;I ordain you a kingdom,but it is such as my Father hath ordained me;a kingdom that I am now to purchase with my blood,and not to possess till my second coming;then ye shall eat and drink at my table,and sit on thrones,judging the twelve tribes of Israel."And then addressing himself to St.Peter,he saith,"Simon,Simon,Satan seeks,by suggesting a present domination,to weaken your faith of the future;but I have prayed for thee,that thy faith shall not fail;thou therefore note this:being converted,and understanding my kingdom as of another world,confirm the same faith in thy brethren."To which St.Peter answered (as one that no more expected any authority in this world),"Lord,I am ready to go with thee,not only to prison,but to death."Whereby it is manifest,St.Peter had not only no jurisdiction given him in this world,but a charge to teach all the other Apostles that they also should have none.And for the infallibility of St.Peter's sentence definitive in matter of faith,there is no more to be attributed to it out of this text than that Peter should continue in the belief of this point,namely,that Christ should come again and possess the kingdom at the day of judgement;which was not given by this text to all his successors;for we see they claim it in the world that now is.
The second place is that of Matthew 16.18,"Thou art Peter,and upon this rock I will build my Church,and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."By which,as I have already shown in this chapter,is proved no more than that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the confession of Peter,which gave occasion to that speech;namely this,that Jesus is Christ the Son of God.
The third text is John,21.16,17,"Feed my sheep";which contains no more but a commission of teaching.And if we grant the rest of the Apostles to be contained in that name of sheep,then it is the supreme power of teaching:but it was only for the time that there were no Christian sovereigns already possessed of that supremacy.
But I have already proved that Christian sovereigns are in their own dominions the supreme pastors,and instituted thereto by virtue of their being baptized,though without other imposition of hands.For such imposition,being a ceremony of designing the person,is needless when he is already designed to the power of teaching what doctrine he will,by his institution to an absolute power over his subjects.
For as I have proved before,sovereigns are supreme teachers,in general,by their office,and therefore oblige themselves,by their baptism,to teach the doctrine of Christ:and when they suffer others to teach their people,they do it at the peril of their own souls;for it is at the hands of the heads of families that God will require the account of the instruction of His children and servants.
It is of Abraham himself,not of a hireling,that God saith,"I know him that he will command his children,and his household after him,that they keep the way of the Lord,and do justice and judgement."
The fourth place is that of Exodus,28.30,"Thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgement,the Urim and the Thummim":which he saith is interpreted by the Septuagint,delosin kai aletheian,that is,evidence and truth:and thence concludeth,God hath given evidence and truth,which is almost infallibility,to the high priest.But be it evidence and truth itself that was given;or be it but admonition to the priest to endeavour to inform himself clearly,and give judgement uprightly;yet in that it was given to the high priest,it was given to the civil sovereign (for such next under God was the high priest in the Commonwealth of Israel),and is an argument for evidence and truth,that is,for the ecclesiastical supremacy of civil sovereigns over their own subjects,against the pretended power of the Pope.These are all the texts he bringeth for the infallibility of the judgement of the Pope,in point of faith.
For the infallibility of his judgement concerning manners,he bringeth one text,which is that of John,16.13,"When the Spirit of truth is come,he will lead you into all truth":where,saith he,by all truth is meant,at least,all truth necessary to salvation.But with this mitigation,he attributeth no more infallibility to the Pope than to any man that professeth Christianity,and is not to be damned:
for if any man err in any point,wherein not to err is necessary to salvation,it is impossible he should be saved;for that only is necessary to salvation without which to be saved is impossible.What points these are I shall declare out of the Scripture in the chapter following.In this place I say no more but that though it were granted the Pope could not possibly teach any error at all,yet doth not this entitle him to any jurisdiction in the dominions of another prince,unless we shall also say a man is obliged in conscience to set on work upon all occasions the best workman,even then also when he hath formerly promised his work to another.
Besides the text,he argueth from reason,thus.If the Pope could err in necessaries,then Christ hath not sufficiently provided for the Church's salvation,because he hath commanded her to follow the Pope's directions.But this reason is invalid,unless he show when and where Christ commanded that,or took at all any notice of a Pope.Nay,granting whatsoever was given to St.Peter was given to the Pope,yet seeing there is in the Scripture no command to any man to obeyeth him when his commands are contrary to those of his lawful sovereign.
