66 EACH APOSTLE INDEPENDENT. could he conveniently dispense all about his ruling and judging in- fluence? how in cases incident could direction be fetched from him or reference be made to him by those subordinate governors, who could not easilyknowwhere to come at him, or whence to hear from him in any competent time? To send to him had been to shoot at rovers:*affairs, therefore, which should depend on his resolution and orders must have had great stops; he could hut very lamely have executed such an office; so that his jurisdiction must have been rather an extreme inconvenience and encumbrance than any wise beneficial or useful to the church. "Gold and silver he had none," or a very small purse, to maintain dependants and officers to help him (nuncios, legates a latere, secre- taries, auditors, &c.) ; infinity of affairs would have oppressed a poor helpless man; and to bear such a burden as they lay on him, no one could be sufficient. 14. It was indeed most requisite that every apostle should have a complete, absolute, independent authority in managing the con- cerns and dutiesof his office, that he might not anywise be obstructed in the discharge of them, not clogged with a need to consult others, not hampered with orders from those who were at distance and could not well descry what was fit in every place to be done. Thedirection of Himwho hadpromised to be " perpetually present with them," and by his Holy Spirit to guide, to instruct, to admonish them upon all occasions, was abundantly sufficient, Matt. xxviii. 20, John xiv. 26, xvi. 13: they did not want any other conduct or aid beside that special light and powerful influence of grace which they received from him; the which bcciticogy tarok, as St Paul speaks, "rendered them sufficient ministers of the new testament," 2 Cor. iii. 6; Rom. xv. 15. Accordingly, their discourse and practice thoroughly savour of such an independence; nor in them is there any appearance of that being true which Bellarmine dictates, that " the apostles depended on St Peter, as on their head and commander."' 15. Particularly, the discourse and behaviour of St Paul towards St Peter evidences that he did not acknowledge any dependence on him, any subjection to him. St Paul often purposely asserts to himself an independent and ab- solute power, inferior or subordinate to none other, insisting thereon for the enforcement or necessary defence of his doctrine and practice (" I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me," says he, 2 Cor. xii. 11, Rom. xi. 13) ; alleging divers pregnant arguments * At rovers, i.e., at random, without any particular aim. En. 1 a quo illi tanquam a capite et imperatore suo pendebant. Bellarm. de Pont., 1. 16.