INVALIDITY OF THE OPPOSITEARGUMENTS. 77 successors to be equal as such; and particularly, that the Roman bishop, upon account of his succeeding St Peter, hasno pre-eminence above his brethren ; for, " Wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome or at Eugubium, at Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at Thanis, he isof the same worth andof the same priesthood. The power of wealth or the lowness of poverty does not render a bishop more highor more low ; for all of them are successors of the apostles."' 19. Neither is it, to prudential esteem, a despicable consideration that themost ancient of the fathers, havingoccasion sometimes largely to discourse of St Peter, do not mention any such prerogatives be- longing to him. 20. The last argument which I shall use against this primacy shall be the insufficiency of those arguments and testimonies which they allege to warrant and prove it. If this point be of so great consequence as they make it; if, as theywould persuade us, the substance, order, unity, and peace of the church, together with the salvation of Christians, depend on it;2 if as they suppose, many great points of truth hang on this pin; if it be, as they declare, a main article of faith, and "not only a simple error, but a pernicious heresy, to deny this primacy;"3then it is re- quisite that a clear revelation from God should be producible in favourof it, for upon that ground only such points can firmly stand; then it is most probable that God, to prevent controversies, occa- sions of doubt, and excuses for error about so grand a matter, would not have failed to have declared it so plainly asmight serve to satisfy any reasonable man, and to convince any froward gainsayer. But no such revelation appears; for the places of Scripture which they allege do not plainly express it nor pregnantly imply it, nor can itby fair consequencebe inferred from them. No man unprepossessedwith affection to their side would descry it in them; without thwarting St Peter's order, and "wresting theScriptures,"2 Pet. iii. 16, they cannot deduce it from them. This by,examining their allegations will appear. I. They allege those words of our Saviour, uttered by him upon occasion of St Peter's confessing him to be the Son of God, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church," Matt. xvi. 18. Here, say they, St Peter is declared the foundation; that is, the sole supreme governor of the church.' Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive Romee sive Eugubii, &c. Hier. adEvagr., Ep. lxxxv. ; Clem. ad Corinth. Iren., iii. 12, iii. 1, 3. [Eugubium, or Gubio (a small town in the Roman States), Rhegium and Thanis [Tunis P] arehere contrasted with the large cities of Rome, Constantinople, and Alexandria, to show that all bishops or pastors are alike successors ofthe apostles. En.] 2 Agitur de summa rei Christiana, &c. Bell. Prmf. ad Lib. de Pontif. R. 3 Est enim revera non simplex error, sed perniciosa lueresis, negare B. Petri prima- tum a Christo institutum.Bell. de Pont. R., i. 10. 4 S. Romana ecclesia nullis synodicis constitutis cæteris ecciesiis prmlata est, sod
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=