Supremacy
preservation of their good names, in the help and relief of their posterity, as time and occasion shall be offered. Ruth. 1. 8, John. 19.
23.
Conclusion II. We pray further in general manner for the faithful departed, that God would hasten their joyful resurrection, and the full accomplishment of their happiness, both for the body and soul: and thus much we ask in saying, Thy kingdom come, that is, not only the kingdom of grace, but also the kingdom of glory in heaven. Thus far we come; but nearer the gates of Babylon we dare not approch.
Conclusion. III. To pray for particular men departed: and to pray for their deliverance out of purgatory, we think it unlawful: because we have neither promise nor commandment so to do.
Of the Supremacy in Causes Ecclesiastical I. Our Consent Touching the point of supremacy ecclesiastical I will set down how near we may come to the Roman Church in two conclusions:
Conclusion 1.
For the founding of the primitive church, the ministry of the Word was distinguished by degrees not only of order, but also of power— and Peter was called to the highest degree. Christ "ascended up on high and gave gifts unto men," for the good of His church, "as some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and doctors" (Eph. 4:11). Now, howsoever one apostle be not above another, or one evangelist above another, or one pastor above another, yet an apostle was above an evangelist, and an evangelist
above all pastors and teachers. And Peter was by calling an apostle, and therefore above all evangelists and pastors, having the highest room in the ministry of the New Testament, both for order and authority.
Conclusion 2.
Among the twelve apostles, Peter had a threefold privilege or prerogative: 1. The prerogative of authority. 2. Of primacy. 3. Of principality. For the first, by the privilege of authority, I mean a preeminence in regard of estimation, whereby he was had in reverence above the rest of the twelve apostles; for Cephas, with James and John "are called pillars" and "seemed to be great" (Gal.
2:6, 9). Again, he had the preeminence of primacy because he was the first named, as the foreman of the quest. "The names of the twelve apostles are these, the first is Simon, called Peter" (Matt.
10:2). Third, he had the preeminence of principality among the twelve because in regard of the measure of grace, he excelled the rest.
For when Christ asked His disciples whom they said He was, Peter, as being of the greatest ability and zeal, answered for them all [Matt.
6:16]. I use this clause, among the twelve, because Paul excelled Peter every way—in learning, zeal, understanding—as far as Peter excelled the rest. And thus near we come to popish supremacy.
II. The Difference The Church of Rome gives to Peter a supremacy under Christ above all causes and persons. That is, full power to govern and order the Catholic Church upon the whole earth, both for doctrine and regiment. This supremacy stands (as they teach) in a power of judgment, to determine of the true sense of all places of Scripture; to determine all causes of faith; to assemble general councils; to ratify the decrees of the said councils; to excommunicate any man upon earth that lives within the church, even princes and nations; properly to absolve and forgive sins; to decide causes brought to him by appeal from all the parts of the earth; lastly, to make laws that shall
bind the conscience. This fullness of power with one consent is ascribed to Peter and the bishops of Rome that follow him in a supposed succession. Now we hold on the contrary, that neither
Peter, nor any bishop of Rome, has any supremacy over the catholic church, but that all supremacy under Christ is pertaining to kings and princes within their dominions. And that this our doctrine is good and theirs false and forged, I will make it manifest by sundry reasons:
Reason 1.
Christ must be considered of us as a king two ways. First, as He is God; and so is He an absolute king over all things in heaven and earth, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, by the right of creation.
Second, He is a king as He is a redeemer of mankind; and by the right of redemption He is a sovereign king over the whole church, and that in special manner. Now as Christ is God with the Father and the Holy Ghost, He has His deputies on earth to govern the world, as namely kings and princes, who are therefore in Scripture called gods.
But as Christ is Mediator, and consequently a King over His redeemed ones, He has neither fellow nor deputy. No fellow—for then He should be an imperfect mediator. No deputy—for no creature is capable of this office, to do in the room and stead of Christ that which He Himself does. Because every work of the Mediator is a compound work, arising of the effects of two natures concurring in one and the same action, namely the Godhead and the manhood. And therefore, to the effecting of the said work, there is required an infinite power which far exceeds the strength of any created nature. Again [in] Hebrews 7:24, Christ is said to have a priesthood which cannot pass from His person to any other. Whence it follows that neither His kingly nor His prophetical office can pass from Him to any creature—either in whole or in part—because the three offices of mediation in this regard be equal. No, it is a needless thing for Christ to have a deputy to put in execution any part of His mediatorship, considering a deputy only serves to supply the absence of the principal, whereas Christ is always present with His church by
His Word and Spirit. For where two or three be gathered together in His name, He is in the midst among them. It may be said that the ministers in the work of the ministry are deputies of Christ. I answer that they are no deputies, but active instruments. For in the preaching of the Word there be two actions: the first is the uttering or propounding of it to the ear; the second is the inward operation of the Holy Ghost in the heart, which indeed is the principal and belongs to Christ alone, the action of speaking in the minister being only instrumental. Thus likewise, the church of God, in cutting off any member by excommunication, is no more but an instrument performing a ministry in the name of Christ; and that is, to testify and pronounce whom Christ Himself has cut off from the kingdom of heaven—whom He also will have, for this cause, to be severed from the company of His own people until he repents. And so it is in all ecclesiastical actions. Christ has no deputy but only instruments, the whole entire action being personal in respect of Christ. This one conclusion overthrows not only the pope's supremacy, but also many other points of popery.
Reason 2.
All the apostles in regard of power and authority were equal, for the commission apostolical both for right and execution was given equally to them all, as the very words import: "Go teach all nations, baptizing them, etc." (Matt. 28:19). And the promise, "I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven," is not private to Peter, but is made in his person to the rest according as his confession was in the name of the rest. Thus says Theophylact, [on] Mark 16: "They have the power of committing and binding that receive the gift of a bishop as Peter." And Ambrose says, in Psalm 38, "What is said to Peter is said to the apostles." Therefore, Peter had no supremacy over the rest of the apostles in respect of right to the commission, which they say belongs to him only, and the execution thereof to the rest. But let all be granted that Peter was in commission above the rest for the time of his life. Yet hence may not any superiority be gathered for the bishops of Rome because the authority of the apostles was personal,
and consequently ceased with them, without being conveyed to any other because the Lord did not vouchsafe the like honor to any after them. For first of all, it was the privilege of the apostles to be called immediately, and to see the Lord Jesus. Second, they had power to give the gift of the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands. Third, they had such a measure of the assistance of the Spirit, that in their public sermons, and in [the] writing of the Word, they could not err.
And these things were all denied to those that followed after them.
And that their authority ceased in their persons, it stands with reason also, because it was given in so ample a manner for the founding of the church of the New Testament; which being once founded, it was needful only that there should be pastors and teachers for the building of it up unto the end of the world.
Reason 3.
When the sons of Zebedee sued unto Christ for the greatest rooms of honor in His kingdom (deeming He should be an earthly king),
Christ answers them again, "Ye know that the Lords of the Gentiles have dominion and they that are great exercise authority over them: but it shall not be so with you." Bernard applies these very words to Pope Eugenius on this manner: "It is plain," says he, "that here dominion is forbidden the apostles. Go to then; dare if you will, to take upon you ruling and apostleship, or in your apostleship rule or dominion; if you will have both alike, you shall lose both. Otherwise you must not think yourself exempted from the number of them of whom the Lord complains thus: they have reigned, but not of me; they have been, and I have not known them."
Reason 4.
[Eph. 4:11.] Mention is made of gifts which Christ gave to His church after His ascension, whereby some were apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers. Now if there had been an office in which men, as deputies of Christ, should have governed the whole church to the end of the world, the calling might here have
been named fitly with a gift thereto pertaining. And Paul (no doubt) would not here have concealed it where he mentions callings of lesser importance.
Reason 5.
The pope's supremacy was judged by sentences of Scripture and condemned long before it was manifest in the world; the Spirit of prophecy foreseeing and foretelling the state of things to come. "The man of sin (which is that Antichrist) shall exalt himself above all that is called God, etc." (2 Thess. 2:3–4). Now this whole chapter with all the circumstances thereof, most fitly agrees to the see of Rome and the head thereof. And the thing which then stayed the revealing of the man of sin [v. 6], is of the most expounded to be the Roman emperor. I will allege one testimony in the room of many.
Chrysostom says on this place, "As long as the empire shall be had in awe, no man shall straightly submit himself to Antichrist; but after that empire shall be dissolved, Antichrist shall invade the estate of the empire standing void, and shall labor to pull unto himself the empire both of man and God." And this we find now in experience to be true, for the see of Rome never flourished until the Empire decayed, and the seat thereof was removed from the city of Rome.
Again, [in] Revelation 13, mention is made of two beasts, one coming out of the sea, whom the papists confess to be the heathenish Roman
Emperor; the second coming out of the earth, which does all that the first beast could do before him. And this fitly agrees to the popes of Rome, who do and have done all things that the emperor did or could do, and that in his very sight.
Reason 6.
The judgment of the ancient church. Cyprian says, "Doubtless the same were the rest of the apostles that Peter was, endued with equal fellowship both of honor and of power; but a beginning is made of unity that the church may appear to be one." Gregory says, "If one be called universal bishop, the universal church goes to decay." And