A26898:1819
Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part…
Church-history of the government of bishops and their councils abbreviated including the chief part of the government of Christian princes and popes, and a true account of the most troubling controversies and heresies till the Reformation ... / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed by B. Griffin for Thomas Simmons, 1680
Church-History OF BISHOPS And their COUNCILS ABRIDGED, &c. › Chapter 12
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The great argument of the Pope was [The Disciple is not above his Master. One Gunibert undertook to prove, That the Pope had no such power, but what he had usurped, and taken to himself, but might be judged. But the foresaid Argument struck all dead. But might not these Prelates have understood, 1. That the Pope himself may have a Master in Philosophy, Physic, &c.? And is he not for all that, Above his Master? 2. Is the King above no Master that teacheth him in any Art or Science? 3. Are not Christ's words plainly to be understood, of Superiority and Inferiority in eodem genere? The Disciple as such is not above his Master; but as a King he may: or else Princes give up their Kingdoms to every Schoolmaster that they choose. 4. This Doctrine sets not only Popes and Prelates, but every teaching Priest or Preacher above the King; for to such the King may be a Disciple. 5. This tendeth therefore to tempt Princes to be utterly ignorant and brutish;1 for fear lest by learning any thing of any Master, they should give away their Kingdoms. And if Children be Kings by inheritance, what a snare is here laid to undo them? 6. Doth not the Holy Ghost say, Let every Soul be subject; and were not Peter and the Apostles some of these Souls? Did not Christ himself and Peter pay Tribute?
The great argument of the Pope was [The Disciple is not above his Master. One Gunibert undertook to prove, That the Pope had no such power, but what he had usurped, and taken to himself, but might be judged. But the foresaid Argument struck all dead. But might not these Prelates have understood, 1. That the Pope himself may have a Master in Philosophy, Physick, &c.? And is he not for all that, Above his Master? 2. Is the King above no Master that teacheth him in any Art or Science? 3. Are not Christ's words plainly to be understood, of Superiority and Inferiority in eodem genere? The Disciple as such is not above his Master; but as a King he may: or else Princes give up their Kingdoms to every Schoolmaster that they choose. 4. This Doctrine sets not only Popes and Prelates, but every teaching Priest or Preacher above the King; for to such the King may be a Disciple. 5. This tendeth therefore to tempt Princes to be utterly ignorant and brutish;1 for fear lest by learning any thing of any Master, they should give away their Kingdoms. And if Children be Kings by inheritance, what a snare is here laid to undo them? 6. Doth not the Holy Ghost say, Let every Soul be subject; and were not Peter and the Apostles some of these Souls? Did not Christ himself and Peter pay Tribute?