If Christ made the grant of preeminence to him, when he said Tu es Petrus, why did the Apostles enquire afterwards, who among them should be greatest? And why did not our Saviour on that dispute, plainly satisfy them, that Peter was to be chief? But chose rather to so determine the Question, as to evince them of the vanity of any such enquiry? And yet the determination of it, is that, that lies at the bottom of the Papal Monarchy. And why doth Paul say, that he was in nothing inferior to any of the Apostles, when, (if these Gent: say true) he was in many things inferior to Peter? What special place hath the name of Peter, in the foundation of the new Jerusalem, Rev. 21. 14.? What exaltation hath his Throne among the Twelve, whereon the Apostles judge the World, and house of Israel, Mat. 19. 28. What Eminency of commission for teaching all Nations, or for, giving sins? What had his keys more then those of the rest of the Apostles, Joh. 20. 3.? What was peculiar in that triple command of feeding the sheep of Christ, but his triple denial, ⟨p. 174⟩that preceded? Is an injunction for the performance of duty, a grant of new Authority? But that we may make some progress, suppose this also; Why, this Power, Privilege, and Jurisdiction of Peter, was to be transferred to his successors, when the power of all the other Apostles, as such, dyed with them. But what pretence, or colour of it, is there for this Assertion? What one title or [Greek or Hebrew] is there in the whole book of God, giving the least countenance to this imagination? what distinction between Peter and the rest of the Apostles on this account, is once made, or in any kind insinuated? Certainly this was a thing of great importance to the Churches, to have been acquainted with it, When Paul so sadly tells the Church, that after his departure grievous Wolves would spoil the flock, and many among themselves would arise, speaking perverse things, to draw Disciples after them; why did he not give them the least direction, to make their address to him, that should succeed Peter in his Power and Office, for relief and redress? Strange! that it should be of necessity to Salvation, to be subject to him, in whom this power of Peter was to be continued, that he was to be one, in whom ⟨p. 175⟩the Saints were to be consummated;
If Christ made the grant of preheminencie to him, when he said Tu es Petrus, why did the Apostles enquire afterwards, who among them should be greatest? And why did not our Saviour on that dispute, plainly satisfy them, that Peter was to be chiefe? But chose rather to so determine the Question, as to evince them of the vanity of any such enquiry? And yet the determination of it, is that, that lyes at the bottome of the Papall Monarchy. And why doth Paul say, that he was in nothing inferiour to any of the Apostles, when, (if these Gent: say true) he was in many things inferiour to Peter? What speciall place hath the name of Peter, in the foundation of the new Jerusalem, Rev. 21. 14.? What exaltation hath his Throne among the Twelve, whereon the Apostles judge the World, and house of Israel, Mat. 19. 28. What Eminencie of commission for teaching all Nations, or for, giving sinnes? What had his keys more then those of the rest of the Apostles, Joh. 20. 3.? What was peculiar in that triple command of feeding the sheep of Christ, but his triple deniall, ⟨p. 174⟩that preceded? Is an injunction for the performance of duty, a grant of new Authority? But that we may make some progresse, suppose this also; Why, this Power, Priviledge, and Jurisdiction of Peter, was to be transferred to his successors, when the power of all the other Apostles, as such, dyed with them. But what pretence, or colour of it, is there for this Assertion? What one title or 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 is there in the whole book of God, giving the least countenance to this imagination? what distinction between Peter and the rest of the Apostles on this account, is once made, or in any kind insinuated? Certainly this was a thing of great importance to the Churches, to have been acquainted with it, When Paul so sadly tells the Church, that after his departure grievous Wolves would spoyle the flock, and many among themselves would arise, speaking perverse things, to draw Disciples after them; why did he not give them the least direction, to make their addresse to him, that should succeed Peter in his Power and Office, for reliefe and redresse? Strange! that it should be of necessity to Salvation, to be subject to him, in whom this power of Peter was to be continued, that he was to be one, in whom ⟨p. 175⟩the Saints were to be consummated;
