Of five books he hath written of this subject,the first containeth three questions:one,which is simply the best government,monarchy,aristocracy,or democracy,and concludeth for neither,but for a government mixed of all three;another,which of these is the best government of the Church,and concludeth for the mixed,but which should most participate of monarchy;the third,whether in this mixed monarchy,St.Peter had the place of monarch.
Concerning his first conclusion,I have already sufficiently proved (Chapter eighteen)that all governments,which men are bound to obey,are ****** and absolute.In monarchy there is but one man supreme,and all other men that have any kind of power in the state have it by his commission,during his pleasure,and execute it in his name;and in aristocracy and democracy,but one supreme assembly,with the same power that in monarchy belongeth to the monarch,which is not a mixed,but an absolute sovereignty.And of the three sorts,which is the best is not to be disputed where any one of them is already established;but the present ought always to be preferred,maintained,and accounted best,because it is against both the law of nature and the divine positive law to do anything tending to the subversion thereof.Besides,it maketh nothing to the power of any pastor (unless he have the civil sovereignty)what kind of government is the best,because their calling is not to govern men by commandment,but to teach them and persuade them by arguments,and leave it to them to consider whether they shall embrace or reject the doctrine taught.For monarchy,aristocracy,and democracy do mark out unto us three sorts of sovereigns,not of pastors;or,as we may say,three sorts of masters of families,not three sorts of schoolmasters for their children.
And therefore the second conclusion,concerning the best form of government of the Church,is nothing to the question of the Pope's power without his own dominions:for in all other Commonwealths his power,if he have any at all,is that of the schoolmaster only,and not of the master of the family.
For the third conclusion,which is that St.Peter was monarch of the Church,he bringeth for his chief argument the place of St.Matthew,"Thou art Peter,and upon this rock I will build my church,"etc."And I will give thee the keys of heaven;whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."Which place,well considered,proveth no more but that the Church of Christ hath for foundation one only article;namely,that which Peter,in the name of all the Apostles professing,gave occasion to our Saviour to speak the words here cited.Which that we may clearly understand,we are to consider,that our Saviour preached by himself,by John Baptist,and by his Apostles,nothing but this article of faith,"that he was the Christ";all other articles requiring faith no otherwise than as founded on that.John began first,preaching only this,"The kingdom of God is at hand."Then our Saviour himself preached the same:and to his twelve Apostles,when he gave them their commission,there is no mention of preaching any other article but that.This was the fundamental article,that is the foundation of the Church's faith.Afterwards the Apostles being returned to him,he asketh them all,not Peter only,who men said he was;and they answered that some said he was John the Baptist,some Elias,and others Jeremias,or one of the Prophets;then he asked them all again,not Peter only,"Whom say ye that I am?"Therefore St.
Peter answered for them all,"Thou art Christ,the Son of the living God";which I said is the foundation of the faith of the whole Church;from which our Saviour takes the occasion of saying,"upon this stone I will build my Church":by which it is manifest that by the foundation-stone of the Church was meant the fundamental article of the Church's faith.But why then,will some object,doth our Saviour interpose these words,"Thou art Peter"?If the original of this text had been rigidly the reason would easily have appeared.We are therefore to consider that the Apostle Simon was surnamed Stone (which is the signification of the Syriac word cephas,and of the Greek word petrus).Our Saviour therefore after the confession of that fundamental article,alluding to his name,said (as if it were in English)thus,"Thou art Stone,and upon this Stone I will build my Church":which is as much as to say,"This article,that I am the Christ,is the foundation of all the faith I require in those that are to be members my Church."Neither is this allusion to a name an unusual thing in common speech:but it had been a strange and obscure speech,if our Saviour,intending to build his Church on the person of St.Peter,had said,"Thou art a stone,and upon this stone I will build my Church,"when it was so obvious,without ambiguity,to have said,"I will build my Church on thee";and yet there had been still the same allusion to his name.
And for the following words,"I will give thee the keys of heaven,"etc.,it is no more than what our Saviour gave also to all the rest of his Disciples,"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.And whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."But howsoever this be interpreted,there is no doubt but the power here granted belongs to all supreme pastors;such as are all Christian civil sovereigns in their own dominions.
Insomuch as if St.Peter,or our Saviour himself,had converted any of them to believe him and to acknowledge his kingdom;yet because his kingdom is not of this world,he had left the supreme care of converting his subjects to none but him;or else he must have deprived him of the sovereignty to which the right of teaching is inseparably annexed.And thus much in refutation of his first book,wherein he would prove St.Peter to have been the monarch universal of the Church,that is to say,of all the Christians in the world.
