Lastly,it hath not been declared by the Church,nor by the Pope himself,that he is the civil of all the Christians in the world;and therefore all Christians are not bound to acknowledge his jurisdiction in point of manners.For the civil sovereignty,and supreme judicature in controversies of manners,are the same thing:
and the makers of civil laws are not only declarers,but also makers of the justice and injustice of actions;there being nothing in men's manners that makes them righteous or unrighteous,but their conformity with the law of the sovereign.And therefore when the Pope challengeth supremacy in controversies of manners,he teacheth men to disobey the civil sovereign;which is an erroneous doctrine,contrary to the many precepts of our Saviour and his Apostles delivered to us in the Scripture.
To prove the Pope has power to make laws,he allegeth many places;as first,Deuteronomy,17.12,"The man that will do presumptuously,and will not hearken unto the priest,that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God,or unto the judge,even that man shall die,and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel."For answer whereunto we are to remember that the high priest,next and immediately under God,was the civil sovereign;and all judges were to be constituted by him.The words alleged sound therefore thus,"The man that will presume to disobey the civil sovereign for the time being,or any of his officers,in the execution of their places,that man shall die,"etc.,which is clearly for the civil sovereignty,against the universal power of the Pope.
Secondly,he allegeth that of Matthew,16,"Whatsoever ye shall bind,"etc.,and interpreteth it for such binding as is attributed to the Scribes and Pharisees,"They bind heavy burdens,and grievous to be borne,and lay them on men's shoulders";by which is meant,he says,****** of laws;and concludes thence that the Pope can make laws.But this also maketh only for the legislative power of civil sovereigns:for the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses'chair,but Moses next under God was sovereign of the people of Israel:and therefore our Saviour commanded them to do all that they should say,but not all that they should do;that is,to obey their laws,but not follow their example.
The third place is John,21.16,"Feed my sheep";which is not a power to make laws,but a command to teach.Making laws belongs to the lord of the family,who by his own discretion chooseth his chaplain,as also a schoolmaster to teach his children.
The fourth place,John,20.21,is against him.The words are,"As my Father sent me,so send I you."But our Saviour was sent to redeem by his death such as should believe;and by his own and his Apostles'preaching to prepare them for their entrance into his kingdom;which he himself saith is not of this world,and hath taught us to pray for the coming of it hereafter,though he refused to tell his Apostles when it should come;and in which,when it comes,the twelve Apostles shall sit on twelve thrones (every one perhaps as high as that of St.Peter),to judge the twelve tribes of Israel.
Seeing then God the Father sent not our Saviour to make laws in this present world,we may conclude from the text that neither did our Saviour send St.Peter to make laws here,but to persuade men to expect his second coming with a steadfast faith;and in the meantime,if subjects,to obey their princes;and if princes,both to believe it themselves and to do their best to make their subjects do the same,which is the office of a bishop.Therefore this place maketh most strongly for the joining of the ecclesiastical supremacy to the civil sovereignty,contrary to that which Cardinal Bellarmine allegeth it for.
The fifth is Acts,15.28,"It hath seemed good to the Holy Spirit,and to us,to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things,that ye abstain from meats offered to idols,and from blood,and from things strangled,and from fornication."Here he notes the word "laying of burdens"for the legislative power.But who is there that,reading this text,can say this style of the Apostles may not as properly be used in giving counsel as in ****** laws?The style of a law is,"we command":but,"we think good,"is the ordinary style of them that but give advice;and they lay a burden that give advice,though it be conditional,that is,if they to whom they give it will attain their ends:and such is the burden of abstaining from things strangled,and from blood,not absolute,but in case they will not err.I have shown before (Chapter twenty-five)that law is distinguished from counsel in this,that the reason of a law is taken from the design and benefit of him that prescribeth it;but the reason of a counsel,from the design and benefit of him to whom the counsel is given.But here,the Apostles aim only at the benefit of the converted Gentiles,namely,their salvation;not at their own benefit;for having done their endeavour,they shall have their reward,whether they be obeyed or not.And therefore the acts of this council were not laws,but counsels.
