Summa de Ecclesia

But that the Roman pontiff is he who succeeds blessed Peter in the amplitude of the principate and the prerogative of dignity in the Church, we have already shown. For which it is to be noted that the see of a bishop is not called first that in which one first sat, but the last in which, lawfully transferred, one finally remained. But Peter, made bishop of the universal Church, from the beginning appropriated to himself no determinate see. Hence he left the see of Jerusalem to James the brother of the Lord; but afterwards he first sat at Antioch, and at length left that to Ignatius, disciple of blessed John the Evangelist, and coming to Rome transferred his see thither — and there finally remaining until death. Hence blessed Marcellus, pope and martyr of Christ, writing to all the bishops constituted throughout Antioch, thus says in the chapter "Rogamus," 24, q. 1: "Although the first see of Peter was at Antioch, afterwards, the Lord commanding, it was transferred to Rome. Not Antioch therefore, which was first, but Rome, the last, ought to be called the see of Peter." Hence whoever is lawfully constituted in the Roman see is made successor of Peter, and consequently full and perfect vicar of Christ. But here it is consequently to be noted, according to Master Peter de Palude, that the election of a bishop is one thing and the election of an archbishop another, since the election of a bishop ought to pertain only to all the clerics of his diocese, or to the greater ones — as to the cathedral church, which is set over the diocese alone — but the archbishop is set over his own diocese in particular and over the whole province in common. But what touches all ought to be approved by all. Hence, as far as the primitive right of electing is concerned, the election of an archbishop belongs not to the cathedral church alone, whose interest is special, but to the suffragans over whom he is set — and so it was once observed. On account of which, in the election of blessed Nicholas as metropolitan of the church of the Myrrheans, the suffragan bishops came together as principals, to whom alone the election would pertain if the archbishop had no determinate see. But since it is difficult always to convoke the suffragans, it was constituted, with the consent of all to whom it belongs, that the election of the archbishop belong to the cathedral church alone, as does that of a bishop. So therefore, if Peter had died before he chose a see at Rome, the election of the successor of Peter would have pertained to the apostles alone as suffragans; but after he remained at Rome, the election belonged, of common right, both to the patriarchs by reason of the universal Church and to the Roman clergy by reason of appropriation, as it seems. But since it was difficult to convoke the patriarchs, nor was it safe to commit so great a business to simple canons alone, the pope instituted, in place of the patriarchs and of the Roman canons, the cardinals to elect the pope — yet so that two parts agree. Hence he who is thus elected Roman pontiff is the true successor of Peter and full vicar of Christ. Hence the canon of the Council of Chalcedon says: "If any bishop is proclaimed infamous, let him have free power of appealing to the most blessed bishop of ancient Rome, whom we have as Peter, the rock of refuge; and unto him alone, in the place of God, be free power of discerning the infamy of a bishop, according to the keys given to him by God." Likewise the fathers in the synod of Constantinople, as brought forward above: "We venerate, according to the Scriptures and the definitions of the canons, the most holy bishop of ancient Rome as first and greatest of bishops." But it says "of ancient Rome" to distinguish from Constantinople, which Constantine, transferring his see thither and extolling it with the privileges owed to Rome, willed to be called new Rome. Likewise blessed Jerome, writing to Pope Damasus in ch. "Quoniam vetus," 24, q. 1, says: "I speak with the successor of the fisherman." Likewise of this blessed succession the truthful witness is Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople, who in his epistle to Pope Adrian, which was read and received in the eighth universal synod, thus speaks: "God alone, and wholly Master of all, says to Peter, great and supreme of the apostles: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell,' etc. And again: 'To thee I will give the keys,' etc. For such blessed voices He circumscribed and defined unto Peter alone, prince of the apostles, in no wise by any lot, but through him transferred them also unto all who after him were to be made according to him supreme pastors and most divine sacred pontiffs of elder Rome." Moved by this reason, Innocent 3, Roman pontiff, writing to the Emperor of Constantinople, as is had in ch. "Solitae," in the Extra, on majority and obedience, says: "For unto us in blessed Peter the sheep of Christ are committed, the Lord saying: 'Feed My sheep' — distinguishing not between these sheep and those, so that he would show himself estranged from His fold who does not recognize Peter and his successors as masters and pastors" — thus he. Likewise for the same reason Innocent 4, Roman pontiff, presiding in the general Council of Lyons, as is had in the Extra, on homicide, in ch. "Pro humani," bk. 6, thus says: "The Son of God, Jesus Christ — lest, about to ascend to the Father after the resurrection, he leave the flock, gloriously redeemed at the price of his glorious blood, without a pastor — committed its care unto blessed Peter. Hence we, made successors of the same apostle, the Lord disposing, although unworthy, and holding, however unworthily, the place of the Redeemer Himself on earth," etc. From these words it most clearly follows, as Pope Julius says, that just as blessed Peter the apostle was first of all the apostles, so the Roman Church, consecrated in his name, the Lord instituting, is first and head of all churches. The words are of the canon in ch. "Dudum," 3, q. 6. Concerning which also blessed Anacletus, in ch. "Sacrosancta," dist. 22, thus says: "The most holy Roman Church obtained the primacy not from the apostles but from the Lord Saviour Himself, as is said to blessed Peter the apostle: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock,' and the rest, down to 'loosed in heaven.' There was joined in fellowship in the same Roman city the most blessed Paul the apostle, vessel of election, who on one day, at one time, was crowned with Peter in glorious death; and both consecrated the holy Roman Church, and preferred her, both by their presence and by their venerable triumph, to all other cities in the whole world." And it follows below: "The first see therefore is the Roman Church, by heavenly benefit." From these things two errors are most openly eliminated. The first is of those saying that it is not of the necessity of salvation to believe the Roman Church supreme among churches. These were condemned in the Council of Constance. The second error is of those who say that blessed Peter was never Roman bishop — since, as they say, as Ocham relates in his dialogue, it is not found in the whole of divine Scripture that blessed Peter was at Rome. Against whom first is Sacred Scripture: blessed Peter says at the end of ch. 5 of his first canonical epistle: "The Church which is in Babylon saluteth you" — where, according to the Gloss, Bede names Rome Babylon on account of the worship of idolatry. Unto the same is blessed Jerome, who in his book on illustrious men thus says: "Peter in his first epistle under the name of Babylon figuratively signifies Rome, saying: 'The Church which is in Babylon, elect, saluteth you, and Mark my son.'" Secondly, the aforesaid error — granted that Sacred Scripture did not expressly say that Peter was at Rome — is sufficiently condemned by the testimonies of the holy fathers. For Jerome says on that passage to the Rom. 1, "I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual grace to strengthen you," thus: "The Apostle Paul says that he wishes to strengthen the Romans, holding the faith by the preaching of Peter — not that they had received less from Peter, but that, with two apostles testifying and teaching, their faith might be fortified" — thus he. Eusebius, an excellent doctor, in the Ecclesiastical History, ch. 13, is an illustrious witness of this matter, thus saying: "In the very times of Claudius, the mercy of divine providence brings Peter, most approved of all the apostles and greatest in the magnificence of the virtue of faith by the merit of his elders, the prince, unto the city, as a leader and master of its warfare against the common destruction of the human race, knowing how to wage the battles of the Lord and to guard the camps of the virtues — he, coming from the regions of the east, as a heavenly merchant, brought the merchandise of the divine light, should there be any to buy it, and by the word of salutary preaching first in the city of Rome with the keys of his Gospel opened the door of the heavenly kingdom" — thus he. Likewise blessed Bernard, in a certain epistle to Pope Eugene, thus confirms what is proposed, saying: "The place, I say, in which thou standest is holy ground; the place of Peter is the place of the prince of the apostles, where his feet stood, whom the Lord constituted lord of His house and prince of all His possession." Likewise against this error is blessed Anacletus in ch. "Sacrosancta," dist. 22, as is clear a little before. Likewise blessed Ambrose, in his epistle against Auxentius on the handing over of the basilicas, thus speaks of blessed Peter: "By night he began to go forth from the walls, and seeing Christ meeting him at the gate and entering the city, he said: 'Lord, whither goest Thou?' Christ answered: 'I come to Rome to be crucified again.' Peter understood that the divine answer pertained to his own cross." Thus Ambrose. This is also confirmed through the same Ambrose in ch. "Beati," 2, q. 7, where Ambrose thus speaks: "Peter and Paul suffered martyrdom in the city of Rome, which holds the principate and headship of the nations — that where was the head of superstition, there the head of holiness might rest; and where the princes of the Gentiles dwelt, there also the princes of the churches might abide." This also confirms blessed Marcellus the pope in ch. "Rogamus," 24, q. 1, which was brought forward above. This also the Emperor Constantine, in the epistle which he directs to the universal Church, in ch. "Constantinus," dist. 96, thus testifies: "Where the principate of priests and the head of the Christian religion is constituted by the heavenly Emperor, it is not just that the earthly emperor have power there." This also the apostolic see confirms in ch. "Per venerabilem," in the Extra, on those who are legitimate sons, and in ch. "Fundamenta," in the Extra, on election, in bk. 6. It is clear therefore, by the testimony both of Sacred Scripture and of the holy fathers, and also of the apostolic see, that blessed Peter was at Rome, where he held the episcopal chair until death. From which is confounded the presumption of the Armenians and Greeks, who do not recognize the Roman pontiff as successor of Peter and pastor of the universal Church. But if it be asked which of the churches of the city of Rome hath this prerogative of superiority over all the other churches of the world, to this it seems that answer must be given, according to our elders, that the church of blessed John of the Lateran. Hence Pope Melchiades, in ch. "Futuram," 12, q. 1, speaking of the Emperor Constantine, thus says: "Finally, the same aforesaid prince conferred immense gifts, and instituted the fabric of the first see of blessed Peter in the Lateran patriarchate" — as Hugh expounds. Secondly, unto the same is Pope Nicholas, writing to the archbishops and bishops of the metropolitan see and to all the clergy of the church of Constantinople, thus saying: "A synod having been gathered in the Church of God in which blessed Peter, prince of the apostles, is fragrant in body and gleams with virtues — whence, on account of the colder place, in the Church of the Saviour, which is called Constantinian from its author, and which was first built by Constantine in the whole world by his command" — thus he. Thirdly, unto the same is Peter of Ravenna, in his sermon on blessed John the Baptist, which begins "Today, most beloved," in which he thus says: "The tenth step is the assertion of the mother church; for that mistress of all churches, the Roman Church, to whom it was said, 'I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not,' was consecrated and signed in honor of blessed John the Baptist after the name of the Saviour" — thus he. Fourthly, unto the same is Hugh, in ch. "Futuram," 12, q. 1, who, having recited the opinion of those saying that the first see of Peter is the church of St. Peter, thus subjoins: "I however believe that the church of St. John of the Lateran is the first papal see, and not the church of St. Peter. For Constantine built that one. Besides, the church of St. Peter is not patriarchal but episcopal — but of the bishopric of Porto." Thus he. Concerning this we have said more fully above on ch. "Dudum," 3, q. 6.