SERM. Wonder then if he were called the rock ra

VI. ther than any other, who was first in laying the foundation of the church, tho' all were fellow-labourers with him, and invefted with equal authority.

Such primacy of action, as well as of precedency and reputation, may fairly be afcribed to this great Apoftle, confiftently with scripture and with catholick tradition. But a Primacy of fovereign power and jurifdiction (fuch as the Popes pretend to claim by their fucceffion to him) was never either challenged by St. Peter to himself, or acknowledged in him by the other Apostles. In all councils and debates he took no more upon him than what was fuitable to the character of a chief fpeaker; one that was forward to propofe and argue, but not to decide or determine

his own authority. St. Paul, who was the laft in his call to the Apostleship, yet tells us he came not behind the very chiefeft Apoftles, but received of St. Peter, among others, the right-hand of fellowship; and when he obferv'd his conduct blameable, took occafion to reprove him with fuch fmartness and freedom, as could but ill have become him, if that fame St. Peter had been really acknowledg'd for his prince and fovereign.

How weak again and infolent had been the contrivance of the fons of Zebedee to

gain the principal preferments in our Sa-SER M. viour's kingdom, if they had understood VI. the primacy to be enfured already to St. Peter by our Lord himself? And how ridiculous had been the envy of the other difciples, and particularly of St. Peter, to have fear'd the fuccefs of that ignorant ambition, which afpired to fuch honours as had been granted to another?

Upon the wholé, we may have leave to conclude, that, tho' the church might be built upon the labours of St. Peter more eminently than the reft, yet this was not understood to confer any fupremacy of power. And from this view which we have taken of the foundation of the church, proceed we, in the

II. SECOND place, to confider its fecurity; and the gates of hell fhall not prevail against it.

There is fome doubt about the relative pronoun at the end of the verfe, whether it relates to the rock or the church to be erected on it. Some have understood it of the rock, and accordingly have interpreted these words to contain nothing but a promife of St. Peter's conftancy in that faith he had but now confefs'd, that, like a rock, he should remain impregnable, and

* Le Clerc's Addit. to Dr. Hammond on the New Teftament.

SERM. not all the terrors of death, none of the vaVI. rious difficulties he should have to grapple

with, fhould be able to shake or to remove him from it. And if we take this to relate, not to the whole following time of this Apoftle's life, but only to the times which fucceeded the miraculous effufion of the Holy Spirit, and to imply this Apostle's final perfeverance with conftancy and refolution even unto death, (as our Lord afterwards took another occafion to fignify by what death he should glorify God) then was the promise or prediction moft exactly fulfill'd in his refolute confeffion of this faith before the Roman Emperor, and perfifting in it under the most shameful and accurfed death of crucifixion. The fame affiftance of Divine grace which fupported him in fuch extremities, is ready to affist all the faithful difciples and followers of Jefus, who agree with him in this good confeffion, and love the Lord Jefus in fincerity.

But the truth is, it is much more natural, as well as more generally approved, to understand these words, not of the rock itself, but of the church to be built by the labours of St. Peter and the reft, who had witneffed this good confeffion, and fo laid a foundation which could not be moved.

The

The difficulty that remains is to account SER M. for the meaning of that other expreffion, VI. the gates of bell. Now, as the gates of cities were anciently made ufe of both for garrisons and likewife for councils or courts of juftice, from hence this phrase of the gates of bell has been taken to imply all that ftrength and policy of Satan, whereby he conftantly endeavours to extinguish and deftroy the church of Chrift, either by the vices and fcandalous examples of its members, or by fowing fchifms and herefies among them, or elfe by the Perfecutions of Tyrants and mercilefs Oppreffors. But against this it has been urged, that the metaphor is inconfiftent, and whatever ftrength or policy may be afcribed to gates, yet they are only places of defence, not meant to make attacks upon the enemy, but only to receive and defeat those which the enemy fhould make. And therefore when we read here of the gates of hell, 'tis fuppofed we cannot by this expreffion understand any offenfive hoftilities of the Devil or his inftruments, but only the defence they make against the preaching of the gofpel, those ftrong holds by which they fortify themfelves against the weapons of our fpiritual warfare. And in this view thefe words contain a promise that Chrift's Reign fhall be triumphant, that he fhall be fuccessful in his conflict with the powers of dark

nefs

SERM. nefs, no longer able to ftand out against VI. him, and shall finally deftroy the kingdom of fin and Satan by erecting of his own.

And yet how plaufibly foever this other fense of the words may feem to be maintain'd, there are two ccnfiderable objections to be made against it. (1.) That whilft the church is spoken of under the figure of a building, it cannot, confiftently with that figure of speech, be reckon'd to make war or lay fiege to any other, but only to ftand out against the attacks that are made upon it. And (2.) That the word xaoxuey, which is here render'd prevail, is not properly applied to the befieged refifting the affaults and batteries from without, but rather to the befiegers oppreffing those within, and rufhing in upon them by storm and violence; fo that when 'tis faid the gates of hell fhall not prevail against the church, the gates of bell may feem to be confider'd as the befiegers, and the church itself as beleaguer'd or befieged by them.

The inconvenience then appears to be in both cafes equal; and the truth is, the eastern manner of expreffion abounds fo much with metaphors, that 'tis unreafonable to press them on to every circumftance, and expect the fame congruity as if the matter had been nakedly exprefs'd, without a figure. But indeed both these in-.

terpre