"The ministers of Christ's kingdom have power. to loose and bind, as they see the Scriptures teach them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you forgive . . . but not whensoever Sir John Lacklatin will for money lay his hand on his head."1

Again, it is frequently stated that what our Lord promised in Matt. xvi. and xviii. He actually gave in John xx., no distinction of the commissions being made. In the Obedience of a Christian Man Tindale writes: "Christ "Christ promised (to Peter) the keys in the person of all (Matt. xvi.) And in John xx. He paid them, saying, 'Receive ye the Holy Ghost . . Coverdale (1540) has an exactly parallel passage: "The keys which were promised unto Peter, and in him to the whole Church (Matt. xvi.), are here (John xx.) given of Christ.""

2 Cor. ii. See Nowell's Catechism (1570), pp. 57, 176. Ques. "Why dost thou . . . after the Church, make mention of the forgiveness of sins? Ans. Because the keys... i.e. that power of binding and loosing, of reserving and forgiving sins, which standeth in the ministry of the Word of God, is by Christ. . . committed to the Church, and properly belongeth to the Church." In Cranmer's translation of Justus Jonas's Catechism, (see p. 234), the commission of John xx. is thus explained, "that they may loose us, and declare unto us the forgiveness of sins when we truly repent." Cranmer's Catechism, p. 198. Oxford, 1829.

1 Pilkington, p. 271.

2 Tind. i. 205, Coverd. i. 372.

See Becon ii. 564:

"Christ in this place only promised the keys to the con

Certain distinctions are discussed and denied. Whitaker denies that "the keys," as distinct from "binding" and "loosing," give to the Pope "the chief judgment of Scripture." He says, "The keys do not here denote the authority of interpreting the Scriptures. . . but they denote the authority of preaching the Gospel." He identifies where the Jesuit had distinguished. Bullinger takes the same line, and condemns those who interpret "binding and loosing," not only of excommunication, but also of determining, judging, and establishing commandments, laws and canons." 1

66

Cartwright, in his controversy with Whitgift, went so far as to draw this contrast between the binding and loosing in Matt. xvi., and that in ch. xviii.

gregation, and performed the promise after the Resurrection" and Whitaker, p. 425: "He did not give the keys, but only promised . . . afterwards He actually gives them." He quotes Matt. xxviii. 18-19, as well as

John xx. 21-23.

1 Whitaker, p. 425. Bull. v. 40. Bullinger, it may be said, was not an English divine, but, as the Convocation of Canterbury in 1586 enjoined certain of the clergy to read every week one sermon of Bullinger's Decades, we may at least turn to them for "instruction," even if we may not use them "to establish any doctrine." He is said, by Strype, to have been well deserving of this nation for his kind entertainment and harbour of our divines and scholars that fled abroad in Queen Mary's reign." Strype, Ann. ii. 144.

66

"In the former Christ speaketh of the binding and loosing which is by the preaching of the Word of God, and therefore that binding and loosing pertaineth only unto the ministers. . . But in Matt. xviii., when He speaketh of the binding and loosing by excommunication, ... there He attributeth this power unto the Church."

Whitgift was not likely to allow so strained a distinction, and one which begged the whole question at issue. He replied that Matt. xvi. and John xx. refer to discipline as well as Matt. xviii.: and he appeals to Chrysostom as referring Matt. xvi. to the grant of authority to forgive sins, thus identifying the passage in St. Matthew with that in St. John.1 Whitgift's own conclusion is quite clear: "He giveth that power in Matt. xviii. to His disciples .. that He doth in Matt. xvi. and in John xx."2 This was the view in general taken by the Reformers, though not, as we shall see, without exceptions; and it was needful to call attention to a fact which will be constantly apparent as we proceed.

As an exception to this tendency to combine The KeysBinding and and identify, we may quote Hooker, who interprets Loosing Matt. xvi. of a perfectly general commission. The following is his account of "the keys":

1 Chrys. In Matt. Hom. liv. (vii. 616). Whitgift also quotes Beza as giving one meaning to all three passages.

'Quam misera sit conditio eorum quibus cœlum clauditur, id est, quorum retinentur peccata (John xx.).” Beza, Nov. Test. in Matt. xvi. 19 (p. 63).

2 Whitg. iii. p. 235 f.

"Our Lord in Matt. xvi. giveth His Apostles regiment in general over God's Church. For they that have the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven are thereby signified to be stewards of the house of God, under whom they guide, command, judge and correct His family."1

Bucer, at an earlier date, had formed the same judgment, that Christ then gave munus et potestatem administrandi Ecclesiam Dei, that is, "the whole government of the Church." "

We shall see that many writers appear at first sight to limit the keys to a knowledge of Scripture but it is probable that they do not intend to limit them thus exclusively, but rather to teach that in such knowledge lay the real safeguard and guarantee of all true and effectual ministry.

This is the line taken by Jewel. His opponent, Harding, had contended that the keys denote "the whole spiritual power" promised to Peter. Rightly applied, this would not have challenged an adverse criticism. But Jewel complains that out of this Harding has produced "a whole bunch of keys," "devised by the holy fathers," and yet, he adds, "of all these holy fathers, for modesty's sake, he nameth not one." Jewel holds that there is one chief or

1 Hooker, VI. iv. 1.

2 Bucer (on Matt. xvi.) quoted by Whitgift, l.c. See Additional Note, i., on the Sixth Book of Hooker.

principal key, described by Tertullian as "the interpretation of the law," by Chrysostom as "the knowledge of Scripture," by Eusebius as "the Word of God." And when he allows two keys in the Church of God, one of instruction which works inwardly, and one of correction which works outwardly, the former before God, the latter before the congregation, he adds, "Yet either of these standeth wholly in the Word of God." 1

With Hutchinson again the key promised to Peter "is God's holy word wherewith the minister bindeth and unbindeth us, as the key doth shut and open the door." Tindale is full of this thought. "The preaching of the law ... bindeth . . . the Gospel is the key that looseth all consciences that repent." It is obvious that the figure of the keys is here used more loosely than in our Lord's own words. Hooker

1 Jewel, iii. 363-369, 381-384. For the key of instruction, Jewel quotes the case of Lydia (Acts xvi.), and for the key of correction, St. Paul's dealing with the Corinthians.

66

2 Hutch., p. 98. Tind. i. 119. See also i. 21, ii. 139, 205, 282. "Whose knowledge, as it were a key, letteth in to God." Peter, in Acts ii., practised his keys, and by preaching the law brought the people into the knowledge of themselves, and bound their consciences, so that they were pricked in their hearts.' . . . Then brought they forth the key of the sweet promises, saying, 'Repent and be baptized.'"

6